Originally posted by WajomaI wish I was your partner.
Money is just a tool shav, no need to get all frothy. It is a tool to exchange value for value and I put it to you that you have a relationship with your gf precisely for that reason i.e. what you can get out of it, how you can profit from that relationship, and if you're both doing it right she's there for the same reason. Good luck to you both ,may you both profit from your relationship with each other.
You sound soooooooo romantic.
Originally posted by bill718Milton Friedman predicted that ANY system that is regulated by the government and/or relies on third-party payers tends to become more and more inefficient and expensive as the level of regulation increases. The reason regulation does this is that it interferes with the competition mechanism which is the primary means by which prices are kept down.
Taking the profit motive out of the American healthcare system would clearly be the best way to provide at least a moderate standard of healthcare for all. Consider the untold billions of dollars made by Insurance Companies, HMO's and Drug Companies every year. If these dollars were put to use providing healthcare services, rather than paying for drug advert ...[text shortened]... d medical operation. If you believe this is true, I have a bridge I'll sell you...cheap!!😏
Health care is extremely highly regulated -- who is certified to provide it, who can say what about it, who can sell what to whom.
Health care needs to be less regulated and more open to competition.
Originally posted by spruce112358Of course, like with most things he said, Milton Friedman was wrong.
Milton Friedman predicted that ANY system that is regulated by the government and/or relies on third-party payers tends to become more and more inefficient and expensive as the level of regulation increases. The reason regulation does this is that it interferes with the competition mechanism which is the primary means by which prices are kept down.
H ...[text shortened]... o can sell what to whom.
Health care needs to be less regulated and more open to competition.
Last month, I paid more than 50 eurocents for a text message abroad within the EU, even though the doe-eyed "free market" laws suggest competition should drive prices to a few cents at most. Now I pay 11 cents due to EU government intervention in the telecommunications cartel.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraRather than whinging about it why didn't you put together a business plan, find some investors and sell text messages for 12 cents, you'd be extremely popular and you could give all profits away.
Of course, like with most things he said, Milton Friedman was wrong.
Last month, I paid more than 50 eurocents for a text message abroad within the EU, even though the doe-eyed "free market" laws suggest competition should drive prices to a few cents at most. Now I pay 11 cents due to EU government intervention in the telecommunications cartel.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraYou're saying 50 cents was too much and that text messages can be sent for 11 cents, do you realise what profit you could make massively undercutting the opposition, people would be knocking your door down trying to sign up.
I am genuinely wondering if it's the case; do you not know about the obstructions that exist when trying to start a new telecommunications business? And even if I did, joining the cartel would be better for the business.
...and the bonus, it would all be voluntary.
but you'd rather cry cry to gummint.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraSomebody has to do it, what obstructions besides all that regulation you're in love with?
I am genuinely wondering if it's the case; do you not know about the obstructions that exist when trying to start a new telecommunications business? And even if I did, joining the cartel would be better for the business.
If it's a sound plan you would have no problem selling it voluntarily and since you're so concerned about wealth re-distribution you could give all profits away, again, voluntarily.
2 edits
Originally posted by WajomaYour denial is staggering. People did not make such a company because they couldn't. It takes initial capital, advertising, etc. etc. etc. to get people to sign up. There are companies which offer cheaper texting and calling abroad, but they tend to have lackluster domestic coverage, and they don't have the capital to start national advertising campaigns. Also, people tend not to switch providers easily.
You're saying 50 cents was too much and that text messages can be sent for 11 cents, do you realise what profit you could make massively undercutting the opposition, people would be knocking your door down trying to sign up.
...and the bonus, it would all be voluntary.
but you'd rather cry cry to gummint.
And, once again, companies which did manage to penetrate in the market happily signed up with the cartel to maximize their profits, as one would expect them to do in a free market.
But of course, it's all the government's fault!
2 edits
Originally posted by shavixmirHealthcare is an odd industry: In most profit and benefit to society are linked. e.g if you make computers, clothes then it clearly provides an incentive to make a good product.
Of course, running healthcare systems for profit instead of for health is obviously a much better way of doing things.
And you'd be a fool and communist to think otherwise.
If nobody's making money out of it, it's clear it can't work.
Because everybody in the whole wide world is so shallow that they can only be motivated by financial profit.
.
But in health care, there are 'morbid' conflicts of interest if you consider only profit,
I think the US system suffers from this although am no expert. In the UK there's difference between public and private (although the NHS is very good)
The drugs method of treating diseases is most profitable , which is why companies invest so much in it. Tools like CT scanners are still very expensive. Vaccines less profitable.
Also in reaserch into drugs is extremely difficult, as fewer people get terminal illness then
depression etc.. these fall to the bottom of the list although they are of most benefit to cure.
I think private companies can still treat them ... but in a way it what the share holders ask of them?
I'd buy share in glaxo if my life depended on there drugs for sure... but not for x% growth.
Still believe in state funded health system tho as it provides a level of decency.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraDo you see that KN
Your denial is staggering. People did not make such a company because they couldn't. It takes initial capital, advertising, etc. etc. etc. to get people to sign up. There are companies which offer cheaper texting and calling abroad, but they tend to have lackluster domestic coverage, and they don't have the capital to start national advertising campaign ...[text shortened]... would expect them to do in a free market.
But of course, it's all the government's fault!
"People did not make such a company because the couldn't"
"And, once again, companies which did..."
Because it can be done, and it does get done, and no one owes you 10 cent text messages. Oh boo hoo it takes "initial capital, advertising, etc, etc" somebody did it didn't they? Here you are saying you can undercut their price by 80%, put together a plan not only will you have customers banging your down but you'll have investors too. That would be the true test of your 'brilliant' economic ideas, that they were sound enough to stand without resorting to gummint force.