The Washington Post shocked many of its Democratic readers this week by telling the truth about the growing disaster in the UK’s National Health Service — a cautionary tale as a few Republicans plan to join Democrats to extend the failed Obamacare subsidies rather than reform our own broken health care system.
Socialism is in vogue in America. Various socialists are assuming greater power in the Democratic Party and mayors such as Zohran Mamdani (New York) and Katie Wilson (Seattle) are taking over the leadership of major cities.
I discuss the rising class of American socialists in my new book, Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution. The young voters fueling this shift have never experienced life under socialism and have no memories of the meltdowns in prior such systems. As former socialist and communist countries move toward capitalism, many Americans are embracing socialism, according to polls.
The Washington Post editorial board exposed the myth of nationalized systems in its scathing column on the UK’s National Health Service, which is asking sick people to stay away from hospitals as the system struggles to offer basic care.
The NHS has existed for years in a perpetual state of emergency. This was the case before the pandemic hit, and it has only gotten worse. Hospital corridors overflow and routine procedures get canceled due to a catastrophic event commonly known as “winter.” It comes around every year, yet the system, despite annual funding increases, still somehow remains unable to cope.
A campaign to keep people away from hospitals during the holidays is underway, which includes begging the public to seek out other forms of treatment for “less serious” injuries and ailments. The British press compares the messaging to “Covid-era stay-at-home pleas,” which included asking patients who needed care to avoid medical facilities in order to “protect the NHS.”
In November, some 50,468 people waited 12 hours or more in emergency departments, often on trolleys in corridors. This is the highest on record for that time of year. Some 2.35 million people went to A&E in November, the highest on record for that month.
What is troubling in the debate over Obamacare is that some Democrats admit that it has failed. Democrats touted the law with an enabling class of academic experts as promising lower health care costs in a system that would pay for itself. Obama himself spread the false claim that you could keep your doctor under Obamacare. (later called the “lie of the year.”)
It proved to be a disaster. Health care costs soared under Obamacare and Democrats stepped in to pass massive subsidies that pay a fortune to insurance companies without doing anything to correct the underlying problems.
The shocking increase in costs under Obamacare should galvanize a nation in seeking a major overhaul without delay. Health care is now unaffordable for many. Yet, that desperation is political gold for many in dangling subsidies before voters as an inducement to return them to power.
With the midterm elections approaching, Congress is about to repeat the same pay-now-worry-later approach. For some, the directions may even be reassuring. As Obamacare craters, it will become increasingly difficult to return to a market-driven system. Instead, many Democratic members want a single national health care system or a Medicaid-like system for all.
It does not matter that the UK is struggling with its own system to provide basic care, and NBC is describing the UK system as “broken.”
With the threat of the Democrats taking over the House in the midterms and producing gridlock in Washington, it is unlikely that the GOP can remain firm and unified on creating an alternative. Some will join Democratic members admitting that Obamacare failed, but this is not the time to correct the problem. Instead, we will pour more money into a broken system and kick the can down the road.
Estovir and S. Meyer have commented correctly below that Canadians come to the US for medical treatment. As I have said below, the Canadian Fraser Institute has also documented the thousands of Canadians coming here for medical treatment.
Here is an article about a Canadian politician who praised and boosted Canadian healthcare but who personally choose American treatment when she got cancer.
https://www.cato.org/blog/canadian-mp-thinks-very-highly-medicare-goes-us-surgery
Here’s another politician who chooses to pay in America rather than risk free Canadian cures.
https://heartland.org/opinion/top-canadian-politician-chooses-us-health-care
Socialist medicine is great for politicians so long as they can hop over to the US when THEY need proper care.
Young: Yes, but there is a downward trend (literally, longitudinally) for that. As Canadians come here for better care, Americans head southward (medical tourism/wellness tourism) to Mexico and South America for cheaper/less expensive care. So it’s a wash, n’est ce pas?
https://mexiconewsdaily.com/lifestyle/why-more-americans-are-crossing-the-border-for-tijuana-healthcare/
Lin, absolutely true! I hear that Costa Rica, a country and people I love, has good plastic surgery clinics.
The difference is that we go to places south for bargains and Canadians go south to save their lives.
It’s another case of “the more things change , the more they remain the same”.
But Mr. Turley, you should have addressed the fact that the article mentions other socialist or semi-socialist medical systems, such as Denmark, South Korea and Australia, are successful compared to the UK’s, or not nearly as bad.
not nearly as bad, huh? lol…not exatly a ringing endorsement.
It’s like dspeer33 has no self awareness of that self own.
Did you read that before posting… good grief!
This sounds like a good solution to the huge mistake of employer-based health insurance.
Dr. Rand Paul Introduces Bill to Expand Health Care Freedom for the Self-Employed and Small Businesses
https://www.paul.senate.gov/265528-2/
The real question is how did what Paul is proposing EVER become illegal ?
We should not need a law to allow people to purchase health insurance of their choice privately (or no),
nor should we need a law to allow individuals or small businesses or anyone to decide to join some group to purchase health insurance.
I would take Pauls proposed law and go farther and make it clear that ANYONE is free to purchase (or not) health insurance – individually, or as part of any voluntary group.
There’s a joke in Canada. If you need a CT scan or MRI, go to a vet — same day/next day. If you go to a human doctor, you’ll wait 80 days for the CT and 100 for the MRI.
So much for early diagnosis being key to treatment. And so much for the foolish notion that socialized medicine is “humanitarian.”
But is it joke…..or is it true?
In America, some can get access to treatment in a short time. Others will never get access to treatment. The joke in America is “I can get treatment and be homeless and die on the street.” Medical bankruptcy is the leading cause of personal bankruptcy in America. In Canada, there still exists private insurance to get faster results. Unlike America, there’s the backstop safety net.
In Canada, health care varies by province – it’s not universal.
I’ll pass on the canadian model – they dont have money for a crippled vet to get a new wheelchair , but they gleefully offered being euthanized instead….. because it’s cheaper. So yeah , a hot pass on canuckian “healthcare”.
Medical bankruptcy is the leading cause of personal bankruptcy in America.
No, it isn’t. That was the lie that got Elizabeth Warren her doctorate, but it remains a lie. What she found was that the majority of personal bankruptcies included medical bills among the bankrupt’s debts. That just means when someone stops paying their bills they’re not going to go out of their way to pay the medical ones. Why would they?
“Medical bankruptcy is the leading cause of personal bankruptcy in America.”
You fell for another lie based on perverted statistics. Read the so-called study that produced the slogan and take note of the ridiculous distortions.
Drawing upon sixty-two years of personal adult experience (as opposed to fatally-flawed “evidence-based” meidicne) and more recent (during and since the phony Covid-19 pandemic) findings online, the three leading causes of chronic illnesses and premature disability and mortality in the US (the world leader in ‘illnesscare’) are: 1) undiagnosed sub-acute non-IgE-mediated food allergy reactions, 2) allergy aggravating FDA approved food poisoning (soy [late 1960s], TBHQ [1972] and MSG [1980], minimally) and 3) excessive related/resultant medical errors, as parts of a medical conspiracy instigated by John D. Rockefeller in the early 1900s (“Murder by Injection,” Eustace Mullins, 1988). Remedy those and you remedy so-called “healthcare.” Concerned US citizen Charles G. Shaver.
It’s not just Obamacare that relies on government subsidies. Healthcare spending in the USA amounts to 17% of GDP and the federal and state spending account for half of the $5 trillion spent.
Many Americans are quick to point to the other guy who is getting a “handout” for healthcare.
Sure, Medicaid is subsidized healthcare for those in lower incomes. However, the handouts don’t stop there.
The vast majority of seniors receiving Medicare Part B (outpatient) and D (drugs) including those with Medicare Advantage plans are being subsided by the federal government for 75% of the costs, or about $7,000 annually per beneficiary. And no, these plans were not paid for during working years, as payroll taxes for Medicare only funded Medicare Part A involving hospitalizations.
Similar annual subsidies are provided to those on the Obamacare exchanges.
Even those who get employer provided health insurance enjoy tax breaks as this compensation is not taxed. For a family of four, the tax break may account for $2,000 or more per year.
Insurance companies deserve a good chunk of the ire directed towards them, however their profits are less than 1% of spending.
High costs of healthcare are due to salaries, services, products and overhead throughout the entire healthcare and insurance industries that are propped up by ever increasing dollars from government spending.
