791
submitted 11 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

American taxpayers footed the bill for at least $1.8 trillion in federal and state health care expenditures in 2022 — about 41% of the nearly $4.5 trillion in both public and private health care spending the U.S. recorded last year, according to the annual report released last week by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

On top of that $1.8 trillion, third-party programs, which are often government-funded, and public health programs accounted for another $600 billion in spending.

This means the U.S. government spent more on health care last year than the governments of Germany, the U.K., Italy, Spain, Austria, and France combined spent to provide universal health care coverage to the whole of their population (335 million in total), which is comparable in size to the U.S. population of 331 million.

Between direct public spending and compulsory, tax-driven insurance programs, Germany spent about $380 billion in health care in 2022; France spent around $300 billion, and so did the U.K.; Italy, $147 billion; Spain, $105 billion; and Austria, $43 billion. The total, $1.2 trillion, is about two-thirds of what the U.S. government spent without offering all of its citizens the option of forgoing private insurance.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 46 points 11 months ago

Though we should also definitely dismantle the US military

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 38 points 11 months ago

Dismantle? No.

Reform for efficiency? Yes.

For example, the entire admin back end can be civil service. (Some of it already is) and contracting needs to go die in a dumpster fire. You've got at least 30,000 infantrymen sitting around doing nothing on any given day. Take a survey of their skills and start assigning additional duties. You can always fall back on contractors if you run out of grunts.

Also, for the love of God stop maintaining an entire mechanized army. You don't need to mount every soldier at the same time. Yes it's awesome. But most infantry units aren't going much of anywhere once they're dug in.

[-] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 15 points 11 months ago

Efficiency of what? Imperialism? Fuck no.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 24 points 11 months ago

Until superheroes or the Carebears become real we will need a military. The things I mentioned don't touch the power projection debate on purpose. That's a whole ideology thing that people need to be voting for and stuff. I'm taking about ways to save money whether we pull back or not.

[-] raynethackery@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Ready troops? Care Bear Stare!

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

It would be awesome.

[-] aniki@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

you gotta source for that platitude?

[-] wanderingmagus@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

Source: Ukraine. Gave up nuclear weapons in exchange for an accord specifying its borders and promising peace. Almost immediately got invaded by a nuclear power with an army after making political decisions on its own. If it had kept its nuclear weapons, Russia would not have been so cavalier about straight up invading. Disarmament is a lie.

[-] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Disarmament of an actual nuclear power has been done once. South Africa.

Ukraine never owned or controlled those nukes. They were guarded by Russian soldiers. They would have had to attack Russian soldiers, somehow repulse a Russian counterattack without Western aid, and then reprogram them since they didn't have launch codes. Ukraine got the best concessions they could for giving Russia back the Russian nukes.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Yeah. The world. Minutemen were cool in 1776. But that wouldn't fly these days.

[-] CybranM@feddit.nu 12 points 11 months ago

You think Russia/Iran/China would just behave without the threat of US intervention?

[-] ICastFist@programming.dev 4 points 11 months ago

Ironically, without the "bigger threat" of the USA, they'd likely be at odds against each other. China still wants Outer Manchuria back, a region it was forced to cede to Russia back in 1860. Iran wants to be the de facto power of the muslim world, but has to deal with many other muslim countries that don't want it, plus Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan are countries that Russia would prefer to have control over.

[-] CybranM@feddit.nu 1 points 11 months ago

Yeah there might be a struggle there for a bit but China would steamroll both of them and then what?

[-] ICastFist@programming.dev 1 points 11 months ago

I doubt China would steamroll them. People thought Russia would steamroll Ukraine, it very clearly didn't. Besides, China isn't exactly a loved country, it has "allies" that would likely abandon them on the first opportunity and many countries that would love to see them getting kicked in the proverbial nuts.

Any militaristic action of China against any of those big targets would trigger a response from several countries. While everyone will talk peace, in reality a good portion would try to play the war up for as long as possible, to bleed both dry.

[-] BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee 26 points 11 months ago

Build some god damn trains, subways, and bus routes with the military money. Bing bang boom we're an actual "first world" country now

[-] Jessvj93@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Honestly, rather than them run their budgets to max so they don't lose any the next cycle. It's a damn self feeding monster.

this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2023
791 points (100.0% liked)

News

23387 readers
2819 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS