Healthcare for Profit

[Robert Maxwell]

All this whilst paying less than half the amount the US does per capita.

This is the killer point, right here. How can the US claim to boast an amazing healthcare system when it costs twice as much for what are, if we are being honest, mediocre outcomes? Life expectancy and quality of life lag behind Western Europe and Japan, largely because we would rather let a small share of the population have access to the best treatment on Earth (no matter the cost) while simultaneously leaving a lot of people with inadequate access or no access at all. (And by "access" I also mean "affordability" since whether or not someone can pay for their care is always a factor in the US.)

 

[Spot261]

This is the killer point, right here. How can the US claim to boast an amazing healthcare system when it costs twice as much for what are, if we are being honest, mediocre outcomes? Life expectancy and quality of life lag behind Western Europe and Japan, largely because we would rather let a small share of the population have access to the best treatment on Earth (no matter the cost) while simultaneously leaving a lot of people with inadequate access or no access at all. (And by "access" I also mean "affordability" since whether or not someone can pay for their care is always a factor in the US.)

No one should ever be put in a position where they have to ask if they can afford drugs which they need to survive.

Not in this day and age, not in a "developed" country.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

No one should ever be put in a position where they have to ask if they can afford drugs which they need to survive.

Not in this day and age, not in a "developed" country.

You're telling me.

And yet, my friends are always on the verge of mental breakdowns because they have to figure out how to afford their medications (often hundreds of dollars a month) or worried that their coverage will be stripped altogether.

Greatest country on Earth, I tell ya.

 

[Snaploud]

The U.S. has a relatively low population density of 86 people per square mile. Japan has a much higher population density of 868 people per square mile. Healthcare costs more money per capita to reach a lower density population. The U.S. could certainly be more efficient, but you can't blame it all on the for-profit model.

Note: Population density can actually be a tricky measure in some cases, though. Take Australia, for instance. They have a very low population density over-all, but that's largely because almost the entire population lives along the much more densely populated coasts. Canada is a similar example (with much of the population living in the southern region of the country). So, I should clarify say that it's not an easy comparison to make even though population distribution can have a big effect on health costs.

 

[Amaris]

The U.S. has a relatively low population density of 86 people per square mile. Japan has a much higher population density of 868 people per square mile. Healthcare costs more money per capita to reach a lower density population. The U.S. could certainly be more efficient, but you can't blame it all on the for-profit model.

Note: Population density can actually be a tricky measure in some cases, though. Take Australia, for instance. They have a very low population density over-all, but that's largely because almost the entire population lives along the much more densely populated coasts. Canada is a similar example (with much of the population living in the southern region of the country). So, I should clarify say that it's not an easy comparison to make even though population distribution can have a big effect on health costs.

Sure we can, because the U.S. believes in unvarnished avarice. Our modern outlook is built on the notion of "we're all soon-to-be billionaires, we just have to wait until the billionaire fairy gives us our money. In the meantime, leave those other billionaires alone or you'll jinx it."

We are more dedicated to shareholders than patients.
We have an outlook that says if you're poor you did it to yourself and deserve to be there.
We pass laws that reward the super wealthy, and penalize the middle class and poor.
1 in 5 children in this country are going hungry.

It derives from our capitalist at all cost society, a nation that believes in for-profit market based solutions applied to everything between, up to, and including birth to death.

 

[Snaploud]

Hey, you're preaching to the choir when it comes to discussing the ridiculousness of the U.S. healthcare system. I'm simply pointing out that you're unlikely to get per capita healthcare costs down to Japan's level with the same health outcomes. Population distribution also plays a role in cost efficiency.

 

[Amaris]

Hey, you're preaching to the choir when it comes to discussing the ridiculousness of the U.S. healthcare system. I'm simply pointing out that you're unlikely to get per capita healthcare costs down to Japan's level with the same health outcomes. Population distribution also plays a role in cost efficiency.

Honestly? I bet we could do it if we really wanted to. If we really had the political motivation, we could. I'm no American Exceptionalism kind of person, but we have done some amazing things in this country to protect the well-being of its citizenry (much of it now rolled back or neutered... ugh), and if we really gave a damn, we could do more.

 

[MacLeod]

The U.S. has a relatively low population density of 86 people per square mile. Japan has a much higher population density of 868 people per square mile. Healthcare costs more money per capita to reach a lower density population. The U.S. could certainly be more efficient, but you can't blame it all on the for-profit model.

Note: Population density can actually be a tricky measure in some cases, though. Take Australia, for instance. They have a very low population density over-all, but that's largely because almost the entire population lives along the much more densely populated coasts. Canada is a similar example (with much of the population living in the southern region of the country). So, I should clarify say that it's not an easy comparison to make even though population distribution can have a big effect on health costs.

And according to the US census ~81% of the US population live in urbanised areas vs ~19% who live in rural areas

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2016/cb16-210.html


For the UK is ~79% urban vs ~21% rural

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rural-population-and-migration/rural-population-201415

Germany's about 75% urban vs 25% rural

Japan is about 78% urban vs 22% rural

So similar split percentage wise. Of course one factor in the US is the distances might be larger between a rural location and the nearest urban area.

 

[Snaploud]

And according to the US census ~81% of the US population live in urbanised areas vs ~19% who live in rural areas

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2016/cb16-210.html


For the UK is ~79% urban vs ~21% rural

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rural-population-and-migration/rural-population-201415

Germany's about 75% urban vs 25% rural

Japan is about 78% urban vs 22% rural

So similar split percentage wise. Of course one factor in the US is the distances might be larger between a rural location and the nearest urban area.

Interesting. Thanks for the information.

 

[Spot261]

Interesting. Thanks for the information.

It's also worth bearing in mind population density is a double edged sword, low PD makes accessing any services ([public or private) more difficult, but it also alleviates many of the problems those services are there to deal with in the first place.

All other things being equal, overcrowding in cities is a major factor in reduced life expectancies