American taxpayers footed the bill for about 41% of the nearly $4.5 trillion in both public and private health care spending the U.S. recorded last year.
American taxpayers footed the bill for at least $1.8 trillion in federal and state health care expenditures in 2022 — about 41% of the nearly $4.5 trillion in both public and private health care spending the U.S. recorded last year, according to the annual report released last week by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
On top of that $1.8 trillion, third-party programs, which are often government-funded, and public health programs accounted for another $600 billion in spending.
This means the U.S. government spent more on health care last year than the governments of Germany, the U.K., Italy, Spain, Austria, and France combined spent to provide universal health care coverage to the whole of their population (335 million in total), which is comparable in size to the U.S. population of 331 million.
Between direct public spending and compulsory, tax-driven insurance programs, Germany spent about $380 billion in health care in 2022; France spent around $300 billion, and so did the U.K.; Italy, $147 billion; Spain, $105 billion; and Austria, $43 billion. The total, $1.2 trillion, is about two-thirds of what the U.S. government spent without offering all of its citizens the option of forgoing private insurance.
People talking about dismantling the military to pay for health care distract themselves from the fact that the health care system already holds all the money that is needed for single payer health-care. Which is what the people making money off this system want. They want people to blame the military, because that doesn't solve shit.
For example, the entire admin back end can be civil service. (Some of it already is) and contracting needs to go die in a dumpster fire. You've got at least 30,000 infantrymen sitting around doing nothing on any given day. Take a survey of their skills and start assigning additional duties. You can always fall back on contractors if you run out of grunts.
Also, for the love of God stop maintaining an entire mechanized army. You don't need to mount every soldier at the same time. Yes it's awesome. But most infantry units aren't going much of anywhere once they're dug in.
They also distract themselves from the fact that a single payer system would be cheaper so we could actually afford more military with one. No dismantling needed.
I get the sentiment, but it actually would be a positive thing. Most people in these industries are there because the jobs were available and paid well, even if those jobs only existed to produce more unjustifiable profits for the bloated system.
Remove the jobs, and those people might actually go on to play productive rather than parasitic roles in society.
By contributing to the building up of the productive forces. Fuck this stagnation bullshit, invest in infrastructure and urbanization, invest in clean energy, and automation. Cut out meaningless jobs.
I feel vindicated. Not 15 days ago I complained about paying more in taxes AND health insurance. And I’ve been saying it for over a decade. Fuck private healthcare, it serves no purpose for the people.
Yep, this is why I argue with people who say, we should raise taxes to fund it....no fuck that, we can afford it now already without having to raise taxes even a penny.
This may not be a popular question, but: Would Americans be willing to pay less?
No really. This would mean a lot of good jobs being cut. Yes, they are jobs that provide no benefit to the public (rather the opposite), but thinking about the big picture isn't very American. Americans like to side with the little guy.
It gets worse. It would mean a huge pay cut for doctors. They are way overpaid compared to doctors anywhere else. Would Americans side with themselvesthe people the government or those nice family doctors?
Year over year my insurance at huge companies would get both worse and costlier. It was to the point that the insurance that was costing me $200/mo was literally just acting as a safeguard against something costing me $10,000- which would have financially ruined anybody at those jobs anyway
How timely! American here who just received a bill for scoping my sinuses by an ENT specialist: insurance covered $28 out of the $415 procedure. This is on top of the $70 copay I owe for the $195 office visit. So all accounting factored in, I owe $450 for what I thought was going to be $70.
Because it was billed through insurance, the provider's hands are tied in terms of further negotiation. I would bet if I had gone in as a cash patient, I'd be much better off.
The icing on the cake is that the scoping procedure was non-conclusive.
The US healthcare insurance system is the ultimate way to make money fast, for little effort. As long as you're on the right side of it, that is.
The worst is that insurance companies "cover" things and that's all they can say before anything is done. After, when billed, they can say "we cover 5% of the final bill. See? We covered it." And we have no idea how much we will need to pay for standard necessary procedures.
Fuck. Canadian here who is just aghast at the charge. Had a friend go through the same procedure but essentially never paid a dime. We don't even pay MSP any more but back when we did it was locked to your income bracket and while I had some bumpercrop years (my base rate is 33 bucks an hour and I work 12 hour days standard with time and a half applied for everything past 8 hours for 2019 I worked 11 months with routine 60 hour weeks) my payments never crested $250 for a quarterly payment. Heck I didn't even realize that they stopped charging for two years because I had the thing rigged to autopay.
Heck a friend of mine's Dad needed emergency hospital transfer from a small town and they used a helicopter ambulance and the family was never charged.
People want to complain that we're slower and that people have to actually wait in waiting rooms and sure, non life-threatening stuff needs to be put in a queue but from what I have heard from my US buddies wait times at least are pretty comparable.
I swear people who talk about waiting have never visited an ER for something mundane because it’s the only option opened after 6, or who never had to meet with a specialist, or get a procedure that requires one.
Story time. January 2019. I have a 6 month old baby with mysterious rash. Pediatrician has us cut out common allergens and he clears up. Tells us to book with a pediatric allergist.
Now, I don’t live in BFE. I live in Southeastern MA. By no means an area underserved by doctors. The doctor refers us to Boston Children’s Hospital. It’s an hour and a half away without traffic, or 2 hours and 3 transfers on public transit.
The first appointment available was in October. Kids 7 months old at this point and already getting appointments for longer than that out.
We get put on a cancellation list and around March we get a call for him to be seen and get a scratch test. We take it, we are going on vacation 3 days after that and we’d love to know exactly what to avoid.
Kid lights up like a damn Christmas tree, but only one food allergy (peanuts) and it comes in like 1.5x the diameter of positive control.
Next, because of his age, they want to get him into an exposure therapy study, but he needs a good challenge first and they would call us when we got back from vacation.
Well, we came back from vacation the first week of March, 2019. BCH was now not scheduling any challenges due to the pandemic. Try again after Easter when the whole thing blows over. Then a month later. And another month.
Eventually they are booking again and after getting through the backlog of people that were cancelled due to the pandemic , the next appointment is 14 months out. By that point he’s too old for the study and we neeed to wait till he’s 4.
Well, now he’s 4. We book an appointment for his food challenge. The old scratch test is no longer good. He needs another one. Next booking for that is 10 months out, again. As luck would have it, though, we called back over and over again and eventually got a booking for his scratch test.
That was back in August. We booked his food challenge while we were in the office. It will be next October, barring any more global catastrophes or blind luck on the cancellation list. He will be five.
It’s amazing to me that there’s a person who can beat me at Smash Bros who has been waiting for a doctors appointment for nearly his entire life. And people tell me healthcare in America is fine. Those motherfuckers don’t know about this. They don’t know how much it costs every time he’s out of school for a couple of days with a fever and the school wants a doctor’s note. They don’t know that after wages, the single biggest part of their compensation package is their employers portion of their health insurance. In fact, depending on their job, it may even be more than their wages.
That last bit is important. People don’t realize how much their healthcare actually costs. They see the pre-tax line item for their share of premiums, never their employers. They see that as separate from the Medicare pre-tax item, and the vision and dental, all of which they don’t see the employers portion. They might see the bills if they got the high deductible plan, but they’re somewhat expected because “they got the ‘cheap’ plan”.
For those who are interested, the population of those countries combined is roughly the same as the US: 331,137,369 compared to 339,996,563 for the US.
These stats are easy to find. The US spends a much higher percentage of its GDP on health care (16.6%) than anyone else. The difference is bigger than the entire US military budget. If the US cut its health care spending to the level of France (12.1%) or Germany (12.7%), it could more than double its military spending.
It terms of actual resources, the difference is even bigger, as US-Americans work much more than Europeans. I'm not sure what for.
