Unraveling Complexities in Financial Data

Follow:

HOME

SAVINGS ACCOUNTS

CDs

FINANCIAL INFOGRAPHICS

Blog > Infographics > Healthcare Costs Around the World

Healthcare Costs Around the World

View Comments

Healthcare Costs Around the World

According to Reuters, “The United States spends more on healthcare than any country in the world but has higher rates of infant mortality, diabetes and other ills than many other developed countries.”

Total Health Expenditures as a Percentage of GDP

In Australia, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 9 percent. In Austria, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 9.5 percent. In Belgium, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 10 percent. In Canada, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 10 percent. In Denmark, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 8.5 percent. In Finland, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 7 percent.

In France, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 10 percent. In Germany, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 11 percent. In Iceland, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 10.5 percent. In Ireland, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 7 percent. In Italy, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 8.5 percent. In Japan, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 7.5 percent.

In Luxembourg, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 7 percent. In Netherlands, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 9 percent. In Norway, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 10 percent. In Sweden, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 9.5 percent. In Switzerland, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 11.5 percent. In United Kingdom, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 7.5 percent. In United States, the total health expenditures as a percentage of GDP are about 15 percent.

Infant Mortality

The Infant mortality rate, the rate of deaths per 1,000 live births, remains higher in the U.S. than in most other developed nations. The infant mortality rate in Japan is 2.8. The infant mortality rate in Germany is 3.9. The infant mortality rate in Switzerland is 4.2. The infant mortality rate in the United Kingdom is 5.1. The infant mortality rate in the United States is 6.8.

Life Expectancy

The life expectancy in the U.S. is lower than in many other developed countries. The life expectance in Japan is 82.1. The life expectancy in Germany is 79. The life expectancy in Switzerland is 81.3. The life expectancy in the United Kingdom is 79. The life expectancy in the Unites States is 77.

MRI Machines

In Japan, 40.1 MRI machines exist for every million people. In Germany, 7.1 MRI machines exist for every million people. In Switzerland, 14.4 MRI machines exist for every million people. In the United Kingdom, 5.4 MRI machines exist for every million people. In the United States, 26.6 MRI machines exist for every million people.

Annual Costs of Health Care Per Capita

In Australia, the annual cost of health care per capita is $2,886. In Canada, the annual cost of health care per capita is $2,998. In Denmark, the annual cost of health care per capita is $2,743. In Finland, the annual cost of health care per capita is $2,104. In France, the annual cost of health care per capita is $3,048.

In Germany, the annual cost of health care per capita is $2,983. In Iceland, the annual cost of health care per capita is $3,159. In Ireland, the annual cost of health care per capita is $2,455. In Japan, the annual cost of health care per capita is $2,249. In Sweden, the annual cost of health care per capita is $2,745. In Switzerland, the annual cost of health care per capita is $3,847. In United Kingdom, the annual cost of health care per capita is $2,317. In United States, the annual cost of health care per capita is $5,711.

Posted by: cbennett Tags: healthcare costs

related visualeconomic articles

Free Health Care Plan Costs Add Up

Kevin

This country is pretty screwed up if you ask me. It has to do with our lifestyle more than our system. The lifestyle is associated with poverty and lack of education. This is linked to our poor social structure and lack of wealth distribution.
Jeff

They should probably factor in the high murder rate and car accident deaths in US, then life expectancy would be higher.
MLM

Good article posted...Very informational..US spends more on healthcare than any country in the world
e cigarette

wow.
bertad01

The figures on this page are very misleading. The United States has a different way of determining the infant mortality rate than other countries. For instance, United States doctors consider babies with the slightest sign of life as a live birth whereas other countries consider them as still births. Also, they consider the babies live regardless whether they are premature or not. The definintion of the infant mortality rate varies from country to country.

The life expectancy in the US is low for one reason, obesity. In 2009, the US had a 30.6% obese population which towers over any other country in the world. Physicians cant monitor everything that people put in their mouth, don't blame the US health care quality for Americans' poor choices.

And finally the cost of health care. Many factors contribute to the high costs of health care in America. Malpractice insurance is extremely steep for doctors which increases the price. Also, American doctors do an extremely thorough job to prevent a lawsuit. Americans are so quick to file a lawsuit that doctors have to do more than is necessary to make sure the diagnosis is right.
bar

U.S. healthcare is already rationed based on economic status, and we already have bureaucrats making our healthcare decisions, they are called insurance adjusters and they have an economic interest to deny you the care your doctor recommends.

Profit-seeking healthcare providers know the way to make the most money is to oversupply treatment to those who can pay, and undersupply to those who cannot. The health result is poor in either case but health is not the objective of U.S. health care. Profits are the objective, and profits are the only thing the health business is held accountable for.

