A libertarian take on health care

Summary

In this enlightening discussion, Matt Welch, Editor-in-Chief of Reason magazine, talks about the healthcare system in France and its implications from a libertarian viewpoint. While many associate libertarianism with smaller government, Welch commends the French healthcare model, which is often criticized by American libertarians. He addresses common misconceptions about foreign health systems, the convoluted nature of the American healthcare system, and the importance of market competition in driving down costs and increasing coverage. Welch also discusses American ideologies concerning government intervention, and the potential benefits of state-level experimentation in healthcare policy.

Highlights

• Matt Welch finds some positive aspects in the French healthcare system, despite libertarian tendencies towards smaller government. 🇫🇷
• He argues that misconceptions about foreign health systems skew the American healthcare debate. 🤔
• Welch believes that increased market competition could lead to better healthcare outcomes in the U.S. by lowering costs and increasing availability. 📉
• He highlights the ideological bias in America's view of government-run healthcare programs. 🚦
• The conversation touches on the potential for states to become incubators for innovative healthcare solutions. 🌟

Key Takeaways

• Libertarians don't always oppose socialized healthcare; they sometimes find merit in certain systems, like France's unique model. 🏥
• Misconceptions abound in the U.S. about foreign healthcare systems, with many myths debunked in this discussion. 🚫
• Market competition is seen by libertarians as a means to reduce healthcare costs and improve quality. 🏪
• The American healthcare debate is deeply ideological and often misinformed about other countries' successes and failures. 🇺🇸
• There is a push for more state-level experimentation in healthcare innovation and policy development. 🌐

Overview

Matt Welch, the Editor-in-Chief of Reason magazine, discusses his intriguing view on the healthcare systems in France as it relates to libertarian beliefs. Despite working from a framework that traditionally favors less government intervention, Welch notes the successes of the French model, which defies typical American criticisms of socialized medicine.

Throughout the discussion, Welch dispels myths about foreign healthcare systems, stressing that ideologies often muddle facts in the American debate. He provides insight into how these misconceptions shape policies and public opinion, advocating for a more fact-based discourse on the potential integration of good practices from abroad.

Welch also underscores the importance of market competition in healthcare, noting that more choices for consumers could drive down costs and improve the quality of care. His optimistic view encourages state-level policy innovation, reflecting on the possibilities if states individually experiment with public healthcare systems as opposed to a singular national approach.

