I've always wondered how the wealthy managed their health care, and now I know: "boutique medicine".
f firms like MDVIP are the Cadillac of health care, then MD2 (pronounced "M-D-Squared") is the Bentley -- offering unlimited access to patients who can afford it."Imagine if your brother, your father, or your mother was a physician and you became ill, that's what we provide," said MD2 partner John Moses.
Each MD2 doctor treats no more than 50 families, Moses said.
"What that means is that our physicians have all the time necessary to provide complete access to their patients, extraordinary care and service, and home or office visits," Moses said. "We're able to offer total privacy because it's highly unlikely that we would ever have more than one patient at our office at any given time."
The offices don't have waiting rooms (or much waiting) and patients are encouraged to call their doctors directly when they need to talk to them. If a patient needs to see a specialist, the MD2 doctor will help find the best ones and even go to the appointment.
Moses said MD2's style of care costs a family of four about $24,000 a year. That fee would cover all doctor visits and any other services the office provides, such as X-rays, but outside treatment -- an MRI, for example -- would cost extra.
Sounds like it might be a bit excessive, but there are certainly plenty of people who can afford it.
If there are people who without access to health care, isn't it a bit gluttonous to lavish these resources and expertise on those who buy this plan? (A plan which, presumably, doesn't actually deliver very much benefit to those who use it... I don't know how much better it is than the alternative plans in the US).
Spoken like a true socialist!
Shouldn't people be allowed to spend their money how they want? Or should the government tax away everything we earn and give it to people who earn less to eliminate such "gluttonous" behavior and make everything "fair"?
It doesn't have to be illegal for it to be immoral.
I believe there is an argument for a degree of socialism in the fields of medicine, education, defense and some other areas. Not every market is like computer hardware.
I think socialism works very well among small groups like families or churches, but just doesn't scale well because of selfishness and competition. It would be nice if everyone got all the health care they need, but that would basically require the enslavement of doctors and other medical professionals. Which is the worse evil, limited medical care governed by economic forces, or enslaved doctors? If you enslave the doctors, how long will there be medical care for anyone?
Forced socialism is basically slavery.
I think you're abusing the word "slavery". Would you say that the armed forces are enslaved, and that the US army is in danger of dissolving?
That's completely different for a whole host of reasons. Joining the military doesn't require hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of education paid for by loans, for one thing. For another, soldiers know what they're in for when they join. Doctors began their profession in a free market. Just imagine how you'd feel if the government came in and took over your job. C'mon.