Center for Business and Economic Research - Ball State University


CBER Data Center
Projects and PublicationsEconomic IndicatorsWeekly CommentaryCommunity Asset InventoryManufacturing Scorecard

About

Commentaries are published weekly and distributed through the Indianapolis Business Journal and many other print and online publications. Disclaimer

RSS Feed

Disclaimer

The views expressed in these commentaries do not reflect those of Ball State University or the Center for Business and Economic Research.

Recent

Don’t Expect the UAW to GrowThere is no evidence of a resurgence in the UAW or other industrial unions today.

Thoughts About Trump’s Tax PlanIn considering any tax change, first ask how it might eventually reduce the debt.

China Is a Poor and Failing NationChina is getting in the way of its own economic growth.

Work From Home Is Here to StayAt least 1 million Hoosiers work from home at least one day per week.

View archives

Top Tags

jobs and employment 237
economics 180
education 153
economic development 153
state and local government 140
taxes 126
indiana 117
budget and spending 111
finance 110
migration and population change 109
Browse all tags
Reporter / Admin Login

August 17, 2009

The Tricky Health Care Debate

In almost every place two or more Americans gather health care is debated. Because the bills before Congress are inaccessible, the debate has shifted to first principles such as the role of government and individual freedoms. I think this a healthy thing. But for advocates of the bills before Congress it exposes some tough questions.

Despite what you may hear, we have universal health coverage in the U.S. through a combination of private insurance, public assistance and regulatory restrictions on hospitals. The structure of this explains some of the growth in health care expenditures, but it is not all of the explanation. Economists have long known that we spend an increasing share of our income on health care as we become wealthier. This is the textbook definition of a luxury good.

In truth, health care is a fairly simple personal service, which is complicated by government rules and institutions (like the AMA). Health care financing – which is part, but not all of the issue at hand – is very complex.

Despite the fundamental simplicity of the health care supply chain, advocacy research on the issues is confusing and often quite bad. I think this is because so many in health care dabble in economic policy. It is as unwise to go to an economist for surgery as it is to attend a physician on economics, though the immediate results are less unpleasant. My favorite example is the much touted ‘health care costs’ of smoking, which are said to run into the hundreds of billions annually. This is true of course, but only if you would not otherwise die. Most of us will, and often of something more expensive to treat such as old age.

The truth is we will spend more, not less, on health care as we become richer – and live to be older. We Americans have been doing both for well over 200 years. But, many folks do not like the way health care dollars are spent. We live in a world of scarcity, where everything is rationed. Free markets, not government commissions will always be better at it. So, I think households are best suited to make these choices.

This brings us to the final folly of the health care debate – cost.

The bills before Congress are touted by their advocates to actually cut the cost of health care through a combination of regulatory changes and a government insurance option. The Congressional Budget Office and everyone with a lick of common sense disagrees.

The real anger though is aimed at the government insurance option. There is good reason for this, because any government insurance option can quickly crowd-out all other forms of health care delivery except for the very, very rich.

I am sure there is much good in the bill, and to be sure health care insurance rules can use some tweaking. But if you like the government insurance option you no doubt think Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were great for housing markets.

Link to this commentary: https://commentaries.cberdata.org/50/the-tricky-health-care-debate

Tags: health care


About the Author

Michael Hicks cberdirector@bsu.edu

Michael J. Hicks, PhD, is the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research and the George and Frances Ball distinguished professor of economics in the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. Hicks earned doctoral and master’s degrees in economics from the University of Tennessee and a bachelor’s degree in economics from Virginia Military Institute. He has authored two books and more than 60 scholarly works focusing on state and local public policy, including tax and expenditure policy and the impact of Wal-Mart on local economies.

© Center for Business and Economic Research, Ball State University

About Ball State CBER Data Center

Ball State CBER Data Center is one-stop shop for economic data including demographics, education, health, and social capital. Our easy-to-use, visual web tools offer data collection and analysis for grant writers, economic developers, policy makers, and the general public.

Ball State CBER Data Center (cberdata.org) is a product of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University. CBER's mission is to conduct relevant and timely public policy research on a wide range of economic issues affecting the state and nation. Learn more.

Terms of Service

Center for Business and Economic Research

Ball State University • Whitinger Business Building, room 149
2000 W. University Ave.
Muncie, IN 47306-0360
Phone:
765-285-5926
Email:
cber@bsu.edu
Website:
www.bsu.edu/cber
Facebook:
www.facebook.com/BallStateCBER
Twitter:
www.twitter.com/BallStateCBER
Close