![Silver](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="32" height="32"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
847
Britons now pay almost as much as Americans on out-of-pocket healthcare spending
80% Upvoted
level 1
I'd be more interested to see what the median of out of pocket spending would be compared to each other
286
level 2
Here you go! It's not comparable:
165
level 1
Garbage way to describe such statistic. Put in consideration the huge difference in gdp per capita and nominal gdp.
171
level 2
Fun fact, America consumes nearly half of global healthcare spending
33
level 2
· 1 hr. ago
Bavaria
No, it’s a interesting aspect when you are comparing different health care systems. But only one aspect out of many. Price for the end user and quality of health care is also important.
For example, Switzerland has been always above the US in this single metric, but their quality is really good and their price for the end user is reasonable.
8
level 2
Defending poor decisions to the bottom of empty pockets?
Vote
level 1
Oh boy, can't wait to see this (ironically misrepresentative) data misrepresented by idiots who think it proves something that it doesn't.
15
![User avatar](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="256" height="256"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
level 2
level 1
But that will have always been the case, regardless of what those figures claim. Medical procedures aren't cheaper in the UK, they're just free. The ones that aren't free will cost the same as in the US.
The stupid part of this article is that it's complaining about the NHS and using people who CHOSE to seek private treatment for personal reasons.
The NHS isn't perfect, and it doesn't claim to be, but comparing it to the US healthcare system is just a disgusting and intentional stretching of the truth just to have something to rant about.
294
level 2
people who CHOSE to seek private treatment for personal reasons.
People pay because the condition is painful and/or life threatening and the waiting list is years long. If the waiting list is long enough, then free healthcare may as well no longer exist.
44
level 2
Well those that aren't free could still theoretically be cheaper. Public healthcare acts as (profitless) competition, private insurance and care is likely to pursue somewhat lower profit margins to attract more people. In the US market domination and long held patents sometimes do away with the incentive to lower profits (as is exemplified by price increases in insulin).
4
level 2
I don't think it's "just to have something to rant about." These weird stories that are popping up in the last week to try to prove you may as well get rid of the NHS are very questionable and most likely sponsored by whoever is going to make the most money if they privatize.
4
level 2
Theres a lot of bloat in the US system. That drives up cost quite a bit.
3
level 2
level 2
Medical procedures aren't cheaper in the UK, they're just
freepaid with your taxes.
Vote
level 2
· 2 hr. ago
Italy
Yeah, but the tories have been cutting funds for the NHS and privatising previously public parts of it for ages so that the service becomes worse and worse pushing people to seek private treatment. Supposedly, they are doing it so that in the long run they can get rid of the NHS entirely and get an American system.
That's why it's a problem, not because people choose to go privately.
0
level 2
But it does, because in the UK if you get seriously ill or in an accident, it can leave you unable to do your job. Same as the US
Loss of income is what leads to bankruptcy
And the UK actually has a higher bankruptcy rate than the U.S.
Vote
level 1
· 3 hr. ago · edited 3 hr. ago
I have all sorts of questions about the data they've used here, after all, this is an opinion piece (and should really be flagged as such).
For example, the chart that is the thread 'content', is only showing 'out of pocket healthcare payments', I strongly suspect that this does not include insurance premiums, and far, far more people in the US are insured vs the UK (and not all of them have their premiums covered by their employers).
Additionally, I couldn't find this data on OWID (the purported source), I find something similar but it only goes up to 2014, no further. Note their definition of this metric
Out-of-pocket expenditure on healthcare as percent of total healthcare expenditure. 'Out-of-pocket' refers to direct outlays made by households, including gratuities and in-kind payments, to healthcare providers.
Suspicion confirmed, it almost certaintly does not account for insurance premiums. Well done FT.
22
level 1
· 34 min. ago · edited 27 min. ago
Im from the US and live in the UK, I far prefer the UK’s health system. The NHS isn’t perfect, but they aren’t even in the same playing field in terms of cost, even privately.
Vote
level 2
· 26 min. ago · edited 17 min. ago
This post is complete bullshit, nhs is paid for through your taxes and if your rich you can go private and pay for it yourself. Completely different system to the US.
Vote
level 1
· 3 hr. ago
Ireland
Most Americans actually do have health insurance, and while they have to pay a decent chunk even with comprehensive health insurance, healthcare isn’t actually a problem for most Americans. The criticism of American healthcare is that an American without health insurance (10% of the population doesn’t have any) will be completely bankrupted over minor procedures. Calling an ambulance for someone without health insurance is essentially a financial death sentence.