Supply and demand do not work for healthcare. Supply is limited and demand is infinite. What percentage of your assets would you pay to have your life saved? Correct answer: 100%. Markets cannot work in such a scenario, sorry ideologues.

Health care is not a luxury, but it's not a right either. It's simply good public policy to make sure people have some essential level of access to both preventative and emergency care, and it's a good public investment. What we need is sane policy but we'll never get it from the loons and whores in Washington. Fixing campaign finance would be a start, and hopefully those corporate scumbag criminals on the Supreme Court will not strike it down next time we fix it.
Elizabeth

Thats because we are FAT. Obesity is linked to higher prenatal problems, many cancers including breast, hypertension, diabetes, gallbladder problems, liver disease....
Rupert W

Impactlab reports:
"WellPoint spent $2.6 billion repurchasing its own shares last year. This was such a good deal for shareholders that its board recently authorized spending an additional $3.5 billion for the same purpose. None of those dollars, it should go without saying, will be available for delivering healthcare to customers."
BigE

Consider the percentage of GDP spent on health care in the US. It has more than doubled in recent years. That means there is less money for anything else -- infrastructure, schools, military, you-name-it.

Supporting the current system is unpatriotic since it is bankrupting our nation!
pete8717

Sorry, the argument that socialised medicine doesn’t work doesn't stack up from a financial or health outcomes perspective.

Total Health Spending Govt Health Spending Infant Mortality Life Expectancy
(per capita) (per capita) (per 100k live births)
USA 6714 3074 7 78
Germany 3669 2809 4 80
Switzerland 5878 3541 4 82
United Kingdom 3361 2939 5 79
Australia 3316 2227 5 82
Japan 2690 2212 3 83

WHO figures collected 2006. Check it out for yourselves http://apps.who.int/whosis/data/Search.jsp?countries=%5bLocation%5d.Members There is a whole lot more to see.

To Nick who claims that UK health care is much more expensive and of poor quality, no society is composed of only tax payers and we can all find horror stories when we look for the worst sort of anecdotal evidence. The statistical evidence does not support your claim.

To Joe, the rationing of socialised health care argument is bogus while private insurers practice rescission and hide behind pre-existing condition rules. In my personal experiance, I have seen perhaps too much medical intervention undertaken on the old an infirm for little to no cost to the patient under the Australian system. I have certainly seen no evidence of rationing. The MRI stat is the one where US Health care looks good so don't complain, although I would say that you can have too many MRI machines and be inappropriately spending money. Yes, dietary habits are partly to blame for poor outcomes in the US and the rest of the western world. Changing these habits involves education programs (along with other initiatives like restricting advertising to children) that are considered to be preventative health programs and this contribute to the cost of the total health bill. These preventative health programs are where socialised systems do particularly well and which, in the long term, offer definite health savings. Preventative medicine in the US is particularly underfunded in the US from all the reports that I have read.

The bottom line is that people living in the US pay to much for below average health care. If they are happy with this situation or believe that the price of having quality, affordable health care is too high (beware 'big government'! whatever that means) then that's ok with me. Just don't tell me that the health care system in the US is the best in the world because that indicates that you are arguing on purely ideological grounds, not with rational evidence based arguments and people are dying as a result.
Rupert W

Nick commented that the numbers don't add up. Well it's probably a very old chart been lying around for ages judging by all the coffee stains.
Also there's an error: the USA doesn't spend 16% on healthcare, much of that 16% is spent on health insurance companies. How much ends up being spent on heathcare after paying all the executives, and funding the marketing propaganda to make us believe we have good healthcare is not specified.
merecan

Does anyone think the US can actually fix the problem? Liability concerns cause a lot of the issues and cost. Like, can the US fix the political system? Can the US fix education? Can the US restore balance to society (half lives led because of beauracracy and laws and regulations).
American

still think USA doesnt need health care reform?
Scott

http://www.visualeconomics.com/healthcare-costs-around-the-world_2010-03-01/
Matt

Uhm the State of Tasmania is still a State of Australia. Try and guess where it's meant to be visible ;)
Ed

So, it costs more to get the best healthcare. I don't mind.

Anyway, cool site. I like it.
Greg

So......what's your point? That Obamacare can bring these numbers into line with other countries? Or that government managed healthcare would only make things worse?
ToDufus

You've obviously never heard of collective bargaining?

What makes more sense?

Individuals against an oligopoly of pharmaceutical and medical companies?

Or a whole nation?

This is why the US freetrade agreement signed in Australia had all sorts of caveats designed to break up our medicare system to allow us all to be f*&%ed over by the big US pharmaceuticals.

