---
title: "Want to know how medical care would be provided in a more libertarian…"
date: 2017-01-17
source: facebook
type: Archer T. Ships shared a link.
---

# Want to know how medical care would be provided in a more libertarian…

*January 17, 2017 · Facebook*

::::: {}
::: {}
[http://www.freenation.org/a/f12l3.html](http://www.freenation.org/a/f12l3.html){target="_blank"}
:::

::: {}
Want to know how medical care would be provided in a more libertarian society? Much like this. @\[207923:2048:David E. Weekly\]\
\
\"Lodge practice\" refers to an arrangement, reminiscent of today\'s HMOs, whereby a particular society or lodge would contract with a doctor to provide medical care to its members. The doctor received a regular salary on a retainer basis, rather than charging per item; members would pay a yearly fee and then call on the doctor\'s services as needed. If medical services were found unsatisfactory, the doctor would be penalized, and the contract might not be renewed. Lodge members reportedly enjoyed the degree of customer control this system afforded them. And the tendency to overuse the physician\'s services was kept in check by the fraternal society\'s own \"self-policing\"; lodge members who wanted to avoid future increases in premiums were motivated to make sure that their fellow members were not abusing the system.\
\
Most remarkable was the low cost at which these medical services were provided. At the turn of the century, the average cost of \"lodge practice\" to an individual member was between one and two dollars a year. A day\'s wage would pay for a year\'s worth of medical care. By contrast, the average cost of medical service on the regular market was between one and two dollars per visit. Yet licensed physicians, particularly those who did not come from \"big name\" medical schools, competed vigorously for lodge contracts, perhaps because of the security they offered; and this competition continued to keep costs low.\
\
The response of the medical establishment, both in America and in Britain, was one of outrage; the institution of lodge practice was denounced in harsh language and apocalyptic tones. Such low fees, many doctors charged, were bankrupting the medical profession. Moreover, many saw it as a blow to the dignity of the profession that trained physicians should be eagerly bidding for the chance to serve as the hirelings of lower-class tradesmen. It was particularly detestable that such uneducated and socially inferior people should be permitted to set fees for the physicians\' services, or to sit in judgment on professionals to determine whether their services had been satisfactory. The government, they demanded, must do something.\
\
And so it did. In Britain, the state put an end to the \"evil\" of lodge practice by bringing health care under political control. Physicians\' fees would now be determined by panels of trained professionals (i.e., the physicians themselves) rather than by ignorant patients. State-financed medical care edged out lodge practice; those who were being forced to pay taxes for \"free\" health care whether they wanted it or not had little incentive to pay extra for health care through the fraternal societies, rather than using the government care they had already paid for.\"\
\
[http://www.freenation.org/a/f12l3.html](http://www.freenation.org/a/f12l3.html){target="_blank"}
:::
:::::