[ExI] "Controlling the cost of health care" an immoral idea?
anders at aleph.se
Sat Apr 28 01:27:41 UTC 2012
On 28/04/2012 01:06, Brent Allsop wrote:
> If we want to the average life span to continue on it's exponentially
> growing trajectory, we, as a society, need to be ready to pay the
> exponentially growing cost of funding such. There is an exponentially
> growing number of things physicians can do to help us live longer, and
> even though the costs of all such are dropping, dramatically, none of
> it is going to be free, especially the initial development of all such.
Well, the real question is how much health per dollar you can get. All
increases in cost are not due to better options. And given the health
disparities between the US and Europe despite the higher US costs of
care, it is pretty safe to say that you have plenty of room for
efficiency improvement. However, health care systems seem to be
excellent at locking themselves into local optima with strong incumbents
and big costs of switching to other systems, so fixing issues like that
might be hard.
As a card-carrying crazy libertarian I am fine with the existence of
very expensive health care options, even when few can afford them.
Technology will often lower their prices over time, their development
paid for by rich early adopters. But it would be stupid for any
consumer, whether individual or a group, not to try to find an optimal
balance between health and cost. We might have different setpoints
(another reason for aiming for a more individualistic system), but few
if any would pay *all* their disposable income for a bit of extra health.
Future of Humanity Institute
Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
More information about the extropy-chat