Talk:Free-market healthcare

Article doesn't describe free market healthcare
Hi all,

This article is bizarre. It doesn't describe a free market healthcare model, which is a model in which there are no third-party payers, or where the role of third-party payers is severely curtailed compared to the American status quo -- in other words, a model in which people generally pay for their own healthcare directly or buy their own insurance.

None of the five positions listed describe the core of free market healthcare -- they make no mention of people paying for their own care, which is the central idea. The first position says that FMHC advocates want to eliminate patents. I'm not aware of this, and I'm sure it's not the majority view. The citation provided on that position links to an article that does not contain the word patent anywhere, and does not appear to take that position.

The next section on Debates and Arguments centers on comparisons between formally socialized systems (e.g. the UK) and the United States. The United States does not have a free market healthcare system (almost no one in the US pays for their healthcare out-of-pocket, or buys their own health insurance), so this framing makes no sense given the topic of the article.

I assume this article is a victim of neglect. It would be great if free market healthcare advocates or economists could rewrite it, someone more of an expert than me.

Googling free market healthcare comes up with:

http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/yes-mr-president-free-market-can-fix-health-care

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/03/liberals-are-wrong-free-market-health-care-is-possible/254648/

http://blog.heritage.org/2013/11/12/what-does-a-free-market-in-health-care-look-like-heres-an-example/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlueSingularity (talk • contribs) 07:10, 23 January 2014 (UTC)


 * This article is complete mess. It's factual wrong in many, many places, and worse yet, it uses citations that are basically completely fraudulent. The article will cite a source, I'll go to the source to check it, and lo and behold the topic isn't even mentioned in the cited text. I'll begin by deleting the false citations and associate content and removing factual errors. Once it's cleaned up, hopefully someone will do a good quality re-write.  E.D.J. Muckenfuss (talk) 06:29, 22 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Clean-up completed. Also rewrote lead. article still needs expansion and more citations of reliable sources. E.D.J. Muckenfuss (talk) 07:34, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 29 November 2015

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved to Free-market healthcare. Clear consensus to hyphenate, but no consensus on the spacing issue – feel free to start a new RM that focuses solely on that. Jenks24 (talk) 14:20, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Free market healthcare → Free-market health care – All of the other pages have a space between "health" and "care":
 * Publicly funded health care
 * Single-payer health care
 * Universal health care
 * Two-tier health care
 * Health care provider
 * Health care

All other pages have a hyphen between "free market".


 * Free-market anarchism
 * Free-market environmentalism
 * Free-market roads UltimateLiberty (talk) 19:25, 29 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Support the hyphenation (as it enhances readability per WP:HYPHEN), but I'm not so sure about the change of "healthcare" to "health care". —BarrelProof (talk) 16:39, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose instead use free-market healthcare and move other articles to use "healthcare" isntead -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 05:53, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Be cautious. This is seemingly a WP:ENGVAR situation, because in my limited experience, "health care" seems to be more favoured in en:gb, and "healthcare" seems to be more favored in en:us.  Nyttend (talk) 22:36, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment I think both forms are used in both dialects. In any case, without the space, it is clearer what the subject is, and shorter. Wordwraps won't affect perceived interpretation of health+care. -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 04:59, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Support hyphenation of free market, but not splitting healthcare. Suggest move to . &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 10:23, 7 December 2015 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Not really specific to the U.S.
The Health care reform in the United States template says this article is about the United States, but that's clearly not really true. The article barely even mentions the United States. It's about the provision of healthcare as a market good. It may be a more popular idea in the United States than in some other places, but it's not really a concept more closely associated with the United States than elsewhere. In fact, there are probably some other countries that are closer approximations to this model than the U.S. —BarrelProof (talk) 16:48, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Examples
This article could use examples I think some potential qualifying examples might include early America, Medical Europe Non regulated medically significant or relevant products, essential oils, herbs etc, actual numbers, price of product before regulated and or insured and price after, eg if a product like aspirin went from unregulated uninsured to regulated and insured, what happens to price, quality, corruption, etc especially weighted against standard change with time etc

home remedies, snake oil salesmen, etc, though it would be nice to see redeeming qualities as well as negative, specifically toward economics and statistics eg price of similar care cost per improvement in health Rate of innovation Rate of corruption Life span Stats on health impairments, (chronic cases, disabilities, )

It would especially be useful to have examples of before and after transitions between free, monopolized, regulated, etc healthcare economies Eg before and after insurance companies gain traction in an area,

Though it might be hard as this topic and even the language is muddied, attempts to search free market healthcare economics get misconstrued with government healthcare, woes of not being insured etc Very little is available about considerations studies examples of free market healthcare 128.187.116.14 (talk) 03:16, 8 December 2022 (UTC)