[k1musab1]

Time and time again large competing forces in the market are found to have colluded instead of directly competing with each other to drive price/cost down. What is it that still makes you believe that two (or n-number) of providers won't collude to charge an astronomical amount for a life-saving treatment?

[nickpp]

> Time and time again large competing forces in the market are found to have colluded instead of directly competing with each other to drive price/cost down.

Collusion and cartels never work on the long run. It's an unstable equilibrium, the incentive to reduce prices to capture more market is too great.

> What is it that still makes you believe

Competition. It's the only force keeping humans honest. That's why we must treat any barriers of entry in a market with extreme care. The only "failed" or "captured" market is a strongly regulated one.

[jgeada]

Markets can remain irrational, or colluding, far longer than you can stay solvent (or even alive).

For example, while the Phoebus cartel only really lasted from 1925 through to 1939, 1000hr incandescent light bulbs remain the standard offering till present day. Profitable market manipulations are sticky.

The whole notion that markets are efficient is just a mathematical construct that has become very dogmatic for people. But if you look into the details, markets are efficient under the assumptions of perfect information and infinite time. Neither of those conditions are present in the real world: we neither have perfect information nor infinite time.

[nickpp]

> the Phoebus cartel

> 1000hr incandescent light bulbs remain the standard offering till present day

This proves in fact that all the cartel did was establish a standard, an optimal average between various tradeoffs when building an incandescent lightbulb: brightness, cost, efficiency and life span. Yes, the cartel behaved anti-competitively. The effect on the market? Nil.

> perfect information and infinite time

There is absolutely no requirement for this for markets to work. Markets work just fine with partial information and just-in time. When new information and new market participants appear, markets will self-correct. The only way to prevent markets from working is through government intervention.

In facts, free markets are the only system we have that works with incomplete info and reacts in real-time. Central planning will happily decide on incomplete info then never adapt. We saw that during communism when the Party decided allocate X resources for production of Y and it always resulted in a glut or shortages. Central planning doesn't work.

[jittles]

> Competition. It's the only force keeping humans honest.

Pure misanthropic fantasy pretending to be sophisticated economics.

[nickpp]

> misanthropic fantasy

It's the obvious reality around me here in Eastern Europe. We were starving under communism before 1990 but are now enjoying the amazing wealth capitalism brought.

[lenkite]

> Collusion and cartels never work on the long run.

Define "long run" - they have been already proven to have worked for years and in some cases even decades.

[bko]

Because if something sucks, someone comes up with something better and sells it for a profit. This is the history of pretty much every other good or service that is not heavily influenced by regulation and artificial barriers to entry

[ryandrake]

> Because if something sucks, someone comes up with something better and sells it for a profit.

This is basically a religious belief at this point. It's how a perfectly ideal free market might work, but we don't have any of these, especially in healthcare.

[bko]

Do you not use private businesses or something? Do you not shop at a private grocer or order things from Amazon or use a private search engine?

Probably 99% of what I consume comes from private companies and the services generally get better over time, with some exceptions. Compare that to an experience with the TSA.