An Australian looks into what we pay for our healthcare
My Australian friend Toby is fascinated with the health care debate in America, especially by the enormous disparity between what we pay and what we get in return, and he has written a post with all the numbers. Take it away, Aleksandr Ivanovich:
"...in 2008, the US spent $7220 per capita on healthcare (all figures in 2011 USD). This represents 17.4% of GDP. More than half of that is what Americans are paying privately. Every woman, man and child in the US forked out more than an average $3610 for private healthcare and almost the same again indirectly through tax.
Second place in the staggering statistics department goes to the Netherlands, who spent $4241 per capita, or 12% GDP. Unlike the US, the Netherlands has a universal health care system, and only about one-sixth of that is in the private sector.
In twenty-third place is Australia, possibly the best match for the US in health after Canada. After all, Australians eat roughly much the same amount of rubbish, watch a similar amount of terrible television and speak (mostly) the same language (but without the weird accents). Australia’s figures for 2008 are $3445 per capita or 8.7% of GDP, below the OECD average of 9.5% GDP.
Keeping in mind this total is the private and government sectors combined per capita, and yet it’s less than what the US pays privately per capita. Despite this, Australians on average live longer and have better health outcomes than Americans. The OECD data demonstrates Australia’s universal healthcare system is more efficient than the US private fend-for-yourself system and more effective. Surely that can’t be right? Believe me, the healthcare system in Australia isn’t exactly a shining beacon of efficiency, no matter how hard or magnificently those at the coal face work. How can such a sector, two-thirds funded by governments (i.e. Australian tax payers), be better than the equivalent private sector in the US, the land where the consumer rules?..."