4 ms·

Couldn't you argue that an increase in compensation driven by 'ballooning healthcare costs' wouldn't actually improve the standard of living of workers? Compari

Couldn't you argue that an increase in compensation driven by 'ballooning healthcare costs' wouldn't actually improve the standard of living of workers? Comparing wages (rather than total compensation) to cost of living would seem more pertinent in this regard.

swagasaurus-rex 9y ago
He's pointing out how there are many facets to the problems we see in America. Healthcare, education, and housing in many areas take massive chunks out of people's livelihood. I hear a lot about the politics of the poor and the rich, but not about how to actually solve these problems we see in our economic system today. There's something rotten in Denmark.
will_pseudonym 9y ago
This may be an unpopular opinion, but new medications for difficult to treat diseases do raise the quality of life for those populations, despite being incredibly expensive. I'm certainly not saying they shouldn't be less expensive, mind you. :)
- mtremsal 9y ago
  I agree with your point, but are you also implying that 'new medications for difficult to treat diseases' are a primary driver of 'ballooning healthcare costs'? I don't think healthcare costs are increasing as quickly in other developed countries while they do benefit from constant medical advances.
  - njarboe 9y ago
    Which "developed" (hopefully we can develop some more) country is creating these medical advances? One might guess the US, but I don't really know. Any good studies I could read?
    - tripzilch 9y ago
      Most of them. It kind of comes with having a good healthcare system. And education.
    - orwin 9y ago
      Well, if we are talking about recent great medical advances, i think Spain and France are leading right now with the discovery of CRISPR. And i'm pretty happy about this, if it were discovered by an american pharmaceutical company, no other laboratory would have even heard of this before a patented product hit the market, and every research on the subject would be subject to a patent too.
- Spooky23 9y ago
  That’s true, but it costs dramatically less in places like Ireland, Singapore, or Japan to benefit from those drugs as compared to the US.
- dredmorbius 9y ago
  The overwhelming evidence is that 1) this is not the case and 2) that it's been improvements to access rather than intensity of medical care that have had the biggest impacts. This is a major component of Robert J. Gordon's The Rise and Fall of American Growth. Effectively, medical progress in the U.S. halted roughly in the 1960s and 1970s, with a very small number of exceptions. If you go back to the bigger picture, virtually all improvements in healthcare outcomes were made prior to 1920, and those largely constituted public health, sanitation, and nutritional improvements. Laurie Garrett attributes 85% of the improvements in lifespan to public health, rather than acute medical treatments. Improved pre-natal, natal, and childhood circumstances (medical, nutrition, nurturing, nutrition, and safety), overall safety improvements, environmental regulation, and reductions in high-risk behaviours (smoking, drinking, indiscriminate and unprotected sex, injected drugs) have all had major impacts. Joel Mokyr notes that the truly effective medical advances are tremendously underreported in GDP statistics as the measurement basis is cost rather than benefit. Sorry, but this turns out to be a tremendous and highly-repeated canard.
VHRanger 9y ago
I didn't say people are better off. We need awareness on where the problem stems from if we want to advocate for effective solution (instead of appealing solutions that won't do much).
dredmorbius 9y ago
David Ricardo. Rent vs. Wages. (Rents win.)

swagasaurus-rex 9y ago

He's pointing out how there are many facets to the problems we see in America. Healthcare, education, and housing in many areas take massive chunks out of people's livelihood. I hear a lot about the politics of the poor and the rich, but not about how to actually solve these problems we see in our economic system today. There's something rotten in Denmark.

will_pseudonym 9y ago

This may be an unpopular opinion, but new medications for difficult to treat diseases do raise the quality of life for those populations, despite being incredibly expensive. I'm certainly not saying they shouldn't be less expensive, mind you. :)

mtremsal 9y ago
I agree with your point, but are you also implying that 'new medications for difficult to treat diseases' are a primary driver of 'ballooning healthcare costs'? I don't think healthcare costs are increasing as quickly in other developed countries while they do benefit from constant medical advances.
- njarboe 9y ago
  Which "developed" (hopefully we can develop some more) country is creating these medical advances? One might guess the US, but I don't really know. Any good studies I could read?
  - tripzilch 9y ago
    Most of them. It kind of comes with having a good healthcare system. And education.
  - orwin 9y ago
    Well, if we are talking about recent great medical advances, i think Spain and France are leading right now with the discovery of CRISPR. And i'm pretty happy about this, if it were discovered by an american pharmaceutical company, no other laboratory would have even heard of this before a patented product hit the market, and every research on the subject would be subject to a patent too.
Spooky23 9y ago
That’s true, but it costs dramatically less in places like Ireland, Singapore, or Japan to benefit from those drugs as compared to the US.
dredmorbius 9y ago
The overwhelming evidence is that 1) this is not the case and 2) that it's been improvements to access rather than intensity of medical care that have had the biggest impacts. This is a major component of Robert J. Gordon's The Rise and Fall of American Growth. Effectively, medical progress in the U.S. halted roughly in the 1960s and 1970s, with a very small number of exceptions. If you go back to the bigger picture, virtually all improvements in healthcare outcomes were made prior to 1920, and those largely constituted public health, sanitation, and nutritional improvements. Laurie Garrett attributes 85% of the improvements in lifespan to public health, rather than acute medical treatments. Improved pre-natal, natal, and childhood circumstances (medical, nutrition, nurturing, nutrition, and safety), overall safety improvements, environmental regulation, and reductions in high-risk behaviours (smoking, drinking, indiscriminate and unprotected sex, injected drugs) have all had major impacts. Joel Mokyr notes that the truly effective medical advances are tremendously underreported in GDP statistics as the measurement basis is cost rather than benefit. Sorry, but this turns out to be a tremendous and highly-repeated canard.

VHRanger 9y ago

I didn't say people are better off. We need awareness on where the problem stems from if we want to advocate for effective solution (instead of appealing solutions that won't do much).

dredmorbius 9y ago

David Ricardo. Rent vs. Wages. (Rents win.)