A simple solution of 'culling the herd' through proxy seems to be the flavor of this fine new millennium.


Good luck FreeWorld!

---

Your beliefs become your thoughts,
Your thoughts become your words,
Your words become your actions,
Your actions become your habits,
Your habits become your values,
Your values become your destiny.

As usual, liberal ideas about commerce work just fine until the real world intrudes. What's the most recent industry to get a new batch of regulation? Health care. What happens immediately after the government sticks its nose further in the tent? Consolidation. The free market doesn't cause this, over regulation and government intrusion cause it.

 

UnitedHealthcare trying to buy Aetna.

 

http://moneybasicsradio.com/2015/06/unit...-or-stock/

 

Anthem trying to buy Cigna and Aetna trying to buy Humana.

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/anthem-bids-...1434821349

 

Of course Democrats want single payer and Republicans favor big business, so we're all going to get screwed. Too bad we don't have a free market solution to this madness.

 

LOL, when was the last time you read a book on economics.  I mean seriously, Econ101 completely shuts down your arguement.  You honestly think that the ACA (Obamacare) causes the consolidation?  Talk about a spurious correlation...  X happened.  Then A happened.  X caused A.  That's not always how it works...

 

We had a free market solution prior to the ACA...  The insurance companies were making up all the rules.  How'd that work out for us?  

---

LOL, when was the last time you read a book on economics.  I mean seriously, Econ101 completely shuts down your arguement.  You honestly think that the ACA (Obamacare) causes the consolidation?  Talk about a spurious correlation...  X happened.  Then A happened.  X caused A.  That's not always how it works...

 

We had a free market solution prior to the ACA...  The insurance companies were making up all the rules.  How'd that work out for us?  

 

Your comment about cause and effect is spot on. The ACA could be the immediate cause of consolidation if the insurance companies that went big into the exchanges suffered a loss, and made them ripe for takeover. But just because one happened after the other is not proof, or even a good indication of cause and effect. In any case, AFAIK the ACA didn't force insurance companies to sign up for the exchange business.


 

But health insurance has not been free market for a very long time. The fact that business got tax breaks for employee insurance while individuals didn't (federal regulations) distorts the market. Medicare and the pricing and other regulations that accompany it also distort the whole healthcare market. So do federal mandates that a hospital must accept every patient who shows up in the emergency room.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

LOL, when was the last time you read a book on economics.  I mean seriously, Econ101 completely shuts down your arguement.  You honestly think that the ACA (Obamacare) causes the consolidation?  Talk about a spurious correlation...  X happened.  Then A happened.  X caused A.  That's not always how it works...

 

We had a free market solution prior to the ACA...  The insurance companies were making up all the rules.  How'd that work out for us?  

 

The correlation is found in the incentives offered to the industry by the regulation. Rather than paying fee for service the new laws pay based on the outcomes to the population through bonus pools. Those pools represent increases to profits only if the size of the patient panel is large enough that the percentage increase tallies to a higher per claim rate than the current system. Therefore, the insurance companies are consolidating because each one must increase the number of covered lives in their organizations. The end result: each company that will survive must purchase patient panel by absorbing other payers. In other words, the ACA is driving consolidation. 

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

So you want totally free markets eh? That means removing your immigration policies too right? Or is that government intrusion ok?

You must be new here. Immigration wouldn't be an issue if we didn't have state mandated welfare, education, public utilities, and education.


My solution to immigration, turn off welfare, change over the tax code to a consumption tax. Mexico suddenly has an immigration problem not us.

---

To Malabar and flsprt, ok I can concede that the prior to the aca, the system was also not a free market. But my point remains that consolidation is not something new that only happened after the aca.


I posted a link to the sec filing of subsidiaries of cardinal health, this has been going on for decades.


This idea of a free market, in my opinion, is like that boy robot searching for the blue fairy in AI... it doesn't exist in the real world.


A society sets up the rules for commerce in order to protect the interests of the society. Therefore, the idea of a true free market doesn't and will never exist in the real world.