Chapters

• 00:00 - 00:30: Introduction, musical intro, and welcome segment The chapter begins with an introduction that includes a musical intro and a welcome segment. The host, Paul Jay, introduces the show from the Real News Network's studio in Washington and welcomes guest Matt Welch, the editor-in-chief of Reason Magazine. Paul provides a brief background on Matt's career, mentioning his previous work at the Los Angeles Times. Paul highlights that Reason Magazine and its website are broadly Libertarian in perspective, setting the stage for the conversation.
• 00:30 - 01:00: Welcoming Matt Welch, Reason Magazine and innovative perspective on French health care In this chapter, the discussion focuses on Matt Welch from Reason Magazine and his unique view on the French health care system. Although it may seem surprising for a Libertarian to praise a foreign health care system, Welch shares a personal perspective. His wife is French, which allows him to experience the French health care system firsthand during his visits to France. He contrasts this with typical perceptions in America, particularly from a Libertarian standpoint.
• 01:00 - 02:00: Personal experiences and perspectives on French versus U.S. healthcare systems The chapter discusses personal experiences and perspectives on French versus U.S. healthcare systems. The narrator shares their surprise at the high quality of healthcare received in France, which contradicts the negative stereotypes often associated with socialized medicine, especially from a U.S. right-wing perspective.
• 02:00 - 03:00: Discussion on healthcare caricatures, choices, and systematic issues The chapter covers the ongoing debate over socialized medicine in the United States, touching on perspectives from the Democratic Party leadership. It mentions the fear of implementing socialized medicine but also notes that some of the criticized elements are present in the current American healthcare system rather than the French system. The discussion hints at systematic issues in the healthcare choices available in America.
• 03:00 - 04:00: American system's convolution and personal anecdotes The chapter discusses the complexity of the American healthcare system, highlighting personal experiences with choosing in-network doctors, and contrasting it with experiences in France. It emphasizes the challenges in finding doctors within the network and addresses common misconceptions regarding payment responsibilities in the French healthcare system.
• 04:00 - 05:00: Critique of U.S. healthcare status quo and ideological debates The chapter critiques the U.S. healthcare status quo and explores ideological debates surrounding the system. It compares the heavily subsidized systems, where people pay small fees at the point of contact, to the complex and convoluted third-party system in America. This complexity leads to confusion about how the system operates for individuals.
• 05:00 - 06:00: Potential for market competition in healthcare systems The chapter discusses the complexities and inefficiencies present in the healthcare billing system, using a personal anecdote about receiving unexpected and high medical bills for simple procedures and prescriptions. It highlights the lack of transparency and understanding in healthcare costs, demonstrating a need for clearer and more competitive market practices within healthcare systems.
• 06:00 - 07:00: Dual citizenship and comparisons with Canadian healthcare This chapter discusses the challenging experience of dealing with healthcare costs in the American system. The narrator recounts a personal story of seeking medical care in California while financially constrained. They emphasize the lack of transparency regarding costs throughout the treatment process, only to be faced with a $33,000 bill at the end. The story highlights the financial burden and unpredictability of healthcare expenses in the U.S.
• 07:00 - 08:00: Ideological dynamics in American healthcare debates The chapter delves into the complex ideological dynamics of American healthcare debates, highlighting the dual nature of the system. While acknowledging that the U.S. healthcare system produces world-class medical innovation and top-end healthcare services, it also criticizes the system for being convoluted and lacking price sensitivity. The speaker reflects on personal concerns about healthcare as they age, noting a preference for the U.S. system despite its flaws due to its advanced medical procedures.
• 08:00 - 09:00: Historical factors affecting the U.S. healthcare framework The chapter discusses the misconceptions surrounding foreign healthcare systems, particularly the Canadian and French models, among Americans. It highlights that while both Canada and France utilize government insurance with private delivery, allowing patients to choose their doctors, the American healthcare debate is often clouded by misinformation and ideological biases, particularly fears of government overreach in health care.
• 09:00 - 10:00: Implications of the status quo on employment and insurance The chapter discusses the ideology surrounding the American political debate, particularly from a libertarian perspective that favors smaller government. It highlights the persistent presence of this ideology. Additionally, it critiques the American tendency to misunderstand or overlook international contexts and use foreign nations as tools in domestic arguments.