If we think of the Health Care industry as setting the standard of Compensation: “High costs of healthcare are due to salaries, services, products and overhead throughout the entire healthcare and insurance industries that are propped up by ever increasing dollars from government spending. “,
Then Other Industries of which are not subsidized by the Government (State & Federal) are massively under-par, meaning that these other Industries can not compete with subsidized Vocations. skewing the Labor Market. Hence should the subsidies be removed and applied to the Other Industries a more competitive Labor Market would arise and the the Medical Industrial Complex would adjust its compensation and cost lower to balance their accounting ledgers. Of course this would reduce the available Services, however it would force the Medical Industrial to learn to compete more competitively (Lean Competition) with the rest of the Labor Market, correcting the distortion and adjusting to a fair market price.
You forgot to mention the money that goes to personal injury lawyers, and litigation costs in general.
And if it wasn’t for those personal injury lawyers, who would seek justice for those injured by medical malpractice?
And who subsidizes the government with the money it collects for Medicare? The worker. I.paid Medicare taxes for over 50 years. Don’t tell me I am getting something for free. I also pay for my Medicare now and my Advantage program to have decent minimal coverage.
Sadly, what you paid and pay do not cover the costs.
That is correct, as is the fact that the entire implimentation of medicarfe distorts the markets and encourages rent seeking wwhich drives up costs.
That said – people DID pay for medicare, and they are owed something as a result.
We should absolutely end entirely all govenrment involvement in anything beyond the core roles of government – we should get government entirely out of the economy.
Nut that does not change the fact that we have a contract with those who contributed to medicare that we must honor in some form.
Yes, per the program people paid for and are owed Medicare Part A to cover hospitalization, but not Parts B and D.
That said, Medicare Part A has a transfer of wealth component embedded in the program. A worker contributing payroll taxes for just ten years (40 quarters) qualifies for the same Part A benefits as a worker who pays payroll taxes for 30+ years. Also, there is no cap on wages subject Medicare payroll taxes, and higher earners are even hit with additional 0.9%.
No, there is no contract, just as the Supreme Court ruled in 1960 that there is no contract for social security. Congress could abolish social security tomorrow, and cut off all recipients, and no one would be able to sue. the same is true of Medicare.
Yes, you paid payroll taxes for Medicare, however those funds were solely directed Medicare Part A which covers hospitalization. None of those payroll taxes are directed to Part B and D. Parts B and D and those portions rolled into Medicare Advantage Plans are funded by premiums paid which account for about 25% of the cost. The remaining 75% comes from general revenues and borrowing.
Note, the subsidies for Parts A and B decline on a sliding scale (i.e., premiums increase) for those seniors with income over $100K, or couple over $200K.
My typo, post should have read “subsidies for Parts B and D decline on a sliding scale …” Not Part A.
Here, here and the premiums and deductibles go up every year. Subsidies from the gov? What subsidies?
Yes. Health insurance cannot be reformed until the cost of healthcare is reformed.
Several major drivers of high healthcare costs. Overinsurance, interstate insurance restrictions, and lack of transparency stem directly from the structure of health insurance. Other insurance-related contributors include mandated benefits, limited competition, and payment models that insulate consumers from true prices and reward utilization over value.
Reform the insurance industry now.
SM there is ONE driver of increasing healthcare costs – GOVERNMENT.
Each of us is free to have whatever ideas we wish to improve healthcare – myriads of people here have diagnosed what is wrong and what should be done to fix it.
I agree with some of those ideas and not others. But that is completely irrelevant.
The big problem – mostly absent in everyones “ideas” is that there is NOTHING that govenrment can do – except reduce its involvment in healthcare that will work. The very best of ideas WILL NOT WORK if imposed by Government.
As to the merits of the various ideas proposed by you and others – these will get weighed by the free market – if we ever get a free market in healthcare. Some of those ideas will work others will not, Rinse and repeat infinitely.
That is what free markets do. They test ideas those FEW that actually succeed become the norm until they are replaced by even better ideas, those that fail disappear, and this happens over and over continuously.
The result is that over time we get more and more of what we want and need for less and less of what we produced.
“SM there is ONE driver of increasing healthcare costs – GOVERNMENT.”
Despite overstating your case in the above statement, you are moving in the right direction. The government structured health insurance by suppressing price signals, while restricting competition and rewarding utilization.
.
The ideas you disagree with: addressing overinsurance, interstate insurance barriers, mandated benefits, lack of transparency, and distorted payment models, are largely efforts to unwind those government-created distortions. They are not calls for more government control, but for less: fewer mandates and barriers, where the system lets consumers once again see prices and tradeoffs.
If your goal is to show that big government is not the answer, the most effective approach is to fix the specific problems that government policy created in the insurance market. It is unwise to make abstract calls to eliminate government altogether.
False, Government can not fix healthcare costs – beyond making things worse – look how well Obamacare has worked.
What government can do is get out of healthcare.
The more distances there is between Government and healthcare the more that the free market will fix healthcare on its own – and that includes costs.
Yes, All government subsidies ultimately increase costs.
Medicare was a huge mistake and responsible for nearly all US increases in Health Care costs.
But medicare will be the hardest to fix because like SS people paid for medicare.
That does not mean it does not need reform, or even to be just plain ended.
But you still have to find some way to return to people the money they paid for medicare.
No, you don’t, just as Congress could end social security and there would be no need to refund everyone’s FICA taxes. Paying taxes does NOT create a contract with the USA to deliver services in return.
It’s called the Iatrogenetic Quackerie. AKA a rotten business racket.
But healthcare is affordable in countries with socialized medicine. The American conception of affordability has produced an omnipresent danger of both death and government confiscation of most individuals’ personal assets.
Then why do Canadians flock to America for their healthcare? Affordable if you live long enough in line for the surgery?
Tort reform
Blind insurance pools
Open insurance markets
Pharmaceutical regs
No proof that C’s flock to the USA for healthcare.
Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit has a business performing surgeries for Canadians. This can easily be confirmed. Prominent Canadians politicians have come to the USA for medical services, including the Premier of Quebec.
When I attended medical school at the Univ of Florida, a large % of the surgeries in the winter months were because of Canadians. We called them 2 for 1 winter Canadians: vacation and US medical care, the Canadians who had the money, that is
When? Got proof or are you lying again? So much lying going on here. Are you so naïve to think just a because you print it its a fact?
Medical school huh? Wanna bet that’s a lie too?
Everybody here is either a MD or a lawyer. F-ing liars.
Estovir is correct. And we still see Canadian medical tourism today. Orthopedics is a big one.
A decision from the Supreme Court of Canada: Chaoulli v. Quebec (AG) (2005), Dr. Jacques Chaoulli and George Zeliotis challenged Quebec’s ban on private health insurance, arguing that long wait times violated their rights under the Quebec Charter. The Supreme Court agreed, ruling in their favor.
“In a context of long waiting times, the prohibition on private insurance for medically necessary services may jeopardize the life and personal security of patients, thereby infringing s. 1 of the Quebec Charter.”
“Excessive waiting times for necessary medical treatment may endanger patients’ health to the extent that the prohibition of private insurance constitutes a violation of the right to life and security of the person.”
There was a time when Hollywood, FL was invaded every winter by Canadians from Quebec. I never had any affiliations with the hospitals of Broward or Palm Beach counties but I believe you might know something about Canadians using South Florida hospitals during their winter vacations given you live in the area. Yuma, Arizona health systems benefit greatly from Canadian winter travelers.
The continuity and dependability of the ‘snowbird season’ provides overlapping opportunities in the practice and community environments, which serves as the basis for another important intersection in our thematic findings. Because the seasonal population influx in Yuma can be relied upon, although specific numbers may vary annually, the hospital was able to meaningfully expand its seasonal operations to include additional health workers and community outreach activities that benefitted all retirement migrants, including those from Canada. While a number of existing studies have touted the economic benefits to local communities that host Canadian retirees who winter in the US [9, 15, 33, 34], the current analysis provides unique insight into how the operations of a specific hospital benefits from this transnational mobility. These benefits result in creating opportunities in the practice and community environments that form the basis of the transnational care received by older Canadians in Yuma, which included community outreach initiatives with significant uptake. These benefits also facilitate the development of distinct types of continuity. For example, the clinicians, nurses and physicians operating in the practice environment benefitted from the return of some of the same seasonal health professionals yearly, while the community environment provided experienced retirement migrant volunteers for the hospital. According to participants, the combination of these two opportunities created a positive working environment and enhanced the work culture of the hospital during snowbird season
Pickering, J., et al (2020). Opportunities and challenges in providing health care for International Retirement Migrants: a qualitative case study of Canadians travelling to Yuma, Arizona. Tropical Diseases, Travel Medicine and Vaccines, 6(1), p.9. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40794-020-00110-6
A lot of Canadians live in Palm Beach, and lived next door to me in my old and my newer home. They can only stay in the US for about half the year. Canadians help fill up the local hospitals in the winter, but their insurance frequently will only permit stabilization and then transport back to Canada. My understanding, kept quiet, is that political figures use the hospital here when they can’t get it done fast enough in Canada, or the procedure is better here. Years ago, a lot of Canadians came for open-heart surgery; today orthopedics.