I though we should start discussing something that could actually occur... a fair market.


A fair market, in my mind, would be a situation where small businesses are protected and incentivized. A fair market would stop consolidation. A fair market would protect national business from moving to where cheap labor can be exploited, where national manufacturing can compete here in the usa. Level the playing field, and then let competition determine winners and losers.


At least we can all see that the current economic system is not a fair market or a free market...

---

To Malabar and flsprt, ok I can concede that the prior to the aca, the system was also not a free market. But my point remains that consolidation is not something new that only happened after the aca.


I posted a link to the sec filing of subsidiaries of cardinal health, this has been going on for decades.


This idea of a free market, in my opinion, is like that boy robot searching for the blue fairy in AI... it doesn't exist in the real world.


A society sets up the rules for commerce in order to protect the interests of the society. Therefore, the idea of a true free market doesn't and will never exist in the real world.


I though we should start discussing something that could actually occur... a fair market.


A fair market, in my mind, would be a situation where small businesses are protected and incentivized. A fair market would stop consolidation. A fair market would protect national business from moving to where cheap labor can be exploited, where national manufacturing can compete here in the usa. Level the playing field, and then let competition determine winners and losers.


At least we can all see that the current economic system is not a fair market or a free market...

The problem is trying to achieve a fair market leads to state controlled market.

---

The problem is trying to achieve a fair market leads to state controlled market.

That's the point you guys keep missing. Every market is to some extent beholden to a government entity. That's the fact of macro economics. To not have laws that govern commerce you'd have anarchy...

---

You must be new here. Immigration wouldn't be an issue if we didn't have state mandated welfare, education, public utilities, and education.

My solution to immigration, turn off welfare, change over the tax code to a consumption tax. Mexico suddenly has an immigration problem not us.

New round here? Been on this mb since 05. Not sure about USA but in Britain the British born population are much more likely to receive welfare than immigrants. Who moves countries for welfare? Your welfare system and standard of living is way behind Europe. Why wouldn't they just move there instead if they want welfare?

---

That's the point you guys keep missing. Every market is to some extent beholden to a government entity. That's the fact of macro economics. To not have laws that govern commerce you'd have anarchy...

 

However, my question is, at what point does a government entity actually hinder markets?

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

New round here? Been on this mb since 05. Not sure about USA but in Britain the British born population are much more likely to receive welfare than immigrants. Who moves countries for welfare? Your welfare system and standard of living is way behind Europe. Why wouldn't they just move there instead if they want welfare?

 

There's this thing in between called an ocean that's much harder to cross than the Rio Grande.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

However, my question is, at what point does a government entity actually hinder markets?

That's a really good question.


Do you think that combustion regulations on automobiles hinders the market?


I guess my questions to you would be, what do you consider a market hindrance... and can you give an example of one?

---

That's a really good question.


Do you think that combustion regulations on automobiles hinders the market?


I guess my questions to you would be, what do you consider a market hindrance... and can you give an example of one?

 

I don't know anything about combustion regulations, so I can't really answer your first question.

 

Regarding your second question, I won't name a specific example of hindrance in the market caused by government regulations, but a good start is this op-ed piece from USA Today.

 

Also, this article from entrepreneur.com also addresses the problem, though not very specifically.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

New round here? Been on this mb since 05. Not sure about USA but in Britain the British born population are much more likely to receive welfare than immigrants. Who moves countries for welfare? Your welfare system and standard of living is way behind Europe. Why wouldn't they just move there instead if they want welfare?

 

I would disagree, though it depends on what you would define a "good standard of living".

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

I'm talking about your average Joe. Better healthcare, live longer, work less hours, earn more, have more holiday, more welfare. But that means a bit more dirty socialism

---

I'm talking about your average Joe. Better healthcare, live longer, work less hours, earn more, have more holiday, more welfare. But that means a bit more dirty socialism

 

In the past I would have disagreed with you regarding health care.  It's become a mess.  I will tell you this though.  When I was in Scotland I spoke with a young lady that raved about the quality of our health care system.  That was a huge thing for her and something that she kind of envied about me being a "yank".

