> The solution to the problem of private equity running the medical system is government-run health care

A super majority of the medical R&D is funded by the US system. The gov run systems pay for a minimum of it. Of the U.S. adopts a system like other gov run countries where does the medical R&D get financed?

US americans are already spending the money that funds that R&D. One possible solution that occurs to me just now (and is therefore very half baked) is that there must be a way they could continue to spend that money to fund research, while also having a functioning medical safety net

Be a shame if someone looked up this on Google and found that it's not as outsized as some think

https://data.oecd.org/rd/gross-domestic-spending-on-r-d.htm

Incorrect. You linked to the overall R&D spending data, not medical R&D spending.

You can find the health R&D expenditure data here: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/health_glance-2017-72-en...

It shows the U.S. spending 2.4x that of Europe on pharma expenditure as a % of GDP, and 3.2x that of Europe on government R&D health budgets as a % of GDP.

Edit: somewhat newer data is here https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/fc8b43f4-en/index.html?i...

It shows that the R&D pharma spending gap has actually increased even further to 3.5x.

60 Billion a year (if I've read you charts correctly) is a drop in the bucket of US annual medical spending (4 Trillion/year.)

You could pick the next most expensive country's plan, triple US R&D expenditures, and still spend way less. The GP's point about it not being outsized is correct.

You're attempting to introduce a tangential point to cloud the issue, a typical Red Herring fallacy. Bowyakka was 100% incorrect. It is indisputable that U.S. medical R&D spending makes European spending appear insignificant.