Nevertheless, we have already provided an extensive criticism of a previous paper by John Goodman and Devon Herrick that took similar liberties in reaching spurious conclusions. That paper was “Twenty Myths about Single-payer Health Insurance.” (http://www.debate-central.org/topics/2002/book2.pdf) The response, written by John Geyman, was “Myths and Memes about Single-Payer Health Insurance in the United States: A Rebuttal to Conservative Claims.” (http://www.pnhp.org/facts/myths_memes.pdf). Repeating a similar critique of Goodman’s current paper is not worth our time since we’ve already made our point.

And ideologues? Yes, we support the ideology of egalitarianism – the view that everyone should have the health care that they need without having to face financial hardship. That is very different from the “you’re on your own” ideology wherein you are expected to shop for health care with your own health savings account that you were never able to fund.

He attacks Goodman, Herrick, Gorman and Sade for using studies that are “discredited as manipulations or distortions based on libertarian ideology, even though they are aware of the highly credible challenges to those reports.” However, he never bothers to cite a single example. I didn’t know that making an accusation without backing it up with evidence was a valid tehcnique of argumentation.

He suggests that Goodman et al. are inhuman by saying that their report is “repulsive to those of us outraged by the…victims of a flawed financing system.” Apparently it never occurs to him that Goodman, et al. could be outraged by the same thing but see the causes of and solutions to the problem as very different. There can be no intellectually honest disagreements. Goodman, Herrick, Gorman, Sade and anyone who agrees with them are just “ideologues.”

It sure is a good thing that we have all those “non-ideologues” at McCanne’s organization, Physicians for a National Health Plan, to enlighten us.

In his articles and studies, John Goodman explains how to draw on these same free-market forces to reduce the cost and improve the value of health care. By creating a financing system that rewards doctors who compete on quality and price, we can improve the overall value and reduce the overall cost of health care in this country. Goodman is also talking about creating and expanding markets that will bring affordable, quality health care to the low-income, chronically ill, the elderly, and other vulnerable populations – just like in other sectors of our economy. This, it seems to me, is a health care solution that would succeed in the United States. Entrepreneurs are ready to solve these problems, but in the health care sector of our economy, they are held back by burdensome government (and third-party insurance) payment schemes that actually pay them less when they create a better, more efficient way to deliver health care. The system is perpetuating mediocrity, instead of encouraging innovation and problem-solving.

I don’t mind if scholars want to study and examine the health care systems of Canada, France or Cuba – but I’m hesitant to copy an economic model to pay for health care from a country that never made a good car, TV, microwave or cell phone.

Instead let him answer the real question. If he were not (with his wife) making the better part of a million bucks a year running a propaganda mill funded by the HSA crowd, would he REALLY want to be a poor, uninsured sick patient in the US, or in one of those European hell holes where they don’t ration treatment via job, education level or choice of parents and send the collections agent after you when it’s done?

History has shown the virtues of the free market in every other sector of the economy. And our experience with partially free markets in health care also shows that people benefit tremendously when they are allowed to freely trade goods and services based on mutual self-interest — as is their right.

As a practicing physician, I’ve worked with many patients who use health savings accounts for their medical purchases and I’ve found them all to be consistently knowledgeable consumers interested in gaining the maximum benefit for their health dollar. I wish all my patients were like this.

America should not adopt the failed health systems of other countries. And I’m glad that people like Goodman, Gorman, Herrick, Sade, and Atlas are willing to make this point.

The only other aspect that did not find mention in this paper was how the lifestyle of the average American plays a part in higher health care utilization as compared to those in other developed countries.