Menu
The Goodman Institute Health Blog
  • Home
  • Authors
    • Devon Herrick, Ph.D.
    • John C. Goodman
  • Popular Topics
    • Artificial Intelligence and Healthcare
    • Consumer-Driven Health Care
      • Affordable Care Act
      • Cost of Healthcare
      • COVID-19 and Public Health
      • Doctors & Hospitals
      • Public Insurance
      • Policy & Legislation
    • Direct Primary Care
    • Health Economics & Costs
      • Drug Prices & Regulations
      • Health Insurance
      • Health Reform
    • Medical Tourism
    • Telemedicine
    • Medicare
      • Single-Payer/Medicare-for-All
  • Goodman Institute
  • Contact
The Goodman Institute Health Blog

Monday Links

Posted on August 28, 2023August 27, 2023 by John C. Goodman

David Henderson reviews Einav and Finkelstein’s new heath care book.

Americans who are married with children are happier and more prosperous lives, on average, than men and women who are single and childless.

Out-party hate is now more powerful than in-party love as a predictor of voting behavior in the United States.

AEI study: Every additional $1,000 of federal aid per resident led to over 50,000 more Covid tests per 100,000 people. But there was no effect on total vaccinations.

A bipartisan solution to this problem: barriers to competition in the biologic drug market increase patient costs by more than $30 billion.

6 thoughts on “Monday Links”

  1. Devon Herrick says:
    August 28, 2023 at 6:17 pm

    I read David Henderson’s review of the Finkelstein book. I thought he made some good points. The book not discussing the supply side is really an oversight. Also, not embracing any kind of cost-sharing is also an oversight. If you do not ration by money, you have to ration another way.

    Loading...
    Reply
    1. Bob Hertz says:
      August 29, 2023 at 12:59 am

      I have read several reviews of the Finkelstein book. My reservation about the book is this:

      The authors of the new proposal are very naive about the actual workings of insurance. I do not think they have the slightest idea of how to design a national “basic coverage” policy that costs any less than private insurance today. Once you are committed to covering primary care, specialist care, outpatient and inpatient care, there is a high unavoidable cost.

      In the real world, insurers use high deductibles to blunt the cost of ‘basic coverage’ policies. I doubt that this would sit well with these authors.

      To paraphrase the great politician Sam Rayburn, I’d be a lot more comfortable if Einav and Finkelstein had ever worked for a real insurance company.

      Loading...
  2. Devon Herrick says:
    August 28, 2023 at 6:20 pm

    Item three: Out-party hate is more powerful than in-party love. That is one thing I have always thought that Trump got wrong about campaign politics. Once in office he should have been more of a uniter rather than empowering his opponents by antagonizing them. In the process of rallying his base, he also rallied his opponents’ base while making the median voter disinterested.

    Loading...
    Reply
  3. Bob Hertz says:
    August 29, 2023 at 7:18 am

    Let me be more specific on why I think that “basic insurance” would be hard to implement.

    In any health insurance plan, the sickest 10 per cent of enrollees account for about 70-75 per cent of the claims costs.

    Under a ‘basic insurance’ plan, these ten percent are still with you. It will be very hard to reduce premiums.

    Now, there are cheaper insurance plans nonetheless. How are they cheaper? 1. Higher deductibles 2. Lifetime and annual limits 3. Underwriting — you don’t let some of the ten percent into your plan in the first place.

    Loading...
    Reply
  4. Bart Ingles says:
    August 29, 2023 at 3:09 pm

    In-party love tends to be tempered by healthy cynicism, while out-party hate is easily exploited and exacerbated by various media in search of ratings, as well as by opponents.

    A lot of this is made possible by our single-vote plurality voting system, which keeps a two-party duopoly in power. Under such a system, whenever there is a three-way race it is generally the centrist, if there is one, who fares worst because of the center-squeeze effect. This leaves the two fringe candidates to fight it out from opposite sides of the political spectrum.

    It’s easy to see with a simple thought exercise: picture an electorate distributed evenly from 1st to 100th percentile along a policy dimension. Now picture three candidates, positioned at the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile. Intuitively you might expect the centrist to have the advantage. But if voters all choose the candidate closest to their own position, the two fringe candidates will come out ahead with 37.5 percent of the vote each, while the centrist loses with only 25 percent.

    Runoff elections, whether by traditional or ranked-ballot, are also subject to the center-squeeze effect. The centrist is still eliminated first, so they can only alter which fringe candidate will win.

    Approval voting is not subject to the center-squeeze effect, and in fact may slightly favor the centrist, but is currently limited to municipal elections in Fargo, ND and Saint Louis, MO. Hopefully we will see wider usage in the future, along with more approval polling instead of the “choose one” kind.

    Loading...
    Reply
  5. John Fembup says:
    September 5, 2023 at 9:00 am

    “I do not think they have the slightest idea of how to design a national “basic coverage” policy that costs any less than private insurance today. Once you are committed to covering primary care, specialist care, outpatient and inpatient care, there is a high unavoidable cost.”

    Not true. France does just fine.

    Loading...
    Reply

Join the conversation.Cancel reply

For many years, our health care blog was the only free enterprise health policy blog on the internet. Then, when the NCPA closed its doors, the health blog stopped as well.

During this five-year hiatus no one else has come forward to claim the space. So, my colleagues and I have decided to restart the blog in connection with the Goodman Institute. We invite you and others to use this forum to share your views.

John C. Goodman,

Visit www.goodmaninstitute.org

Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 36 other subscribers

Popular Topics

©2025 The Goodman Institute Health Blog | Website by Lexicom
%d