His argument is “a guy is dying! Quick, save him! It’s all that matters!”
Apply the same logic to a situation where no one wants to help him - do we then enslave the doctors to make them help him?
Also his point about “who can shop around for a doctor when you need a surgery?” kind of misses the point. Even if it doesn’t miss the point, how long does it take to find a well-reviewed doctor on the internet? But don’t bother granting that, the point is that when consumers shop around, scrutiny is placed on service-providers. When scrutiny is placed on service-providers they must jockey to attract customers. Thus, even without selecting the optimal insurer/surgeon, the customer still benefits because the trend of free-competition is to improve service across the board.
Did Hyptothetical “IM DYING RIGHT NOW” Dude plan in advance for a Hypothetical Market Insurance Plan to prevent these things from happening? Why should I Hyptothetically care if he didn’t and failed to be responsible? And if I don’t care, do they really think a co-op style, defacto ‘public’ Hypothetical Emergency Medical service that would care for these irresponsible people (and that I could call if I encountered such a Hypothetical Man) wouldn’t exist in an open market?
Then that just goes back to this weird ‘charities won’t exist in a free market’ fear that a lot of people have.
This is precisely why I came to you guys for answers. Thanks!
Let us know how it works out!
I will! It won’t be for a month or two because I live about 4 hours away from them, but I may be able to convince my father over email.
This is a great video on healthcare pre welfare state:
