If the real metric for healthcare reform in the United States were lives saved, we would cut healthcare spending here. High healthcare spending here raises healthcare costs everywhere. That’s what it means to be the biggest-spending purchaser. High U. S. spending means not only that we’re causing healthcare costs to rise in other OECD countries but that we’re outbidding poor countries for medical services. In those places a relatively small incremental change in spending means saving a lot more lives than it does here.
I think Americans should mostly be concerned about those things they can control. If we suddenly spend less on health care, why would Somalia spend more? There may very well be a cost inflationary effect, though it does not seem to effect drug costs that much or personnel costs as far as I can tell. I would see most of the higher costs coming from new tech, which is not really what poor countries need.
We do siphon off a lot of medical personnel from India, Pakistan and a few other countries. The economics of health care in third world countries gets hazy for me. It seems like most people are too poor for anything at all, or can afford only the most basic care anyway, which they would not be getting from someone qualified to work here.
Steve
Another study showing that the uninsured are more likely to die. This time it is children, which I am sure will provoke great hilarity amongst the conservatives.
http://www.jpedsurg.org/article/S0022-3468(08)01147-0/abstract
Steve