←back to thread

201 points andsoitis | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.646s | source
Show context
defrost ◴[] No.41854450[source]
For an interesting side piece:

    Curiously, however, for a system apparently stultified by the dead hand of government, Australia’s health system far outperforms the free market-based US healthcare system, which spends nearly twice as much per capita as Australia to deliver far worse outcomes — including Americans dying five years younger than us.
The shocking truth: Australia has a world-leading health system — because of governments

Source: https://www.crikey.com.au/2024/10/16/pubic-private-healthcar...

Bypass: https://clearthis.page/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.crikey.com.au%2F...

    Overall, we now have the fourth-highest life expectancy in the world.

   This is contrary to the narrative that pervades the media about our health system — one in which our “frontline” health workers heroically battle to overcome government neglect and inadequate spending, while the population is beset by various “epidemics” — obesity, alcohol, illicit drugs.

    In fact, Australian longevity is so remarkable that in August The Economist published a piece simply titled “Why do Australians live so long?”
Other references:

The Economist: https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2024/08/23/why-do-a...

AU Gov Report: Advances in measuring healthcare productivity https://www.pc.gov.au/research/completed/measuring-healthcar...

replies(14): >>41854605 #>>41854613 #>>41854799 #>>41855053 #>>41855120 #>>41855218 #>>41855732 #>>41856242 #>>41856326 #>>41857738 #>>41857930 #>>41857960 #>>41858153 #>>41876405 #
mbostleman ◴[] No.41855218[source]
Free market-based US healthcare system? Which US are we talking about?
replies(3): >>41856361 #>>41856956 #>>41861008 #
globular-toast ◴[] No.41856361[source]
"Free market" is one of the best examples of a technical term people use with complete confidence despite not knowing what it really means. Furthermore, even if you do know what it means you probably remember it as something you learnt on day 1 of economics class before learning all the reasons they never really exist and what governments try to do about that.
replies(1): >>41863520 #
1. valval ◴[] No.41863520[source]
I’ve studied economics for years and I’m still of the opinion that the only government intervention to the market should be breaking monopolies and cartels. I’m waiting for a piece of literature that would convince me otherwise, maybe you could provide one?
replies(1): >>41864246 #
2. globular-toast ◴[] No.41864246[source]
I can't, but I'm curious how you think problems like externalities would sort themselves out. Also what about natural monopolies like utilities and infrastructure that can't really be broken up?
replies(1): >>41873567 #
3. valval ◴[] No.41873567[source]
I think humans are excellent survivors. I don’t lose sleep over externalities because of that alone. What I mean by that is that once people realise their daily lives are being affected by a negative externality, they start making decisions that alleviate that hardship.

I do recognise though that it’s an unsolved problem, and will lead to some form of regulation as our understanding is lacking.

I think only harmful monopolies should be broken up by force, since they’re a legitimate market force. I’m conceding some ground on that because I’m not prepared to claim that monopolies aren’t always harmless.