USA! USA! USA!

We're #28 - FUCK YEAH - wait, what?

It's almost like there's somebody actively working against doing anything that might help make this whole mess better.

Sweet screamin' Jesus, I'm getting more than a little tired of this shit.

JAMA came out with a study of 34 "rich countries", and the US is ranked 28th in Health Outcomes.

Overall, population health in the United States has improved from 1990 to 2010. Life expectancy at birth and HALE have increased and all-cause death rates at all ages have decreased. Although life span has increased, rates of age-specific YLDs have remained stable, and morbidity and chronic disability now account for nearly half of the health burden in the United States. However, improvements in population health in the United States have not kept pace with advances in population health in other wealthy nations. Regular assessments of the local burden of disease and matching information on health expenditures for the same disease and injury categories could allow for a more direct assessment of how changes in health spending have affected or, indeed, not affected changes in the burden of disease and may provide insights into where the US health care system could most effectively invest its resources to obtain maximum benefits for the nation’s population health. In many cases, the best investments for improving population health would likely be public health programs and multisectoral action to address risks such as physical inactivity, diet, ambient particulate pollution, and alcohol and tobacco consumption.

For all you clear-eyed, pragmatic, bidness-savvy 'conservatives' out there, here's the deal:  Healthy people cost less than sick ones, and Prevention is way more cost-effective than Remedy. 

If you're the soul-dead corporate clods who care for nothing but the Quarterly Numbers that you seem to be, then you have to recognize that a healthy labor pool is more valuable to you than an unhealthy labor pool.  

Of course, since you guys are so highly attuned to the concept of Other People's Money, you can get around the inconvenience of operating within any kind of ethical boundaries  by adopting the Wal-Mart strategy, and simply dump all your healthcare costs onto the taxpayer, but hey - that's Wal-Mart; those guys are absolute masters of The Big Bamboozle.

C'mon - look:

• We have a healthcare system that's Crazy Stupid Expensive which doesn't produce particularly healthy people
• Unhealthy workers are more costly than healthy workers
• Shifting the cost from one payer to another makes the system more complex and that complexity helps drive up the actual cost 

So here's what I really don't understand: Why are so many of you 'conservatives' so dead set against making changes to a system that is so obviously less efficient and more costly than it needs to be?