[Villages PL]

Some things that can make the free-market system more vibrant in the near term, can be harmful in the long term. Can you think of a scenario where this is already happening?

I believe the demand for universal health care (a harm to the free-market system) is directly proportiional to the number of those who are overweight or obese. In other words, the more prosperous the food industry becomes the more likely it is that people gain excess weight. And when you get to the point where 1/3 of the population is obese, there will be a big demand for universal health care.

The average person is already overweight and unable to afford their own health care. So what do they want? Universal health care.

To restate it once again: To the extent that the food industry is successful, the free-market system is harmed (long term).

Note: I'm not placing blame on anyone, I'm just focusing attention on what's happening.

[justjim]

Univeral Health Care was driven more by the free market health care system costs that in recent years has gotten completely out of hand.

[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by justjim

Univeral Health Care was driven more by the free market health care system costs that in recent years has gotten completely out of hand.

Good point. That's definitely a part of it that I neglected to address. I would guess the two are working together: Higher costs and higher rates of disease.

[rubicon]

Originally Posted by Villages PL

Some things that can make the free-market system more vibrant in the near term, can be harmful in the long term. Can you think of a scenario where this is already happening?

I believe the demand for universal health care (a harm to the free-market system) is directly proportiional to the number of those who are overweight or obese. In other words, the more prosperous the food industry becomes the more likely it is that people gain excess weight. And when you get to the point where 1/3 of the population is obese, there will be a big demand for universal health care.

The average person is already overweight and unable to afford their own health care. So what do they want? Universal health care.

To restate it once again: To the extent that the food industry is successful, the free-market system is harmed (long term).

Note: I'm not placing blame on anyone, I'm just focusing attention on what's happening.

VillagesPL perhaps I misunderstand the intent of post but what comes to my mind as an example is the Fed's QE and also the retention of very low interest rates.

Both of these actions are fueling the market but do nothing to help Main Street. Their actions are also allowing banks to hold excessive amount of reserves. Ultimately when the Fed pulls back it is going to have an adverse effect on the economy.

As to the health care issue in my view there is no real market because of government's over-regulation on the insurance side and its interference as to payments on the medical side.

As to obese one needs to define to me what that means. for example the BMI measurement makes no distinction between fat and muscle. Also as to fat medical experts now state that there is good fat and bad fat. Fat around the stomach is bad fat. Fat below the waist may actually be beneficial.

Again perhaps I misunderstand the intent of this question

[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by rubicon

VillagesPL perhaps I misunderstand the intent of post but what comes to my mind as an example is the Fed's QE and also the retention of very low interest rates.

Both of these actions are fueling the market but do nothing to help Main Street. Their actions are also allowing banks to hold excessive amount of reserves. Ultimately when the Fed pulls back it is going to have an adverse effect on the economy.

You raise an interesting point. What the Fed does is not part of the "free market" as much as it is an attempt to stimulate our free market economy. Would we have been better off or worse off if they had not acted? I can't speak for everyone but I'm much better off because of their actions. I think in time Main Street will follow along and do better.

As to the health care issue in my view there is no real market because of government's over-regulation on the insurance side and its interference as to payments on the medical side.

Yes, I agree.

As to obese one needs to define to me what that means. for example the BMI measurement makes no distinction between fat and muscle. Also as to fat medical experts now state that there is good fat and bad fat. Fat around the stomach is bad fat. Fat below the waist may actually be beneficial.

Deciding what is good or bad for each individual may be difficult at times. But my opening post was mostly going along with the judgement of the CDC and other medical authorities. They claim there is an obesity epidemic and I have no reason to disagree with them based on what I see whenever I go out in public.

But your point is well taken. I think one would have to go by at least 2 measures. Possibly BMI and percentage of body fat. Waistline measure is a good indication also. If someone is a bodybuilder, I think we know it when we see it, so that shouldn't be too confusing, especially to medical professionals.

[rubicon]

Hi villagesPL The fact is that we have no free market now because of the Fed's QE. the Fed simply stated have become central planners. I pray the experts are wrong but if the Fed doesn't handle the retraction of QE properly we will not only have a national problem it will have a very negative global effect.

The Fed was not designed to do what it is doing now and the only winners are the stock guys reaping over priced fees. the market highs are creating a bubble and we know what happens with bubbles

[BarryRX]

The free market has many advantages that we are all familiar with. When demand exceeds supply, companies expand by hiring more people. The competition for labor drives wages higher. The tax base increases which helps fund social programs. When supply exceeds demand, companies may layoff people, but they will also compete with other like companies by lowering prices too. This is the "Darwinian" part of the market because it affects the poor more than others but it also rids us of companies not equipped to survive and leaves us with strong companies best suited to lead us out of a recession. But, as you ask, what are the disadvantages of a free market system. One of them is the natural economic cycle of boom or recession. Another is the tendancy for companies to try to control the market by monopolizing it so they can set prices versus the market setting prices. Globalization is the free market at its best and worse. I often wonder how some people shout "free market" out of one side of their mouth, and "buy American" out of the other.

[ijusluvit]

It amazes me how two posters above can believe that there is "no real (free) market" relative to health care. Very simply, US drug companies, many hospitals and some doctors charge astronomical fees in comparison to those costs elsewhere in the developed world. Those same entities reap astronomical profits - all because there is essentially NOTHING regulating them.

