According to the Federal Trade Commission, “When health care markets are competitive, consumers benefit from lower costs, better care, and more innovation.” On a superficial level, this sounds good, but the devil is in the details. A huge detail is that the health care consumer rarely pays directly for the services, and has little say over how they are performed. Likewise, the notion of what constitutes “better care” and “innovation” are hotly debated. Ironically, those two precepts often lead to higher cost, with questionable benefits to outcome.
Category Archives: Costs and benefits
It seems that a bunch of epidemics (arguably pandemics) were courtesy of… escapes from labs that were researching them/trying to produce vaccines, etc. Continue reading
It always astounds me when Harvard High Flyers put up something that makes no sense.
Thanks to the Chief Toxicologist for Texas, Dr. Mike Honeycutt, for tipping me off.
Three Billionaire Warmist Stooges embarrass themselves in WaPo pretending that America hasn’t already considered global warming
MIchael Bloomberg, Hank Paulson and Tom Steyer write in the WaPo: Continue reading
The Economist: Wrong economic models of climate impact better than no models — But how is assuming harm better than not?
The Economist opines: Continue reading
Social cost of carbon — another bogus metric for stealing liberties, subverting real cost-benefit analysis
Chip Knappenberger writes in The Hill: Continue reading