As I pointed out last week, there has now been a three year trend of Medicare per beneficiary spending growing at a very slow rate. These three years of slow growth have already produce substantial reductions in the deficit, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s new budget outlook.
|By: Jon Walker Wednesday February 6, 2013 11:30 am|
|By: Jon Walker Tuesday September 25, 2012 1:30 pm|
The problem is primarily that we pay radically more for the same procedures, tests and medications than any other first-world country. Until we adopt one of the proven price control systems other first-world countries have used for decades –single payer or all-payer — our health care cost will continue to grow at a crushing rate.
|By: Jon Walker Friday September 7, 2012 12:20 pm|
A new report by the Institute of Medicine has been getting a fair amount of attention. The report not surprisingly found that the American health care system is radically more expensive than it should be. It found that in 2009 the nation spent an estimated $750 billion in unnecessary health spending.
|By: Jon Walker Thursday January 12, 2012 3:30 pm|
If you actually wanted to reduce health care spending you need to reduce how much we are actually paying for health care products and services. Not only do we spend way more than the rest of the industrialized world on administrative costs, we also pay way more for the exact same drugs and treatments. Forcing people to pay more for their health care out of pocket, i.e. have “skin in the game,” will not fix our problems.
|By: Jon Walker Monday November 28, 2011 11:15 am|
Washington Post columnist correctly notes that OECD nations provide equal or better health care but at a fraction of the cost paid by the US. But he then ignores the obvious conclusion — that we should adopt one of their proven systems — and instead claims that an unproven and unlikely scheme using vouchers to private insurers would work.
|By: Jon Walker Thursday January 6, 2011 8:30 am|
This morning is the tale of two headlines — one from The New York Times and one from the Los Angeles Times — which are completely at odds with each other with regard to health care costs and the rationale for premium rate hikes. If health care spending has grown by only 4%, why does Blue Shield of California need to increase its rates by as much as 59%?