Bigger Pizzas: A Capitalist Case for Health Care Reform

Bigger Pizzas: A Capitalist Case for Health Care Reform

In which John discusses some of the many ways that our current massively inefficient health care system leads to the irrational allocation of capital. He dis…

16,830
Like
Save

Comments

Skitria says:

You guys made VidCon 🙂 You are amazing

bhandakavi.krb Prasad says:

Yeah man this site is just sending out 100% free Pink Apple new iPad’s for today only.

But you have to be give your address but it is all real, I claimed my one a few minutes ago. Better hurry up! UPAD3.COM

War teaches us to need an enemy to conquer and overcome and to see those who are different as lesser, dangerous, inhuman.

Vidar says:

But doesn’t the US pay more for their healthcare & get less from it than plenty other westernized countries? Living in Sweden makes your healthcare problem just seem pretty insane. Your remark on involuntary socialism is also a bit bizzarre though isn’t it? You’re basically paying taxes for the best solutions your country can come up with, it’s not about socialism but rather, hopefully, you have intelligent people in your government who can deal with the problems & not just allocate money 😛

Dj Vanderlay says:

Thanks for your comment. I wish John and his brother would read “Economics in One Lesson” by Henry Hazlitt. They would be forever cured of their redistributive fallacies!

bullpcp says:

Obviously the cost was simply shifted to other third parties. Basic economics. Not emotionally satisfying denying people their imaginary free pizza. Thus the thumbs down.

bullpcp says:

So John is stating that the solution to high healthcare costs is to force third parties, health insurance companies, to provide these services at a loss to some, providing insurance to people with preexisting conditions is a sure way of doing just that, and pass on this loss to their other customers, who’s employers where forced to provide for them, effectively removing the pricing mechanism, and therefor removing downward market pressure on prices while simultaneously reducing innovation.

bullpcp says:

If you have any knowledge of economics this is obvious. Unfortunately people almost completely ignorant of economics seem all too eager to subject everyone around them to their ignorance. People fully aware of the absurdity of specking in ignorance on other complex sciences like mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, see nothing wrong with speaking about economics. It’s rather absurd.

bullpcp says:

Given that insurance is based upon the theory that many pay into a pot in case of a unlikely but possibly catastrophic occurrence in the future it makes sense that those that have not previously payed into the system not be allowed to retroactively. The reason minute physics couldn’t afford his insurance was because of all the regulations on the insurance market. The reason health insurance is as expensive as it is is BECAUSE OF health insurance regulation.

bullpcp says:

Next health insurance was exempt from taxes further incentive’s it’s increased utilization as a benefit. Catastrophic insurance with a high deductible and high limit without mandates, where it is observed in reality, is quite affordable.  It is not affordable because of a plethora of regulations imposed upon the insurance industry.

bullpcp says:

The vast majority of businesses are forced to provide health insurance. Health insurance started being provided by employers after disastrous wages controls put in place during WWII that allowed benefits to increase despite stagnant wages. This chains employees to jobs. If people were allowed to purchase their own insurance they would not be attached to their job because of it. This is a result of regulations and mandates.

bullpcp says:

The vast majority of businesses are forced to provide health insurance. Health insurance started being provided by employers after disastrous wages controls put in place during WWII that allowed benefits to increase despite stagnant wages. This chains employees to jobs. If people were allowed to purchase their own insurance they would not be attached to their job because of it. This is a result of regulations and mandates.

bullpcp says:

Next he conflates health insurance and healthcare. The problem with healthcare IS health insurance, as health insurance is currently defined, in other words it’s not really insurance. and the related third party payer problem. You aren’t going to fix healthcare expenses by doubling down on the main cause of ballooning expenses.

bullpcp says:

The Pizza statistic conflates wealth with net income. The real measure of income inequality would be individual income after taxes and all redistributions with a modifier for household size. Citing household income inequality without taking into account how large the household, how much the individuals are taxed, or how much is redistributed gives a horrifically skewed picture. For example If you are part of a large household of low wage earners that pay low taxes but receive redistribution.

Lee Ann Spillane says:

You rock, but I love your brother.

MaydeOfDreams says:

Seeing the secret innards of John’s desk is like seeing backstage at Disneyland.

Dj Vanderlay says:

John seems like a nice guy. But his economics are completely ridiculous. For example, all that money that Hank didn’t have for treatment had to come from somewhere. Wealth can’t simply be legislated. By neglecting to discuss this “unseen cost” as Hazlitt would call it, you have neglecting to adequately address the issue. John is a redistributive socialist, and although I abhor all involuntary socialism, I respect his view. But he is distorting the economics here.

14bc says:

You guys are more than welcome to move down here to Australia, we would love to have you (just as long as you don’t come by boat, in which case sadly, you will find yourselves in the Australian version of a concentration camp). We have pretty good public healthcare. So come down, become Australians and I will buy you a pizza  (I will even chuck in a couple of ice cold beers)

Spruce says:

3:59 My personal space was violated.

purpletortoise99 says:

2:28 best part

Paige Dussold says:

John Green i love you

EmilyEmilyIris says:

But in a public system less money needs to be spent in the first place. Why? Because Hank, as a sick person, is like, the WORST POSSIBLE NEGOTIATOR . He can’t talk to a pharmaceutical company and say “If you don’t lower your prices, I’ll take my business elsewhere,” because if he doesn’t get the meds he needs, he risks his life and wellbeing. A huge buyer, like say, a government, on the other hand, has way more power in the consumer-producer relationship and can demand things like lower prices.

cp516 says:

While that’s true, the argument is that, if there are enough incentives to become an entrepreneur instead of finding a job with health insurance, the money flow into the government’s treasury will be greater than the flow outwards to pay for the healthcare. Honestly though, they could just take *some* of the money from the military funding and this wouldn’t be a problem. 😛

Tyler Valentik says:

That all works until you realize that the money that hank doesn’t have to spend on healthcare still needs to come from somewhere else in the economy.

Cameron Thomas says:

No, but technically, you did 🙂

cmremley says:

Competition is fine, competition is great, but when Republicans suggested insurers could “sell across state lines” they weren’t interested in fostering competition. They allowed credit card companies to “sell across state lines” and they all moved their business to South Dakota where the laws were the most lax and they could legally charge the highest interest rates. “Across state lines” is code for “circumvent local regulation” which always ends up as “race to the bottom.”

FieryAshes says:

Sexplainations?

unit145 says:

I was about ready to post something on the 4 minute limit, but then I heard John sing song the reason.

Write a comment

*