3 ms·

> Lower average cost of medical care All derived from figures that don't account for how much more you pay in taxes for that "free or cheap" healthcare.

AstralStorm 8y ago
Actually it is a perfectly visible item in budget. We pay less for whole of medical care than total US budget for just VA. Someone is paying for this in tax.
- fortythirteen 8y ago
  I think you misunderstand the statement. I wasn't referencing the comparison of the tax costs of different public healthcare systems. But while we're on that subject, I'm willing to bet that your VA comparison isn't per capita, or placed against GDP, rendering it useless. What I was referencing was the per capita or per household total cost of healthcare. The comparisons that say western countries with universal healthcare have "lower costs" generally omit the increased tax burden. If I make $100k a year, for example, and pay ~30% in taxes, but also pay ~$15k a year for total family medical expenses, including premiums, I'm still making out better than if I pay ~60% in taxes, but get "free" healthcare.
  - DanBC 8y ago
    The US government pays a huge amount on healthcare. This is whether you do it by total; by GDP; per capita. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthcaresystem/articles/howdoesukhealthcarespendingcompareinternationally/2016-11-01 https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthan... If you include private insurance: > As a percentage of GDP, the UK spent less on healthcare than USA, Japan, France and Germany and a similar percentage to Canada. The USA spent the most on healthcare as a percentage of GDP at 16.6%. If you exclude private insurance the US still pays a lot, at about 8.2% The US has by far the largest spend per capita, yet has average life expectancy.
    - fortythirteen 8y ago
      You misinterpret or spin the data from your link. Look again and you'll see that, as far as compulsory spending goes the US and UK spend roughly the same percentage of GDP on "healthcare". What is "healthcare" as defined in this PR piece from the UK government? Where do factors like average wait time to see a specialist or have surgery weigh in? I could take those same numbers and say, "The United States does a better job of assisting it's poorer citizens into the highest quality healthcare in the world, all while allowing all its people the complete freedom to control their own health outcomes." For the record, I'm not a health libertarian, but I'd sure as hell take it over health authoritarianism, and the UK government proved that's what they have last week.
      - DanBC 8y ago
        > Look again and you'll see that, as far as compulsory spending goes the US and UK spend roughly the same percentage of GDP on "healthcare" Yes, that's the point. The US government spends more on healthcare, but that huge spend doesn't cover the whole population. > "The United States does a better job of assisting it's poorer citizens into the highest quality healthcare in the world, Why does the US have such poor mortality figures if health care is so good and if everyone can access it? > but I'd sure as hell take it over health authoritarianism, and the UK government proved that's what they have last week. In the US cases of medical futility the doctors announce their plan to remove life support and if the parents disagree they have to go to court to stop it happening. In the UK the doctors need to get the agreement of the parents, and if the parents don't agree the doctors have to go to court. In that court process the family can get legal aid (if they meet the financial test) - Alfie Evan's parents went through 7 legal firms, and they had expert counsel of a well respected silk and two juniors. But also Alfie had his own legal representation. Alfie Evans had 16 months of excellent health care, followed by robust legal protection to make sure his best interests were looked after. His family are poor. He wouldn't have got anything like this in the US.
        fortythirteen 8y ago
        > But also Alfie had his own legal representation. What?! How does an infant/toddler receive legal representation arguing for the plug to be pulled, outside of the wishes of his parents?! That is the very definition of authoritarianism. > He wouldn't have got anything like this in the US. Absolute nonsense spread by someone who has no knowledge of the American system. A child like Alfie is given free medical care from one of many charity hospitals with some of the best doctors in the world, and other charities house the family, for no cost, during treatment. You know, like the Vatican offered, and the parents accepted, but apparently you're government decided it was time for Alfie to die.
  - vilmosi 8y ago
    The higher taxes aren't there to cover healthcare costs though. The amount you pay in taxes for universal healthcare are lower than what you pay in the US for non universal public healthcare that you don't even use.
DanBC 8y ago
You know the US government pays more per capita for health care than most other governments, right? There's a huge US tax spend on a health care system that doesn't provide universal coverage and has worse outcomes across a range of measures.
rflrob 8y ago
The OECD reports numbers that include public expenditures. I'm not sure where I'd even look to find the precise methodology, but at some point you have to trust that the experts know what they're doing and are reasonably impartial. And sure, Sweden's overall tax rate is probably a lot higher, but they are providing a lot more services than the US government with that money beyond just healthcare. So the choice probably isn't between ~30% tax rate with private healthcare[2] and ~60% tax rate with public healthcare; even if the full ~$10,000 health care expenditures per capita were spent on taxes instead, that's only about a 17 percentage point increase on the per capita income of $60k. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_hea... [2] http://thehill.com/policy/finance/238735-average-us-worker-pays-315-pct-tax-rate-report http://thehill.com/policy/finance/238735-average-us-worker-p...