To answer your question, OF COURSE an upscaled public health system in the US is going to have a better chance of bringing prices down.
kc

so true... free trade in prescription medicine for Americans? What a laugh. They've created laws with myriad loopholes so that Americans are forced to pay whatever Merck, Glaxo, Lilly, etc demand be paid. We should be able to import these meds from whatever country we choose, at the most competitive price. Free Trade??? You lie!
anon

lol
Bill

When we start looking at medical costs we then will curve the price. Blaming the insurance company is pointless. If you do not like the price of insurance don't buy it. Pay that cheap medical bill yourself! Why is going to the hospital so expensive?
Keeper54

Take into account the taxes they pay and re-factor the numbers. I'd be interested in the true per capita cost for other countries.
NotSoBad

These numbers appear based on the World Health Organization's annual report, although they seem a little out of date. Anyone can access these on the WHO web site. The most current numbers show statistics for 2006 (the 2009 report).

For those concerned about any skew they may see, here is some interesting statistics comparing Canada to the US;

General Government Expenditure on Health (as % of total spending)
Canada - 17.8%
USA - 19.3 %

PER CAPITA total Government Expenditure (adjusted to US dollars)
Canada - $2759
USA - $3076

PER CAPITA total Expenditure (incluses Gov't/Private spending; adjusted to US $$)
Canada - $3673
USA - $6719.

So... while the numbers are a little off, I think the trend the graphic shows is pretty accurate. But, I suppose if you want to argue that the WHO is a socialist/communist/Obamist/blah blah, there isn't going to be any convincing you of the data's impartiality anyhow so my whole post is moot :)
Keeper54

I don't really have a bone to pick with Obama, socialists, etc. I was genuinely interested in the numbers, mostly because my statement is one I hear repeated whenever a graph like this is used. At the same time, it's tough to look at this graph and find the intangibles that the US brings to the table in health care for the world. Innovations, exploration, etc are pioneered mostly (no hard evidence, just thinking of the medical supply breakthroughs and drug therapy breakthroughs) by US based companies and hospitals. I would say that while the cost of health care in the US is MUCH too high, there is a trade-off - those extra dollars, in addition to padding the pockets of the owners, also fund innovation which in turn leads to better care.

In my opinion the whole argument of health care spending is a moot point. Nothing we say will matter to those in power in the U.S. Time to just vote against the incumbent, no matter what.
bob

you should change your MRI slide to highlight the US, not the UK
HAYSOOS

BUT AMERICAN HEALTHCARE IS JUST FINE, RIGHT REPUBLICANS?!
Dave

Wish you had doctor pay in that graph
theweeble

People see this and go, see look- healthcare should be free. What no one is looking at is why it cost so much? Why do we pay doctors so much? If Doctors are over paid then why isn't everyone a doctor? What could doctors charge without mal-practice insurance? Why are medical devices, tools, equipment, anything- so expensive? There was a time when people knew how much a doctor visit would be and could pay for it in cash if they wanted, now a doctors office will hardly speak to you without an insurance card. Do we need insurance reform, an in-case-shit-happens reform? No we need to figure out how to lower cost.
Nick

It's not the case that Socialist based systems are cheaper. In the UK, even that figures for a family of 4 are higher that that in the US.

However, even that is an underestimate. You need to add on top the pension liabilities. They are running Ponzi based pension schemes. The nutters here upped Doctors pay dramatically, and the end result was they retired early because they were on final salary pension set ups.
Joe

1. Who's money is being spent? In countries with socialist healthcare plans costs are going to appear lower since its a government program, which means rationing and paying whatever rates they want. Also is the US "cost" higher because we simply utilize the healthcare more?

2. MRIs per million is hilarious. They are made in Japan. That is like saying Mexico has the most tacos of any other country.

3. Most of our illness is directly related to the food we eat. So blame Cargil, blame the corn lobbyists, blame fast food, blame the people consuming it, then let them die on their own failure to know how to eat.
vince

The whole point of the chart is to show how much of people's money is being spent on health care.

BTW - MRIs are not only made in Japan. Actually one of the top maker's, General Electric, makes them stateside as well as overseas.

Blame everyone except for yourselves and the US government.
mj

With that said on point #3... Should we expect a reduction of the US population ? ;-)
KAT

blame cargill, that is hilarious!
vinceNYC

What makes healthcare "socialist"...What an idiot...All the countries listed are DEMOCRACIES
Omer

Hey ace. Sorry to burst your bubble, but the United States has one of the highest PER CAPITA GOVERNMENT SPENDING ON HEALTH CARE than any other country in the world. Look it up if you don't believe me. That's right, our government spends more money on healthcare per person than countries with universal coverage.

Just a heads up, I'm no lefty. This is all the more reason why the U.S. Government should NOT do universal healthcare. If our government manages to spend more than other countries who have socialized medicine when we don't, all that means is our government is too incompetent to run our healthcare system. The fix? Easy. Get rid of government regulations making healthcare and insurance absurdly expensive.