Some Americans, at least in the past, travel to Canada for treatment. A friend had a brain tumor, and his insurance wasn’t satisfactory. McGill University Hospital had a good team, so he went there. The hospitals at that time were low on cash, so a cash-paying American could get a spot immediately at a much lower cost.
And we still see Canadian medical tourism today.
It has been their history. See:
Longino CF Jr, Marshall VW, Mullins LC, Tucker RD. On the nesting of snowbirds: a question about seasonal and permanent migrants. J Appl Gerontol. 1991 Jun;10(2):157–68
Marshall VW, Longino CF Jr, Tucker R, Mullins L. Health care utilization of Canadian snowbirds: an example of strategic planning. J Aging Health. 1989;1(2):150–68.
Longino CF, Taplin IM. How does the mobility of the elderly affect health care delivery in the USA? Aging Clin Exp Res. 1994;6(6):399–409.
Betancourt J, Green A, Carillo JE. The challenges of cross-cultural healthcare-diversity, ethics, and the medical encounter. Bioethics Forum. 2000;16:27–32 Midwest Bioethics Center.
ATS the data is readily available if you want to find it.
Even the canadian government reports on Canadians seeking healthcare outside of Canada.
Take a page from your own post. Some of us have experienced exactly this.
This can easily be confirmed…. Okay, then why haven’t you confirmed it?
While exact numbers are unclear, approximately 52,000 Canadians sought medical care outside of Canada in 2014, with many traveling for quicker access to services or treatments not available domestically. A 2024 poll indicated that 42% of Canadians would consider going to the U.S. for routine healthcare if needed.
https://cusjc.ca/catalyst/project/medical-tourism-on-the-rise-why-more-canadians-are-seeking-medical-treatment-abroad-draft/
That’s odd as it was common around Fort Drum when I was stationed there…and to this day it’s common for canucks to cross for healthcare. I made friends up there almost 40 years ago I still see and talk to every year.
Just get govenrment out of healthcare – the rest will take care of itself.
There is not ONE right idea that will fix everything.
Free markets do not work by making one change and getting everything perfect.
They work by constantly trying new things.
Discarding the myriads of ideas that fail, and then doing it all over again with a new set of ideas.
The Canadian system is no different from the American system. If you have the money you will get more and better treatment with a better outcome than if you just have government or private insurance. Russia also has government insurance, but if you need advanced medicine or surgery you won’t get it in Russia. You have to be able to afford to fly to Germany or Israel for treatment and that takes cash.
A significant portion of healthcare spending occurs in the last months of life, with estimates showing that average medical spending during the last year can be quite high, often reaching tens of thousands of dollars. In the U.S., for example, average spending in the last year of life was around $80,000, with a large share of this cost covered by Medicare. – cepr org
We can now keep people alive for just about ever on machines, we cannot afford to keep everybody alive for ever on machines. Government healthcare of cradle to grave with extraordinary measures covered will never work. We will all die, we need to accept that.
“The Canadian system is no different from the American system.” One example: they are different in many ways, not so commonly understood. The Canadian system is more centralized, while America’s is decentralized. That difference is significantly related to the death of actress Natasha Richardson.
I know what death is, but what are those personal assets you talk about?
LOL.. Canada health care is so good. Instead of fixing what’s wrong. They will pay to turn you off.
It’s not hard to see Ano doesn’t watch with news coming out of Canada.
Come to Bellingham WA. Walk in the door to Peace-health hospital. You might learn something.
What an idiotic reply. Does this idiot even have a brain; understand he wrote? “They will pay to turn you off.” WTF does that mean?
And even more stupid is this “Come to Bellingham WA. Walk in the door to Peace-health hospital. You might learn something.”.
Assisted suicide you bumbling moron lacking of any critical thinking ability.
It truly means your education level is quite low if you can not figure that out.
“But healthcare is affordable in countries with socialized medicine.”
ROFL
There are very very few countries with medicine that is more socialized than the US. And the healthcare systems in those countries are disastrous.
I would further note there are few actually socialist countries anymore. Starting in the 60’s and moving to the present almost the entire world has moved away from socialism – because it has failed. What we have globally is formerly socialist countries that have to greater and lessor extents embraced free markets. These countries have Vestiges of socialist systems – most frequently in the area of social safety nets.
In ALL those countries these vestigal socialist social safety nets FAIL – and those honest within the country know it, but it is very hard to get rid of failed social safetynet programs unless they fail catastrophically.
Finally in much of europe these supposedly socialist heathcare systems are NOT govenrment run, not government regulated – alteast not as much as the US, the only thing “socialist” about them is that they are mandated.
” The American conception of affordability has produced an omnipresent danger of both death and government confiscation of most individuals’ personal assets.”
ROFL
Please produce data from ANYWHERE that demonstrates even a corelation between health insurance and health (or death). Insurance companies spent 75 years looking for evidence that insurance improves health and found ZERO evidence.
Well, As Ronald Reagan Said, there you go again–So then let’s make sure Americans won’t get sick–oh wait, you have enabled the likes of RFK seeing to it that any semblance of healthcare is destroyed–aren’t you proud!!
Happy New year.
ATS -0 this is NOT the UK. Virtually nowhere in the US is healthcare provided by govenrment.
RFK can not destroy healthcare – but he can potentially release it from the control of big government and big business.
Regardless YOU will still be about to make EXACTLY yhe same healthcare choices you did before.
But unlike before many who think the Choices you and other left wing nuts are forcing on the rest of us are BS will be able to make their own free choices too.
Freedom all arround. Sounds good to me.
Potentially release from … what a non-statement. You write BS pal.
Anon-
You sure are prolific today! It’s clear the dozen or so posts that are yours. They lack insight or even basic logic. Once you are proven to be a bumbling buffoon you post under someone else’s comment.
The US system is broken (which is what the article mentions), but Canada and the UK (and the rest of the world) are even worse. The solution is not to copy what is actively failing. It’s also not to continue down our own failed path. Just look at the VA! That’s pure government funded healthcare! Nobody wants to deal with the VA if they can avoid it.
So, how about we start with transparency and zero subsidies except for the neediest. Medicare and medicaid are both broken, but starting with transparency and accountability will give the public more information on a possible solution.
Bankrupt those near the bottom so there are more “neediest”. That’s the plan?
I do not control what RFK does. I can not predict with certainty what he will do.
Only what he should do.
Much of what he has said he will do would improve things.
NONE of what he has said he is doing would cause actual harm.
The poor will have the same choices as the wealthy, but the wealthy will have the benefit of receiving treatment.
That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read on this site. All he asked is we review everything healthcare, what is working and what is not, what is harmful not helpful and we concentrate some on being healthier and trying to eliminate chronic illness from lifestyles. That all just makes sense.
Canadians Without Life Threatening Diseases Are Being Encouraged to Consider Suicide – Newsweek Feb 12, 2024
What are the Democrats\liberals wanting government healthcare now asking? Please kill yourself with the governments help because your needs are bankrupting the system! That is your government healthcare. The next step,euthanasia.
You left out that these are people in untreatable agony from which there would never be escape. That you feel that they should required to twist and squirm on the sword of pain thrust into them on the off chance that some breakthrough might come along.
“Canadians Without Life Threatening Diseases Are Being Encouraged to Consider Suicide” – Newsweek Feb 12, 2024 is an opinion piece, not a journalistic examination of the problem at large.
