Total Posts:6|Showing Posts:1-6
Jump to topic:

Blame Government For High Health Care Costs

JamesMadison
Posts: 381
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2012 9:41:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
In 1960, the USA spent 148 per capita on health care. In 2010, we spent 8233 per capita on health care.

This means that, from 1960 to 2010, real health spending grew at an annual average rate of 8.4%.

However, not all components of health spending grew equally. Private per capita health spending only grew 7.5% annually. That is high, but not as high as government per capita health spending, which grew at an average annual rate of 10%!

So, government health spending has grown MUCH faster than private health spending (2.5 percentage points is a HUGE difference over 50 years!).

In fact, if government health spending had grown the same speed as private health spending, we would be spending about 25% LESS per capita on health care. That means each person in the US would be spending about $2100 less a year on HC.

How would 2100 more dollars to go towards things other health sound to you guys?

As a percentage of GDP, we would be spending about 13% of GDP on health care instead 18% of GDP, as we do today.

The point here is that the government health spending has been a much larger driver of excess health spending than has private health spending.
As a general rule, you'll find that, when a conservative is talking about policy, history, economics, or something serious, liberals are nowhere to be found. But, as soon as a conservative mentions Obama's birthplace or personal life, liberals are everywhere, only to dissappear again when evidence enters the discussion.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2012 9:42:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Actually, you can blame our severely heterogenous population combined with a tendency to be obese and at risk of some diseases for high healthcare costs.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
JamesMadison
Posts: 381
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2012 9:52:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/3/2012 9:42:41 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Actually, you can blame our severely heterogenous population combined with a tendency to be obese and at risk of some diseases for high healthcare costs.

Of course you can. But, the fact of the matter is that, in 1960, we spent $148 per capita and 5.1% of GDP on Health Care. In 2010, we spend $8233 per capita and 17.6% on health care.

A BIG part of that is a rise in obesity and other cultural factors.

But, increased gov't involvement plays a role.

For instance, in 1960, 49% of health spending was out of pocket... meaning that individuals paid 49% of health spending directly out of pocket. Today, only 12% of health spending is out of pocket.

This means that individuals are paying less and less directly for HC... so market forces are less allowed to work than ever.
As a general rule, you'll find that, when a conservative is talking about policy, history, economics, or something serious, liberals are nowhere to be found. But, as soon as a conservative mentions Obama's birthplace or personal life, liberals are everywhere, only to dissappear again when evidence enters the discussion.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2012 9:58:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Just because the government is spending more doesn't mean that health care is becoming more expensive- it just means that the government is intruding more into the market.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
MrBrooks
Posts: 831
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2012 10:21:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/3/2012 9:58:57 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Just because the government is spending more doesn't mean that health care is becoming more expensive- it just means that the government is intruding more into the market.

I think there is a correlation between the two though. If you look at any sector of the economy where government has gotten heavily involved, prices have drastically gone up. Education and health care are very similar in this regard. The more the government pumps subsidies into an industry, the more prices rise to soak up those subsidies, which produces more subsidies to keep up with the rising costs.
JamesMadison
Posts: 381
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2012 10:59:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/3/2012 10:21:25 PM, MrBrooks wrote:
At 8/3/2012 9:58:57 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Just because the government is spending more doesn't mean that health care is becoming more expensive- it just means that the government is intruding more into the market.

I think there is a correlation between the two though. If you look at any sector of the economy where government has gotten heavily involved, prices have drastically gone up. Education and health care are very similar in this regard. The more the government pumps subsidies into an industry, the more prices rise to soak up those subsidies, which produces more subsidies to keep up with the rising costs.

+1

This is an excellent point. And, btw, you can add housing to that mix... another messed up sector with a lot of government interfernce.

We have a "health care crisis", "housing crisis", and "education crisis".

We don't have a "computer crisis", "internet crisis", or "food crisis" because government basically stays out of the way.
As a general rule, you'll find that, when a conservative is talking about policy, history, economics, or something serious, liberals are nowhere to be found. But, as soon as a conservative mentions Obama's birthplace or personal life, liberals are everywhere, only to dissappear again when evidence enters the discussion.