That is an extremely myopic viewpoint that doesn't fit with the data, despite how much you may hate the previous administration. Vaccine, medical technology companies, and pharma companies all have show that they can both improve lives of ALL citizens of a country, and still make money. In fact, I will say that lives were SAVED because of for-profit companies like Moderna and Pfizer compared to if government was running everything. Vaccine release and start of administration would be YEARS later than it was (not months). The companies will profit from that, and literally lives will be saved. EDIT - sure, there are examples of the Epi-Pen guy that tried to price gouge everyone, but THAT example further emphasizes my point. The US Gov failed in that case and allowed ONE company to buy up all the rights to a drug, creating a monopoly. That was a failure that would have never happened if competition existed. The purpose of Gov is to ENSURE COMPETITION, NOT TO TAKE OVER MARKETS. Markets will always be faster and more efficient than government (SpaceX vs. NASA is yet another example).
Yeah, as a physician, California's roll-out has been an example of how NOT to do things. Literally, they are sitting on millions of doses sitting in storage and have not been administered.
The purpose of my state government (the fed has little effect here) is to make us suffer for the crime of paying taxes. They are doing a great job. I enjoy my work and helping others, so I started my own business almost 30 years ago. If I wanted to get rich, I'd have picked a different occupation.
Other countries with more socialized medicine prove that to be false. Our system is a disaster unless you are wealthy.
NO NO NO. Because the VAST majority of medical advancements and research is performed in THIS COUNTRY, those countries benefit directly from those advancements without contributing to them and basically are barnacles feeding off our innovation. Once you remove the innovation in the USA, which will happen with a 100% government run system without market forces, you will see innovation and medical advancements grind to a halt. I just don't understand how everyone here, YOU included as a TSLA investor, believe so strongly in an entrepreneur like Elon and the efficiencies someone like him through disruptive innovation can bring to the market. I want the SAME for the Healthcare market. Do you think the US Gov would have built an EV, ever? And if they did, would it be remotely as good as a Tesla? Did you not read my experience at the San Diego Health Department regarding vaccines just 3 weeks ago? It was a @#$% show, run completely by the government. Meanwhile, the PRIVATE sponsored system provided by UC San Diego Healthcare (a private entity) has been vaccinating ~5000 people daily at one site (they do partner with the gov to get the vaccine, but that is it, the rest is privately run).
Isn't there two different topics here? Innovation and service. It's the service part that the U.S. is poor at. No one should file bankruptcy because of health issues. No one should have to choose between food and insulin. These are service issues, not innovation issues. My opinion (FWIW) is that it's the insurance companies that are the villain. To increase profits, they hike prices and deny coverage. This is where government can help.
Yet the vaccine is being federally distributed. As you posted today Israel has the most inoculated population by far, and they are a state run healthcare system. Private healthcare has been a major failure in this country because the poor pay the most on all fronts.
You are incorrect on a VERY key point. DISTRIBUTION is NOT Federally run. The US Gov is ONLY shipping vaccine to the states. Each STATE then determines its own distribution plan. Some states (West Virginia, Alaska) are doing GREAT. Other states, like California, are a *sugar* show. If private systems were distributing this, they would run it like Amazon and it would run far FAR better.
I'm in complete agreement with this. The current system is a *sugar* show, but I disagree greatly about how it should be fixed. The current system has a ton of microcosms which allow small to medium sized health companies to carve out regional monopolies and have no competition within their area of service. This used to NOT be the case. I would be 100% in favor of the US Gov entering the system as an insurer to COMPETE with everyone else, as long as at the same time these local monopolies were destroyed. Competition will lower prices and improve service. Going to a 100% gov run system would be moving things even worse. Gov corruption in this country is insane (ahem, Newsom and others telling the public how to be in the pandemic - but the rules do NOT apply to them). It would only be worse if Gov was the only provider there is. How is that the rest here don't see this? Don't look to other countries for solutions, they don't have the same level of gov corruption we have here - their solutions (and they are far from perfect), will not work here.
You must still believe in Santa Clause, the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny, right? Yep, call me jaded. I view an open market as a nice check to a corrupt government, but I'm sensing that I'm in the minority here . . .
In agreement as long as the government isn't hamstrung the way it is now by not be able to have competitive bids. Having competitive bids is what the industry is scared of as it would kill their profits.
Who do you think corrupts government? Big business in an open market. We need to get real draconian on corrupt elected officials and the corrupt businessmen who corrupt them.
Spot on. But the job of government is NOT to run private enterprises (show me where this has EVER ended well). You REALLY want government telling you how to live your life (you don't get healthcare unless you exercise X times per week). The job of government is to make the laws, and enforce them. If the government didn't do that, we should all take a hard look at who we elected. Socialism, of any form, never works out better for the public. Never.
Agreed, but only those currently in the industry are scared of competition. Those that are entrepreneurs would love to come into healthcare and disrupt. Hell, even Elon has been eying disrupting parts of the healthcare system (mRNA printers, etc.).
It's not government RUN, not directly. Dig into it, it's actually a big pot of money dolled out by the Gov that 3rd parties all compete for (insurers, hospitals, physicians). Gov as 3rd party insurer, NOT as the actual service provider (physicians, hospitals, etc.). I don't have a problem with the Gov providing insurance (i.e. competing in the industry). I have a problem with them TAKING OVER everything, owning the hospitals (have you ever been to the VA?), directing the physicians on what they can and cannot do (insurers are bad enough with this), etc.
Except for all the countries which are able to provide good health care for their citizens. You are literally denying reality.