ETA: At the same time, the US has a younger population, which should not really need as much care.
But the cost of the US Healthcare generally shouldn't be ignored either. And it seems to be by a good majority of our politicians.
IMHO, our population should give us MORE leverage to get cost reductions but it's just not going to happen. We need a severe overhaul of our healthcare system and the people who benefit from our current system have too much power and influence.
I work with companies in the health care space globally. The percentage of their profits that come from the US business versus others is just astonishing.
When you do a half assed public insurance option, you get a shitty result - terrible care, at quadruple the price. We need true single payer and more importantly, single system costs negotiator.
Somehow you have more money for Israel, bailing out banks, covering police with pension, spending on stadiums, buying lavish gifts for SC Judges, and PPP loans but not enough to pay your citizens who built your country and shoulder it everyday?
The American "Healthcare" system is a money-making venture, first and foremost. Health care is simply the structure the corporations use to wring as much money from the masses as possible.
I saw a commercial for healthcare.gov. It talked about how people only paid a few bucks for healthcare. It was all after government assistance.
The fact that you need heavy government assistance to get healthcare shows how much of a failure things are here.
Also in Mexico they have legal price limits on drugs. They're printed on the box so you know if you're getting a deal or paying the max. Also can see a doctor for like 40 pesos (about 2 to 3 USD). It's much cheaper than my post insurance copay. I understand it's a different market, but they have better general healthcare than the US.
Also as a side note, most drugs don't need a prescription. You can tell the pharmacist what hurts and they can tell you what should help (or when to see a Dr). If I want to see my Dr, I'm on hold for 20 minutes then get an appointment in 2 weeks. Once again: viva Mexico!
In the US, when I want to see my doctor I drive 15 minutes to get there and tell them I need to be seen for whatever and then I wait 15 minutes and then talk to the doctor. If they say I need to talk to a specialist, that may take 1-2 weeks after making an appointment though. It's not cheaper, but at least I can get care when I need it.
Of course, not everyone can afford healthcare in our country. That's the biggest problem. But it's generally fast and competent.
Man this is less and less the experience I'm seeing. Months to see my primary. Urgent care I can get in same day, but I work at hospital that saves slots for their employees
Where I am in the US, dentist schedules 6 months out, doctor likes you to schedule annual exams a year out and non urgent a couple of weeks at a minimum but there are some urgent care appointments available each day (or most days). Dermatologist and GYN a couple months wait for routine care. But there are lots of independent urgent care standalone clinics, including for orthopedic stuff, so for broken bones I did not have to go to the emergency room and incur that cost.
It's uneven I would say. Definitely not worth what we are paying in taxes, insurance premiums and payments to providers, though.
So about the same waiting times as developed nations with a healthcare system, but with 10 000 times the cost.
I pay like 5€ in Belgium to go see a doctor, the rest is paid by my insurance. I can walk into a hospital right now and get service. As long as the issue warrants urgency of course. And a call to my house doctor can be met with a half hour wait time if it is less urgent.
Most people cannot see their primary care physician just by driving up and being like, hey, I need to be seen for x issue. You pretty much have to make an appointment unless you go to a minute clinic or something. And that's with insurance. Your experience is very much an outlier.
what's fun is for all this extra money we get a lower (and dropping) life expectancy and a higher infant mortality rate. that's right, we pay more to bury our kids and then die sooner. FREEDOM BAYBAY!
oh it's about the money. it's about funneling money from both the government and directly from the citizenry into the hands of private medical death panel operators
I guess you could say that's supposed to be the point they are trying to make: most of the insurance and hospice in America is overpriced, exploitative, and aren't worth the paper they are printed on.
This is a useless metric, the US has more population than all of those countries combined and the healthcare costs in Europe are about half of what they are in the US. This article is reaching towards a conclusion, not really objectively coming to it, although it's not surprising considering the source.
