I thought you were a fan of medicare for all with allowance for a secondary private market where people could pay more for better quicker treatment
So Chicagoron when you say successful are you referring to where she calls it effective and popular? Because medicare is indeed widely supported across multiple swaths of the population as shown in multiple studies. Medicaid is less popular but the core concept is widely supported. Effectiveness is far more difficult to ascertain. What markers and goals would medicare have to hit for you to agree that it is effective? Patients are highly satisfied with their treatment. Doctors are less satisfied with the payments and although the acceptance rate for medicare is lower than private insurance the vast majority of doctors you meet will accept medicare. IMO the payments are fair as they've considered margins for material cost, human capital cost, profit for business, geographical differences in cost of living and the amount paid out is still higher than in the vast majority of countries
I'm sure piobaire could point out wrongs in my statement but this is my impression.
This efficient market argument you put out just doesn't work in this case and I would argue in a lot of real world cases. High effectiveness and appeal don't always cause policy ideas to be adopted as there are many more aspects that need to be faced. One example I can think of is the disclose act which had high appeal among the populations and previous similar but lesser laws had good effectiveness and even passed the house and had a majority vote, in fact one vote away from 60, in the senate but got stalled at cloture.
I'm very bad at writing. I should ask l'incandescent or erictheobscure to train me