Spending > Per person 4,271 [1st of 133]Really? You aren't aware of the disparity in per capita health care spending between the US and every other industrialized nation on earth? That includes the consumer cost at the window, the cost monthly for the service/insurance, and the tax per capita. I thought my statement was pretty common knowledge.
For you to read: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_spe_per_per-health-spending-per-person
Specifically note these are PPP dollars, so the differences have cost of living and everything already weighted in to them, allowing for a direct comparison. As you can clearly see not only do we pay more, we pay a LOT more.
If you need more sources I can provide you with about 1,000 more that will say the same thing.
Definition: Health > Spending > Per person
Spending > Private 7.1 [3rd of 141]
Definition: Health > Spending > Private
Spending > Public 5.7% (1999)
Definition: Health > Spending > Public
The site doesn't adequately define "Spending", actually, at least on the front end. I'll go ahead and do some more research to make/break your case for you.
There's a View All stats area, which is rather revealing. Would you look at that, we're already 3rd in Public Health Care Spending. At least now we'll be #1 there, too, which is all we really want. To be #1!
I consider dubious any source that says 1 in 4 women have HIV, btw. But that's just a side -note.
Health care funding > Private per capita $2,580.00 per capita [1st of 25]
Definition: Health > Health care funding > Private per capita
Health care funding > Public per capita $2,051.00 per capita [3rd of 25]
Definition: Health > Health care funding > Public per capita
Health care funding > Total per capita $4,631.00 per capita [1st of 25]
There's some ADDITIONAL information. So now I can't tell which one's accurate, since they're different, but all from the same "source".
But wait, there's more. I decided to delve deeper into your claim of "cheaper health care" at the other countries. Switzerland's had universal health care for some time, but since its inception, the % of GDP used has risen steadily.
The OECD had this to say about Norway's Universal Health Care in 2004:Switzerland spent 11.5% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on health in 2003, against the OECD average of 8.8%. The cost has been increasing steadily in Switzerland, rising by 2.4% of GDP between 1990 and 2004, above the OECD average increase of 1.5%. http://www.oecd.org/document/47/0,2340,en_2649_201185_37562223_1_1_1_1,00.html
The OECD also indicates that since the "Act of Patients Rights" in 1999, %GDP costs have steadily risen in Norway.The cost of health services delivery, however, has risen faster than expected. The current financing system falls short of aligning incentives of health care providers and patients with social objectives. Downward pressure on prices and costs from greater competition is a missed opportunity in the hospital and pharmaceutical sectors.
I simply can't find the data to support the claim that costs will go down. Sure, we'll have to take less out of our wallet. But that's because it will be taken out before it gets there. Through taxation and inflation.
After all this you've yet to address how increasing taxes and demand will lower healthcare costs per capita in the US. You've also managed to avoid the loss of liberty you get when people are forced to do something by the overlords at the barrel of a gun. All this without even discussing quality of service, which will also be reduced.
As a libertarian, it does appall me when people say "Norway's very satisfied with their UHC!". Being taxed by force to provide others a service is the opposite of what I consider freedom. I'm not sure anyone's answered yet why the government should provide health care in the first place. Are they exceptional health practitioners? What's their track record? They got involved, they screwed everything up, and now we're begging them to act again. Repeal the tax break, or better yet, provide citizens with an equal tax break for health expenses. Put the individual back in a place of competition, instead of GUARANTEEING ensuring that only groups (employers and unions), can get the discounted services.