Healthcare in the US and other wealthy nations
I’ve taken an interest in our country’s healthcare system lately. It seems to be quite a big topic with the presidential candidates and, from what I can tell with my limited perspective, it seems like it could use a good bit of help.
One thing that I’ve found interesting in the last couple of days is a series of stories on NPR’s All Things Considered where they are taking a look at the health care systems of other wealthy nations. On Monday, they reviewed Japan’s system and on Tuesday, they reported on Taiwan. I look forward to hearing more stories in this series.
It is certainly helpful and interesting to look at what other nations are doing, but it really doesn’t solve anything. Each system just has its own set of pros and cons. It simply reinforces the fact that healthcare is a huge and far-reaching issue that will never be easily solved, yet somehow, I think our nation is going to have to address it soon.
Since I have such a limited perspective, I try to refrain from making many judgments, but I do have two thoughts to share.
First, the report on Taiwan indicated that the Taiwanese government spends about 6% of its GDP on healthcare, and provides complete government-sponsored coverage for all citizens. The US spends closer to 15%, and we only cover people over 65 and we don’t even provide as much coverage for them. They also indicated that the percentage the US spends is pretty high compared to most wealthy nations. Now, I’m not saying that this is apples to apples, but it is at least a bit of an indication that our nation could afford to be more efficient in its provision for health care.
Second, I am a pretty big-time fiscal conservative, believing that a free market is the best path to growth and prosperity, yet I can’t help but think healthcare doesn’t react the same to an open market as other industries. The supply and demand relationship doesn’t seem to work the same way when people have to have the product (healthcare) in order to live. What is the value of a surgery if that surgery will save your life? Can an open and free market system balance these issues? I tend to think that healthcare to some degree will have to have heavier government regulation and even possibly government-sponsored programs. Of course, this really isn’t all that novel since we already do have government healthcare through medicare, it just is limited to people over 65.
So, what am I saying? I’m saying that I hope there are a whole lot of people smarter and more well informed than me working on this issue, because it is very complex, unusual, and in need of some help. And no matter what sound bites the presidential candidates from either party throw out, I seriously doubt there are any simple solutions to this problem.
April 16th, 2008 at 9:53 am
Wow, that’s an interesting take on the subject.
Ever since Sicko came out, I’ve been thinking that we (the U.S.) should have a better way of dealing with our sick, and of performing preventative maintenance on our bodies.
I’m not economist, but I know what we’re doing right now isn’t working, and I’m sure that there is a better way, even if we haven’t found it yet; seems as though as long as people are satisfied with what they have now, things won’t change.
I for one, am not currently satisfied.
April 16th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
Thanks for the comment, Josh. I’d actually never heard of Sicko. I kind of live in a hole when it comes to movies, plus I’m not much of a Michael Moore fan. But, it does seem it hits on the same subject here so maybe, just maybe, sometime I will check it out. More likely, I might try to at least read up on it a little.
April 17th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
I agree that we are in dire straits with our healthcare costs. But I think the U.S. government has proven itself completely incapable of making our lives better. Government housing, social security, medicare - 60% of our GDP goes to entitlements, and have they really solved anything? I think what would help the most would be 1) requiring insurance companies to cover most, if not all, diagnostic/preventative procedures in order to catch disease early, before it becomes so expensive to treat, 2) personal responsibility, since 80% of our healthcare costs are related to chronic disease, and 3) tort reform. Our ridiculously litigious society runs healthcare costs through the roof.
But that’s just me. I have a limited perspective as well. I would just never trust the government to solve our problems with more taxes and more regulations, since that has never worked in the past.
And, like you, not a Michael Moore fan.
April 18th, 2008 at 10:22 am
I’m y’all’s worst nightmare. I am a Michael Moore fan!(grin)
I don’t think our nation is going to address it at all, except in the few instances where it is forced to come up with excuses as to why it remains broken. Dealing with health care in this nation would mean hard choices and sacrifices, with only a far off potential value, no immediate reward or benefit to point to as the reason for all the hard choices and sacrifices.
Our political system is not built to handle this reality. Therefore, we will never “address” this issue. IMHO, as always.
April 18th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
@Liz — yeah, I guess that is sort of my point. I think we’re spending too much on it now and it’s not working. So, we’ve got to become more efficient. But, the government can’t just be hands off with it. Your points #1 and #3 would both require government intervention.
@Jimmy — unfortunately, I tend to agree with you. Most people don’t think long term or outside of themselves. I’m not pointing fingers because I personally think about myself and my situation far more than I show concern about anyone else. Fixing this one would require us to operate outside of that, and I’m not sure that it’s possible.
April 18th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
True - but what I meant was government-run healthcare, akin to government-run retirement, or government-run housing… etc. I don’t mind revamping the regs, especially when it comes to #1 and #3.
Of course, military healthcare is free, so who am I to talk. Except that I know how poorly-run it is, and what a hassle it is. And I can see that would be extended to everyone in the country if we went to a socialist system.
Good topic though. Nice discussion.
May 7th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
As someone who has had a great need for healthcare due to having had 4 surgeries (bummer), I might bring a different perspective.
First, I feel that healthcare is extremely expensive. Although my husband’s employer pays for his portion of health insurance, we pay almost $700 a month for my daughter and me. That’s insane as it’s very difficult for most people to pay those kinds of premiums.
Second, in my case, every penny I’ve paid has been worth it. I have had two back surgeries and although I have some residiual problems, either one of them could have left me paralized. I don’t relish the idea of being put on a waiting list and getting the next general surgeon that has an opening on his schedule. If someone is going to be cutting on me, shouldn’t I be able to make the choice of who that will be?
This subject is distressing to me because I’m very well aware that I’m one of the lucky ones that can afford quality healthcare. It deeply saddens me when I hear of people who die or lead a poor quality of life because they can’t afford to go to the doctor.
You’re right. What we’re doing isn’t working. I, too, hope that someone smarter than me can figure out what to do. On the other hand, I don’t want my choices taken away.
May 11th, 2008 at 9:43 am
@Dana. Thanks for that perspective. You are right, that is a different perspective from my family, which typically doesn’t use even enough healthcare to justify the premiums we pay. But, when you need it, it is certainly good to have the coverage in place.
I’m not necessarily advocating a system where you can’t choose your own doctors. In fact, many of the other countries systems I heard about on NPR do have complete freedom of choice. The US isn’t the only place where choice of doctor is important.
The biggest difference that I see between the US system and other countries is that in the US, the consumer (us) bears most of the burden (cost). In other countries, things are subsidized and regulated to the point that actually the doctors and hospitals are the ones going bankrupt and having trouble making ends meet.
Neither extreme works well. I don’t advocate throwing the US system out and starting over because it’s highly unlikely we would end up with something better. I think small changes and tweaks are the better way to go.