It Saves Lives. It Can Save Money. So Why Aren’t We Spending More on Public Health ? - The New York Times
▻https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/28/upshot/it-saves-lives-it-can-save-money-so-why-arent-we-spending-more-on-public-he
Mais s’il y a beaucoup moins de malades, comment les grosses compagnies pharmaceutiques, les gros hôpitaux privés et les gros médecins vont-ils sur-vivre, notamment à travers Medicare et Medicaid dont les budgets sont proprement faramineux, infiniment plus que les sommes décrites ci-dessous ?
Et comment interdire coca-cola et big-mac sans nuire au lobbying alias « liberté d’expression », et autre « respect de la liberté individuelle » ?
Of course, it’s hard to pin down total public health spending. In 2017, the budget for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — which almost all agree is public health spending — was about $12 billion.
The budget for the Health Resources and Services Administration — some of which is devoted to public health — was $10.7 billion. (The agency helps people who are uninsured or medically vulnerable gain access to health care.)
The Agriculture Department spends more than $100 billion on nutrition assistance and about $1 billion on food safety, both of which arguably contribute to public health.
But even if we’re generous, and call all of that public health spending, it’s dwarfed by what Americans spend on health care directly.