• 10:00 - 11:00: Confusion within Democrat healthcare proposals and public opinion The chapter discusses the confusion and public apprehension surrounding Democrat healthcare proposals, highlighting a deep-rooted American suspicion of large government. This fear extends to the current healthcare debate, where there is unease about the state assuming a greater role in one-sixth of the economy, given healthcare's personalized nature.
• 11:00 - 12:00: Divergent healthcare systems in France, Britain, and U.S. The chapter discusses the benefits of market competition in healthcare systems, focusing on France, Britain, and the U.S. The speaker advocates for increased competition to drive down prices and increase insurance availability. The argument is made that individuals should have control over their healthcare choices, rather than having them tied to employment.
• 12:00 - 13:00: Possibility of state-run insurance systems in the U.S. The speaker discusses the potential benefits of a state-run insurance system in the U.S., drawing from the Canadian model. They express a desire for more stability in health insurance, particularly when transitioning between jobs, and suggest that a system that allows consumers to shop around more freely would be beneficial. They highlight a concern that the current system, with its numerous regulations, limits competition and consumer choice.
• 13:00 - 14:00: Economics of public and private healthcare systems The chapter discusses the impact of linking healthcare to employment, leading to a lack of choice and freedom for workers who fear losing their healthcare benefits if they switch jobs. This situation is likened to bonded labor, restricting personal and professional growth. The narrative traces back to post-World War II policies, specifically wage controls imposed by Harry Truman, marking a critical point in how healthcare became tied to employment in the United States.
• 14:00 - 15:00: Discussion on the implications and potential for state experimentation The chapter discusses how organizations resorted to offering extensive healthcare packages as a way to attract top talent when salary increases were not feasible. This approach was initially incentivized by tax codes and other regulations. The text reflects on how this practice emerged during the era when employees typically stayed with the same company throughout their careers, a period preceding the more transient professional culture of today.
• 15:00 - 16:00: Libertarian views on healthcare market competition The chapter delves into libertarian perspectives on healthcare market competition, highlighting the notion that the core issue in the healthcare system is the employer-related and third-party delivery approach. It points out that, despite recognition from economists across the spectrum, political figures like Barack Obama have avoided addressing this issue to maintain the status quo. The chapter suggests that equal treatment for individuals and employers would significantly improve the healthcare system, potentially enhancing market competition and efficiency.
• 16:00 - 17:00: Concerns about Medicare, insurance systems, and regulatory balance The chapter delves into concerns regarding Medicare, insurance systems, and the balance of regulations. It highlights the confusion stemming from the Democratic party's communication about healthcare reform and reflects on external healthcare systems like those in France and Canada. The discussion emphasizes transparency issues surrounding the proposed health bill, exemplified by a statement from Nancy Pelosi that suggests the bill's content is not fully comprehended even by its proponents. This sentiment is embodied by the complexity of the bill, which spans 2400 pages, leaving many uncertain about its implications and provisions.
• 17:00 - 18:00: Pharmaceutical costs and healthcare expenditure analysis This chapter explores the challenges and intricacies associated with pharmaceutical costs and healthcare expenditure. It critiques governance issues in healthcare, particularly focusing on how insurance is conflated with healthcare provision and the impact of policies introduced under the Obama administration. The chapter underscores the implications of implementing universal insurance coverage with specific mandates, highlighting the resultant shift towards a top-down system in which people are obliged to participate.
• 18:00 - 19:00: Innovation and pharmaceutical industry dynamics The chapter discusses the inefficiencies and frustrations associated with the healthcare system in the context of insurance, particularly from the perspective of young and healthy individuals who struggle to find suitable insurance coverage. It highlights the desire for catastrophic insurance to avoid financial ruin from unexpected, significant medical events rather than comprehensive coverage for routine tests, reflecting discontent with the existing system. The chapter also touches on political aspects, noting that an opportunity may have been missed in the healthcare debate.
• 19:00 - 19:30: Conclusion and plan for future segments The chapter discusses the complexity of creating a fair healthcare insurance system. It highlights an argument for a unified pool for insurance, which would include both young and old, to balance costs over a lifetime. The conversation notes the challenge of making such a system compulsory for Americans, implying the difficulty in policy implementation despite the logical benefits of a comprehensive insurance pool.

