cowden disease 16 Pros and Cons of Single Payer Health Care – BrandonGaille.com


  • Topics

    What’s New


    World Leaders Set to Convene Argentina Summit Clouded by Disputes


    When to Sell a Stock

    Topics
    • News
    • Financial Advisors
    • The Tax Center

    • Anxiety Index
    • Investing
    • Managing Wealth
    • ETFs
    • The Trump Economy
    • Retirement
    • Personal Finance
    • Trading
    • Tech
    • Life Stages
    • Small Business
    • Bitcoin
    • Special Features

  • Reference

    Dictionary

    Term Of The Day
    Internal Rate of Return – IRR
    Internal Rate of Return (IRR) is a metric used in capital budgeting to estimate the …
    Read More »

    Broker Reviews

    Find the best broker for your trading or investing needs

    See Reviews

    Latest Videos


    What Does a Flattening Yield Curve Mean for Investors?

    Guides

    • Stock Basics
    • Economics Basics
    • Options Basics

    Exam Prep

    • Series 7 Exam
    • CFA Level 1
    • Series 65 Exam

  • Advisors

    Advisor Insights
    Our network of expert financial advisors field questions from our community.
    Ask A Question

    Join Advisor Insights
    Are you a financial advisor? Showcase your expertise to 20+ million investors.
    Join Now

    Financial Advisors
    Sophisticated content for financial advisors
    around investment strategies, industry trends, and advisor education.

    The Investopedia 100
    A celebration of the 100 most influential
    advisors and their contributions to critical conversations on finance.

  • Markets

    Markets
    The latest markets news, real time quotes, financials and more.

    Watchlist
    Track stocks and ETFs
    Add New Watchlist

  • Simulator

    Stock Simulator
    Trade with a starting balance of $100,000 and zero risk!

    My Portfolios
    View the performance of your stock and option holdings

  • Academy

    Investopedia Academy
    Learn from the world’s leader in financial education
    Check out all courses

    Featured Courses


    Become a day trader
    Start Learning

    Excel for Finance
    Start Learning
    Latest Courses
    • Investing for Beginners
    • Find Great Value Stocks
    • Cryptocurrency for Beginners
    • Financial Modeling
    • All Courses




  • Site Log In
  • Advisor Insights Log In
  • Newsletters

The Drawbacks Of Single-Payer Healthcare


By Greg McFarlane


Share

To some, it’s the greatest idea since price supports for agriculture: A government assumes its citizens’ healthcare choices, paying every cost and minimizing all guesswork. To others, it’s an infringement on individual human autonomy, the transference of private decisions about health to a taxpayer-funded bureaucracy. 

Single-Payer Healthcare

A euphemism for “government-run,” “single-payer” means that instead of every person in the marketplace paying for his or her own healthcare, there’s just one payer . A  monopsony . In some parts of the world, such a system has been entrenched for so long that it’s difficult to conceive of any other way. In others, in particular the United States, there’s  still plenty of debate on the issue . It’s easy to talk about a fundamental “right to healthcare,” but the issue gets complicated when one realizes that entitling a person to certain time and resources means putting an obligation on someone else to provide the same.

An Old Idea

Advocacy for a single-payer system in the U.S. is nothing new. In the fall of 1945, just after the end of World War II, recently inaugurated President Harry Truman addressed Congress with a plea for a national healthcare system. The American Medical Association opposed the idea, and it eventually faded away.

Incremental steps did continue throughout the decades.  Medicare and Medicaid  were established in 1965, essentially becoming a de facto single-payer system for certain groups of the population – senior citizens, and young children and the poor, respectively.

Brought Back in Recent Times

In modern times, the strongest push to nationalize healthcare in the world’s largest economy happened in 1993. When her husband’s administration was months old, then-First Lady Hillary Clinton spearheaded the Health Security Act. Thus known commonly as “Hillarycare,” the bill required all citizens to enroll in a government-approved health plan and forbade them from ever exiting that plan.

Hillarycare also called for the creation of a National Health Board, a seven-member panel whose duties would include determining what constitutes “an item or service that is not medically necessary or appropriate” [Section 1141(a)(1)]. The bill was a bureaucrat’s dream, as it set criteria for everything from a new tax on cigarette rolling papers [Section 7113(a)], to payment limits on certain drugs. When prominent members of the President’s own party began to question the bill’s feasibility, support continued to weaken. The bill officially died a few weeks before 1994’s midterm congressional elections, which was seen as something of a referendum on Hillarycare.

One fact often used to defend the concept of a single-payer plan is that the U.S. spends more of its  gross domestic product  (GDP) on healthcare than do other nations.

Mexico and Turkey  each spend barely a third as much on healthcare, relative to GDP, as does the United States. Among countries that aren’t part of the  Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development , the numbers can go even lower. For instance,  Equatorial Guinea spends less than a quarter as much of its GDP on healthcare as the United States  does. But Equatorial Guinea’s 13.4% savings over the US on healthcare also nets the country  27 fewer years in life expectancy  and  12 times the infant mortality rate  of the US. 

But it’s probably most instructive to compare U.S. healthcare expenditures to those in the nation’s “peer group” – other developed nations. Canada, for example, has a life expectancy of 81 years while the US sits at 79 years. And Canada’s infant mortality rate per 1,000 live births is five, as opposed to six in the US. Yet Canada spends $2,233 less per capita on healthcare than does the U.S.

Is Socialized Really Better?

Just ask citizens of Canada or the United Kingdom, two nations famous for their  universal healthcare systems . Many Canadians love to talk of their “free” healthcare system, forgetting that if  a free lunch doesn’t exist, then a free colonoscopy can’t either. Neither doctor salaries nor cardiopulmonary bypass pumps are cheap, and the money to pay for them has to come from somewhere.

Canadian health care expenditures work out to just shy of  $6,000  per capita per year, compared to the top-ranked U.S. with $8,233. In Canada, nearly all of the $6,000 is funded  via taxes . Less than half of that comes from income taxes with the bulk of the costs bankrolled by corporate and sales taxes .

Increases in per capita healthcare spending in Canada have kept pace with those in the U.S., expenditures in the former having almost tripled since the mid-70s, going from $39.7 billion to $137.3 billion. The Canadian government not only acknowledges that many of its citizens have to wait a long time for care, but  recently spent an additional billion dollars to examine the issue . In the meantime, watching the months pass is an unavoidable component of Canadian healthcare. If you want a new hip or knee,  prepare to live with your old one for at least half a year . 

Wait times are a fact of life under socialized medicine in the United Kingdom, too. The U.K.’s National Health Service claims that  you shouldn’t have to wait longer than 4.5 months for your approved service  yet recent reports say patients can wait as long as eight months for cataract surgery.

Wait times in Canada are increasing, too and are u p by 95% since 1993, according to one measure . At least one Canadian doctor has pointed out the absurdity of dogs being able to see specialists faster than humans can. In the U.S., such wait times aren’t even an issue.

The Bottom Line

It wasn’t all that long ago that healthcare was a market no different than that for furniture or electronics: you paid as you went, usually  out-of-pocket . Then rising costs led to the notion of a single-payer. When a party other than a patient or a provider starts making healthcare decisions, it’s easy to lose sight of whose interests should be paramount in a healthcare transaction. Governments and private insurers often have conflicting agendas regarding treatment, but a sick person never does. He or she just has one goal: recuperation.