It looks that way in hospitals but the demand is not infinite. The problem typically is that primary healthcare is unaffordable and or unavailable because they are fully booked and everyone ends up at the ER.

> The demand is just short of infinite, it requires an extremely specialized and highly capable labor force, and it has piss poor labor productivity forever.

Just because demand (typically) outstrips supply doesn't mean demand is just short of infinite. It just means it's hard to measure the demand. This is just like highway traffic --- you can't know what the demand is when it's all full, you just know there's more demand than capacity/supply.

If you built a crap ton more hospitals, and forced everyone into mandatory service in healthcare for 20 years, I'm sure you'd have more supply than demand. That's a terrible plan, but it would solve the supply problem. You could modulate the mandatory service period to adjust to the needs, and it would still be a terrible plan. :)

Something better would be some steps to address the bottlenecks. How can we attract / train a larger labor force; how can we retain the labor force; how can we increase productivity; something about facilities. Who can make the changes and how can they be incentivized to do it.

I'm outside of healthcare, but here are some armchair ideas. There's a lot of "administrative busy work" that makes everything harder to do; if you ever need to call around to multiple pharmacies to get your meds, there's two problems there: the first problem is that shouldn't need to happen, the second one is that it's amazingly difficult for pharmacies to communicate; it's not uncommon for a physician to order a test and the wrong test is performed, etc ... it's not easy to streamline communications, but it would improve productivity if done correctly. There's also a lot of things that reduce quality of life of healthcare professionals which reduces desire to go into the field and reduces time spent in the field. And of course, there's limitations on the number of residency spots.

The pharmacies issue is a constant problem: patient lives out of town so prescription is sent to his home pharmacy at his request, on the day of discharge he realized his pharmacy is closed and wants them sent to a local pharmacy, of course this always happens at 5pm when you are driving in traffic, the patient is angry because they want to leave but there is not much you can do. This happens very frequently, doesnt matter if you ask ahead of time for the patient to confirm the pharmacy, something inevitably happens.

The other issue is peer to peers and prior authorizations, these take up a significant amount of time and are essentially ways the insurance companies put barriers to care and reduce their costs.

I think some of your ideas could work but good luck getting anything past the politicians, some of these things would be expensive and others would be unpopular to those that donate to the politicians.

For your first example, wouldn't the friction be reduced just by telling patients the business hours of the pharmacies nearby? I hate how this question is always posed, as if I'm supposed to come up with a name and address out of a hat. If it's the middle of the night or Christmas Eve and I'm trying to get medicine for the baby, the provider probably has a better intuition than myself as to which pharmacy will actually serve me. If I ask explicitly, the provider is usually happy to suggest some options. Even a simple web interface listing hours of operation would be better than the current method, where the patient is expected to pick a pharmacy from memory before they even know what medicine they need or how long it will be before they are discharged.

This setup is crazy, as someone from another country.

Why don't you have a unified system for the pharmacies and doctors to tap into?

In my country, if I get a prescription it goes into my card. Then any pharmacy can read the card, see what prescriptions are yet not used, and provide the product (which marks the prescription as covered). Recurring products, like allergy medication or chronic illnesses, become automatically available again after a certain time, like a cooldown. You only need doctor intervention during the original diagnosis and prescription, or after rare issues (like needing an extra prescription because you lost the meds).

I'd have thought this system or a very similar one is universal.

We used to! Doctor would write prescription on a pad, and you could take the script to any pharmacy.

Of course, doctor penmanship is terrible, and we're going paperless, so we've got to digitize. And every doctor's office and every pharmacy has their own system, and sometimes they can talk (but I think there's a lot of faxing behind the scenes)

Of course, you can't know what drugs will be covered, so the doctor has to guess, and if they guess wrong, the pharamacist will want to check with the doctor to see if something else is OK to save you money, but nobody can be reached, ever.

In the United States, the government deliberately creates a shortage of medical residencies through a longstanding cap on federal funding for graduate medical education, primarily administered via Medicare. Residencies represent the essential postgraduate training phase that new medical school graduates must complete to become licensed physicians, yet the vast majority of these positions are financed by Medicare payments to teaching hospitals. This funding mechanism traces back to the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, which Congress passed amid concerns over a perceived surplus of physicians at the time. The act froze the number of Medicare-supported residency slots at their 1996 levels, effectively limiting hospitals to reimbursements for a fixed quota of resident positions without adjustments for population growth or expanded medical school enrollment. As a result, while the number of U.S. medical school graduates has surged by over 30% since the late 1990s to meet rising healthcare demands, the pool of federally funded residency spots has remained largely stagnant, creating a persistent bottleneck that prevents thousands of qualified applicants from advancing into practice each year.

This cap not only constrains overall physician supply but exacerbates shortages in critical areas like primary care and rural medicine, as hospitals hesitate to expand programs without guaranteed reimbursement. Recent legislative efforts, such as the bipartisan Resident Physician Shortage Reduction Act, seek to add thousands of new slots over several years, but until such reforms pass, the 1997 policy continues to throttle the pipeline of trained doctors, leaving patients with longer waits and uneven access to care.

Nothing is stopping the market from paying for this themselves. They’re just cheap.

The market has to get money to pay more. Health insurance is already expensive - raising it to ultimately hire more care givers doesn’t work for most people - do you have the most expensive insurance option or the cheapest?

The market has plenty of money to pay as it is, the highest of any first world country in fact . They just divert it to shareholders / admin instead of patient care.

I'm perfectly willing to believe that US has many, many issues that compound the curse - with some low hanging fruits among them.

But there are numerous countries that aren't US, and don't share US laws.

Do they have medical staff that's not overworked, or a healthcare system that doesn't suffer from a constant labor shortage, long wait times, poor treatment quality, or all of the above?

The root of the issue is deeper than just "US is uniquely dumb".