Mak, this has been posted multiple times, but here it is again: http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL34175_20070917.pdf
Ten times the price for marginally better results in some specific kinds of cancer treatments (and decidedly poorer results for people who can't access treatment because it's too expensive) isn't a bargain.
Again Hank, there're the anecdotes, but the overall numbers do not tell a story of the US being a "safety net" for other health care systems.
Ahhh... so now you admit we get better care. It's just not better "enough" for you.
Now, if you want to argue about the price of that care- rather than the quality- let's start with basic economics.
What causes a price increase? Either a deficit of supply or an overabundance of demand. (Absent government meddling, but we'll come back to that.)
Obviously we don't have a large supply problem (unlike other countries, like, oh, say Canada). So, we have an overabundance of demand versus other countries.
WHY? Don't you think the question of why our demand is so high ought to be dealt with before we decide to meddle? (Oh look, it's that government meddling again.)
One reason is the seperation of pricing decisions from the point of sale. Doctors often have no idea what specific services they provide will cost. This argues for more
consumer control, not more government control.
FURTHER, this decoupling of consumer choices at the margin was a result of government meddling that encouraged (and encourages) comprehensive insurance that covers EVERYTHING.
Add to this government mandates, malpractice insurance and the related (and higher) costs of defensive medicine, and a government granted cartel in medicine and you get higher prices.
But of course, this isn't really about the prices, it's about making it "fair" for everyone.