The kind of reasoning that underpins the tired old asymmetric information bogeyman in health care falls straight into the behavioral symmetry between market participants and policy makers that is a core contribution of modern public choice economics: it is not believable to submit that governments have magic wands.

As for Medicare for All, the COVID-19 crisis in Canada has shown the brutal consequences of government-run health care: shortages just when you need care the most.

We need new drugs to fight COVID-19 and other diseases. But our government’s approval process makes that too hard.

The COVID-19 crisis is the result of decades of FDA rule.

Because nobody had an incentive to stockpile PPE or other medical equipment.

Three simple reforms: (1) posted prices for procedures; (2) Goodman-esque health savings accounts and high-deductible insurance; (3) age rather than community rating.

Why weren’t there enough Wuhan Corona Virus (COVID-19) tests? Because our government insists on control of medical innovation.

Highly restrictive government regulations have had the unintended consequence of shutting down tests that could detect outbreaks and save lives.

The South Korean government has brought about superior outcomes than the much heavier handed, authoritarian measures of China, Italy, the U.S., and virtually every other afflicted nation. 

In order for government to provide medical services to someone who cannot afford it, it must use intimidation, threats, and coercion to take the earnings of another American to provide that service.

In health care, and all fields, it’s better to see what competition can do rather than letting the government and its cronies decide what to allow.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., wants "Medicare for All," as does Sen. Bernie Sanders, D-Vt., her self-described "Democratic socialist" rival. Unlike Sanders, however, Warren claims she can finance her plan by raising taxes only on the superrich....