A libertarian take on health care Transcription

• 00:00 - 00:30 [Music] welcome back to the real News Network I'm Paul Jay in our studio in Washington and joining us now is Matt Welch Matt is the editor and chief of Reason magazine he used to write at the Los Angeles Times thanks for joining us thanks for having me back so for those who don't know and maybe you don't know reason magazine and reason.com is a Libertarian uh in the broadest Strokes libertarian website and magazine um and Matt you you
• 00:30 - 01:00 wrote something recently on healthc care uh which wasn't normally thought of being something would come from a Libertarian uh where you wrote you actually like the health system in France so talk a bit about what's going on here and what you wrote um my wife is French so I experience health care a little bit differently than the average uh libertarian or average person in America I every year go there for Christmas and yeah I think I was there last time I went to the dentist I think
• 01:00 - 01:30 I had a filling I don't even really know I wasn't paying attention uh and uh I get routine healthc care done there and I've always been struck by a what high quality it is generally speaking both for me and my wife and our small child and extended family uh and how it doesn't match up with the caricatures that are given towards in general socialized medicine but specifically France you see a lot on the uh right especially over the years be moaning oh
• 01:30 - 02:00 it would be terrible to have socialized medicine and not just to right you've heard it from the leadership of the democratic party as well how horrendous would be to have so oh we're not so we don't want socialized medicine we want a public option and now they don't even want that yeah I mean it it is entirely possible even probable that socialized medicine wouldn't work however when they do talk about this Bugaboo they describe elements that uh actually exist in the American system but not in the French system they say uh they say oh you know if we do this we won't be able choose
• 02:00 - 02:30 your own doctor uh well I don't know what kind of healthcare these people have had their whole lives but uh I know at various times through Blue Cross and other people you have to look for an in network doctor it's not very easy to choose one they talk about long waiting times I've never experienced anything like uh waiting time in France um they talk about uh uh you know people don't pay out of their own pocket or there's some like a confusion between the consumer and uh and the provider in France you go and to be fair this is
• 02:30 - 03:00 totally subsidized it's a big entitlement and they're having a difficult time paying for it however you go to the doctor you pay every time you pay at at the point of contact the price is very small it's it's very heavily subsidized but um but they just describe this Mirror Image world that doesn't exist whereas in America because we have this really convoluted you third-party system uh I have no idea how this stuff works honestly I mean I I go to the doctor you get you pay $40 at the at the door and then you get the first bill but
• 03:00 - 03:30 you're kind of supposed to ignore it because you're waiting for the it just doesn't make sense it's even more B Byzantine when you go to a hospital you go to a hospital my wife went to a hospital for an infection and she winds up they give her antibiotics she gets a $2,000 bill for an antibiotics prescription and then several months later there's another bill from another Doctor Who stuck his head in the door for something like another, that's really and if and if you like cannot understand this we were when the one time my wife had to go to an emergency
• 03:30 - 04:00 room she just was feeling very bad it turned out to me not much but um we were Stone broke at the time this is in California and we asked at every step of the way look we know she's dying but how much is this going to cost because we really couldn't afford it if it was above you know x00 and at every step of the way they said oh honey don't worry about it it's not an issue basically we can't tell you and then we got that $33,000 you know Bill at the end of the process like we can't we we can't afford this if we would have known this so in the American system uh for m money uh and my point of
• 04:00 - 04:30 view uh it is in many ways the worst of a lot of different worlds it does produce at the top end great Healthcare uh you know the best Innovation happens in this country as far as you know the best medical procedures happen here if you know I'm getting older now so when I get the serious diseases that older men tend to get maybe I would rather be here than there I don't I don't actually know um but what I do know is that the existing system uh is completely convoluted and there's no price sensitivity there's so so I mean I know
• 04:30 - 05:00 a little bit about the Canadian system I know more than a little bit as as viewers know I'm dual citizens and the hospital I was talking about my wife went to was in California we're on a trip but in Canada we have somewhat similar system to France uh government insurance private delivery we choose our own doctors um the American debate about this has been so filled with misinformation about other country system so imbued with ideology and the critique is all about big government takeover of Health Care that's why I'm