I’m not not sure if this graph includes health insurance payments but it isn’t hard to believe even if it does. 54% of Americans get health insurance through their employer, the other 36% of Americans that have to pay for their own health insurance do pay a much higher cost than Brits but employer health insurance is less common in the UK (19%).
17
level 2
· 3 hr. ago · edited 3 hr. ago
long desk enjoyer
level 2
You are correct, I checked Our World In Data's definition of out-of-pocket healthcare spending and it does not include insurance.
5
level 2
This is not accurate. Insurance is ludicrously expensive in the US for the value you obtain from it. Something missed by a lot of people is that 20-30% of their total benefits is tied to the employer side of health care - in addition to what the person pays on their own.
I did the math, because I now have UK team members and know what they pay, and just switching to pay their same amount and not even have the free health care, just have the insurance paid via taxes, actually saves me 20% of my income.
When you factor in the costs of prescriptions and treatment, that number grows significantly.
I am a self-identifying neoliberal but this kind of externality is exactly what the government exists to address.
4
level 2
level 1
· 4 hr. ago
long desk enjoyer
level 2
Some people chose to buy private healthcare. This will give people access to shorter queues and plusher hospitals.
It can take months to get free mental health counselling on the NHS, so many will go private.
Dental care and eye care aren’t covered by the NHS I think, except for the poor, elderly and under-18s. Prescriptions cost £8 in England but are free in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, unless they’re for a chronic disease and then they are free or capped.
14
level 2
In Slovakia for example you have public doctors and private ones. So e.g. you want to see a specialist. You can get appointment maybe in 6 months maybe next year. And if you need it now, you can pay and go see private. Usually they also have better and nicer facilities.
Other problem is for example some medications are not registered, even when they are in other EU countries, so even if the drug could save the patient, they have to request approval from insurance company, which is not always approved.
Probably similar in UK.
9
level 1
I had a toothache and can't get an emergency NHS appointment because I am not taking painkillers and my face hasn't swollen up.
Just came back from my private appointment this morning and my teeth is still sensitive.
5
level 1
It is easy to paint the US healthcare experience as a capitalist dystopia, and the NHS as its socialist antithesis, but with each passing year this moves further from the truth. In 1990, out-of-pocket spending by Britons on medical expenses was equivalent to 1 per cent of GDP, while across the Atlantic, uninsured Americans forked out more than twice as much, at 2.2 per cent. Thirty years on, that gap has all but disappeared. Americans’ non-reimbursable spending now stands at 1.9 per cent, and Britons’ has doubled to 1.8 per cent.
11
level 2
Maybe, but uninsured Americans don't pay 2.2%. They either get away with not needing the service (mostly) or are footed with colossal bills. $800 for an ambulance callout, $50 for the water to wash down your pills, $1m for some actual treatment. The average isnt a useful measure
7
level 2
This sounds like total bullshit. Maybe if it includes dental care and cosmetic, but for all major healthcare the vast majority of people us the NHS. Private insurance wouldn't be out of pocket and drug fees are capped at £100 per year. This is really strange.
Vote
level 2
level 1
Full article:
1
In recent years, there has been a growing fear among certain sections of the British public that our much loved and strictly publicly funded National Health Service is at risk of being privatised. The NHS will be secretly sold by the dastardly Tories to US corporations in a cut price deal, or so the theory goes.
While the methods described may be fictional, it is impossible not to conclude from the data that a broader shift is happening. British healthcare is quietly inching into the private sector, and what is most concerning is that it is increasingly those least able to pay who are being forced away from the NHS.
If I told you that in the US, with its notoriously expensive healthcare system, the number resorting to crowdfunding campaigns to pay exorbitant private medical expenses has risen 20-fold in the past five years, I’m sure you wouldn’t be surprised. But those statistics don’t refer to the US, they refer to the UK.
Hundreds of Britons have launched GoFundMe campaigns so far in 2022 to raise money for private medical expenses, frequently citing their desperation after spending months or even years on NHS waiting lists. One Northern Irish family felt compelled to get private treatment overseas for their 12-year-old son’s curved spine after being told they would have to wait years by the NHS. They eventually raised £50,000 and the treatment was carried out successfully in Turkey.
Other cases include people suffering from debilitating hereditary disorders, career-derailing injuries and various forms of cancer, and all of whom feel the NHS is unable to meet their needs.
