Earlier quoted context omitted.
You seem to be saying two opposite things here, that the US is better because you spend more money on it, and yet also that you don't spend more money on it. Both can't be true, but both can be wrong. > Our facilities are far superior. Then why is US life expectancy worse? > In California where I live though folks with little money get very subsidized healthcare that is cheaper than NHS taxes. Unless "very subsidized…
If my salary is 150k and I spend 5k that's 3.3%. If my salary is 60k that same 5k is 8.3%. So when I am talking about "cost" I mean hours of labor. It costs Americans fewer hours of labor to pay for their healthcare. This is true across all socioeconomic classes. The same Medicare + Medicaid you cite is actually our tax payer funded subsidized healthcare for folks that have to use tax payer funded socialized healthca…
> If my salary is 60k that same 5k is 8.3%.
So? The US federal taxes are not a constant dollar amount. Someone who earns $60k pays $5,020, someone who earns $150k pays $24,734, from the first tax calculator I found.
Same idea in the UK.
> So when I am talking about "cost" I mean hours of labor. It costs Americans fewer hours of labor to pay for their healthcare. This is true across all socioeconomic classes.
False.
The average person in the UK spends about half as many hours on health as the average person in the USA.
What you're comparing now isn't just the government taxation supported stuff, so you also have to include the insurance and out-of-pocket costs, which then brings the USA to a nationwide average of $15,474/person, i.e. 18% of GDP, compared to the UK's (in USD terms) $5493/capita or 8.9% GDP: https://www.cms.gov/data-research/statistics-trends-and-repo... vs https://healthsystemsfacts.org/uk-consumer-costs/
> The same Medicare + Medicaid you cite is actually our tax payer funded subsidized healthcare for folks that have to use tax payer funded socialized healthcare and are basically at the mercy of what our healthcare system will provide them state by state but generally it is federal law that an ER has to take care of you if it's an immediate life threatening problem. So what you are citing is actually our tax payer funded socialized healthcare which is funded differently state by state and a lot of people won't even use because it's basically the last resort. Most Americans are subsidizing that healthcare.
I know all of that. What's your argument here? Mine is that the NHS costs roughly the same as Americans spend on just this alone, and the UK doesn't then need other spending on top.
> Having a lower cost per person is actually not a good thing. It's bad, actually. It means worse facilities, fewer staff, worse equipment.
False:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/life-expectancy?tab=line&...