Even if you consider the population about the same, the healthcare costs in Europe are about half of what they are in the US, so the fact that they spend 30% more than 0.9T is basically them spending 30% per citizen on the proportional healthcare. The real benefit is also, y'know, not going bankrupt over healthcare fees..
The population of the US is more, although not by much. I pointed it out because the results from the article are different, claiming the population from those countries is more than that of the US (no, it isn't) with very different numbers, which hints at the hand they are playing.
The article is comparing 2022 costs/populations. Your link is estimated 2023 populations.
The article is literally about healthcare costs.
The article also states there is an additional 600 billion that is paid. 1.2T vs 1.8T + 600B = double the costs. Your second link seems to agree with this article.
This means the U.S. government spent more on health care last year than the governments of Germany, the U.K., Italy, Spain, Austria, and France combined spent to provide universal health care coverage to the whole of their population (335 million in total), which is comparable in size to the U.S. population of 331 million.
dude didn't even read his own comment. he legit went "yeah, well healthcare is cheaper in europe" as though that proved his point and not the point of the article.
Holy spamming troll. Any other comment you'd care to spam under, you insecure little snowflake? Just make your point and move on. Instead you are just replying under every other comment like the bad toxic shit you are.
You would be on to something, but on a per Capita basis the US still spends more. So the reality is the US still spends more on healthcare than its developed counterparts
This means the U.S. government spent more on health care last year than the governments of Germany, the U.K., Italy, Spain, Austria, and France combined spent to provide universal health care coverage to the whole of their population (335 million in total), which is comparable in size to the U.S. population of 331 million.
As mentioned in the summary, the combined population of those countries is almost the same as the US. So per capita costs are in fact about 2/3 that of the US government's spending.
Just a quick mote: That is great and all, but the US has more people than a large part of Europe…combined The whole of the US has a population of around 337 million, the entirety of the EU is 461 million.
If you aren’t just trying to drop this as a random fact and are instead pushing for universal healthcare in the US, might I suggest looking at something more meaningful, such as cost per covered person.
Numbers also don’t scale linearly with covered persons due to inefficiencies, so that is something to think about as well. Quality of care is also a consideration. If i need an optional surgery here in the US I can typically get in within 2-6 weeks for the surgery. In some countries it can take months.
sigh the healthcare debate is so much more complex than people realize. I am pro universal healthcare, btw.
If we adopted universal healthcare tomorrow without consideration of the issues, the worldwide economy would take a massive hit. Insurers and private healthcare companies invest dollars worldwide in many different industries.
The six countries have a comparable total population to the US...
This means the U.S. government spent more on health care last year than the governments of Germany, the U.K., Italy, Spain, Austria, and France combined spent to provide universal health care coverage to the whole of their population (335 million in total), which is comparable in size to the U.S. population of 331 million.
4 million more people covered for 2/3 the cost, and for what the US government is spending, it's not even covering the 331 million people in the US.
Also it’s wildly dependent on what surgery. 1-2 years for some surgeries. Though the UK is significantly worse on that specific procedure, entirely on purpose.
So right now the PE ratio of the s & p 500 is 26 or so. That number on average historically around 15.5 if I remember correctly. Meaning it would take 15.5 year's profits at current profit levels to pay for a stock you buy. Ie, if a share was worth ten dollars, it would take 15.5 years for the companies to all make enough profit to cover the price of ten dollars for all the shares.
So that's average. We are now at 26 or more. So it now takes 26 years. Meaning, the stock market is TOO EXPENSIVE. This is a great thing for the boomers living off selling their shares. Just like with their overpriced homes, they are enjoying this situation.
Those of us working and BUYING shares are not. We can buy less percentage of a company for more money, and expect poorer returns on what we invest today. Same as with houses. We can buy less home for more money. Long term, means we will either have to work longer, or somehow live on less when we are unable to work anymore as we age.
So if you tell me we can perhaps get universal healthcare AND enjoy the benefit of stocks returning to reasonable levels enjoyed by previous generations, I'm now even more excited thinking about universal healthcare.