Has Western capitalism become too efficient and ruthless?

Oct 2013
14,446
Europix
I am afraid you are minimizing how complicated medical care and treatment is my friend beyond the proverbial aspirin.
I'm not minimizing anything.

Actually, having a larger and a more diverse population is an advantage, not a disatvantage.

Medical research is easier as there is a "bigger pot". Significantly bigger ressources, from money raising to number of available specialists, testing possibilities, potential users.

Why do You think pharmaceutical is so largely concentrated in US?

Normally, diversity and larger population
should drive to reducing costs, not raising them.

Personally, I don't think is what is causing larger expenses in US.
 

Rodger

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
6,113
US
I'm not minimizing anything.

Actually, having a larger and a more diverse population is an advantage, not a disatvantage.

Medical research is easier as there is a "bigger pot". Significantly bigger ressources, from money raising to number of available specialists, testing possibilities, potential users.

Why do You think pharmaceutical is so largely concentrated in US?

Normally, diversity and larger population
should drive to reducing costs, not raising them.

Personally, I don't think is what is causing larger expenses in US.
For research, yes. For medical care, I can't see how a diverse, complicated population is an advantage over a small, homogeneous group. It's kind of like a family doctor treating the same family for years, where their medical history and diagnoses are well known, versus a doctor in a big city treating a large heterogeneous population, where their health history is more of a mystery. Who is more equipped to get the right and best treatment with a minimum of effort and therefore cost? I am not sure if this is the primary reason for increased health care. It is probably a contributing factor. Higher salaries for healthcare professionals is another, and there have been posts here to demonstrate this. Insurance companies are likely another, but that is because they are in the business of assessing risk and minimizing their payouts for such things. Then again, I have learned that many, if not most, socialized medical care nations have private insurance. If I am not mistaken, in one of the nations nearly 60% have private insurance. that will certainly relieve the nationalized bureaucracy from some of the cost and burden of health care for its citizens. And no nation has as many non citizens as the U.S. Emergency care is provided to anybody who comes to an emergency room. It would be interesting to see what the cost of that medical care is, as I would imagine little - if any - is paid back by those who are here illegally. I believe California actually offers medical care through Medicaid to those who are here illegally. Somebody coming here from an undeveloped nation may have ailments that are costly due to a lack of routine medical care from whence they came. And, as I have said all along that in socialized nations the national government subsidizes the cost of health. In the process, something has to give. For many nations that is their military defense budget. They leave their ultimate protection to others, in the event that a real war or conflict ever arises. Maybe they are hedging their bets that such a thing won't occur?
 
Last edited:
Oct 2013
14,446
Europix
For research, yes. For medical care, I can't see how a diverse, complicated population is an advantage over a small, homogeneous group. It's kind of like a family doctor treating the same family for years, where their medical history and diagnoses are well known, versus a doctor in a big city treating a large heterogeneous population, where their health history is more of a mystery. Who is more equipped to get the right and best treatment with a minimum of effort and therefore cost? I am not sure if this is the primary reason for increased health care. It is probably a contributing factor. Higher salaries for healthcare professionals is another, and there have been posts here to demonstrate this. Insurance companies are likely another, but that is because they are in the business of assessing risk and minimizing their payouts for such things ...
The highest costs in the modern health care system aren't the medical personnel but medication (meaning research and production) and technology (again, research and production).

It's why I said a diversified and large society is an advantage.


.... And, as I have said all along that in socialized nations the national government subsidizes the cost of health. In the process, something has to give. For many nations that is their military defense budget,. They leave their ultimate protection to others, in the event that a real war or conflict ever arises. Maybe they are hedging their bets that such a thing won't occur?
The defense meme ...

Rodger, US nation spends more than European nations on health care !!!
 