• 05:00 - 05:30 particularly interested in your point of view your your back your politics and your magazine is all about libertarianism it's all about smaller governments so what do you make of the ideology of this American debate well I mean I think it's a combination of things it's the uh uh ideology that's always going to be with us and there's also the very American uh complete lack of understanding of what happens outside its own borders uh and the use of other countries as uh as sort of a bludgeons with with which to hit people um I think that there is an understandable American
• 05:30 - 06:00 fear uh across all sectors of large government there's a very American tradition which you know puzzles foreigners to know end but we are uh inherently suspicious of a government that gets bigger and bigger and bigger every year the healthcare debate is part of that uh uh suspicion that's happening right now uh and it's it's an understandable one and there's an understandable impl we're talking about one six of the economy to have the state assume a much bigger role in that uh makes people nervous and it's a very intimate kind of personalized Healthcare
• 06:00 - 06:30 thing um from my point of view as someone who believes that in competition in Market competition wherever possible uh I think that we would get a lot more uh we would be able to maintain a lot of this Innovation that we enjoy here legitimately but we would also get to where we want to be in terms of driving prices down and increasing the amounts of insurance available to people if there was more competition if people individuals had control over their own healthc care Destiny instead instead of having it tied to their employment or
• 06:30 - 07:00 through Cobra or something like that if I could just pay for my you know x00 for my plan and it goes with me next time I get fired um I would feel much more uh sanguin I don't really know what that means about our uh Health Care policy here because I wouldn't have that fear of what happens when I go in between jobs also I'd be able to shop around if the system was set up that I could really shop if there wasn't just as is in California like three insurance companies because when you add a thousand regulations it's just going to weed out anyone who small that's the thing from from putting on my Canadian
• 07:00 - 07:30 hat that's so bizarre to try to understand is that people become practic practically like bonded laborers to their employer because they're terrified if they leave they won't get another job with Healthcare so they stay in jobs they hate which is the which is the very definition of lack of choice the the original sin in healthcare in this country is what happened after World War II it is when they said uh actually I think it was Harry Truman imposed uh wage controls basically you can't give you any more money for this year because
• 07:30 - 08:00 we're all tightening our belts and so what did people do they said aha if we can't uh increase salary to try to get uh ATT trct our best talent we will give them a big fancy Healthcare package because that's not wages um from that moment on in the tax code and and other areas of life uh employers have been incentivized to uh to do healthc care and the government policy has been basically let's tie it let's extend that relationship that was back in the company man era that's back that's like pread men when we all stayed at the same
• 08:00 - 08:30 job for 25 years that era is gone and most honest Healthcare economists from all sides of the debate including our crazy little side over here will say that was the original problem however you'll notice that Barack Obama isn't touching that with a 10-ft pole no one wants to upset that status quo the status quo of third- party delivery the status quo of it's all employer related if there was equal treatment for individuals and employers our healthare system here would look a lot different and a lot better well if they actually the public option and defended it in a
• 08:30 - 09:00 robust way that people had that choice and weren't so defensive about what was going on in France and Canada and say here what can we learn from it but the the the message coming from the leadership of the democratic party has been so confused I don't think people actually know what they're pitching oh no I mean Nancy Pelosi said I think just yesterday like look let's pass this only by passing this bill will we know what's in it uh and I mean you want to think that's a joke or a misquote and it's neither it's actual it's a 2400 page Bill no one really understands it and if
• 09:00 - 09:30 we just pass it we'll like work out the details later that's just insane that is terrible governance on every level what you have also is is I think a democratic um conflation with insurance and Healthcare so you have Obama uh not just saying I I want to insure everybody which is an understandable goal but like uh I want to also make sure that everybody's Insurance contains this this this this and this we will pay for these things uh this will be free uh this is creating more of a top- Down system and also making people buy into a more
• 09:30 - 10:00 expensive system and and you know insurance from my point of view especially as I was young and healthy and I'm someone who didn't couldn't get insurance for three years in this country and I'm very bitter about it to this day uh you know the insurance that I wanted back then was what happens if I get hit by a car tomorrow I don't want to be bankrupt I don't want my children to be bankrupt what can I do there that's basically all I wanted I didn't want to get you know a free testing for this disease and that disease I was in my 20s you know just give me the catastrophic stuff and if Democrats would have gone into this uh debate
