Looking for competition in all the wrong places

American Thinker's James Eaves:

"Competition could work to improve quality and lower costs in health care, if the right mix of policies were part of health care reform. That increased competition would lower health care costs and increase accessibility seems widely accepted (at least publically) -- even among those on the left. But the leading reform proposals do not address the barriers to competition in health care, and would accelerate cost growth, even if a 'public option' isn't adopted.

America's health care market has a distinctive quality: over time, technology advances are associated with higher costs. This is unlike most markets. (Consider computers, high definition TVs, and digital cameras.) And the difference is not caused by something special about health care technology.

In fact, in the right market circumstances, health care technologies can advance while costs decline. The quality of some types of cosmetic surgery, such as breast augmentation, has increased while its cost actually has decreased."

Interesting thoughts.