Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Tuesday January 23 2018, @11:51PM   Printer-friendly

"Spending more on health care sounds like it should improve health, but our study suggests that is not the case and social spending could be used to improve the health of everyone," says Dr. Daniel Dutton, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta. "Relative to health care, we spend little on social services per person, so redistributing money to social services from health care is actually a small change in health care spending."

Health care costs are expanding in many developed countries like Canada, and governments are seeking ways to contain costs while maintaining a healthy population. Treating the social determinants of health like income, education, or social and physical living environments through spending on social services can help address the root causes of disease and poor health. However, health spending continues to make up the lion's share of spending.

[...] The commentary author suggests governments should allocate social spending fairly for both young and old to ensure that the younger generation is not being shortchanged.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180122104016.htm

[Paper]: Effect of provincial spending on social services and health care on health outcomes in Canada: an observational longitudinal study

[Related]: The need for health in all policies in Canada


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 24 2018, @04:34AM (8 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 24 2018, @04:34AM (#626968)

    when there's all these generous giveaways to older generations like health care and public pensions?

    It's easy. Hey, Costa Rica does it.
    Of course, they gave up their aggressor forces.
    ...decades ago.
    Costa Rica Has Healthcare, Education, & Pensions For All Because They Scrapped Their Army In 1948 [googleusercontent.com] (orig) [dissidentvoice.org]

    -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 24 2018, @04:59AM (7 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 24 2018, @04:59AM (#626978)

    Are you suggesting we have a world army to enforce sovereignty of all so that we don't need to keep wasting money posturing at each other?

    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday January 24 2018, @06:01AM

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday January 24 2018, @06:01AM (#627000) Journal

      Does it seem so preposterous? Why?

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 24 2018, @06:10AM (5 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 24 2018, @06:10AM (#627003)

      No, just that if any country were to give up theirs, they could put the money to much better uses! And how that applies to the one country that spends in excess of ten times what any other country does, and complains about how it cannot afford health care, and (coming soon, courtesy of Paul Ryan) old age pensions, is left as an exercise to the very stupid American who asked the question in the first place.

      • (Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Wednesday January 24 2018, @11:05AM (4 children)

        by GreatAuntAnesthesia (3275) on Wednesday January 24 2018, @11:05AM (#627087) Journal

        Or, if the idea of giving up the army altogether is a step too far for some people, how about just... you know... spending a bit less on it? I mean the US could probably cut its military budget in half and still have a world-class military. Hell, if they just spent that remaining half better rather than on massive high-tech corporate-welfare bullshit boondoggle fighter plane projects and such, and maybe cut down on the number of pointless foreign invasions they carry out, they probably wouldn't even have to face any reduction in military manpower or effectiveness at all. Imagine that! Just as much military for half the price!

        Now, imagine what good things could be done for US taxpayers with a spare $390000000000.

        Same advice applies to many other first-world countries.

        • (Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Wednesday January 24 2018, @11:09AM

          by GreatAuntAnesthesia (3275) on Wednesday January 24 2018, @11:09AM (#627090) Journal

          Correction: $290000000000. Fat fingers.

        • (Score: 3, Informative) by meustrus on Wednesday January 24 2018, @07:06PM (2 children)

          by meustrus (4961) on Wednesday January 24 2018, @07:06PM (#627297)

          Hell, if they just spent that remaining half better rather than on massive high-tech corporate-welfare bullshit boondoggle fighter plane projects and such, and maybe cut down on the number of pointless foreign invasions they carry out, they probably wouldn't even have to face any reduction in military manpower or effectiveness at all.

          Hear, hear. Spending all your military budget on pie-in-the-sky next-gen technology is (part of) how the Nazis lost WW2 while inventing ballistic missiles and getting most of the way to the atomic bomb. Which ended up being used against its ally.

          --
          If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 25 2018, @07:24AM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 25 2018, @07:24AM (#627585)

            The most advanced thing that Heisenberg and his guys had looked like tinker toys. [google.com]
            The Nazis Were Nowhere Near Making An Atomic Bomb [acs.org] image [acs.org]

            There's a stage play called "Copenhagen" which proposes the notion that he was purposely thwarting the Nazi effort.

            -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

            • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Thursday January 25 2018, @05:58PM

              by meustrus (4961) on Thursday January 25 2018, @05:58PM (#627775)

              Those uranium cubes would make an awesome set piece to a Bond villain's lair.

              --
              If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?