Btw, I'm a Libertarian. Republicans AND Democrats ruined this country. Let's take our country back. Learn about the Libertarian party.
asdfghjkl

You do realize that higher costs, means more money diverted from other things right? The fact that the US government has to spend twice as much as other nations, shows that the United States is a less healthy society in whole, than the rest of the worlds right?
Phil

Actually, US Gov. per capita health care spending is about half of Canada's.

New argument please.
Ted

Really Phil?

Because according to the OECD data, the US public (that's government) expenditure as of the 2009 data was $3307 per person, while Canada's was $2729. Want to try again? The same data shows that US public expenditures are higher than any other nation's except Norway's.

So let's try this again.
Nick

Even the figures I've posted that show the UK figures are blatently wrong, its actually worse.

Only 50% of people work in the UK. The rest are retired, unemployed, on benefits or children. Only those 50% pay money for the NHS.

For a family of 4, the real figure is then around the 25,000 USD mark
SSpeedracer

US GDP is over reported compared to the other established countries. The difference in health care per GDP would be even more significant if equivalent economics were used.
Marvin

It's obvious that the US health care system is dysfunctional and that it's going to run our country into the ground... yet we have so many politicians trying to protect it and keep the status quo... it's a real problem.
John M

Are you factoring taxes paid into this report?
DanJohn

When it says "Healthcare Costs", who is it referring to? Individuals, or the government?
noface

=[
joe

The only reason why the US has high infan mortality, is because in other countries the babies would not have been born in the first place. The US can keep the baby alive longer.
vince

Dude - you are dumb.

Infant Mortality = dead baby. Which means that the US obviously didn't keep it alive versus the other countries where the baby DID NOT die.
sergiodeathstar

US = fail.

That you even have to debate healthcare reform shows how corporate-centric the US has become, and how gullable it's citizens are to the rubbish in the media.

Thats how a country ends though. Goodbye.
P13RCE

I agree that we are too ignorant with regard to the amount that we let the media spoon-feed us information, but if your solution to sprawling corporate power is an increase in the size and reach of government, then we might as well just turn out the lights now, because that's goodnight for your liberties.

I'm not in favor of large corporations overrunning everything either, but I'd take it over a nanny state. I don't trust people to wield more power than they absolutely have to.
orbit

that's right, here in Europe we have no liberty at all, because we have free-at-point-of-use, universal medical cover provided by the State.

It's like a Gulag, I tell you.
Chris

So, you trust companies that only exist to increase their bottom line to wield as much power as they do now? I don't want a 'nanny state', either, but the amount of power that corporate America has is terrifying sometimes. There are CEOs who are more powerful than the president. The level of income inequity in America is more similar to countries in Africa than to the rest of the developed world. I don't know where that's headed, but I don't think it would hurt anything to give everyone the right to health care.
samala5793

Guess what...the corporations already control everything! The prescription drug and insurance companies are the ones that tried to kill universal healthcare in the U.S. Why do you think the Republicans were so opposed to it? Because the companies that line their pockets for their vote wanted it dead (didn't work though). Government in the U.S. already tells us what we can do with our money, our bodies and "freedom" is just a catch phrase they use when they want your vote. "People" are us...the people...and the ones that object to healthcare for everyone are the ones who can already afford it! Plus, even people in America that already have healthcare can still be denied critical surgeries and treatments because the insurance company doesn't want to pay for it...even though these people have paid for their insurance. I would rather see everyone be able to go to a doctor than have one person die because they don't go to the doctor...because they are too poor to pay for it.
davidwayneosedah

I lived in England for three years and found that their National Health Service was better than what we have here at half the cost!
Nick

UK spending on the NHS (ignores private spending and anything like prescription charges), is 119 billion

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/

The population is 60 million.

Spending per person is then 2,070 GBP,

2070 British pounds = 3 087 U.S. dollars according to Google.

You've quoted 2,317 USD.

You're way out.

Don't forget too in the UK, that you not getting a good standard of care. The NHS estimates it killed 25,000 last year due to errors. In comparison, 3,000 we killed on the roads.

We've had single hospitals kill hundreds from one cause.

They didn't even pick up a mass murderer killing off his patients.

At the end of the day, if you want compenstation, you will have to be very lucky, and it will be a pittance.
butcher99

Socialized medicine.. Bah. who cares if it is cheaper and better and could help cut the deficit! Who needs it.
illustratorblog

one of reason why my sister become doctor.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Join thousands of VE readers!

Twitter

RSS

Facebook

Newsletter

Share this page with friends!

Delicious

Stumbleupon

Yahoo