[rubicon]

Free markets determine price. Price is determined by a willing buyer and a willing seller. As to healthcare insurance companies started in 1983 to challenge the need for healthcare, its duration and its cost. Medicare and Medicaid reduced fees. With the advent of the ACA those individuals have to purchase one of four policies at higher prices and an increase in out of pocket costs. The fees paid by ACA policies are at or below Medicaid's fixed fees. Those purchasing ACA policies may qualify for a subsidy. The element of fraud along these lines has already been noted but not addressed.

I could go on with more but what I am essentially saying is that there is no willing seller or willing buyers because it is all heavy regulated by DOJ, IRS, etc.....ergo there is no free market. So begin learning to say things like Welcome Commrade as statism= Stalinism

[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by rubicon

Hi villagesPL The fact is that we have no free market now because of the Fed's QE. the Fed simply stated have become central planners. I pray the experts are wrong but if the Fed doesn't handle the retraction of QE properly we will not only have a national problem it will have a very negative global effect.

The Fed was not designed to do what it is doing now and the only winners are the stock guys reaping over priced fees. the market highs are creating a bubble and we know what happens with bubbles

I have no reason to believe that the Fed will not handle the retraction of "QE" properly. And I don't see any bubbles being created by market highs because industry just happens to be profitable. Market highs are well deserved in my opinion.

[2BNTV]

Originally Posted by rubicon

Hi villagesPL The fact is that we have no free market now because of the Fed's QE. the Fed simply stated have become central planners. I pray the experts are wrong but if the Fed doesn't handle the retraction of QE properly we will not only have a national problem it will have a very negative global effect.

The Fed was not designed to do what it is doing now and the only winners are the stock guys reaping over priced fees. the market highs are creating a bubble and we know what happens with bubbles

I will be watching, to see if the bubble burst. There's always money to be made, if one buys low and sells high. Nothing new under the sun.

You just can't time the market. IMHO

Maybe I read this wrong but the insurance companies, are driving the bus on the healthcare law. They lobby hard, to get what they want. IMHO

Not trying to be political.

[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by ijusluvit

It amazes me how two posters above can believe that there is "no real (free) market" relative to health care. Very simply, US drug companies, many hospitals and some doctors charge astronomical fees in comparison to those costs elsewhere in the developed world. Those same entities reap astronomical profits - all because there is essentially NOTHING regulating them.

I'm not arguing that there's "no real free market" relative to health care. We still have "fee for service" providers. We have people getting cheaper drugs from Canada and people getting operations in foreign countries. And American drug companies do compete with each other, that's why some have done very well and some have failed. I'm not an expert on how hospitals operate but they charge "astronomical fees" to make up for all the poor who don't pay them anything. And, in that regard, hospitals charge more precisely because they are regulated.

My opening post simply makes the case that we are moving in the wrong direction, the direction of over regulation driven by higher rates of disease. I'm not making a case for zero regulation. It's likely that some basic regulation will always be needed.

[rubicon]

Originally Posted by Villages PL

I have no reason to believe that the Fed will not handle the retraction of "QE" properly. And I don't see any bubbles being created by market highs because industry just happens to be profitable. Market highs are well deserved in my opinion.

VillagesPL from your keyboard to God's ears

[graciegirl]

,,,

[donb9006]

Originally Posted by Villages PL

I have no reason to believe that the Fed will not handle the retraction of "QE" properly. And I don't see any bubbles being created by market highs because industry just happens to be profitable. Market highs are well deserved in my opinion.

Really? No bubbles? How about in bonds? The fed is giving money to the banks to buy treasuries, keeping the interest rates low and prices high. How much? How about $45 billion a month. The fed is also buying up the "toxic", non performing mortgages the banks got stuck with when the government made them give out mortgages to inner city minorities. How much? Another $45 billion each and every month. And how does the Fed, a private gable of banks PAY for these things...credits on a computer screen. Our financial system is based on credit.

Originally Posted by 2BNTV

I will be watching, to see if the bubble burst. There's always money to be made, if one buys low and sells high. Nothing new under the sun.

You just can't time the market. IMHO

Maybe I read this wrong but the insurance companies, are driving the bus on the healthcare law. They lobby hard, to get what they want. IMHO

Not trying to be political.

So...if you can't time the market...how do you know when the highs and lows are? If you can't time the highs and lows, how do you know when to "buy low", and "sell high"?

That's what I've heard too...it's the medical insurance companies who want EVERYONE to be a policy holder. But you can't forget the extravagant salaries the medical "professionals" get either. Medicine, the field, simply costs too much. It's the cost that has to go down, it must be affordable.

Originally Posted by Villages PL

I'm not arguing that there's "no real free market" relative to health care. We still have "fee for service" providers. We have people getting cheaper drugs from Canada and people getting operations in foreign countries. And American drug companies do compete with each other, that's why some have done very well and some have failed. I'm not an expert on how hospitals operate but they charge "astronomical fees" to make up for all the poor who don't pay them anything. And, in that regard, hospitals charge more precisely because they are regulated.

My opening post simply makes the case that we are moving in the wrong direction, the direction of over regulation driven by higher rates of disease. I'm not making a case for zero regulation. It's likely that some basic regulation will always be needed.

Is it a "free market" when you have to introduce buying Canadian as a viable alternative to getting your medications? When you have to travel to a foreign country for an operation? Really?

Hospitals and good doctors charge "astronomical fees" because they can. No expense is too great when MY life is on the line...do it, whatever the best charges...pay it! 90% of medical costs are to keep the old and terminal alive a few more months.

Unfortunately, medicine is fully of greedy people. Greedy people in need of regulation. Look at China for an example of no regulation, no enforcement anyway... However, regulations shouldn't be politically driven, giving one an advantage over another.