Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, February 25, 1992 TAG: 9202250269
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-8 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
ECONOMY NOT HELPED BY HEALTH-CARE DOLLAR
A FRONT-PAGE article Feb. 8 makes the point that "nearly 8 percent of the nation's non-agriculture workers are in health services," and that "health-care workers account for more than 12 percent of the gross domestic product." The article calls it a "painful paradox" that attempts to control health-care costs could end up costing jobs.This line of thinking is very wrong-headed. Health care is a service industry. There is no value added or wealth created.
Say I spend $1,000 on finishing out that extra room in the basement. I buy lumber, drywall, nails, etc.
The money goes to companies and employs workers who take raw materials and create something worth more than the raw materials; i.e., value is added. Workers are employed by the money I spend, but more importantly, wealth is created in the process. This results in expansion of the economy.
If I spend $1,000 on health care instead, a service is provided, and that's it. Workers are employed by the money I spend, but nothing is created.
Thus, the health-care industry ties up resources and is a drag on our economy. We know that people in our nation have a certain amount of income to spend each year. The less we spend on health care and the more we spend on durable goods, the better off we will all be.
Spending less on health care will result in some lost jobs, as pointed out in the article. Ending with this thought, however, is extremely myopic. The money not spent on health care will be spent on other things, such as durable goods. The result is an expanding economy that is not slowed by unnecessary expense.
Good-quality health care is something we need, but the best course of action is to minimize what we spend on it. BRYAN W. DISHNER PULASKI