• ijeff@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This is true for any health system (labour and technology costs are huge components to health care, even in systems with universal coverage). However, there are also huge and significant costs inherent to any system that doesn’t provide universal coverage (e.g., people delaying care leading to more severe illness costlier to respond to). Private insurance systems also introduce significant cost pressures even for non-profit and publicly funded providers by driving up staffing costs and requiring more support staff to operate.

    All this to say, the US doesn’t have a budget problem when it comes to health care - the primary obstacle is the policy challenge of switching to a system that does a better job at delivering care for everyone based on need rather than ability/willingness to pay. Massive cost savings follow when people are kept healthier.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      My point is the money isn’t actually being spent on labor or technology - it’s just going into shareholders pockets.