Single-payer advocates counter that government-run health systems in other developed countries spend much less than the U.S. does on its complex public-private arrangement. They say that if the U.S. adopted a European model, it could expand coverage to everyone by realizing a mountain of savings with no measurable decline in health outcomes, in part because excessive administrative costs and profit would be wrung from the system.
The public piece of the American health-care system has not proven itself to be particularly cost-efficient. On a per capita basis, U.S. government health programs alone spend more than Canada, Australia, France and Britain each do on their entire health systems. That means the U.S. government spends more per American to cover a slice of the population than other governments spend per citizen to cover all of theirs. Simply expanding Medicare to all would not automatically result in a radically more efficient health-care system.
To realize the single-payer dream of coverage for all and big savings, medical industry players, including doctors, would likely have to get paid less and patients would have to accept different standards of access and comfort. There is little evidence most Americans are willing to accept such tradeoffs.
The Washington Post
Inflation was estimated by the International Monetary Fund at 720 percent this year; it is expected to surpass 2,000 percent next year. Shortages are so acute that 3 of 4 Venezuelans lost an average of 18 pounds last year, according to a survey by Venezuelan universities. Diseases not seen there in decades, such as malaria, are back. …
The so-called Bolivarian revolution has become less about ideology and more about money. Venezuelans often call it a “robolucion” rather than a “revolucion,” using the Spanish word for robbery. If Cuba is an ideologically motivated communist dictatorship, Venezuela is something different: as oil-rich as Saudi Arabia, as authoritarian as Russia and as corrupt as Nigeria. …
As in many petrostates, oil accounts for 95 percent of Venezuela’s foreign-currency earnings. Since the government administers the oil, one sure way to get ahead is not by creating a new business but by getting close to the government to secure access to oil rents. Venezuelans call the enterprising class following this model “los enchufados” — the plugged-in ones. … Venezuela’s army recently got the rights to set up its own mining and oil companies, and the armed forces are in charge of most critical imports. In 2016, 18 generals and admirals were tasked with importing key foods and sanitary items. One brigadier general was put in command of acquiring black beans; another was charged with acquiring toilet paper, feminine napkins and diapers. Logically, an admiral was placed in charge of acquiring fish.
David Luhnow and Jose De Cordoba, The Wall Street Journal
Whereas most populists cleave to right and left, the Macron revolution is to the center. He steals policies without prejudice — from the right, a desire to free up markets and businesses to create jobs and wealth; from the left, a belief in the role of government to shape, direct and protect. In the battle between open and closed, (President Emmanuel) Macron is broadly for open in both trade and immigration. … And, crucially, he is an optimist. For decades France has suffered from the morose belief that politics involves struggle, but no real solutions.
Somehow, Macron has convinced the French that progress is possible. He has hit back against populist taunts that free markets are a concession to the bankers and the globalists with refreshing patriotism — whether by crushing the hand of Donald Trump or restoring pomp to the presidency. Against warnings about immigrants and foreign competition, he asserts that both will invigorate France, not enfeeble it. To Euroskeptics who accuse Brussels of sucking the life out of the nation, he insists that, no, the EU magnifies French power.
The Economist
t