A few Chart links: (per Visual Capitalist – Note some are dated circa ~ 2025-2017)
How U.S. Medicare Prices Compare to Other Rich Nations – April 16, 2025
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/how-u-s-medicare-prices-compare-to-other-rich-nations/
Charted: Life Expectancy vs. Health Spending Per Capita – July 9, 2024
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/life-expectancies-vs-health-spending-per-capita/
Healthcare Costs in Advanced Economies (2023 Data)
[Link] voronoiapp.com/healthcare/Healthcare-Costs-in-Advanced-Economies-2023-Data-216
Charted: Healthcare Spending and Life Expectancy, by Country – November 13, 2022
[Link] visualcapitalist.com/cp/healthcare-spending-versus-life-expectancy-by-country/
How Much Do Countries Spend on Healthcare Compared to the Military? – July 22, 2020
[Link] visualcapitalist.com/what-do-countries-spend-on-healthcare-versus-military/
The U.S. Spends More Public Money on Healthcare Than Sweden or Canada – March 31, 2017
[Link] visualcapitalist.com/u-s-spends-public-money-healthcare-sweden-canada/
Who’s Skipping the Doctor Due to Cost Reasons? – Oct 16, 2025
Southern states post higher shares of surveyed adults who said they skipped visiting the doctor due to cost reasons in 2023, per CDC data. Notable amongst them in Texas —highest of all the states
Where Americans can’t afford Health Care
https://www.voronoiapp.com/healthcare/Whos-Skipping-the-Doctor-Due-to-Cost-Reasons-6811
My Doctor just told me I can’t get my Vitamin-B shot until the Medical Insurance Board approves his Trillion Dollar compensation package.
Greenland?, Greenland?, anyone?, Greenland? …. Donald?, Donald? anyone?, Donald, …
Vitamin B is cheap and readily available – without a perscription. You can get it as pills or as an IM injection,
You can self administer it, or you can get it at pharmacies like CVS
B12 is barely regulated by the FDA – because it is safe – you can not overdose. Care should be taken with B12 injections – because ALL injections come with some risk. I got blood poisoning from an IV as part of a colonoscopy and blood poisoning can kill you fast. The bacteria that cause sepsis are all over the outside of your body. Even it the needle and what you are injecting is perfectly sterile, improperly cleaning the injection site could kill you.
But lots of people self inject a variety of medications daily – like insulin for diabetics.
Regardless, if you want B12 injections and can not get them that is just evidence of your own stupidity.
Sarcasm was being sarcastic you dumbass say. Truly a dumb SOB you are Say.
Vitamin B12 injections are a common treatment for vitamin B12 deficiency, particularly in individuals who have difficulty absorbing the vitamin through their diet or digestive system. In the US vitamin B12 injection requires a prescription from a doctor.
Every other peer country makes universal health care work. They spend less money and get better results than the US.
It is absurd to think that we are unable to make it work.
Stated like a committed socialist with blinders to the reality that socialized medicine inevitably leads to lower quality and long wait times.
False – the UK as an example is hiding the costs of the NHS and everyone knows it, and no one sane thinks the uality of the care is anywhere near the US.
Canada has decent care – but the wait times are astronomical.
That is one of the things that happens when you impliment privce controls, you end up with shortages. l
In Most of europe Universal care means the law reuires you to have minimal usaully private health insurance,
Much like states reuire automobile insurance. Peopel are not getting free care – they are paying for it.
Further the EU has discovered – as the US is discovering right now that Universal care and open borders do not work.
There is a really strong backlash against large scale immigration througout europe. Among the other problems it is destroying their healthcare systems.
Most of the EU provides decent basic medical coverage. But then again – virtually no changes in healthcare in the past 60yrs have caused a significant increase in western life expectancy.
You do not need the care most americans have been deluded into beleiving is a right.
Beyond the basics healthcare is a luxury good, not a necescity. Generally European healthcare is cheaper because EU government do not provide the luxury care most americans expect.
Someone here posted that they went to Guatemala for cheaper care – and they likely did.
Again Healthcare itself is NOT all that expensive. It is the luxury care that americans demand that is a major factor in US health care costs.
The wait times in the USA for those not covered by health insurance are measured in decades, sometimes a lifetime.
Imagine all those farmers living in rural areas watching rural hospitals close and John Say going on about how affordable healthcare is and that it is luxury care that is to blame. What luxury care is it that happens in the middle of a million acres of corn? Shortages happen regardless of price controls.
One factor that drives healthcare costs is that 30-40% of insurance premiums go to investors and not service providers. Another big chunk is spent on lobbying and marketing.
“The wait times in the USA for those not covered by health insurance are measured in decades, sometimes a lifetime.”
False.
First as noted REPEATEDLY despite what the left claims there is ZERO correlation between insurance and health outcomes.
Next – because like everything else – just because you are not given something for free does not mean you can not have it or that you can not have it quickly.
In fact the oposite is true – you can nearly always get what you pay for fast.
You can pretty much never get what is provided for free queickly.
“Imagine all those farmers living in rural areas watching rural hospitals close”
Hospitals in rural areas are closing for 2 reasons – people are (or were) leaving rural communities – something that has been true for 3 centuries. Amd because Government regulation has – as it always does made small scale operations impossible.
Obama care imposed burdens on small practives that FORCE consolidation – Are there any individual doctors of small practices anymore ?
“and John Say going on about how affordable healthcare is and that it is luxury care that is to blame.”
Not what I said.
What I have said REPEATEDLY is that the healthcare necescary for our current life expectance is MINIMAL and CHEAP.
Increasingly life expectance in 3rd world countries is catching up to the first world. Why ? Because the requirements to on average live to 80 are relatively minimal.
A VW Bug will get you accoss manhattan in the same time as a Lamborghini Hurican.
But you will likely enjoy the trip more in the Lamborghini.
With very few exceptions the healthcare required for a life expectance of 80 was present in the US in 1960 – that is what actuarial data indicates was the at birth life expectance of americans born in 1960.
In 1960 – hospitals had wards, not rooms, much less private rooms, There were mo MRI’s no CAT scans. no Ultrasounds, no pulsoximeters,
no EKG’s ……. much of what we consider basic healthcare today did not exist in 1960 – and yet if you were born in 1960 in the US you could expect to live to 80.
We are seeing the same thing in the third world today in countries that provide only the most basic healthcare – at birth life expecatnce in most of the 3rd world is now about 80.
The healthcare needed to have an average life expectance of 80 is DIRT CHEAP.
In the 60’s few people had comprehensive medical insurance – they paid out of pocket to go to the doctor,
They had “major medical” insurance – which was cheap – and it still is.
” What luxury care is it that happens in the middle of a million acres of corn?”
No medical care happens in the middle of a million acres of corn.
Medical care happens at Doctors offices – the obamacare related destruction of which is far more of a problem than the also obamacare driven decline in the number of hospitals.
” Shortages happen regardless of price controls.”
Correct, But price controls ALWAYS cause either shortages (most common) or some other negative exonomic consequence.
There is no instance anywhere ever of price controls actually working over the long run.
The laws of supply and demand are immutable. Increases in demand cause increases in prices which cause increases in supply which lower prices – a virtuous circle, Price controls stall increases in supply – resulting in shortages.
“One factor that drives healthcare costs is that 30-40% of insurance premiums go to investors and not service providers.”
False and irrelevant. All businesses produce profits for their investors – the norm being about 5%,
If you do not provide investors with a return – they do not invest – something you ignored, and therefore the service does not exist.
High risk investments provide returns of 10% – not 30-40.
Health insurance if very LOW risk – so low that in fact collected premiums are LESS than total payouts. Insurance companied make profits by collecting premiums and investing them elsewhere until they much pay out. The 2025 ROI to investors in Health insurance was 1.5% – which is extremely low. You are off by a factor of 20-30.
Further you should have known that – if Insurance companies had high profits – everyone would invest in insurance companies – which would drive the price of insurance down and the profits down.
” Another big chunk is spent on lobbying and marketing.”
Lobbying costs would disappear entirely if you got govenrment out of healthcare.
Health insurance marketing costs are low.
How many adds for health insurance do you see ?
There is this thing called the internet where you can look things up instead of making them up.
John Say, nothing you have said accurate. It’s the same talking points made during the ACA pushback from conservatives and Republicans. Professor Turley is essentially providing cover for Republicans failure to extend the subsides that will increase the healthcare costs for everyone dramatically.
The UK NHS has always been the scapegoat for Republicans to use as comparison against the U.S. The wait time crap is common everywhere depending on the time of day and region. It’s even an issue here. ER’s take a long time.
