US health care now a liability to Global Economy

[Kathryn41 3,205]

http://www.ajc.com/health/content/health/s..._value_gap.html

Report: US health care now a ‘liability’ to global economy

By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR

Associated Press

Thursday, March 12, 2009

WASHINGTON — If the global economy were a 100-yard dash, the U.S. would start 23 yards behind its closest competitors because of health care that costs too much and delivers too little, a business group says in a report to be released Thursday.

The report from the Business Roundtable, which represents CEOs of major companies, says America’s health care system has become a liability in a global economy.

Concern about high U.S. costs has existed for years, and business executives — whose companies provide health coverage for workers — have long called for getting costs under control. Now President Barack Obama says the costs have become unsustainable and the system must be overhauled.

Americans spend $2.4 trillion a year on health care. The Business Roundtable report says Americans in 2006 spent $1,928 per capita on health care, at least two-and-a-half times more per person than any other advanced country.

In a different twist, the report took those costs and factored benefits into the equation.

It compares statistics on life expectancy, death rates and even cholesterol readings and blood pressures. The health measures are factored together with costs into a 100-point “value” scale. That hasn’t been done before, the authors said.

The results are not encouraging.

The United States is 23 points behind five leading economic competitors: Canada, Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom and France. The five nations cover all their citizens, and though their systems differ, in each country the government plays a much larger role than in the U.S.

The cost-benefit disparity is even wider — 46 points — when the U.S. is compared with emerging competitors: China, Brazil and India.

“What’s important is that we measure and compare actual value — not just how much we spend on health care, but the performance we get back in return,” said H. Edward Hanway, CEO of the insurance company Cigna. “That’s what this study does, and the results are quite eye-opening.”

Higher U.S. spending funnels away resources that could be invested elsewhere in the economy, but fails to deliver a healthier work force, the report said.

“Spending more would not be a problem if our health scores were proportionately higher,” Dr. Arnold Milstein, one of the authors of the study, said in an interview. “But what this study shows is that the U.S. is not getting higher levels of health and quality of care.”

Other countries spend less on health care and their workers are relatively healthier, the report said.

Medical costs have long been a problem for U.S. auto companies. General Motors spends more per car on health care than it does on steel. But as more American companies face global competition, the “value gap” is being felt by more CEOs — and their hard pressed workers.

One thing the report does not do is endorse the same solution that countries like Canada have adopted: a government-run health care system.

The CEOs of the Business Roundtable believe health care for U.S. workers and their families should stay in private hands, with a government-funded safety net for low-income people.

[Reba 2]

One thing the report does not do is endorse the same solution that countries like Canada have adopted: a government-run health care system.

The CEOs of the Business Roundtable believe health care for U.S. workers and their families should stay in private hands, with a government-funded safety net for low-income people.

don't know why they can't figure out how to do it both ways sort of. Government funded, like Canada, (not even all provinces are totally government paid anymore anyhow) but with user fees and/or subsidised premiums based on income. We all already pay into Medicare off our paychecks anyhow, and yet most of us will never see a dime of it back ourselves. Why not just add to that? It would probably still add up to be less costly to the consumers than our current $400 per month insurance premiums

Edited March 14, 2009 by Reba

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Very interesting. Let's see how pragmatic the Republicans can be on this issue.

[Ban Hammer 13,671]

Very interesting. Let's see how pragmatic the Republicans can be on this issue.

what do they have to do with it? they are a minority in every branch of the legislative.

[Nikita2Charles 32]

The Dems didn't reach the 60 votes filbuster proof to make all the reforms they want to do. They need to get at least 2 republican in the senate to join them, not counting there are lot of conservative democrats who votes like republican on some issues.

Very interesting. Let's see how pragmatic the Republicans can be on this issue.

what do they have to do with it? they are a minority in every branch of the legislative.

[Ban Hammer 13,671]

The Dems didn't reach the 60 votes filbuster proof to make all the reforms they want to do. They need to get at least 2 republican in the senate to join them, not counting there are lot of conservative democrats who votes like republican on some issues.

Very interesting. Let's see how pragmatic the Republicans can be on this issue.

what do they have to do with it? they are a minority in every branch of the legislative.

so that's the root of the problem: the dems can't steamroll right over everyone to get what they want shoved through the legislative.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The Dems didn't reach the 60 votes filbuster proof to make all the reforms they want to do. They need to get at least 2 republican in the senate to join them, not counting there are lot of conservative democrats who votes like republican on some issues.

Very interesting. Let's see how pragmatic the Republicans can be on this issue.

what do they have to do with it? they are a minority in every branch of the legislative.

so that's the root of the problem: the dems can't steamroll right over everyone to get what they want shoved through the legislative.

Democracy sucks, don't it!

[Pooky 3,847]

The Dems didn't reach the 60 votes filbuster proof to make all the reforms they want to do. They need to get at least 2 republican in the senate to join them, not counting there are lot of conservative democrats who votes like republican on some issues.

Very interesting. Let's see how pragmatic the Republicans can be on this issue.

what do they have to do with it? they are a minority in every branch of the legislative.

so that's the root of the problem: the dems can't steamroll right over everyone to get what they want shoved through the legislative.

Democracy sucks, don't it!

So, the Republican'ts have to be pragmatic, eh? Why can't the Democretins be proactive, too?

[mawilson 2,133]

Yeah, I still don't see how US health care is a 'liability' to global economy.

[Ban Hammer 13,671]

Yeah, I still don't see how US health care is a 'liability' to global economy.

nor do i - it's a chicken little moment.