WTF enthoven?

Since when is this acceptable academic writing?

Enthoven is discussing managed competition, out of nowhere he pulls the following:

By “equity” I mean that a just and humane society can define a minimum standard of medical care that should be available to all its
members-essentially all the costworthy medical care that can effectively prevent
or cure disease, relieve suffering, and correct dysfunction. (By “costworthy” I
mean that marginal benefits equal marginal costs for persons of average incomes.)
Denial of anything that meets that standard is morally unacceptable. Care above
that standard can be considered a discretionary luxury. No person should be denied
the minimum standard of care because he or she cannot pay, and no person
should be subjected to great financial hardship to pay for care.

Just 1 paragraph of mere assertians, then moves on to a different topic. Not one single reason is given in that paragraph…Denial of anything that meets that standard is morally unacceptable…why? who says? If you provide such a specific measure of ‘morality’ should you not take some time to discuss why and how you came up with it?

Every person should have a right to FREE water and food, also to free education!! To deny this is immoral and unjust! No person should be denied the minimum standard of food and education because he or she cannot pay.

He is saying a society could choose as such.

Check out his affiliations.

He is saying a society could choose as such.


No he is using that as an actual measure of success of the market. Since competition does not lead to the type of equity he prefers he calls that a ‘market failure’ later in the paper. Also free market doesn’t lead to efficiency apparantly.

Society is not a person, so how can it “choose” any particular uniform standard? Does everyone have to agree?

I’m not sure what you mean. Can you elaborate. From the articles I can tell, if he were russian, he would be first in line to apply his ideas for the good of the people.