Medical Expenses, Naive application of economic theory

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of economic theory to the medical field, specifically questioning why traditional market dynamics, such as supply and demand, seem not to apply to healthcare services. Participants explore barriers to entry, market competition, and the role of government regulation in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the principles of supply and demand should apply to medicine, questioning why this is not the case.
  • Another participant challenges the initial assertion, asking for clarification on the belief that economic principles do not apply to medicine.
  • A third participant points to barriers of entry in the medical field as a significant factor affecting market dynamics.
  • One participant elaborates on the complexities of market competition, noting that high entry costs can deter new firms from entering the healthcare market, thus allowing existing firms to maintain economic profits.
  • The same participant discusses the concept of contestable non-competitive markets, where firms have economic profit but limited pricing power, and how this impacts consumer prices.
  • A later post reiterates the initial question about the applicability of economic theory to medicine and introduces the idea of government regulation as a potential influencing factor.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of economic theory to medicine, with some arguing that traditional principles do apply while others highlight significant barriers and complexities that complicate this application. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention barriers to entry and government regulation as factors that may influence the dynamics of the healthcare market, but these points are not fully explored or agreed upon, leaving some assumptions and implications unaddressed.

Iforgot
Messages
105
Reaction score
0
So I learned way back in economics 101, that when it's more profitable to produce/provide service A rather than B, more people will jump on the A band wagon, until the supply of A increases to the point that the price of A is no longer greater than B.

Why does this not apply for medicine? Is it the lack of sufficient schools to train more doctors?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
It does apply, but elementary theory is just that: elementary. In the real world, markets are not perfectly competitive. As dickfore said, there are barriers to entry (fixed costs), at the least.

In the event that a firm must pay a high cost to enter a new market, it is dissuaded from doing so unless it can earn positive sustained economic profits. If it observes operating firms earning a positive economic profit, but also observes a high entry cost and anticipates other firms paying that cost to enter the market, it will stay out (it rightly expects the entry of competitive firms to reduce economic profits to zero, and it will be out its sunk costs).

Firms will only enter profitable new markets if the cost of entry is very low, or they anticipate that their position would be defensible. The market for healthcare is relatively difficult to enter, which dissuades the entry of new firms and probably allows for some economic profit. The market is still relatively competitive, however; firms operate with diminished pricing power and their potential for economic profit is diminished (at the point where P ~= MC) but non-zero. These are called contestable non-competitive markets; the individual firms have economic profit but no pricing power - if the profit-maximizing gap between MC and AC is too large, the entry disincentive is lost and the firm will face new competition, lowering the gap. This provides an incetive for incumbent firms to choose to operate at a point inside the profit-maximizing intersect, and consumers benefit from lower prices.

There are also other avenues consumers have to prevent producers from earning high economic profits, ie by raising the cost of capital and/or labor.

Make sense?
 
Iforgot said:
So I learned way back in economics 101, that when it's more profitable to produce/provide service A rather than B, more people will jump on the A band wagon, until the supply of A increases to the point that the price of A is no longer greater than B.

Why does this not apply for medicine? Is it the lack of sufficient schools to train more doctors?

Is there any Government regulation imposed on your A / B example?
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
12K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
9K