Health Care and The Economy Go Hand In Hand
I’ve been saying this for years, but maybe hearing it from Business Roundtable will add credibility to my liberal opinion. Let’s look at the findings (emphasis mine).
Lead Health Care Messages
In many important respects, the American health care system is among the best in the world. When it comes to scientific advances, medical technology and the quality of our doctors and medical institutions, the United States is without peer. But our country’s health care system also is becoming increasingly expensive, which is having a direct negative impact on American competitiveness. Rising health care costs are one of the top cost pressures facing U.S. businesses today, inhibiting job creation and hurting America’s ability to compete in global markets. This study helps demonstrate the relationship between spending, quality and competitiveness while enabling us to track progress as we push forward with health care reform.
Direct negative impact on American competitiveness. Inhibiting job creation and hurting America’s ability to compete in global markets. Houston, we have a problem, and it doesn’t get any clearer than this. We also have health issues, which given the money we spend on Health Insurance should make all of us realize we aren’t getting what we’re paying for.
Let’s look at the study’s results which “combines internationally reported measures covering both spending on, and the performance of, national health care systems to assign a value to the U.S. health care system compared with important global competitors.”
These results show the U.S. is suffering from a significant health care value gap.
o U.S. workers and employers receive 23% less value from our health care system than the
average of five leading economic competitors – Canada, Japan, Germany, the United
Kingdom and France (the “G-5 group”).
o U.S. workers and employers receive 46% less value than the average of emerging
competitors Brazil, India and China (the “BIC group”).
Let’s be honest. The only people benefiting from the US Health Care system are the insurance companies and those rich enough to go outside of their network and pay for care. And given what we pay for Health Care as a nation there is no excuse for us not to be number one. These figures are a national embarrassment, and all the flag waving and free market talk won’t change the fact that we are paying top dollar for an inferior product.
The study also shows:
o As a group, G-5 countries spend about 63 cents for every dollar the U.S. spends on health
care – yet the health of the U.S. workforce lags by 10% in a composite measure.
o The gap is even wider in relation to rising economic powers: the three BIC countries
spend just 15% of what we spend on health care, yet the health of the U.S. workforce
trails that of BIC countries by 5%.
o In terms of per capita spending, the United States spends $828 more per person than G-5
countries and $1,654 more per person than BIC countries.
o When you look just at employer spending, in 2006, American businesses paid 73 cents
more per hour more for health benefits than those in the G-5 group – a disparity that grew
by nearly 50% between 2004 and 2006.
Pro-Business groups… are you listening? This is a problem that’s effecting our economy and our health. We, as a nation, can no longer afford to separate the two. The connection between our Economy and Health Care is indisputable, with Health Care having the upper hand… because it’s Health Care that’s bringing business to its knees.
Tags: Health Care
Ok say that you are right. Wouldn’t it be simpler to take the Medicare laws and strike the words under 65 from the code than do all of this crazy proposed regulation?
I am not proposing that, I am just wondering where you stand.
David, I don’t pretend to have the perfect solution, but I really think Insurance Companies have to be kicked out of the driver’s seat. There are many systems out there, and while none are perfect surely we can incorporate what works into a state of the art system that America could be proud?
Right now our health care system is a dysfunctional, hugely expensive mess that hurts almost everyone except insurance providers. It’s out of balance, and business, once insulated, is now taking a hit.
Pandora, you make a good case for the need for change, that our current healthcare system is neither cost-effective nor medically effective, and there are 47 million Americans not even covered by insurance.
So that’s part of our problem; the other part is the solution which you did not cover.
Obama’s plan is one alternative, but it relies heavily on private insurance which has already failed to meet our needs, as you noted yourself: “Barack Obama and Joe Biden’s plan strengthens employer–based coverage, makes insurance companies accountable and ensures patient choice of doctor and care without government interference. Under the plan, if you like your current health insurance, nothing changes, except your costs will go down by as much as $2,500 per year. If you don’t have health insurance, you will have a choice of new, affordable health insurance options.”
He does not address the problem of too few doctors charging prices too high. He does not address the problem of too few insurance companies that are so big that they virtually control healthcare provision, making decisions that take precedence over doctor’s decisions.
We already have a good starting point, Medicare, which provides for doctor choice and sets cost limits. Moreover, the administration costs are a fraction of those of the for-profit insurance companies.
Medicare is a single-payer provider of universal healthcare insurance which is working, though I am not implying that improvements are needed. I favor a Medicare-like system available to all the people, as David also just suggested we consider.
Not only do we have an effective model in Medicare, but also many developed nations have similar single-payer systems that are both cost-effective and provide quality healthcare, as can be measured by infant mortality and life-span, two metrics in which we are way too far down the list.
I would like to see a robust debate in Congress that examines the Obama approach and the Medicare approach, so we can choose a system that will bring us into the 21st century for the sake of the health quality of Americans and for reducing our healthcare costs.
Single-payer healthcare or
H.R.676
United States National Health Care Act or the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act (Introduced in House)
…. is still mired in house committee since 26 Jan 09
….without Mike Castle as a co-sponsor.
While Castle does not care if you have healthcare. In all fairness, it must be said that he will let some stem cells fall from his table.
I hope we get single payer. I think for-profit health insurance will always be a problem and I think a public/private hybrid may be even worse because private will tend to kick out older, sicker and keep younger, healthier. It will be easier for the private companies to do this knowing that government will pick up the tab.
Pandora’s right that this is hurting our competitiveness. When I lived in Buffalo, I heard of a plant going into Canada instead of South Carolina because the employer saved significant money by not having to pay for employee health care.
Debate is vital, Perry. Like I said, I don’t have the perfect solution. The point I’m making is it’s past time for everyone to admit that our health care system is broken. Hopefully, those free market devotees will see that our present system is hurting business as well; that this system is essentially handicapping everyone.
Single payer or Medicare for all pretty much puts insurance companies out of business. I doubt that there is the political will to do that, but I do think that down the line people will see that as a real option, but I think that there really is an interim step that we have to politically take before that.
What Obama has proposed is essentially the Massachusetts insurance plan writ large. But you can see already in that plan a bunch of real problems that never got addressed by the Mass plan — it does nothing to contain costs and I don’t believe that it provides any meaningful regulation of insurance companies. Mass is having a devil of a time paying for Romney’s big plan to become President — and while people who have insurance now (who didn’t have it) are really happy about this, the costs are still an issue. No one is ready to do that now, but at some point someone is going to look at the pool of money paid into the system that is not available for patient care and that is the insurance company overhead and profits pool.