Few would disagree with the fact that our healthcare system has serious issues. However, it seems that we still have one of the most free (if not THE most free) systems in the world. That might be an arguable statement, but my point is, how much does the world benefit from the United States?
In all of the socialized healthcare systems in the world, if it wasn't for a lot of the drugs and technology coming out of the US, where would they be? Are they able to purchase our older (but functional) equipment when we no longer need it? Do drug companies that reap billions of dollars in the US offer the same drug at a lower cost to Europe, in effect making us subsidize their drugs?
Has anyone read anything regarding these questions that they could point me to? I am less interested in how each system works, and more interested in how, if at all, other countries beneft (and basically free-load) off of our system.
Thanks.
A lot! Practically all medical technology in the last 60 years was developed in the US, where a somewhat intact profit and loss system still exists. European government medical care systems do not produce a lot of technological progress at all, in fact bureaucrats generally dislike having to adjust to changes and have strong incentives to reduce costs. I think their health care systems would pretty much still be stuck with 1950's technology if they didn't have the US to copy from.
Being able to free-ride on expense of the US, European systems have roughly the same health care standards in a nation-by-nation comparison, and everybody therefore assumes that European systems are magically efficient (this is then explained by various economic fallacies). But national comparisons leave out that their systems do not produce what they have on their own, but are completely dependent on the US for any progress whatsoever.
Just imagine how healthy the world could be if all developed nations were producing medical progress, not just a few of them, in very restricted markets. If we compare the current situation with what could have been, instead of comparing nations to each others, there is no doubt that socialized medicine vastly reduces the health of it's citizens.
Prior to 1968 I would say that the entire world took advantage of the USA progress in health care technology. After the 1960 with the advent of Medicare where the fastest growing segment of the population gets subsidized health care and with the overreaching authority of the FDA the rest of the world has caught up. Add into this the tax favored status of employer provided health insurance and you have a financial disaster. So at this point in time there is very little good coming out of the USA health care system for the volume of money going into the system and consequenty many advancing nations like India have picked up and started creating medical technology where the USA left off in a pile of paperwork.
Note the insanity of what is happening in the USA. Insurance companies are finding it cheaper to send patients to India, Costa Rica, Beliz, etc for medical procedures because of the bureaucratic mess that is the USA health care system.
Both opinions so far seem to be at odds with each other, but they both make valid points. I'd be interested to know if there are any further studies on this.
Almost every major medical/drug advance in the past 50 years has come from the US. I could be a coincidence, but I suspect it has to do with the fact that we still have a semi-free healthcare system that allows for a certain level of profit and loss.