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.
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…
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.
The countries they used add up to the same number of people.
Also large systems are more efficient, not less. That’s why WalMart has cheaper stuff than your local mom and pop store.
“If we adopted universal health care tomorrow without consideration of the issues, the worldwide economy would take a massive hit”
I think that’s a lie certain people are spreading who fear change to make other people fear change too.
If you took a middle school economics class and did a basic Google search you would change your mind.
All the stuff I said is independently verifiable.
Wow that sounds amazing, thank you for the advice! 😀 Will ask around in a nearby school soon. Would duckduckgo also work for the “google” part?
Edit: linking your sources instead of claiming “a basic google search proves me right” should be a given.
bold of you to assume we were properly educated about the real world at any time in our American upbringings
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.