It is easy to paint the US healthcare experience as a capitalist dystopia, and the NHS as its socialist antithesis, but with each passing year this moves further from the truth. In 1990, out-of-pocket spending by Britons on medical expenses was equivalent to 1 per cent of GDP, while across the Atlantic, uninsured Americans forked out more than twice as much, at 2.2 per cent. Thirty years on, that gap has all but disappeared. Americans’ non-reimbursable spending now stands at 1.9 per cent, and Britons’ has doubled to 1.8 per cent.
3
level 2
2
And the bulk of the increase in spending is from those who can least afford it. Between 2010 and 2020, the portion of UK spending that went on hospital treatments increased by 60 per cent overall, but more than doubled among the lowest-earning fifth of the population. The poorest now spend as much on private medical care as the richest, in relative terms.
One in 14 of Britain’s poorest households now incurs “catastrophic healthcare costs” in a typical year — where costs exceed 40 per cent of the capacity to pay. This is up from one in 30 a decade ago, coinciding with a period in which the share of the poorest who feel their healthcare needs are going unmet has risen from 1 per cent to 5 per cent.
For decades, droves of middle class Britons have gone private to get treated faster. This has always reflected their capacity to pay as much as the urgency of the need. But when thousands of people on low incomes feel forced to raise money from strangers to circumvent a struggling healthcare system, this is surely the starkest signal yet that the NHS is at breaking point.
2
level 2
level 2
· 4 hr. ago
Finland
Sure but the private sector will still be cheaper because it has to compete with the public sector. You can see any private specialist here for 150€ and with an insurance that’s covered.
5
level 2
Not the case in Belgium at all.
I've been able to see an ear professional the next day. One of those "I studied into my 30's" type.
Universal vs private healthcare isn't exactly the problem with the US system.
The US system not being too different from the dutch or German system.
The problem is their prices. That's it.
German government regulates prices.
And so does the UK.
The US doesn't want to regulate prices so things are often 10 - 20 times or more as expensive.
3
level 2
That's bad universal healthcare. Usually the reason that happens is lobby groups that start to intentionally take away funds from the system and when problem start to occur, they show it as an example how the system is bad.
9
level 1
level 2
It looks like a very uniform, steady rise that doesn't change significantly on any government?
18
level 2
· 4 hr. ago
long desk enjoyer
level 1
Ive never seen anyone in the UK going bankrupt due to medical bill. In the US is 4/10
2
level 1
level 1
· 4 hr. ago · edited 3 hr. ago
level 1
· 3 hr. ago
United Kingdom
level 2
level 1
· 4 hr. ago
Konungariket Sverige
level 1
level 2
· 26 min. ago
United Kingdom
I don't really see that happening. I do think the tories push privatisation too much, but I don't think a system like the US would be welcome here.
In the US, healthcare is a lot more of a polarising issue about whether universal healthcare should be a thing. In the UK it's already a thing and pretty beloved, sure there are people who have issues with it, and definitely think it needs work, but if the government tried to completely get rid of universal healthcare, I don't think the public would stand for that.
Vote
level 1
level 1
· 3 hr. ago
Europe
level 2
· 2 hr. ago
United Kingdom
And how did you work out Brexit has anything to do with this cherry picked data.
2
level 2
· 3 hr. ago
United Kingdom
It's still 3 helf cair tho like ñHš. this is people who are choosing to pay for it some how.
2
level 1
level 1
That's the cheap part wait till you guys have to pay our premiums on top of that.
1
level 1
I’d like to see what it’s for, and by that I mean is it for their monthly cost or deductibles, prescriptions, co payments. I think a lot of Americans have such high deductibles they aren’t seeking treatment, or taking all the prescriptions.
A breakdown in categories would be interesting to see.
1
level 1
[deleted]
· 3 hr. agolevel 1
level 1
This post is an excellent example of the quote popularized by Twain: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies and statistics."
Weighting individual spending by GDP makes it obvious the author was fishing for the measure that would end up with the closest results. If you look at World Bank data on out of pocket healthcare spending, the indicators it gives you are:
• out-of-pocket healthcare spending as a % of total health expenditure
• out-of-pocket healthcare spending per capita
• out-of-pocket healthcare spending per capita (PPP-adjusted)
Because those are useful indicators, and "as a % of GDP" is not. The post title is a factually untrue claim by any reasonable criteria; I've half a mind to report it for misinformation.
Vote
level 1
level 1
level 1
Almost time to trash on the Brits as much as they've done on the Americans.
Vote
Europe: 50 (+6) countries, 230 languages, 746M people… 1 subreddit.
3.1m
Members
8.1k
Online
Created Jan 25, 2008
Reddit Inc © 2022. All rights reserved