.@eigenrobot What would game theory say about managing/minimizing healthcare cost while "winning" by maximizing healthy population?
ooooooooh okay this is a . . . dark, unhappy problem. the main issue is going to be adverse selection, probably. are you familiar?
-
-
I considered the possibility a powerful negative reiteration, but I have no background in analysis. Interested in the issues.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Agree, adverse selection. What pressures/rules could help a market/game better respond long-term value of healthy populace?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
CDs/IRAs/mortgages/bonds that fluctuate with with "public good" as some measurable index. Transparent, voluntary tax backed by social shame.
-
I'm not up on the literature, honestly--only enough to know that it's a nigh-intractable problem. IIRC the basic result . . .
-
from the seminal Rothschild-Stiglitz paper is stable insurance markets are nigh-impossible with adverse selection for some parameters. And..
-
you can get around this by increasing market information (but then there's no insurance anyway) or w/ compulsory insurance (eg single payer)
-
This is a thumbnail from basic contracts coursework six years ago, I am probably ignorant of or forgetting many important things :/
-
Realizing how much "we'll just make more" is implied in the concept of "human resource".
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.