The reason why we have such expensive healthcare is because of the private market. The government has to subsidize healthcare because the private healthcare in the US is not working on making it affordable. It’s making sure the executives, shareholders and companies make the most profit while relying on the government to make it barely affordable for those who use the system. Medicare’s overhead costs are around 3% if you take out medicare advantage which is what is costing the most because it’s run by private companies.
Other countries have better systems where people don’t have to worry about being bankrupted or burdened with astronomical bills. Canadians coming here for some procedures are not coming in droves. They come here while THEIR government pays for it and they STILL pay way less out of pocket. That is what critics don’t talk about. They still pay less and don’t have to worry about being in serious debt.
Republicans were terrified that the ACA would be successful. That is why they made sure it would fail and made it sure they took away the things that would make it successful before everyone got to experience the difference. Now they are using that to “show” how it “failed” while offering nothing to fix the same problem which is still the pirivate market making it more expensive when the government is the better option to make it more affordable in real terms.
Medicare’s overhead is around 3% is a misleading statistic that relies on selective accounting. The percentage looks low largely because Medicare patients generate much higher dollar claims per visit, not because the system is uniquely efficient. If it costs, say, $10 to process a claim, that’s 10% on a $100 bill, typical of a younger patient, but only 1% on a $1,000 bill, common for seniors. The administrative work is roughly the same; the denominator is doing the trick.
Quoting the 3% figure without explaining this is, at best, sloppy and at worst, deceptive.
While MEdicare is not as bad as medicaide – it is still true that medicare costs are subsidized by private healthcare.
Medicare pays on average 97% of actual costs. Medicaide is more like 78%.
Between them they are more than 50% of the market AND GROWING – and that is a part of what is driving private costs up.
Each year – in addition to government subsidies – private payers must subsidize a growing protion of public healthcare.
It is not a matter of which is worse. It is also not a matter of % actual costs but whether those costs are beneficial. Government at the bedside is destructive and places money in the wrong places.
That would make a lot more sense if the insurance companies were chasing after that low-overhead business of senior citizens. Experience in the past was that senior citizens would be unable to obtain medical insurance, a potential death sentence. That seems a fact that is deceptive to leave out of the comparison.
The comparison you are talking about is not evident in a discussion of administrative costs.
“Canadians coming here for some procedures are not coming in droves. They come here while THEIR government pays for it and they STILL pay way less out of pocket.”
What are you talking about? Where do you get your information from? The data for the Canadian healthcare system is out there with charts providing wait times. You are very sloppy and ignorant. Their government doesn’t pay for US healthcare except when Canada finds it lacks the ability to treat, even after a significant delay. Do you know how much of their taxes go to fund healthcare? Apparently not.
I am not dissing Canadian healthcare. It is up to Canadians to decide what is right for them. I am only correcting the facts that GSX distorts in every posting.
Anyone with reasonable economic knowledge who read the bill knew in advance it was a failed bill before it was passed. You can pull it up today and search to see how incomplete it actually is.
Read the bill in advance? The one the Republicans kept making changes to up to the last minutes before the vote?
If you don’t like the bill, then fix it. But do so in a way that the protections for patients remain. The Republicans have griped they could do better, but only offer death panels to decide who gets insulin and who doesn’t.
As I said, a read of the bill tells you it will fail. You can reference the bill on the net.
“Professor Turley is essentially providing cover for Republicans failure to extend the subsides that will increase the healthcare costs for everyone dramatically.”
Wait… so X, you are admitting that Obamacare was a pile of manure and a complete failure? That might be the most honest thing I’ve ever seen you write on this website. Why does a success need subsidies? Why would not subsidizing it cause dramatic increases? If all of that is true, why did the Dems under Biden set an expiration for the subsidies? Its as if this was the plan all along and all of us are the patsies.
Also, you’re understanding of the economy is tragically backward. “The government has to subsidize healthcare because the private healthcare in the US is not working on making it affordable” If you spend a little time looking at government intervention in the market it ALWAYS increases overall costs. Why? Because hospitals, universities, etc. will max out that cost of the service at the exact amount the government will pay. Check the recent capping of student loans by the Trump admin. Suddenly universities were offering scholarships which equaled the discrepancy between the max government loan amount and what the university charged. Very odd.
It is clear you know nothing about economics or healthcare. The GOP has done nothing to make “sure [the ACA] would fail.” They have simply sat and watched it rot. The ACA needed no help.
Didn’t the Republicans remove the teeth for the participation mandate, reducing the insurance pool and driving costs up for those who remained?
The Supreme Court agreed that a “participation mandate” would be unconstitutional. PPACA was only rescued by finding that despite all the talk about a “personal mandate” there was no such thing, that it was perfectly lawful not to buy insurance, and that the fee imposed was nothing but another tax on income, despite 0bama and all the Democrats swearing up and down that it was not a tax.
“John Say, nothing you have said accurate. ”
Of course they are – We are ONCE AGAIN in a major healthcare cost crisis.
Something that the left promised PPACA would fix.
“It’s the same talking points made during the ACA pushback from conservatives and Republicans”
Correct and things proved WORSE than predicted – ACA has cost about $4T over a decade not the 1.6T claimed,
And it has INCREASED healthcare and insurance costs faster than inflation rather than decreased them.
Basically we blew $4T for NOTHING.
PPACA did NOTHING to improve healthcare – tends in mortality and life expectance are unaltered.
Millions of people were not saved, tens of people were not saved – no one was saved.
PPACA drove costs up – just like EVERY SUBSIDY EVER.
“Professor Turley is essentially providing cover for Republicans failure to extend the subsides that will increase the healthcare costs for everyone dramatically.”
X – this is not a Republican failure – it is a left wing nut failure.
PPACA has FAILED
Yes if subsidies are not extended healthcare costs MIGHT go up – of course Health insurance companies are predicting that – because they are the ones getting the subsidies.
Regardless, any increases would be shortlived – unless Republicans capitulte – which it seems near certain they are going to.
The laws of supply and demand dictate that if prices rise – demand will drop and them prices will drop,
The actual quote is for someone else but Way back when Hillary was trying to nationalize healthcare in the 90’s Lloyd Benson said
“If Something Cannot Go on Forever, It Will Stop“
The Clinton healthcare plan Died and insurance prices returned to normal.
Health insurance costs like everything else are dictated by the laws of supply and demand.
Prices rise when demand is high and supply is short.
That rise in prices drives demand down and supply up and prices drop.
It has been that way for as long as their have been free markets.
All subsidies do is increase prices to capture 100% of the subsidy and 100% of what consumers are willing to pay
Look arround you the two things that have radically increased in cost over the past 50 years are health insurance and education.
They are the two things with massive govenrment subsidies.
“The UK NHS has always been the scapegoat for Republicans to use as comparison against the U.S.”
Correct – because it is a wonderful expample of the failure od socialized medicine.
It will remain a wonderful object lesson in failure for republicans for so long as it continues to exist.
“The wait time crap is common everywhere depending on the time of day and region.”
To a small extent, but the primary driver of long wait times is Government controls.
In both Canada and the UK healthcare is rationed in an effort to control prices.
Rationing results in longer wait times.
“It’s even an issue here. ER’s take a long time.”
That depends. There is a city hospital 20min from me – wait times there are high.
There are half a dozen urgent cares on the way to that hospital where I can get care in a few minutes.
There is a smaller hospital 5 minutes from me where the time it takes to get seen is how long it takes to fill out paperwork.
No long delays need not be the norm.
Regardless, Turley was not talking about emergency care.
If I get an order for a blood test or MRI or CAT scan, I can often get it the same day. If I wait longer than a week – it is because my schedule is too busy.
“The reason why we have such expensive healthcare is because of the private market. ”
ROFL
Please name ANYTHING that is not deeply subsidized and/or regulated by govenrment that is MORE expensive in Real Dollars today than 10,20, 40 years ago ANYTHING
Free markets LOWER costs.
There are multiple ways to trivially verify that.
First – we have data – again prior to the Federal reserve just about everything cost LESS over time.
Since its inception the Fed has targeted 1-2% inflation and almost nothing EXCEPT those things drenched in govenrment have increased in cost faster than inflation.
But you can reach the same result another way.
Standard of living has risen since the inception of free markets.
Rising standard of living means – having more of what you value to consume for the same or less human effort.
