I think the other response was flagged for language, but the included link was really interesting. I'd never even heard of medical "lodge practice" before seeing this video and reading through some of the references.
They're basically voluntary, mutual aid societies – many of them were basically small unions. The were strangled by the bigger, consolidated organizations:
The video is probably good for most audiences, but if (like me) you prefer to read, it looks like this is the short essay it's based on: http://www.freenation.org/a/f12l3.html
The references at the end of the essay include some really interesting historical accounts which I've enjoyed reading over the past few hours.
Video seems to hand wave the actual issues of healthcare which are treatment costs and scalability.
The only issue addressed was basically labor rate of doctors (and AMA artificially limiting the pool of doctors by raising standards).
The tone of the video was horrible -- no thanks. I don't need scary cartoons to tell me how to vote.
The end conclusion is basically "what if gov't is the problem?" without offering a solution (or even evidence based critique of modern systems -- what happened over 100 years ago is not the most relevant to my interests. As others have pointed out, the practice of medicine was a lot different then). Total waste of time and attention.
I honestly cannot understand how people look at the health care situation in America and think "if only health insurance had less restrictions, that would solve everything!"
Oof, can you really do an apples-to-apples comparison to healthcare in 1910 (before antibiotics) and healthcare today, though? If healthcare in 1910 cost $1 and a doctor poked you in the chest and said "You've got consumption; get your affairs in order." and healthcare in 2010 cost $1000 and a doctor poked you in the chest and said "You've got tuberculosis; take these antibiotics and you will probably live.", I don't think you can say healthcare got 1000x worse.
Would you make the same argument in favor of the cartelization of internet service providers? If in the 90s the ISPs banded together and got a government to prohibit competition, would we be asking if it's fair to compare "internet service measured in baud" with our much faster internet service of today? Humans are very clever; technology can improve even in the most oppressive regimes.
And the comments are actually useful – there’s a pinned link to a New York Times article published in 1910 which explains the argument at the time for cartelizing the industry.
