[ben_w]

According to wikipedia:

> Funding for all short-term health care is 50% from employers, 45% from the insured person and 5% by the government.

…

> Premiums paid by the insured are, on average, €137 per month for basic health care

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_the_Netherlands

Only an order of magnitude if you're in base-2.

That said, this doesn't quite track with the numbers for

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_hea...

and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_dollar

But even then, counting all payers and not just the residents' sticker price, the USA is the high-priced outlier.

[patrec]

> Only an order of magnitude if you're in base-2.

Nope. Look at how much the Netherlands actually spends on Healthcare, it's about 11.2% of GDP in 2021 [1]. Per capita GDP in 2021 was ~53k€.

((53k€*11.2%)/12) ≈ 495€

Only problem is, like most developed countries, close to a majority of people are net recipients (around 40%). Someone will have to pay their share too. Chances are, if you're posting on HN, that's you, as you'll be somewhere in the top 5% income bracket. I think if the OP does the math based on their actual numbers, they'd be more likely to find themselves in the ~1000€/month ballpark than the 150€/month they seem to think they are paying.

> But even then, counting all payers and not just the residents' sticker price, the USA is the high-priced outlier.

The Netherlands (11% of GDP) is not quite as extreme as the US (17%), but it's certainly nothing to write home about, especially as I don't get the impression that either health care expenditure as percentage of GDP or demographics are moving in a favorable direction.

[1] https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.CHEX.GD.ZS?end=2...

[ben_w]

My second link is pretty much the same as the numbers you're giving.

What's the difference between my first and my second? I don't know. If you force me to guess, post-retirement and/or terminal care, possibly?

> like most developed countries, close to a majority of people are net recipients (around 40%)

Yes, and? Isn't much the same also true for private insurance?

You've got the potential for arguing about what "fair" looks like; I'm fine with it being funded like a progressive tax, based on income rather than risk factors, but that's not hugely important.

> I think if the OP does the math based on their actual numbers, they'd be more likely to find themselves in the ~1000€/month ballpark than the 150€/month they seem to think they are paying.

I would assume that zer0tonin pays whatever they say they pay. They're likely to have better insight into their own finances than random internet strangers like thee and me.

> The Netherlands (11% of GDP) is not quite as extreme as the US (17%), but it's certainly nothing to write home about, especially as I don't get the impression that either health care expenditure as percentage of GDP or demographics are moving in a favorable direction.

The direction of movement may or may not be favourable (given the pandemic I assume "not"), but the USA is kinda the outlier in developed nations for spending a lot without delivering particularly good outcomes:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Life_expectancy_vs_h...

(Sourced from: https://ourworldindata.org/us-life-expectancy-low)

[patrec]

I'm not trying to make any statements about fairness or the superiority of the US healthcare system, I'm saying that for the purposes of comparing the cost impacts of different putative health policies in the US (which was the context of the thread zer0tonin was replying to) the €150 you and zer0tonin think zer0tonin is paying a month is nonsense, because it very obviously is not an accurate reflection of zer0tonin's actual monetary contribution to the Dutch health care system.