If standard of living rises – as it ALWAYS DOES in a free market – then REAL costs MUST decline – it is a tautology.
“The government has to subsidize healthcare because the private healthcare in the US is not working on making it affordable.”
ROFL
” It’s making sure the executives, shareholders and companies make the most profit while relying on the government to make it barely affordable for those who use the system. ”
The government does not subsidize grocery stores, or hotels or wall street or chemical companies or oil companies.
Everything you claim is a reason that health insurance prices rise is a reason that ALL other prices must rise.
Except that DOES NOT HAPPEN.
“Medicare’s overhead costs are around 3%”
ROFL – Medicare does not pay the true cost of the services it buys.
Medicaid is even worse.
Regardless – you are idiotically ignoring the laws of supply and demand.
When demand goes up PRICES GO UP.
NORMALLY when prices go up – demand goes down and prices come back down.
Medicare disconnects consumers from prices so demand does not drop when prices rise because consumers costs do not rise.
That drives ALL medical care costs up.
Medicare alone is likely responsible for 100% of all price increases in healthcare since 1965 beyond inflation.
“Other countries have ”
Systems that are not at all like what those of you on the left Claim.
Most of the EU does NOT have socialized Medicine – the UK does and it is a disaster.
Canada’s system is not as socialized as the UK but more than most of Europe.
Most of Europe has “universal healthcare” not socialized healthcare.
I.e people are REQUIRED to have health insurance. In most but not all of the EU healthcare and health insurance are private.
In all or nearly all of the EU people are REQUIRED to pay about 1/3 of the cost of all healthcare up to approx $5000/service.
That eliminates the Moral Hazard present in Medicare and Medicaide.
“better systems where people don’t have to worry about being bankrupted or burdened with astronomical bills.”
First actually read the study done by Eliabeth Warren – the reality is that medical bankrupticies are not common and usually over very small medical costs on average about 2500. Why ? Because unless you are poor you have health insurance and you do NOT get slammed by astronomical health care costs. The people who go bankrupt from healthcare costs do so over SMALL medical bills – they are people with low income and no insurance and even a trip tot he ER will bankrupt them.
Next – I am fine with that – and you should be too. That is a perfectly acceptable free market way for the FEW people who can not afford medical care to deal with the problem. When you go bankrupt – the medical debt goes away.
People who go bankrupt do not lose their jobs, they do not lose their apartments or homes, they do not lose their cars or most of their posessions.
Or more accurately put they do not lose anything UNLESS they are actually wealthy.
Large bankruptcies – the people who loses houses, cars have lots of property auctioned off to pay their debts
are small business owners or entrepeneurs – they are people with multiple homes and cars and boats and ….
If you go bankrupt in the US you do not go to the work house – imprisoned to work off your debt.
You merely have your standard of living reduced – and if you are poor or working class to start with – you do not even have your standard of living reduced.
Regardless the actual number of medical bnakrupticies in the US has always been Tiny – the Federal Government could pay of the medical debt of everyone who goes bankrupt each year For less than 0.1% of the cost of PPACA.
Your afraid of what is a perfectly reasonable way of dealing with the problem.
“Canadians coming here for some procedures are not coming in droves. ”
How big is a drove ? 50,000+/year ?
“They come here while THEIR government pays for it and they STILL pay way less out of pocket. ”
Canada does NOT pay for Canadians to get Medical Care in the US – they must pay for it out of pocket.
“That is what critics don’t talk about. They still pay less and don’t have to worry about being in serious debt.”
But we WANT people to worry about serious debt.
That is how the laws of supply and demand work.
When prices go up – demand goes down.
Demand does NOT go down if people do not “worry” about being able to pay higher prices.
“Republicans were terrified that the ACA would be successful. ”
Wishful thinking on the lefts part.
Regardless it has proved to be a $4T boondoggle.
“That is why they made sure it would fail”
How exactly ? PPACA was created by democrats and passed by democrats.
It is the plan Democrats choose. Republicans voted against it.
If it was less than the left desired that was because DEMOCRATS would not buy more.
Republicans had NO VOICE in PPACA – no one listened to Republicans.
It was passed over Republican objections.
Democrats OWN PPACA 200%.
If it had succeeded – which was never going to happen – Democrats would deserve and get 100% of the credit.
It has FAILED – and you own 100% of the blame.
Republicans did no “make it fail”
“made it sure they took away the things that would make it successful before everyone got to experience the difference.”
Republcians did not take anything away from it.
Not a single Republican voted for PPACA.
It was passed entirely with Democrat votes.
Democrats Own it.
You are completely ignorant of recent history.
” Now they are using that to “show” how it “failed” while offering nothing to fix the same problem”
There is absolutely no fixe needed – repeal PPACA and the problems caused by PPACA will go away.
Or better yet restore an actual free market in healthcare.
Please tell me a SINGLE market that is actually free of govenrment subsidies and regulation that has had prices increase faster than inflation ? Any ?
X The US has not had a free market in health care since Medicare passed in 1964.
That is also when healthcare prices started skyrocketting.
The ability to spell words correctly is a lost art in America. Poor spelling precedes poor reasoning.
Since When are Sweden of Canada Peer Countries to the US ? And who is claiming that the Canadian system works ?
It is just not failing as badly or as rapidly as the UK
John Sey, consider the source.
Oh wait, Say is all knowing and amazingly stupid at the same time.
That pretty much describes you.
And your response just confirms your amazingly stupid reaction. I win!
Do you have an argument ?
John Say,
“ And who is claiming that the Canadian system works ?
It is just not failing as badly or as rapidly as the UK”
No system is perfect. We all know that. However their systems are better compared to ours. Since we are still the only country with no real universal healthcare system that allows everyone to afford or have healthcare without declaring bankruptcy or get into severe debt to support the private market’s exorbitant overhead and shareholder costs.
When it comes to healthcare universal health care is the most efficient and cost effective use of our tax dollars. We should keep in mind that the proof is in the data. Medicare has around 3% overhead, the rest is spent on healthcare. The problem now is Medicare Advantage which is private insurance wanting to cash in on the lucrative profits without the risks because the government bears the risk. Get rid of the private health insurers or allow the government to cover everyone and control costs more effectively. Make it truly affordable. Private insurers only incentive to prevent that from happening is the loss of the lucrative profits. Not everything is better off by a free market approach. The government wouldn’t have to spend so much on subsidies if private insurers weren’t so focused on profits instead of offering affordability. The government provides the competition they need to force the private insurers to compete and make their products more about true affordability and better product than pure profit motive as it is today,
” Since we are still the only country with no real universal healthcare system that allows everyone to afford or have healthcare “
Get this straight. Healthcare insurance is NOT healthcare. It reserves a place in the line.
Get this straight. For many, having no healthcare insurance is the same as having no healthcare.
Government-controlled healthcare is structurally flawed. While it can produce both good and bad outcomes, it inevitably misallocates resources to such an extent that, despite high costs, the system often delivers the moral equivalent of no care.
“When it comes to healthcare universal health care is the most efficient and cost effective use of our tax dollars. We should keep in mind that the proof is in the data. Medicare has around 3% overhead, the rest is spent on healthcare. “
That is so ignorantly stated that only those with the least intelligence can say that without knowingly laughing. The 3% was debunked earlier. Your talking points require backup, something you cannot provide.
The other problem with the 3% claim is that it presumes that prices are objective.
They are not.
The laws of supply and demand would not work if there was one true objectively correct price for anything.
If you are curious about the 3%(?) claim, you might want to read what Mark Litow said 30+ years ago. There are several other names I know of, but he preceded the others.
“No system is perfect.”
Correct,
Free markets interatively approach perfection without ever getting there.
Further because peoples wants and needs change over time. Free markets dynamically adapt .
“We all know that.”
No we do not – socialism is a utopian concept – it claims to be perfect.
In reality it is just about the worst system.
“However their systems are better compared to ours.”
Not the UK or CA,.
There are European systems thare are likely better than the US – because they are ACTUALLY more freemarket – not socialist.
Though comparisons are difficulty.
The US subsidizes global healthcare – particularly medicine. Though that is slowly changing as the chinese produce more drugs.
And as the US government is more hostile to subsidizing foreign drug sales.
We also subsidize nearly all medical advances in the world.
These are costs US consumbers pay that benefit the entire world.
But if we pretend that is not true – there is still a major problem.
The US standard of living is 35% higher than Europe – Americans buy more luxury goods than Europeans. The average US consumer has more to spend. We will pay more for medical care we think is better.