Naomasa298

Forum Staff
Apr 2010
34,609
T'Republic of Yorkshire
For research, yes. For medical care, I can't see how a diverse, complicated population is an advantage over a small, homogeneous group. It's kind of like a family doctor treating the same family for years, where their medical history and diagnoses are well known, versus a doctor in a big city treating a large heterogeneous population, where their health history is more of a mystery. Who is more equipped to get the right and best treatment with a minimum of effort and therefore cost? I am not sure if this is the primary reason for increased health care. It is probably a contributing factor. Higher salaries for healthcare professionals is another, and there have been posts here to demonstrate this. Insurance companies are likely another, but that is because they are in the business of assessing risk and minimizing their payouts for such things. Then again, I have learned that many, if not most, socialized medical care nations have private insurance. If I am not mistaken, in one of the nations nearly 60% have private insurance. that will certainly relieve the nationalized bureaucracy from some of the cost and burden of health care for its citizens. And no nation has as many non citizens as the U.S. Emergency care is provided to anybody who comes to an emergency room. It would be interesting to see what the cost of that medical care is, as I would imagine little - if any - is paid back by those who are here illegally. I believe California actually offers medical care through Medicaid to those who are here illegally. Somebody coming here from an undeveloped nation may have ailments that are costly due to a lack of routine medical care from whence they came. And, as I have said all along that in socialized nations the national government subsidizes the cost of health. In the process, something has to give. For many nations that is their military defense budget. They leave their ultimate protection to others, in the event that a real war or conflict ever arises. Maybe they are hedging their bets that such a thing won't occur?
Yes, but ultimately, where does government revenue come from? The taxpayer.

So effectively, each healthy taxpayer subsidises the users of the health services. They pay a tax premium.

So it's no different to a private system. Instead of paying the premium to an insurance company, we pay it to the governemnt as part of our taxes.
 
Oct 2013
14,446
Europix
Yes, but ultimately, where does government revenue come from? The taxpayer.

So effectively, each healthy taxpayer subsidises the users of the health services. They pay a tax premium.

So it's no different to a private system. Instead of paying the premium to an insurance company, we pay it to the governemnt as part of our taxes.
And in some countries all that becomes even more obvious, as the payments for the social and health care system (called "contributions" in French, for example) are not taxes payments ("impôt" and "taxes" in French). Different things, administrated by different organisms.
 

Ichon

Ad Honorem
Mar 2013
3,622
Actually, having a larger and a more diverse population is an advantage, not a disatvantage.

Why do You think pharmaceutical is so largely concentrated in US?

Normally, diversity and larger population
should drive to reducing costs, not raising them.

Personally, I don't think is what is causing larger expenses in US.
To be fair a diverse population is not helping most medical studies- in fact for many of the same reasons facial recognition algorithms have trouble with non-white faces medical studies frequently have the same problems.

Pharmaceuticals are often having HQ and registering patents in the U.S. because of 3 main reasons- 1. it is the largest single market 2. the US has the strongest patent protections (and easy extensions) 3. the US healthcare system is the easiest for companies to charge higher prices. If you see how much profits US registered pharmaceutical companies transfer out of the US into lower tax dominions it is staggering. I really do believe the big part of the US "War on Drugs" is due to the backing of pharmaceutical companies not wanting the competition of drugs if grown rather than manufactured. It is much more difficult to patent a natural plant than a manufactured substance but... now with DNA splicing and the full genomes of plants being known the monetary reasons are disappearing to spend so much money on the drug war.

I do agree that larger population and more diversity is hardly a large factor in the reason US costs per capita are so much higher but the diversity does probably contribute in a small amount.
 

pugsville

Ad Honorem
Oct 2010
9,279
And, as I have said all along that in socialized nations the national government subsidizes the cost of health. In the process, something has to give. For many nations that is their military defense budget. They leave their ultimate protection to others, in the event that a real war or conflict ever arises. Maybe they are hedging their bets that such a thing won't occur?
really how many times do you have to be told and shown before the information seems in?
The Nations with soclalized health are spending around half what the US spends..
This entire line of argument is just complete fantasy entirely counterfactual to actual facts,

As society they are better off and have more resources for other things.