[clarkmoody]

> give medical professionals more operational and financial freedom to run their practices using tried-and-true free-market principles

I agree completely, but you forgot to add under what we believe: (5) "government has the solution for everything." At least that's what it feels like lately.

The cynic in me says that the healthcare industry will continue to get worse for some time before it gets better, if ever. We may see complete nationalization because the government must swoop in and "save us" from the monster it has helped to create through misguided regulation.

[cwal37]

In countries with socialized healthcare systems, costs are much lower, as is the overall amount spent on healthcare.

Americans actually display stunning recalcitrance towards this fact, and as a result we have an incredibly polarized debate which has led to a bastardized and amalgamated system comprised of several other, and often conflicting, constructs.

[eldavido]

I actually agree with this (wrote the GP). If we could have either whole-hog free market or public option, I believe either would be better than what we have now.

I think integrated systems could help, where the financial and operational sides of healthcare are combined (e.g. Group Health in Seattle, or Kaiser). The key thing is to remove the conflict between the payer and operator -- it's just madness that we have a system where one party has 100% of the incentive to control costs, and the other is completely responsible for outcomes, cost be damned.

[collyw]

Not only that, many Americans seem to believe their system of having insurance companies as middlemen improves the system somehow.

My girlfriend is a doctor here in Europe (though she has worked in Mexico). As such she has worked with private and public systems (generally in Europe, you are automatically part of the public system. You can pay private yourself and generally have to wait less).

Anyway, both her and her boss pointed out that if you have anything serious, go to the public system. Why? Because insurance companies always want to pay the least for the cheapest drugs / treatment. The doctors don't enjoy working for the private, because too much of it is trying to justify using the more expensive treatment to the insurance companies.

At the end of the day the public healthcare system exists to help people get better. The private healthcare system exists to make money.

[jjoonathan]

International comparison: http://healthcarereform.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourc...

Administrative overhead of government vs private insurance: http://healthcarereform.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourc...

[ams6110]

How do outcomes compare?

[cwal37]

Here's some basics:

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/~/media/Files/Publications/I...

Essentially, we excel in a couple very specific things, like survivorship of breast cancer. We're middle of the pack in some things, like general cancer survivorship. And we're the worst by quite a bit in others, like chronic diseases. Basically, I would say we're not getting our $'s worth.

Here's some Commonwealth Fund info if you don't want to trust some random white paper.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_Fund

Oh, and if you want something from an organization with a known bias: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/working_papers/201...

Key abstract quote: "But one key finding emerges – the US ranks poorly on all indicators with the exception of self-reported subjective health status."