Over at Twitter, Matt Yglesias asks:
Do rightwingers really believe that US health insurance has no mortality-curbing impact?
I don't speak for "right-wingers," but I'll say this:
1. I genuinely don't know what to believe. And I often toy with the idea of an "innovation-maximizing" health care policy, so that future coverage is more effective.
2. I am commonly excoriated by people (not Matt) for not supporting government-subsidized universal health insurance, yet few if any of these people grapple seriously with the best evidence.
3. I live in a country where the extension of health insurance is a major issue, and a major budgetary issue, yet much of the discussion is in an evidence-free zone.
4. I don't view it as incumbent on me to come up with the final answers in this debate or even a provisional stance. It's incumbent on the people pushing coverage plans to make the case for what they are doing and so far they haven't. I do recognize that medical bankruptcy is a separate set of issues and that greater coverage will significantly lower financial risk. That said, the appropriate response on the health issue is not to change the topic and start talking about bankruptcy.
My original post is here.