• 10:00 - 10:30 saying okay here's a way to open up competition in the general sector and then we're going to have this option over here for people who have pre-existing conditions or whatever that that is but the argument there is that the pool doesn't include the young people who only really want the car accident Insurance sure then the cost gets way too much and you're going to need it when you get old so the only way over the course of everybody's lifetime to make it fair is there has to be one great big pool doesn't that Mak sense doesn't it uh it makes sense until you get to the point where you're talking about making a making making something compulsory for Americans to to do uh and
• 10:30 - 11:00 I think I mean that there's an open constitutional question whether that is uh is would actually pass constitutional muster if it passes it won't pass I mean an interest we're we are talking policy but the reality of politics right now is I think uh this thing has zero chance of passing the current bill current bill has zero chance of passing I would bet you know what little money is in my bank account that uh that it won't pass and I would have made that bet as soon as Scott Brown didn't uh won election in Teddy Kennedy's old seat from that
• 11:00 - 11:30 moment on Democrats didn't have a filibuster proof majority and this thing is just unpopular it's hugely unpopular right now and but but you like the French system so if do you think Obama should have come out pitching something like the French system I don't and uh here's why the French do things better than other people do when it comes to their public sector um what as good as the French Health Care system is uh it is uh it is so much better than the British healthcare system which is also a similar type of system the Brits are not very good uh when it comes to their
• 11:30 - 12:00 uh uh Pro productivity of their public sector the French are famously very good at both productivity of of public sector and sort of a the general sense of solidarity uh among their citizens which reads into that they feel okay about the fact that people don't make a lot of money but we all have this generous welfare state not none of that is true in America and none of it is going to be true in America if you were to transplant that system onto the American host the body there certain states that are talking about the legislature in
• 12:00 - 12:30 California has passed the single-payer system Governor won't sign it Pennsylvania seems to be heading there Governor says he will sign it so there are states that are talking about essentially Public Health Care insurance systems and it would be great if uh if there was some element of State experimentation you know I mean ma Massachusetts famously did uh what they found is that it's super expensive and it's getting more expensive every year for the state and also for the individuals who are in the system and that's the system that Obama's been trying to sort of or taking at least as part of his
• 12:30 - 13:00 inspiration and it's the problem with France too frankly uh there is a a very negative side effect to their Healthcare System and their generalized sense of welfare system it's it's putting an incredible stress on their public finances uh demographics are all set against it and there's a generalized I would say malaise in French society uh where people are rarely create stuff on their own they look to the state for everything uh there's not much dynamism among young people in terms of creting things and just doing stuff um uh music
• 13:00 - 13:30 aside and a few other things and and jumping on buildings in a weird way um uh I'll have to get someone from France here to to talk to you about that uh yeah um no I mean uh but you like the idea of the movement to the states the idea that states would experiment with different kinds of public Insurance systems uh you know traditionally that has been a great laboratory uh in in America um at the same time I think that there's a strong argument to to be had basically if you would just open up the competition between the states if I was
• 13:30 - 14:00 in California and I could buy Nevada Insurance uh policy why the hell not you know I want to be able to uh choose from as many as possible well you know the counterargument the count you get states that have so little regulation theace to the bottom argument and it's it's certainly is happen in many areas of of Life yeah I have a difficult time understanding what that race to the bottom looks like if I'm in Mississippi to throw out a Bugaboo kind of state and they have very little regulations on their insurance companies uh and then presumably let say uh I as a citizen
• 14:00 - 14:30 there can uh shop in from a a California provider which does have regulations why wouldn't I just shop from one of those plac well because it'll be more expensive so you're going to wind up have a pressure going to the cheapest state and then the just in terms of price competition people are going to be who especially can't afford it are going to go more and more to the more deregulated option again without the big big pool you can't give a good system to everybody so you wind up again with cheap companies undercutting anybody that wants to be I think that the the answer lies in a
