So there's a layer there that gives the hint of a way to disguise the money trail. Hospital real estate? Are hospitals rented like office buildings?
I can't say about the US, but a bit about Germany.
Here the healthcare used to be "socialist" hospitals, run by the state. Single doctors mostly are on their own (dentists for example).
Than the "everything needs to be privatized" shit came round. Now my town's hospital belongs to a (Swiss?) group. The building is run by one company, the doctoring by another. The doctoring one rents from the building-owning company.
Did that safe money?
Maybe a bit. I can't say that for sure. What I can say for sure is that the care did not get better. The narcotics doctor I spoke to last was not really in the position to explain the risks (as would be his job) because he was from somewhere far away and likely only learned medical German.
I agree with you on this privatization manure. I have seen it done for other things. The argument is made that it will cost less. It may initially, but people are in it for the profit motive. The people doing the work are often paid less when things become privatized and now have two bosses, the customer and those who wish to make a profit. if you are working and given a choice between the two, the man who holds the purse strings will win. If he wants more profit, something has to give. With some privatization, there is no real competition. With no competition, there are no forces to keep cost down and little accountability to a customer who has no real choice.
See link:
https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/health-spending-u-s-compare-countries/#item-average-wealthy-countries-spend-half-much-per-person-health-u-s-spendsUS per capita - $10,224
Germany per capita - $5,729
