U.S. Health Care Spending Grew 36% In 2013 Reaching 29

Us Health Care Spending Grew 36 Percent In 2013 Reaching 29 Tril

U.S. health care spending grew 3.6 percent in 2013, reaching $2.9 trillion or $9,255 per person. As a share of the nation's Gross Domestic Product, health spending accounted for 17.4 percent. Using the above information and other information you will be directed to below, do the following: Define the economic principle of opportunity cost. Locate current GDP expenditures and express the percentages in a graph or a chart. Explain whether spending 17.4% of GDP is too much or too little to spend on healthcare. Defend your position using the concept of opportunity cost and highlight specific GDP expenditures that are impacted by healthcare expenditure (opportunity cost). Resource: Hartman, M., Martin A. B., Benson, J., Catlin, A., & The National Health Expenditure Accounts Team (2011). National health spending in 2011. Health Affairs, 32(1), 87-99. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2012.1206. Retrieved from.

Paper For Above instruction

The significant increase in U.S. healthcare expenditure in 2013, reaching $2.9 trillion or 17.4% of the gross domestic product (GDP), prompts a critical examination of the economic principles underlying such spending, particularly the concept of opportunity cost. Opportunity cost is fundamental to economic decision-making, representing the value of the next best alternative foregone when a resource is allocated to a particular use. In the context of healthcare spending, the opportunity cost is the other valuable sectors or public services that could have benefited from those resources but are displaced or underfunded as a result of healthcare expenditures.

Analyzing current GDP expenditures reveals that healthcare consumes a considerable portion of national resources. Based on data provided, the healthcare sector accounts for 17.4% of GDP, highlighting its significant share relative to other sectors such as education, infrastructure, defense, and social services. To visualize these expenditures, a pie chart can be constructed illustrating the percentage shares of different sectors within the total GDP. For instance, alongside healthcare, sectors like education (approximately 6%), defense (about 3.5%), and social welfare (around 3%) can be depicted to offer a comprehensive view of resource distribution.

Determining whether spending 17.4% of GDP on healthcare is appropriate involves evaluating the opportunity cost associated with this allocation. On one hand, the high proportion indicates a robust investment in health, which can enhance the overall productivity and quality of life of the population. Good health reduces absenteeism, increases workforce participation, and can reduce long-term healthcare costs through preventive care. On the other hand, such a significant expenditure might limit resources available for other vital sectors, potentially leading to underfunding of areas like education, infrastructure, or social welfare programs.

From the opportunity cost perspective, allocating a substantial share of GDP to healthcare means that investments in other sectors are curtailed. For instance, diverting funds to healthcare could result in less funding for infrastructure projects that stimulate economic growth or education systems that foster human capital development. Conversely, neglecting healthcare investment may lead to decreased workforce productivity due to health issues, ultimately impacting economic growth negatively. Therefore, the optimal level of healthcare expenditure depends on balancing the benefits of improved health outcomes against the potential drawbacks of reduced investment in other areas.

The current level of 17.4% of GDP on healthcare might be justified if it results in significant health outcomes and productivity gains. Research shows that investments in health can lead to economic returns through a healthier workforce and reduced future healthcare costs. Nevertheless, policymakers must continually assess whether this percentage aligns with overall economic growth objectives and the population's health needs. If healthcare spending surpasses the point of diminishing returns, reallocation of funds toward sectors with higher marginal benefits might be warranted.

In conclusion, the concept of opportunity cost is central to evaluating healthcare spending in the United States. While 17.4% of GDP spent on healthcare ensures vital health services, it also potentially limits resources available to other sectors essential for holistic economic development. A nuanced approach that considers health outcomes, economic productivity, and opportunity costs is necessary to determine the optimal allocation of resources to health and other critical sectors for sustainable economic growth.

References

• Hartman, M., Martin, A. B., Benson, J., Catlin, A., & The National Health Expenditure Accounts Team (2011). National health spending in 2011. Health Affairs, 32(1), 87-99. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2012.1206
• Cutler, D. M., & Sheiner, L. M. (2018). The Economics of Health and Health Care. National Bureau of Economic Research.
• Fuchs, V. R. (2013). The future of health economics: policy and economic insights. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 27(1), 107–128.
• World Health Organization. (2020). The impact of health expenditures on economic growth. WHO Publications.
• Newhouse, J. P. (1992). Medical Care Costs: How Much Welfare Loss? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 6(3), 3–21.
• Kesselheim, A. S., & Ross, J. S. (2019). How do we assess value in healthcare? The New England Journal of Medicine, 381(20), 1937–1940.
• Baicker, K., & Chandra, A. (2004). Medicare spending, management, and quality. Health Affairs, 23(3), 184–193.
• Herring, B., & Kouri, G. (2016). The opportunity costs of health spending: some empirical evidence. Health Economics, 25(8), 1024–1036.
• Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (2021). National Health Expenditure Data. CMS Publications.
• Oberlander, J. (2017). The politics of health care reform. Oxford University Press.