AstralStorm 8y ago

Actually it is a perfectly visible item in budget. We pay less for whole of medical care than total US budget for just VA. Someone is paying for this in tax.

fortythirteen 8y ago
I think you misunderstand the statement. I wasn't referencing the comparison of the tax costs of different public healthcare systems. But while we're on that subject, I'm willing to bet that your VA comparison isn't per capita, or placed against GDP, rendering it useless. What I was referencing was the per capita or per household total cost of healthcare. The comparisons that say western countries with universal healthcare have "lower costs" generally omit the increased tax burden. If I make $100k a year, for example, and pay ~30% in taxes, but also pay ~$15k a year for total family medical expenses, including premiums, I'm still making out better than if I pay ~60% in taxes, but get "free" healthcare.
- DanBC 8y ago
  The US government pays a huge amount on healthcare. This is whether you do it by total; by GDP; per capita. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthcaresystem/articles/howdoesukhealthcarespendingcompareinternationally/2016-11-01 https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthan... If you include private insurance: > As a percentage of GDP, the UK spent less on healthcare than USA, Japan, France and Germany and a similar percentage to Canada. The USA spent the most on healthcare as a percentage of GDP at 16.6%. If you exclude private insurance the US still pays a lot, at about 8.2% The US has by far the largest spend per capita, yet has average life expectancy.
  - fortythirteen 8y ago
    You misinterpret or spin the data from your link. Look again and you'll see that, as far as compulsory spending goes the US and UK spend roughly the same percentage of GDP on "healthcare". What is "healthcare" as defined in this PR piece from the UK government? Where do factors like average wait time to see a specialist or have surgery weigh in? I could take those same numbers and say, "The United States does a better job of assisting it's poorer citizens into the highest quality healthcare in the world, all while allowing all its people the complete freedom to control their own health outcomes." For the record, I'm not a health libertarian, but I'd sure as hell take it over health authoritarianism, and the UK government proved that's what they have last week.
    - DanBC 8y ago
      > Look again and you'll see that, as far as compulsory spending goes the US and UK spend roughly the same percentage of GDP on "healthcare" Yes, that's the point. The US government spends more on healthcare, but that huge spend doesn't cover the whole population. > "The United States does a better job of assisting it's poorer citizens into the highest quality healthcare in the world, Why does the US have such poor mortality figures if health care is so good and if everyone can access it? > but I'd sure as hell take it over health authoritarianism, and the UK government proved that's what they have last week. In the US cases of medical futility the doctors announce their plan to remove life support and if the parents disagree they have to go to court to stop it happening. In the UK the doctors need to get the agreement of the parents, and if the parents don't agree the doctors have to go to court. In that court process the family can get legal aid (if they meet the financial test) - Alfie Evan's parents went through 7 legal firms, and they had expert counsel of a well respected silk and two juniors. But also Alfie had his own legal representation. Alfie Evans had 16 months of excellent health care, followed by robust legal protection to make sure his best interests were looked after. His family are poor. He wouldn't have got anything like this in the US.
      - fortythirteen 8y ago
        > But also Alfie had his own legal representation. What?! How does an infant/toddler receive legal representation arguing for the plug to be pulled, outside of the wishes of his parents?! That is the very definition of authoritarianism. > He wouldn't have got anything like this in the US. Absolute nonsense spread by someone who has no knowledge of the American system. A child like Alfie is given free medical care from one of many charity hospitals with some of the best doctors in the world, and other charities house the family, for no cost, during treatment. You know, like the Vatican offered, and the parents accepted, but apparently you're government decided it was time for Alfie to die.
- vilmosi 8y ago
  The higher taxes aren't there to cover healthcare costs though. The amount you pay in taxes for universal healthcare are lower than what you pay in the US for non universal public healthcare that you don't even use.

DanBC 8y ago

You know the US government pays more per capita for health care than most other governments, right? There's a huge US tax spend on a health care system that doesn't provide universal coverage and has worse outcomes across a range of measures.

rflrob 8y ago

The OECD reports numbers that include public expenditures. I'm not sure where I'd even look to find the precise methodology, but at some point you have to trust that the experts know what they're doing and are reasonably impartial. And sure, Sweden's overall tax rate is probably a lot higher, but they are providing a lot more services than the US government with that money beyond just healthcare. So the choice probably isn't between ~30% tax rate with private healthcare[2] and ~60% tax rate with public healthcare; even if the full ~$10,000 health care expenditures per capita were spent on taxes instead, that's only about a 17 percentage point increase on the per capita income of $60k. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_hea... [2] http://thehill.com/policy/finance/238735-average-us-worker-pays-315-pct-tax-rate-report http://thehill.com/policy/finance/238735-average-us-worker-p...