Sunday, January 31, 2010

Healthcare and the market

I've mentioned the US debates about health insurance before. But it is graphs like this that are worth studying closely to get a quick handle on why universal healthcare is such a no-brainer to the rest of the developed world (a.k.a. "the den of socialism").
Notice that the much maligned NHS in the UK spends about 40% of what the US does per person and yet the UK has a higher average life-expectancy by more than a year. Portugal spends less than 30% of the US level and also has a higher life-expectancy. The country with the greatest longevity, Japan, spends about 35% per person of what the US spends. And this massive US spending is not just absolute, but also relative to GDP. The other salient feature of this graph is noting that the only industrialised nation without universal health care is the US.

Of course, there is not a simple correlation between health system and life expectancy. Also important are genetic and environmental factors (including diet). But it is at least worth pausing for thought and wondering whether the US system is really generating the quality of health care that is often claimed for it. Might not the introduction of market forces actually distort the system by giving doctors falsely inflated motives for unnecessary treatment? And by giving insurers incentive to deny treatment, or to deny cover to those already sick (who often need it most)?

This is not simply another cheap shot at US politics, but a way of raising a larger and more important issue. Namely, that there are parts of life where market forces distort healthy relationships. Introducing the logic of the market to situations requiring trust and gift doesn't improve efficiency; instead, it can often critically undermine the trust and generosity on which the relationship is built. To pick a somewhat facetious example, should we charge our daughter for each nappy that we change? Should breast milk operate on a user-pays system?

Nonetheless, the dominant expression of contemporary capitalism has an imperialist tendency based on the assumption that market logic ought to be extended to more and more spheres of life. Private ownership for profit is treated as though it is the most desirable kind of human sociality. This is not a recipe for good healthcare, and it is not a recipe for a healthy society.

UPDATE: Here are two very good contributions to the healthcare debate.
The simplest explanation of health care reform you will read, giving a very readable summary of the logic behind the proposed reforms.
Catch 22 for opponents of health care reform, or why a government option is neither a takeover nor a sneaky takeover (and why even if it were this wouldn't be a terrible thing). Note: the government option has been taken off the table, but this post is still worth reading to know why that was a bad move.

14 comments:

byron smith said...

Josh has picked up on this and added his own thoughts, including sending me a link to this show, which discusses why the costs of US healthcare keep multiplying faster than most other places without improving treatment. Somewhat ironically, this programme is itself not free...

Toby said...

My understanding is that health insurance in the US is far from "market-forces". The insurance companies have an exemption from the antitrust laws. I've no idea why (apart from lobbying obviously).

Toby said...

Nevertheless, it is definitely an interesting diagram. One thing I got out of it is that the thicker the line, the better it's gradient. In other words, we all need to go to the doctor more often! 12 times a year sounds like a big ask!!

byron smith said...

The US Healthcare system might not be entirely free market (and perhaps dropping those anti-trust laws might help things - there are worse things than a free market), but it is closer to it than any other developed nation.

As for the thickness and gradient of the lines, that's an interesting point. I guess it probably has something to do with prevention being better (cheaper!) than cure, so going more often and getting things earlier actually ends up saving money. Now there's another argument for making visits to the doctor free... (or perhaps just relatively cheap if you also want to discourage abuse of the system).

byron smith said...

Another interesting graphic, claiming the US spends double per capita the average of most wealthy countries and yet comes last on most measures of the care they receive.

byron smith said...

Why is US care so much more expensive? Exploding some myths.

byron smith said...

The government's real agenda for the NHS?

“In future, the NHS will be a state insurance provider not a state deliverer.”

“The NHS will be shown no mercy and the best time to take advantage of this will be in the next couple of years.”

byron smith said...

CD: Does the U.S. Have the World's Best Health Care System? Yes, If You're Talking About the Third World. A summary of a new OECD report putting the US at the bottom of the OECD for health spending vs results.

byron smith said...

Guardian: US healthcare system illustrated via a spider bite.

byron smith said...

CD: A very sick country. An article that begins with the US healthcare system and moves on to critique the whole contemporary US political ecosystem.

byron smith said...

Greg Craven: Why you may as well embrace a single payer system, even if you don't like the idea.

byron smith said...

How I lost my fear of universal healthcare. The story of a conservative US mother travelling to Canada and her experiences giving birth and reflecting upon different healthcare models.

Well written and compelling.

byron smith said...

Guardian: US sicker than rest of rich world.

byron smith said...

YT: An excellent summary of the US health system and how crazy it is.