Outside of Pharmaceuticals, most of the US health-care system is non-profit, so no dividends are allowed. High salaries are allowed, but there aren't business owners that get the surplus the business generates.

"Most" might be technically correct on some grounds. But more than 1/3 of American hospitals are for profit several of the largest health insurance providers are for profit. and basically every specialist, independent doctor practice out there is private.

Do people ask themselves why Obamacare was politically viable?

None of the entrenched interests really seemed to mind.. Wonder if Obama does that wink to his PE friends when they meet

It's called political compromise, you might remember there are two parties in the system.

> there aren't business owners that get the surplus the business generates

You don't have to be a sole proprietor for those at the top to take a ridiculous level of compensation.

> Nonprofit hospitals are under increasing scrutiny for skimping on charity care, relentlessly pursuing payments from low-income patients, and paying executives massive multi-million-dollar salaries—all while earning tax breaks totaling billions.

https://arstechnica.com/health/2023/10/nonprofit-hospitals-s...

The OP article provides clear evidence that for-profit companies is not limited to Pharma:

> ...insurers, chemists, drug distributors and pharmacy-benefit managers (PBMs)—sitting between patients and their treatments. In 2022 the combined revenue of the nine biggest middlemen—call them big health—equated to nearly 45% of America’s health-care bill, up from 25% in 2013. Big health accounts for eight of the top 25 companies by revenue in the S&P 500 index of America’s leading stocks, compared with four for big tech and none for big pharma.

It goes on to detail their profit relative to the S&P as well.

Thank you, I stand corrected on this point.

This was true until the Nixon administration, which not coincidentally is when the cost structure began to skyrocket.