 

Live longer - that's probably debatable, but I wouldn't be surprised due to the diet that many Americans consume.

 

Work less hours / earn more - While I agree that Europeans work less hours, the benefits to me negate the result.  I would rather work the hours that I do, and earn what I get in order to maintain my standard of living.  Earning more money?  Not a chance.

 

More holiday - I get plenty of time off from my job and get to take vacations or take time off pretty much as much as I want (depending on what I earn).

 

More welfare - That's what's killing this country.  The last thing that we need is more welfare.

 

In my opinion, our standard of living is well beyond most other countries.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

American healthcare is the best in the world if you are very rich and can afford the best care available. Its health outcomes are poor for those at the bottom of the pile though where the socialised care model is superior.


I get 33 paid days holiday in Australia used to be about 36 in UK (including public holiday) how's that compare to your average office worker there? Or am I mistaken?

---

American healthcare is the best in the world if you are very rich and can afford the best care available. Its health outcomes are poor for those at the bottom of the pile though where the socialised care model is superior.


I get 33 paid days holiday in Australia used to be about 36 in UK (including public holiday) how's that compare to your average office worker there? Or am I mistaken?

 

A typical worker in the US starts out with 10 days vacation, 10 holidays, and 5 to 10 days of sick leave per year. Unused leave accumulates, so if you don't use a vacation day after your first year you can take 20 days off after two years. Unused vacation days are paid as days worked if an employee leaves with leftover vacation days. Unused sick leave is worthless, but some companies combine the two into a "paid time off," in which case the whole amount is paid on termination. The vacation days per year increase, usually in a lump increase to 15 and 20 after 5 and 10 years with the same company. But that varies significantly by company. Many companies only allow accumulation of vacation up to a set limit.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Yeah that's pretty poor. I just took 3 weeks paid leave to Europe and I had only worked for the company for 10 months. I think it is a bit short sighted too as it leads to fresher workforce and people on their holidays will often spend money into local economy. Hotels,restaurants bars etc. Would love to be able to go to Jags games at everbank but thec overall conditions not worth it.

---

How did I know before opening the link that this was all a hulabalou about income inequality? 

 

First off, the whole idea of income inequality is bogus.   A hedge fund manager is going to earn more than pre-school teacher.  A brain surgeon is going to earn more than an auto mechanic.  If that pulls on your heart strings or not it doesn't matter because it's the truth. 

 

As a proud supply side economics guy I have to say that the entire premise of the IMF report is a farce because It's never been the belief that "well if you artificially increase the incomes of rich people maybe they will give some crumbs to the poor."  The premise was based on the fundamental truth that the private sector manages conserves and produces resources better than the public sector and allowing everyone to keep and manage more of their own money would lead to greater economic success over the long term. 

 

The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.  This has always been true, unfortunately the statists have been so busy banging their heads against the cement wall trying to use federal intervention to change this basic truth than to ask the most fundamental question, "why?"  The answer is so simple that it defies logic, most people who are wealthy are wealthy because they became owners of their means of production and learned to grow their business.  Those who learn to grow their business or in the case of executives managers and successful sales people those who developed highly marketable skills and learned to grow their incomes tend to keep growing their income and or business.  Those at the bottom end of the spectrum end up having to work for those at the top and hence those who are wealthy have direct control and or input over wages and infinitely greater portions of ownership. 

 

The sad thing is that in American society anyone regardless of race color creed or background has the opportunity to develop a marketable skill set, own their means of production and move to the right side of the income quadrant on their way to financial independence, but we don't talk about it and definitely do not hold up those who overcame circumstances to achieve financial independence as examples to the rest of them.   instead you have people showing up to Bernie sanders rallies demanding their FAIR SHARE!

 

We teach information in our school systems.  We don't teach the tools of success.  If the left were serious about truly increasing the wealth of average americans they would be much more efficient with the 13 plus years that they are in charge of their entire educational process. 

---