Would be better without government intervention in medicine.
You don't get that kind of standard of living through Libertarianism. Of course, this is not what Libertarians desire in a society, so my point is mute.
We've never experienced a real libertarian-capitalist society, so there's no room for your argument.
The same argument holds for your argument. How do you know that healthcare would be better in a libertarian-capitalist society if there is no modern example of a libertarian-capitalist society?
Because we used to have a time where medicine and health care was a good deal less regulated-before medicare and medicaid. Those were the days that health care was of better quality and cheaper. Granted a 'whole picture' scenario doesn't make a point, but we can pick generalities to say that adding government to the equation makes services more costly and less efficient.
What old days? The past has been marked by a lack of health care especially if you didn't have any money. The Nordic model of health care (with the grand differences there is between the different systems) is marked by a easy and costless access to health care independent of your job situation and finacial situation. That said, it is in no way a perfect system. There are plenty of flaws and problems because no system is perfect, but that has nothing to do with it being run by the government. There is NO decisive proof that a private organisation is better at runing anything better that a public organisation.
One thing I would like to know is how you would finance a complety private health care system. Heavy insurances? Only get the service if you got the money? A health care system has very little to do with classic supply/demand-models
btw love your avatar
