Libertarians and Health Care

One of my core objections to libertarianism, despite it’s obvious appeal on social issues, is its apparent fuck-you approach to issues of poverty. Here’s Radley Balko on heath care:

Of course the left will celebrate when they ram this though, because though we’ll all then have equally crappy health care, it’s the equal part that’s most important to them.

Yes, because the primary concern of people advocating for socialized health care is equality, and not the inability of some Americans to get health care. Balko is usually a reasonable fellow, so this conspiratorial claim that those of us in favor of some sort of national health care are concerned only with equality is a bit disconcerting. I can assure Balko, for whatever it’s worth, that the primary concern isn’t equality, and that nobody believes that the richest Americans will be standing in line with the poorest Americans waiting for medical treatment. I think that while there may be wingnuts in this debate, almost everybody involved understands that the upper classes and better off will not be using whatever nationalized health care is settled upon. The health insurance companies will not go away, and private interests will continue to maintain firm footing in the marketplace.

If libertarians are genuinely interested in liberty, one wonders why it is always, always, always only their own. I would assume that aggregate increases in liberty for citizens nationwide would be a good, if not great, thing. Being able to get treatment for health conditions is precisely the sort of thing that increases the liberty possessed by Americans. And nevermind that, think of the good that having health insurance does for the marketplace. If people aren’t going deeply into debt to pay for medical treatment, they are free to spend that money on goods and services elsewhere in the marketplace. More participation by consumers will lead to better information, which will in turn lead to a better marketplace.

Sometimes, libertarians will complain about roads. But the government’s (almost) monopoly on roads is good for the marketplace, because it allows consumers and sellers to freely move about the country with ease. That the government takes care of the roads allows consumers and sellers to focus their attentions on other, more important, goals. Thinking of health care in the same way - as opposed to believing that it is a leftist conspiracy designed to hurt the rich - takes the edge off, no?