๊ฐ€์ž… ํ›„ ์ดˆ๋Œ€ ๋งํฌ๋ฅผ ๊ณต์œ ํ•˜๋ฉด ๋™์˜์ƒ ์žฌ์ƒ ๋ฐ ์ดˆ๋Œ€ ๋ณด์ƒ์„ ๋ฐ›์„ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์Šต๋‹ˆ๋‹ค.

The Rational Animal ๐Ÿค”
@theobjectivist
Champion of Reason, Individual Rights and Capitalism.
๊ฐ€์ž… January 2025
946 ํŒ”๋กœ์ž‰ ์ค‘    16.4K ํŒฌ
I agree, and not the way you mean it. What is Big Medicine? Strip away the branding and the only thing in American healthcare that is big in any meaningful sense is the government. It pays about half of every dollar spent on care, and more than half once you count the tax code steering employer insurance. It decides who may become a doctor or a nurse and how many of each get trained. In most states it decides whether a hospital may be built at all. It holds a monopoly on whether a drug or a device may be sold. The conglomerates you want broken up exist in the shape they do because that is the shape the rules reward. Then look at the result. In 1965, the year Medicare and Medicaid began, this country spent about $216 per person on healthcare, which is $2,147 in today's dollars. Last year it spent $15,474. That is a 621 percent increase in real terms, seven times over, while the government's share of the bill went from under a quarter to about half. Healthcare went from 5.6 percent of the economy to 18. CVS is not the monopoly. CVS does not have the power to stop you from buying a drug, opening a clinic, or hiring a nurse from another state. Only one entity in this market has that power, and it is the one AOC works for. Breaking up the companies while leaving that intact gives you smaller firms answering to the same monopoly, and the price keeps climbing, because the price is not coming from them. So yes. Break up Big Medicine. Start with the only part of it that can use force.
๋” ๋ณด๊ธฐ