I am not surprised, Americans love their pets. I feel like this has become a common trend especially in Developed countries, having pets fills in for the lack of social relationship in most urban life styles.
More people are living solo, as well as many couples are choosing not to have kids, and so, having pets is a way to gain that extra social connection without having to commit to kids, which have come with lots of responsibilities and financial stresses.
The money spent on pets could be looked at as more than just medical costs and maintenance.. People receive emotional gratification from pets. I think to some degree, you can associate those costs under entertainment/personal health for humans, not just as “pet expenditures”
U.S. Hospitals are billing the government extravagantly, and because of that I wouldn’t doubt that it creates a market distortion in the price of medical services and good. Free Market Policy is the best policy in regards to healthcare.
I don’t believe that it would necessarily create market distortions if the medical practitioners are charging at the same price as Non-Medicare citizens, the only way the market price of medicine would be distorted is if the government was paying less the baseline average price.
I think it would be assuming to much to believe that the government would be paying these goods at market price, so it is more likely that they would be distorting the price, but without further data, one cannot actually know if the price is being artificially changed/distorted.
It’s nice to see that there is an increasing trend towards providing better price transparency. This is good because it means that they customers are demanding more information on their medical care!
The pet issue in this country is a good testament of American culture. Lots of lonely people out there recurring to pets to provide some comfort. It’s sad, but true.
I agree with you about the need for pets reflecting our culture. If you go to other countries, culture is more community-based and people seem to be less programmed and robotic as they value other aspects of life.
“Many UFCW members have what are known as multi-employer or Taft-Hartley plans. According to the administration’s analysis of the Affordable Care Act, the law does not provide tax subsidies for the roughly 20 million people covered by the plans.”
Americans spent approximately $61.4 billion in 2011 on about 218 million pets…
This is horrible!!! Americans cannot afford this massive burden to our household budgets. We need to lobby Congress to pass the Pet Protection and Affordable Veterinary Care Act. This bill needs to address the inadequate veterinary care for poor households. Congress needs to create state pet insurance exchanges with sliding-scale subsidies based on household income. Congress needs to mandate pet insurance to control for negligent pet owners. There also needs to be a federally-subsidized pet insurance scheme for older pets, who are otherwise uninsurable. This could be called MediPetCare. VetPAC could set price controls on what veterinarians could charge senior pets covered by MediPetCare.
I’ll never forgive unions for the demise of the twinky. The administration isn’t concerned with ingratiating themselves with unions anymore, considering he’s not seeking reelection.
Studebaker, I actually lol’d. The expenditures are huge, but the truth is that procedures on pets are on average much cheaper than the same procedure on a person. It must be because we’re all so complicated and unique.
@ Pet Article
I love this information from the report: Married couples without children living at home spent the most on their pets.
@ Pets
I am not surprised, Americans love their pets. I feel like this has become a common trend especially in Developed countries, having pets fills in for the lack of social relationship in most urban life styles.
@ Pets
More people are living solo, as well as many couples are choosing not to have kids, and so, having pets is a way to gain that extra social connection without having to commit to kids, which have come with lots of responsibilities and financial stresses.
I’m sure they’ll work out some way to make the unions happy at the expense of society as a whole.
Pets Article:
The money spent on pets could be looked at as more than just medical costs and maintenance.. People receive emotional gratification from pets. I think to some degree, you can associate those costs under entertainment/personal health for humans, not just as “pet expenditures”
Hospital Price Transparency:
U.S. Hospitals are billing the government extravagantly, and because of that I wouldn’t doubt that it creates a market distortion in the price of medical services and good. Free Market Policy is the best policy in regards to healthcare.
I don’t believe that it would necessarily create market distortions if the medical practitioners are charging at the same price as Non-Medicare citizens, the only way the market price of medicine would be distorted is if the government was paying less the baseline average price.
I think it would be assuming to much to believe that the government would be paying these goods at market price, so it is more likely that they would be distorting the price, but without further data, one cannot actually know if the price is being artificially changed/distorted.
@ Unions
Unions seem to be unhappy about a lot of things don’t they! How about they try to fix the health care system.
@ Miami Hospital Stating Prices
It’s nice to see that there is an increasing trend towards providing better price transparency. This is good because it means that they customers are demanding more information on their medical care!
@ Pet Spending:
The pet issue in this country is a good testament of American culture. Lots of lonely people out there recurring to pets to provide some comfort. It’s sad, but true.
I agree with you about the need for pets reflecting our culture. If you go to other countries, culture is more community-based and people seem to be less programmed and robotic as they value other aspects of life.
“Many UFCW members have what are known as multi-employer or Taft-Hartley plans. According to the administration’s analysis of the Affordable Care Act, the law does not provide tax subsidies for the roughly 20 million people covered by the plans.”
OH NO! No tax subsidies! I bet they are worried.
Americans spent approximately $61.4 billion in 2011 on about 218 million pets…
This is horrible!!! Americans cannot afford this massive burden to our household budgets. We need to lobby Congress to pass the Pet Protection and Affordable Veterinary Care Act. This bill needs to address the inadequate veterinary care for poor households. Congress needs to create state pet insurance exchanges with sliding-scale subsidies based on household income. Congress needs to mandate pet insurance to control for negligent pet owners. There also needs to be a federally-subsidized pet insurance scheme for older pets, who are otherwise uninsurable. This could be called MediPetCare. VetPAC could set price controls on what veterinarians could charge senior pets covered by MediPetCare.
I’ll never forgive unions for the demise of the twinky. The administration isn’t concerned with ingratiating themselves with unions anymore, considering he’s not seeking reelection.
Studebaker, I actually lol’d. The expenditures are huge, but the truth is that procedures on pets are on average much cheaper than the same procedure on a person. It must be because we’re all so complicated and unique.