• 14:30 - 15:00 more limited idea uh if you're going to entertain Notions of the public option and the government getting involved in the provision of healthcare um then uh which it already is frankly I mean 50% of healthcare spending what's wrong with Medicare for all uh you know it's we'd be in a situation where uh uh medical decisions are inherently politicized I mean there was a a case I think two or three months ago where they talked about uh I think even under existing Medicare and I could be getting some of this wrong um there is a discussion of at
• 15:00 - 15:30 what point do we start cutting off uh you know uh annual mamogram tests is it age 40 or is doing it now I mean the companies don't pay for everything they decide of course not of course not everyone does their amortization and but if it's just Medicare for all and that's all that there is then there is no exit you know uh what I'm looking for is as the maximum number of exits or entry points so that if I want X system I can do that I can choose that as an individual if I'm happy with this system then I can choose that too where
• 15:30 - 16:00 everywhere else in American Society for the most part with the with the exception of the provision of government services consumers because they have this hysterical amount of choice have been able to drive down prices and drive up quality but in the provision of everything from healthare to education all these things where it's more difficult to leave a system uh when you don't have that kind of competition then you have much more sort of limitation on the quality of things and stuff gets more expensive that's the problem medic for all would be more and more expensive
• 16:00 - 16:30 every year it already just stretching out you know look at the at the trend lines on Medicare and Social Security but the private system's worse I I don't know that the private system is worse it is currently the private system is worse well worse on on what cost the cost increases has been worse on the private side well uh sure but uh I mean I mean one of the things people don't talk about is the cost of Pharma which is essentially the prices are unregulated in fact if anything there's been a protection of farmer in terms of Canadian cheaper but there you have a public system
• 16:30 - 17:00 cheaper drugs uh much cheaper cost per individual care same is true in the other countries that have public Insurance systems so if you're talking about cost it's the public systems that have reducing cost not the private system but but then you know who's paying for the costs I mean the the the well the whole society equally pay I mean yeah but I mean we're talking about a taxpayer you know trillions of dollars that go like this stretching on into infinity and that you just can't keep going that direction unless Society d own production you have Cost
• 17:00 - 17:30 Containment in the public systems in in Canada and France like every you know you've seen the numbers all the public systems per capita pay I think it's a third of what the US pays on Healthcare well I mean cost controls in the public system but if you look at at the experience in Massachusetts that's that is absolutely not the case it's not Cost Containment that those costs are literally going out of control right now we talking National systems with great big pools I mean the Canadian Health Care system can say to far farace cutical companies you know we're not
• 17:30 - 18:00 going to pay you a we're going to pay you B and you you really don't have a choice uh Massachusetts never had that kind of right I mean I think I think that gets Pharma is an enormous piece of this cost puzzle which which they're not the Democrats aren't talking it very much because Obama made a deal with Pharma so they don't want to talk about and which went against his own campaign promises if I'm not mistaken uh I mean that gets into a an area of of you know at what price and under what terms Innovation I mean there's a reason why we develop uh Pharmaceuticals here in this country pretty well part of that is
• 18:00 - 18:30 the protection of Monopoly pricing for some amount of time the seven-year period or whatever um and so I think we are understandably uh nervous about saying okay let's just cut that off at the knees and someone's going to produce those marvelous drugs that everybody else gets to have for for uh very cheap uh I'm not sure that we're at a place where it's a great idea to kneecap uh that kind of innovation I don't know what the right balance is there at all I'm I'm hardly an expert on that um but is a very interesting study that Brits
• 18:30 - 19:00 did on the number of new patents that have come from Europe and within the EU countries and it Rivals the American patents yeah is very interesting not all the Innovations coming from us pharmaceutical no certainly not I mean Hungary is a is a where I used to live is a a great innovator of pharmaceuticals and it even was uh under communism just to completely screw everybody's mind here that's watching especially from a Libertarian all right we're going to do this regularly and this is not a problem we're going to solve right now but thanks for joining us thank you very much and thank you for joining us on the real News Network we're going to do a regular gig with
• 19:00 - 19:30 Matt Welch every week or so and please join us for it [Music]