You will not be able to reduce US healthcare costs to match those of the EU – without destroying US standard of living.
Just as we have larger apartments, larger homes, more cars ….
” Since we are still the only country with no real universal healthcare system”
Except that we have always had a universal healthcare system.
“that allows everyone to afford or have healthcare without declaring bankruptcy or get into severe debt to support the private market’s exorbitant overhead and shareholder costs.”
I have already addressed this. Please read prior comment.
Medical bankruptcies are rare, on average less than 2500. And bankruptcy is a far better way to address the problem than PPACA.
“When it comes to healthcare universal health care is the most efficient and cost effective use of our tax dollars.”
ROFL
First “universal” is a giant nean sign to business saying – the laws of supply and demand do not work here – come and get your free money.
Next – Universal is NOT efficient – it is INEFFICIENT.
And why should we be spending tax dollars on health care AT ALL ?
Why should we spend tax dollars on ANYTHING That is not a right ? And by defintion a right is NOT something that imposes a positive obligation on others.
Why should we spend tax on anything people can provide for themselves ?
” We should keep in mind that the proof is in the data.”
Yes it is – and the DATA says that Government healthcare is a FAILURE.
“Medicare has around 3% overhead, the rest is spent on healthcare.”
False and irrelevant.
VALUE IS SUBJECTIVE – that is a LAW OF ECONOMICS – it is the underpinning of the laws of supply and demand.
It is of incredible importance because it obliterates your delusional argument.
You claim that medicares overhead is 3% – while that is actually false.
Even if it were not – subsidies ALWAYS drive prices up.
Or put differently – there is no such thing as an objectively correct price.
The only true price of anything is what a willing buyer and a willing seller agree to.
You rant about universal – that means that people must be FORCED to BUY – and that means you no longer have a true price.
When you drive up Demand “Universal” and you preclude demand from dropping (universal) when that causes prices to rise you have insured that prices will rise forever.
“The problem now is Medicare”
PERIOD – the problem is government subsidies – every single other market works perfectly fine with no regulation and no subsidies.
There is nothing special about healthcare that causes the laws of supply and demand to magically work differently.
Absolutely private businesses will engage in rent seeking anytime Government moves into a market.
They are doing exactly that now. Where are the predictions of price spikes coming from ? Private businesses that are losing subsidies.
They are all over congress and the news and getting people – even republicans to call congress and demand that subsidies be restored – because if they are not the sky will fall.
But the FACT is the sky will NOT fall.
The laws of supply and demand will work as they always do and if prices rise demand will fall and prices will have to drop.
Government does not ever “provide competition” – when it injects itself into free markets it drives REnt seeking.
They don’t have 40M freeloaders…
That’s the point: they don’t make it work.
As anecdotal illustration, a relative in Italy needed treatment for breast cancer, but the best she could do there meant several months wait to start. So she was immediately on a plane to Houston, where treatments were under way in days.
You write comedy often ?.
Many people forget that Obamacare incentivized many small businesses to stop providing their employees with healthcare plans.
Consequently, fewer could pay the much higher Obamacare premiums, so they went without a plan, risking the penalty that Obama/Democrats built in to that system.
Fewer payers, more trips to the emergency room without paying, and the cycle kept getting worse.
Democrats benefit financially and politically from their push for Socialism (check Bernie’s net worth and houses) but as long as they control 95% of the media, nothing will change, because Republicans aren’t brave enough to do the right thing instead of kicking the can down the road with the Dems.
Cliff, many people forget that before the PP-ACA, insurance companies could build all sorts of exclusions into their policies. In many cases the policies weren’t worth the paper they were written on. The PP-ACA set caps on the profits participating insurance companies could take, didn’t allow insurance companies to exclude people coverage if they had some existing health problem, allowed a bridge for children who would potentially continue in college to remain on parental plans.
The Republicans stonewalled on insurance reforms. The original PP-ACA called for the establishment of a Federal insurance group, one that would compete in the open market against private insurance companies. This was the model passed in Massachusetts by Republicans.
Bernie’s net worth is less than what Trump gets from forcing the Secret Service to pay top dollar rates for an average level motor inn called Mar-a-lago when he goes to play golf.
In the free market you get right by treading value for value.
What has Bernie produced ?
Bernie is free to charge whatever he wishes for people to stay at his home.
The SS pays lower rates than others at MAL.
If people did not want what MAL offers – no one would go there are the prices would have to drop.
PPACA was passed entirely with democrat votes. – you do not get to blame republicans for any part of it.
Democrats own every single comma.
PPACA was entirely unnecescary.
Something that can not go on forever, doesn’t.
If any price increases steadily forever – you KNOW you do not have a free market.
In a free market the laws of supply and demand REQUIRE that over the long run real prices go DOWN.
Please name a single thing price that does not have heavy government involvment that has gone up in real dollars over any period longer than a decade.
GENERAL WELFARE—ALL OR THE WHOLE WELL PROCEED
Article 1, Section 8, provides Congress the power to tax for ONLY debt, defense, and general welfare, which includes security and basic infrastructure such as police, fire, roads, water, post offices, electricity, internet, rubbish collection, seaports, airports, sewers, etc.
Food does not constitute a universal general welfare benefit due to a mix of political, economic, logistical, and philosophical arguments, and the same is true of medical attention, etc.
Unfortunately, the left is now fully nihilist. That is, they reject with prejudice any facts which clash with their ideology so pointing out the fact that the UK’s health service is a disaster will have no effect on socialists here. They will evade that fact and say something like (as they say about the vicious murdering communists tyrants ‘Oh they just didn’t get communism right.’) ‘Oh, they just didn’t get socialized medicine right.’ Or ‘Medicine costs way too much. The government has to do something.’ despite the fact that the reason medicine costs so much is the effects of such wasteful corrupt government programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare. Any time you prove something beyond a reasonable doubt, leftists simply ignore the proof and ‘shift the goal posts’ intellectually and morally. Their degree of evasion is staggering to anyone who thinks rationally.
mayfwriter,
recall when Martin Shkreli raised the price of a life-saving AIDS drug by 5,000%? That was Daraprim (pyrimethamine).
“The price of a dose of the drug in the U.S. market increased by a factor of 56 (from US$13.50 to US$750 per pill) overnight.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Shkreli#Daraprim_price_hike
That is capitalist medicine. He was eventually arrested and convicted for lying to almost everyone, but no punishment was related to this reprehensible act with drug pricing.
And that can not happen in a free market.
Read your own link – the patent had expire, but no generic was available.
If Shkreli increased the price 5000% and govenrment did not prevent the distribution of a generic – the price would have dropped way below what it was before.
A company I was part of produced bottle caps – we were one of very few contries in the world that could produce very small metal bottle caps.
A drug company came to us wanting to by large amounts of very small bottle caps for Nitro Glycerin pills. Nitro Glycerin patents expired long long ago. But the order never came about because the company could not get FDA approval. Why ? Because the FDA was requiring exactly the same testing on a drug that has been in common use throughout the world for nearly a century, as it would a new drug.
They were basically protecting the current producer of NG.
There are myriads of examples of this. It is called “Rent seeking” – when private business seeks the assistance of government to keep others out of its market.
Re. Commie Mamdani: His “free” buses are now costing riders MORE since he won. LOL. Can you imagine what he’d do to healthcare?
40 trillion dollars in unaffordable redistributive change schemes and progressive health returns, too. Obamacare should have run as a trial in Illinois before saddling the nation with a forward-looking “burden”. Abort.
The PP-ACA was run as a trial in Massachusetts; there it was even more progressive. That was the work of Republican Governor Mitt Romney.
Health care is now unaffordable for many.
Americans could address their modifiable risk factors and consequently eliminate or reduce many prescription drugs and medical maladies related to obesity /overweight, thus lessening their economic burdens. This conclusion has been reached over and over in countless studies, e.g. United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study dating back to 1970s.
Proportion and number of cancer cases and deaths attributable to potentially modifiable risk factors in the United States, 2019
Islami, F., et al. 2024. Proportion and number of cancer cases and deaths attributable to potentially modifiable risk factors in the United States, 2019. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians, 74(5), pp.405-432. doi.org/10.3322/caac.21858
Up to Half of the US Premature Deaths are Preventable; Behavioral Factors Key
Mather, M. and Scommenga, P., 2015. Up to Half of the US Premature Deaths are Preventable; Behavioral Factors Key. Population Reference Bureau. www. prb. org/Publications/Articles/2015/us-premature-deaths. aspx.
