Rewarding failure

Why and how an institution gets money directed to it may be more important than how much it gets.  This morning's Wall Street Journal article argues that the VA has gotten all the money it ever asked for, and yet it's failing.  The same disturbing pattern afflicts public school financing, which increases endlessly even as its results deteriorate. Paul Krugman argues that freeing the V.A. from the "perverse incentives" of "profit" should be a great thing, but Daniel Greenfield points out his lunacy:
“Crucially, the V.H.A. is an integrated system, which provides health care as well as paying for it,” Krugman wrote.  “So it’s free from the perverse incentives created when doctors and hospitals profit from expensive tests and procedures, whether or not those procedures actually make medical sense.” 
Of course ‘perverse’ profit motive incentives don’t go away.  They just morph into targets that have to be met at any cost.  A quick look at anything from Soviet agriculture to No Child Left Behind would show how that works. 
Krugman was either being dishonest or remaining steadfastly ignorant of how the world works.  And the VA met its targets and budget issues by rationing health care and killing patients. 
The way socialized medicine always does.
Or, frankly, any monopoly that manages to disconnect its funding from its performance by exempting itself from the rigors of competition and therefore from the discipline of consequences of failure.

3 comments:

E Hines said...

Krugman carefully ignores an example from another arena--charter schools. These profit-driven schools are in a very Darwinian--because profit-driven--environment.

There are bad charter schools, just as there are good charter schools. Except that the bad ones don't last as long--not compared to their nonprofit public school "peers," and not in any absolute sense, either.

So it would be with medicine, were there an actual free market there.

Eric Hines

Anonymous said...

A handful of rules changes that would allow portability of insurance policies across state lines and transfer of some benefits, would have increased the percentage of US adults covered by the desired few million, but no, the Democrats wanted a slush fund.

Valerie

douglas said...

Profit is far from the worst motive to do something. There are far, far worse.