IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ieadps/313983.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A piggy bank for healthcare: Why the health system needs old-age reserve funds

Author

Listed:
  • Niemietz, Kristian

Abstract

Healthcare spending as a proportion of GDP has almost doubled since 1990, from just over 5% to almost 10% now. Healthcare costs rise exponentially in old age. Healthcare costs per capita are relatively stable during the first five decades of life, but they quadruple over the next four decades. This means that most healthcare spending represents a transfer from the working-age generation to the retired generation. The combination of rising life expectancy and low birth rates is a demographic pincer movement for the health system. The ratio of people of retirement age to people of working age currently stands at 28 to 100. This is forecast to rise to 47 to 100 by 2064. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) predicts only modest increases in NHS spending as a proportion of GDP, but this forecast is predicated on the heroic assumption that the NHS is going to double its long-term productivity growth rate. The basic problem is that the NHS is financed on a pay-as-you-go basis. The alternative would be a prefunded system that builds up old-age reserves (comparable to pension funds) for people of working age, and then draws upon them when people retire. In such a system, population ageing would be much less of a problem, because as the number of elderly people grows, the reserves accumulated in the old-age funds would grow alongside. The NHS could begin to build up a similar old-age reserve fund. This would require a one-off increase in taxes, or spending cuts in the non-healthcare budget. But it would prevent steeper tax increases (or spending cuts) in the future. While the basic idea of prefunding is simple, a lot of details would need to be worked out first, the idea of prefunding healthcare expenditure is not even part of our current healthcare debate. It should be.

Suggested Citation

  • Niemietz, Kristian, 2017. "A piggy bank for healthcare: Why the health system needs old-age reserve funds," IEA Discussion Papers 83, Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ieadps:313983
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/313983/1/iea-dp083.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Isabelle Joumard & Christophe André & Chantal Nicq, 2010. "Health Care Systems: Efficiency and Institutions," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 769, OECD Publishing.
    2. Niemietz, Kristian, 2007. "From Bismarck to Friedman," IEA Discussion Papers 15, Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA).
    3. Kristian Niemietz, 2007. "From Bismarck to Friedman," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 83-87, June.
    4. Cassel, Dieter, 2003. "Die Notwendigkeit ergänzender Alterungsreserven und höherer Rentner-Beiträge in der GKV," Wirtschaftsdienst – Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik (1949 - 2007), ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 83(2), pages 75-80.
    5. Philip Booth, 2008. "The Young Held To Ransom – A Public Choice Analysis Of The Uk State Pension System," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 4-10, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Niemietz, Kristian, 2015. "A patient approach: Putting the consumer at the heart of UK healthcare," IEA Discussion Papers 64, Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA).
    2. Philip Booth & Nick Silver, 2008. "Editorial: New Perspectives On The Economics And Politics Of Ageing," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 2-3, March.
    3. Åsa Johansson, 2016. "Public Finance, Economic Growth and Inequality: A Survey of the Evidence," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1346, OECD Publishing.
    4. Titeca, Hannes, 2016. "Healthcare Spending: The Role of Healthcare Institutions from an International Perspective," MPRA Paper 73678, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Christine André & Philippe Batifoulier & Mariana Jansen-Ferreira, 2016. "Privatisation de la santé en Europe. Un outil de classification des réformes," Working Papers hal-01256505, HAL.
    6. Bonasia, Mariangela & Kounetas, Konstantinos & Oreste, Napolitano, 2020. "Assessment of regional productive performance of European health systems under a metatechnology framework," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 234-248.
    7. Eduardo A. Cavallo & Tomás Serebrisky & Verónica Frisancho & Jonathan Karver & Andrew Powell & Diego Margot & Ancor Suárez-Alemán & Eduardo Fernández-Arias & Matías Marzani & Solange Berstein & Marian, 2016. "Saving for Development: How Latin America and the Caribbean Can Save More and Better," IDB Publications (Books), Inter-American Development Bank, number 94597 edited by Eduardo A. Cavallo & Tomás Serebrisky, February.
    8. Galina Besstremyannaya, 2014. "Urban inequity in the performance of social health insurance system: evidence from Russian regions," Working Papers w0204, Center for Economic and Financial Research (CEFIR).
    9. Edson Serván‐Mori & Miguel Ángel Mendoza & Carlos Chivardi & Carlos Pineda‐Antúnez & Roxana Rodríguez‐Franco & Gustavo Nigenda, 2019. "A spatio‐temporal cluster analysis of technical efficiency in the production of outpatient maternal health services and its structural correlates in México," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 1417-1436, October.
    10. Liang, Li-Lin & Mirelman, Andrew J., 2014. "Why do some countries spend more for health? An assessment of sociopolitical determinants and international aid for government health expenditures," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 161-168.
    11. De Matteis, Domenico & Ishizaka, Alessio & Resce, Giuliano, 2019. "The ‘postcode lottery’ of the Italian public health bill analysed with the hierarchy Stochastic Multiobjective Acceptability Analysis," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    12. Abelson, Julia & Allin, Sara & Grignon, Michel & Pasic, Dianna & Walli-Attaei, Marjan, 2017. "Uncomfortable trade-offs: Canadian policy makers’ perspectives on setting objectives for their health systems," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 9-16.
    13. Rauf Gönenç & Maria M. Hofmarcher & Andreas Wörgötter, 2011. "Reforming Austria's Highly Regarded but Costly Health System," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 895, OECD Publishing.
    14. Böhm, Katharina & Schmid, Achim & Götze, Ralf & Landwehr, Claudia & Rothgang, Heinz, 2012. "Classifying OECD healthcare systems: A deductive approach," TranState Working Papers 165, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    15. Janusz Jabłonowski & Christoph Müller, 2014. "A fiscal outlook for Poland: Update 2014," NBP Working Papers 187, Narodowy Bank Polski.
    16. Katharina Schley, 2018. "Health care service provision in Europe and regional diversity: a stochastic metafrontier approach," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, December.
    17. Giammanco, Maria Daniela & Gitto, Lara, 2019. "Health expenditure and FDI in Europe," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 255-267.
    18. Jiménez-Rubio, Dolores & García-Gómez, Pilar, 2017. "Decentralization of health care systems and health outcomes: Evidence from a natural experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 69-81.
    19. Nozaki, Masahiro & Kashiwase, Kenichiro & Saito, Ikuo, 2017. "Health spending in Japan: Macro-fiscal implications and reform options," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 156-171.
    20. Shuyun May Li, Solmaz Moslehi, Siew Ling Yew, 2012. "Public-Private Mix of Health Expenditure: A Political Economy Approach and A Quantitative Exercise," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 1157, The University of Melbourne.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • I13 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Insurance, Public and Private
    • H51 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Government Expenditures and Health
    • H83 - Public Economics - - Miscellaneous Issues - - - Public Administration
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • I13 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Insurance, Public and Private
    • H51 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Government Expenditures and Health
    • H83 - Public Economics - - Miscellaneous Issues - - - Public Administration

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:ieadps:313983. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ieaaauk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.