APA poll reveals a nation suffering from stress of societal division, loneliness
Loneliness and emotional disconnection appear to have become a defining feature of life in America…
http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2025/11/nation-suffering-division-loneliness
They could also become active in a religious congregation and be happier.
Religion’s Relationship to Happiness, Civic Engagement and Health Around the World
People who are active in religious congregations tend to be happier and more civically engaged than either religiously unaffiliated adults or inactive members of religious groups, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of survey data from the United States and more than two dozen other countries.
Religiously active people also tend to smoke and drink less, but they are not healthier in terms of exercise frequency and rates of obesity. Nor, in most countries, are highly religious people more likely to rate themselves as being in very good overall health – though the U.S. is among the possible exceptions.
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2019/01/31/religions-relationship-to-happiness-civic-engagement-and-health-around-the-world/
Again – let ACTUALLY free markets deal with it.
If your lifestyle is unhealthy – you can either pay for drugs, or change your lifestyle – YOUR CHOICE.
If the price of those drugs increases – the incentive to change your lifestyle increases.
We are over 70–don’t take prescriptions meds—don’t go to the doctor on a regular basis. We eat good food and exercise. We are doing just fine without all the medical intervention.
So? What are you telling us?
Can’t read?? ” We eat good food and exercise!” DUH
There’s nothing wrong with the habits you describe. But the smugness ignores the fact that many people you’re talking to are elderly and live with infirmities, often despite having done many of the same things you did.
ATS – EVERYONE will eventually die. Even those who make good health choices.
The odds are they will not die as soon.
In the US more people make poor healthcare choices – they eat more poorly they get less excercise they make numerous poorer choices.
And as a result the US healthcare system is far better than the rest of the world at keeping them alive.
The US has the highest rates of Type II diabetes in the world – double most of the rest of the world.
Type II diabetes comes almost entirely from poor living choices.
The US also has by far the highest long term survival rates for people with Type II diabetes.
In most of the world a diagnosis of Type II diabetes is followed by death in 5-10 years.
In the US most people with Type II diabetes live out a normal life span.
But a person in the US with Type II diabetes has much more fragile health.
Even if they do not die directly from Diabetes in the US – they are at much higher risk of dying from something else – like Covid as an example.
This is america – you are free here to make whatever choices you make with your own life.
I do not care if you eat poorly, get little or no excercise, and significantly increase your risk of Type II diabetes – as ONE example.
What I care about is when left wing nut idiots such as you decide all of us – those who made good choices and those who did not have to pay for the bad choices of others.
Making good choices is no guarantee of a good and long life – but it radically increases the odds.
John,
Why do Americans make such poor choices? Could it be because lobbyists work hard to produce such suburban sprawl that walking or bicycling to restaurants and grocery stores is impossible? Could it be the lobbyists who pull for reduced or eliminated regulation of food ingredients, such as putting high-fructose corn syrup into nearly every product because, while it has lower sweetness than cane or beet sugar, it is far cheaper and can be added in sufficient quantity to make up for it, also adding unrecognized calories?
What I don’t ever see is Conservatives or Libertarians exercising in the parks or walking or bicycling in the street. What I do see is Conservatives reworking diesel fuel systems to “roll coal” on bicyclists when they get the chance.
Some of the fattest people I see are cops – are they now left wing?
“What I don’t ever see is Conservatives or Libertarians exercising in the parks or walking or bicycling in the street.”
You need to bottle and sell your fantastic powers of insight.
Just by looking at a person walking or bicycling, you can discern their political convictions. Amazing.
“Why do Americans make such poor choices?”
I do not care, nor do is there are good reason you should be judging other peoples life choices.
What you are absolutely free to do is not PAY for the choices of others – good or bad.
“Could it be because lobbyists work hard to produce such suburban sprawl that walking or bicycling to restaurants and grocery stores is impossible?”
In the US Zoning is not the result of business lobbying – it is the result of a nosy public beleiving it is entitled to dictate how others live.
John Stuart Mill noted two centuries ago that the most oppresive form of govenrment was democracy.
Because there was no limit to the demands the people could impose on their neighbors and no target for our anger when that happens. Democracies impose constraints on the people that would result in revolution in monarchies.
“Could it be the lobbyists who pull for reduced or eliminated regulation of food ingredients, such as putting high-fructose corn syrup into nearly every product because, while it has lower sweetness than cane or beet sugar, it is far cheaper and can be added in sufficient quantity to make up for it, also adding unrecognized calories?”
I have railed here repeatedly about “Rent seeking” which is what you are calling out.
But efforts at rent seeking are natural – I would strongly suggest reading about public choice economics,
how the same incentives that cause free markets to work spectacularly are absolutely disasterous in Govenrment.
REnt seeking only occurs when govenrment can confer favor on a business.
You can not eliminate rent seeking without eliminating Government power.
“What I don’t ever see is Conservatives or Libertarians exercising in the parks or walking or bicycling in the street. ”
Possibly you are blind. I am libertarian and in good health. I get plenty of excercise – though I do not typically bicycle (anymore) of walk in the park. I climb 40ft roof ladders or similar things several times a week as part of my job.
Regardless conservatism is not an ideology, it is merely the recognitiont hat the odds heavily favor what already si working better than the latest new idea.
Libertarians do not have any commitment to good eating good health or making good choices in life.
The core to libertarianism is the freedom to conduct your life as you please so long as YOU pay the costs (or reap the rewards) of your own decisions.
“What I do see is Conservatives reworking diesel fuel systems to “roll coal” on bicyclists when they get the chance.”
I have no clue what you are talking about – as a rule conservatives and libertarians want to be left alone.
“Some of the fattest people I see are cops – are they now left wing?”
So ? There is an incentive for cops to put on weight.
While the optimal choices is to build muscle to have a swarzeneger or Rambo body, the next best choice is to outweigh anyone you have to get physical with.
I love to watch action flicks in which some super ninja female obliterates and army of skilled male fighters.
But in reality incredibly few women are going to prevail in a physical confrontation with a man,
and almost no one is going to defeat an opponent that has 50lbs on them no matter how unfit they are.
Cops are overweight because it makes their jobs easier and reduces the odds of getting injured.
Fine, but maybe less self-righteousness?
I’ve seen some people over 100 years old, having smoked every day since their teens. Single data points are interesting, but not something to build public policy around.
A big killer in America is the redesign of cities to make room for cars. By setting up zoning to prevent the mixing of small business with residential, the ability to walk or bicycle to stores and buy fresh food is nearly eliminated. Instead it becomes a matter of making a trip with a car, dealing with parking, and then the trade-off of buying a week’s worth of groceries with an emphasis on food that will not spoil in a short time. This leaves Americans over-buying because they can haul as much as will fit in the car but not matching the exercise level of Europeans.
“A big killer in America is the redesign of cities to make room for cars.”
????
” By setting up zoning to prevent the mixing of small business with residential, the ability to walk or bicycle to stores and buy fresh food is nearly eliminated. Instead it becomes a matter of making a trip with a car, dealing with parking, and then the trade-off of buying a week’s worth of groceries with an emphasis on food that will not spoil in a short time. ”
All that is an artifact of the Post WWII suburbs NOT Cities.
And Zoning was an effort buy those on the left to control who and what could live near them.
“This leaves Americans over-buying because they can haul as much as will fit in the car but not matching the exercise level of Europeans.”
The average obesity rate in the US is 25%, in the EU it is about 22%. according to WHO.
Overall Obesity strongly correlates to standard of living with poor places having lower rates of obesity.
Though in the US the highest rates of obesity are in the poorest states
But then again the poorest states in the US have a standard of living equivalent to that of the average in the EU.
The UK has an obesity rate of 27% – higher than all but 8 US states.
Whatever patter you are looking for – it is not there.
Lucky you, great genes. Some of us pulled scoliosis and arthritis and cancer to cripple us in our “Golden Years.” Don’t be so arrogant about your terrific genetic dice roll. You can do all the right things for decades, floss every night and still end up incontenent in a wheelchair.
Socialism is always great until you run out of other people’s money. Great article.
Remember Jonathan Gruber, one of the architects of the ACA. “We were able to pass this bill because of the stupidity of the American voter”. And that’s what the democrats think of us.