Rationing Fire Department Services
Uwe Reinhardt thinks this is consumer directed fire service. I think it's entirely political. The victims are offering to donate to the mayor's reelection campaign.
Health Care Policy and Reform Insights | NCPA
-
Recognition and Awards
If this had truly been consumer directed fire service, there would have been twice as many trucks, a choice of motorized or manual ladders, regular and extra-safe landing nets, and, of course, helicopter rescue options for those who chose to exit up rather than down.
And the fire would have been out sooner.
The video is pretty amusing and is intended to suggest that capitalism and health care don’t mix. But, does it really? I think it shows just the opposite.
First, the public (socialized) fire department is clearly under equipped for the task at hand. Ten or so people need to be rescued but they have only one net. That being the case, how should they allocate the resource? By random lottery? Or by choosing the person most worthy of rescue by some criteria — perhaps a child with the most years yet to live, or perhaps an elderly person who merits being saved for her many years of service to society, or perhaps the person with the greatest earning potential who will contribute the most to society’s well-being in the future? Or, most likely, the city councilman who votes on salary increases for the firemen holding the net? Are these methods better than an auction?
More importantly, with all these people bidding to be saved, a capitalist fire department will not want to forego the earning opportunity. It will invest in more nets to save more people and collect more money.
So it was with Ben Franklin and his privately owned Union Fire Company, which later led to the Philadelphia Contributionship for the Insurance of Houses from Loss by Fire. By the way, this company did not believe in Community Rating. It charged wooden houses triple the premium as brick houses and denied coverage for houses with trees in front of them.
Did Franklin’s company charge the same rate for all brick houses, and another fixed rate for all wooden houses? If so, wouldn’t this be Modified Community Rating?
All you folks are missing the most important part of the video. Remember “going, going, gone”? That’s a contract. No private firm would renege on a contract that causes someone’s death — especially for $10.
That would cause a hugely expensive lawsuit.
By contrast, governments can break contracts at will.
Ergo, this must be a governmentl entity.