July 12, 2007

Joining the Club

The good folks at Cato are promoting an "Anti-Universal Coverage Club." Sign me up.

Here are the guiding principles of the Anti-Universal Coverage Club:
  • Health policy should focus on making health care of ever-increasing quality available to an ever-increasing number of people.
  • To achieve “universal coverage” would require either having the government provide health insurance to everyone or forcing everyone to buy it. Government provision is undesirable, because government does a poor job of improving quality or efficiency. Forcing people to get insurance would lead to a worse health-care system for everyone, because it would necessitate so much more government intervention.
  • In a free country, people should have the right to refuse health insurance.
  • If governments must subsidize those who cannot afford medical care, they should be free to experiment with different types of subsidies (cash, vouchers, insurance, public clinics & hospitals, uncompensated care payments, etc.) and tax exemptions, rather than be forced by a policy of “universal coverage” to subsidize people via “insurance.”
Hat-tip: The Everyday Economist Pharmaceuticals Posted by jk at July 12, 2007 12:15 PM

I've heard that the biggest insurance industry in France is Supplemental Health Care, with 80% of the population paying for it; I'll search for that link because that dismisses how supposedly great Universal Care is where it is practised.

Posted by: Charlie on the PA Tpk at July 13, 2007 7:45 AM

I'd love to see that. I didn't know France allowed that. The UK and Republic of Ireland have that and you end up with a stratified system that would be unpalatable here.

In Sweden (and Hillary Clinton's 1993 plan) it's illegal to buy private care.

Posted by: jk at July 13, 2007 10:28 AM

Government has no business making a health care policy, energy policy, etc. Government's only responsibilities there is to punish people who interfere with my right to voluntary commerce with those who would sell me health care, energy, etc. Now, government is the chief criminal when it comes to that interference.

"Government provision is undesirable"

This is the problem with Cato. The word is not "undesirable," but "unacceptable."

Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at July 13, 2007 3:24 PM

Yeah, those left-wing, socialist, pinko commies at Cato!

Once again, Perry, I'm going to call "exigencies!" You are right, but the unfortunate reality is that Government is completely entangled with every aspect of health care. If you're going to pick a fight with Cato over just how bad government interference is, you're going to have a lot more.

Posted by: jk at July 13, 2007 3:45 PM

I'm pretty sure you know I don't believe Cato's people are really left-wing. Not at all. I just think they're too willing to compromise.

HB had a good quote above, which I hadn't heard before. However, it wasn't hard to realize that compromise only leads to bigger and bigger government. There comes a time when we need to stop accepting certain "unfortunate realities" and instead fight for what's right.

Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at July 13, 2007 4:20 PM | What do you think? [5]