What’s next for health care?
Now that it looks like the Obama health care bill may fail, some conservative economists are putting forth ideas on what we should do instead. Most of the proposals are very interesting, and some seem like they may be better that the bill now before congress. Of course, a bill in theory will usually be better than the one before congress, but the ideas are still worth considering.
Eugene Fama (scroll down toward the bottom)
The common thread is that moral hazard is the main problem. These answers make sense economically. Here’s what I’d like to know: as much as I run into this theme, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a health economist make these arguments. I can’t remember seeing a conservative economist quote a health care expert. However, Matthew Yglesias and Ezra Klein seem to regularly quote health care economists at places such as MIT and Harvard. What is the reason for this? Does the research in this field say that this is not the main problem and these people are just unaware? Are these opinions backed up by research in this field but just aren’t brought into the discussion? Is there some kind of selection bias (only liberals want to research health care!) so that these people feel it is alright to ignore research by those in the field.
-Meusebach
The Daily Crockett 
Leave a comment