Oh yeah, and while that first chart is ALL SPENDING per capita, we ALSO SPEND MORE PUBLIC MONEY on healthcare per capita than most socialist countries.
HOW IS THIS TRUE?
HOW DO WE SPEND MORE PUBLIC FUNDS ON HEALTHCARE PER CAPITA THAN UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS?
HOW?
This is why I want to move to Canada (whose per capita public funding of healthcare is ~60% of what america's is per capita), meaning that if we were to, overnight, switch to their system (identically, obviously a thought experiment), OUR TAXES WOULD GO DOWN.
It may seem like a tautology for many americans, but not everything the government does, it does badly. The free market model isn't copy-paste-able in every situation. There's a combination of several factors at work.
For example, national obligatory official IDs mean the government actually knows who lives where and how many of every group there are. National census data in Europe are about 10x more accurate than in the US. This also means preventive campaigns are more useful - the belgian government can send a mail or a letter to every woman between 45 and 55 with no trouble at all; in the US, that's an invasion of privacy. Crap like that.
Also, the acceptance of more government meddling means more obligatory prevention. If I don't go to the dentist's ofice once every 18 months, they don't pay me when I go there for caveties or whatever later on. As long as I *do* go in for a check-up, it's basically free (somewhere around $10 after rebate
). Same for optician. Starting at a certain age, same for colon inspection/mammography. Same for a host of other things. Early capture -> lower risk -> lower costs and more effectiveness.
Also, maximum tariffs for many "standard" procedures, means doctors can't just fleece their patients/insurance companies/... In the US, there's littel to no reason for a doctor to ask less money than more.
