As I said, you have a very simplistic view of the world. You need to see reality.
Feel free to provide a detailed guide to how we know when non-competitive systems are preferred.
Simply saying "In health care" is not providing an answer.
I'm stating that as a general rule, competitive systems are better, and I think the data widely supports this. I'm not saying always & never. I'm not one of the kooks who will claim that only private enterprise greats wealth, well government never can. You need to look for wacko Libertarians to find that attitude. Both public and private entities have pretty much the same toolkit, and can both do pretty much the same job. I just have a bias towards competitive versions rather than non-competitive, and I don't view profits as evil.
For example, you might look at Public Utilities. As far as I can tell, Public Utilities do exactly the same function in certain states that private for-profit companies do in other states or regions. I suspect their efficiencies are actually close, and if you look at the mean for all Public ones vs. the mean for all Private ones and the variance of both, I doubt there is a large difference. It might well be that private ones come out on top (my guess) but I don't think by a large margin.
IMO, the same applies in health care. For-profit/non-profit, public/private is not the issue, even if in general I think there is bias for one combination to excel. |
