Public support for collective health provision is rooted less in technical market failures (asymmetric information, adverse selection) and more in a moral intuition that it is unethical to make sick people bear full costs. That instinct, rather than economic logic, explains much of popular support for broad coverage and therefore should be front‑and‑center when designing reforms.
— If true, reformers must address moral narratives—not just market fixes—so policy tools should reconcile individual responsibility (e.g., high‑deductible multi‑year insurance) with public values to build politically durable systems.
Scott
2026.01.08
78% relevant
Aaronson’s emphasis on following a ‘Morality Oracle’ (conscience) and privileging truth/good maps onto the existing idea that moral intuition and felt‑values drive public policy choices (the healthcare example shows how moral instincts shape policy beyond technical evidence). Both highlight that appeals to conscience and perceived moral clarity shape political behavior and institutional responses.
Arnold Kling
2025.12.01
100% relevant
Arnold Kling’s essay explicitly rejects Arrow/Stiglitz market‑failure justifications and asserts that ‘an instinct that making an individual pay for health care is immoral’ explains government intervention; he then proposes five‑year high‑deductible insurance as a policy response.
← Back to All Ideas