choice in a competitive marketplace? Whether by a "single-payer" socialized medicine system or by government-subsidized "insurance" that deeply undercuts private rates, effectively driving out private insurers, Democratic schemes promise a government monopoly on medical care. Would we be better off under a government-enforced monopoly funded by high taxes or under a competitive free market where companies vie to supply better medical care and insurance at cheaper prices?
Some considerations:
1. How successful has government been in running other monopolies, e.g., the postal service or public schools?
2. In general, do monopolies (e.g., cable companies) supply goods and services better than competitive markets?
3. Today, it may cost a billion dollars to research, develop, and market a medicine. Who takes the risk to develop expensive new medicines and medical technology under government monopoly?
Some considerations:
1. How successful has government been in running other monopolies, e.g., the postal service or public schools?
2. In general, do monopolies (e.g., cable companies) supply goods and services better than competitive markets?
3. Today, it may cost a billion dollars to research, develop, and market a medicine. Who takes the risk to develop expensive new medicines and medical technology under government monopoly?