logo
SA should ditch its woefully inequitable and expensive American health system

SA should ditch its woefully inequitable and expensive American health system

Daily Maverick22-05-2025

Even before the extraordinary ambush by President Trump in the Oval Office, President Ramaphosa was aware that South Africa had come in for special treatment from the new US administration. In addition to threats of punitive import tariffs and massive cuts in aid (especially for HIV programmes) the US secretary of state announced on X that he would not attend the G20 Summit in Johannesburg in November. His reasoning is that South Africa is 'doing very bad things' which includes using the G20 to promote 'solidarity, equality and sustainability'.
The latter charge is indeed true, as evidenced by the G20 Health Working Group meeting in Durban in March, where the overarching theme was 'Accelerating Health Equity, Solidarity and Universal Coverage'. However, these aren't arbitrary slogans, they are principles and values the entire world (including the US) signed up to when all nations agreed to the Sustainable Development Goals in 2015.
In response, Ramaphosa has said South Africa will not be bullied and now he, like other leaders in countries targeted by Trump, such as Canada, China and Denmark, are looking for policy responses to demonstrate to their populations and their peers that they will not kow-tow to this American imperialism.
As the President considers his options, one opportunity he might consider is responding to this crisis by rapidly reforming South Africa's US-style health system.
Courtesy of its apartheid past, South Africa, like the US, has a racially divided health system as a result of the mirrored economic inequity, dominated by private health insurance funding.
In both countries, roughly half of total health expenditure is channelled through private insurance schemes which are characterised by high premiums, inadequate coverage and extremely high administration costs. These systems are woefully inequitable as the poor and vulnerable are excluded.
Also in both countries, it is evident that insurance companies are incapable of constraining ballooning costs in the private health sector. Instead, they simply pass the burden on to households and employers in the form of skyrocketing premiums and unaffordable copayments. Not only does this reduce health coverage, it is also detrimental to the economy, as research conducted by Professor Angus Deaton, a Nobel Laureate in the US, shows that higher health insurance premiums are driving down wages of American workers. Inefficient health insurance schemes are also making US businesses less competitive and fuelling higher levels of inequality.
The warning signs for South Africa are clear: do nothing and the country will end up like the US, which spends an astonishing 18% of its GDP on its inefficient health system but also has some of the worst health outcomes (notably for maternal mortality) in the OECD.
Thankfully the rest of the world has learnt how to overcome these failings, by replacing private health financing (insurance and patient fees) with public financing, in the form of general taxation and compulsory social health insurance. Globally this is the proven way for countries to achieve universal health coverage, whereby everyone receives the health services they need without suffering financial hardship. Every wealthy country in the world has done this, with the exception of the US, where 10% of people still lack adequate health coverage. This situation is set to deteriorate further as Trump and some Republican governors seek to unwind the modest advances made by former president Barack Obama's Affordable Care Act. Under this administration, America is clearly moving away from universal health coverage.
But the good news is that South Africa has a sound strategy to move towards it, through implementing the National Health Insurance (NHI) Act which was signed into law last May. In creating a single-payer system, funded primarily from general taxation, South Africa will compel healthy-wealthy members of society to cross-subsidise services for the sick and the poor. This is the foundation for successful universal health coverage reforms worldwide.
However, just like in the US, powerful vested interest groups who profit from the existing system, are trying to block South Africa's NHI reforms, by mounting legal challenges and spreading misinformation about the supposed dangers of introducing a publicly financed health system. This includes the suggestion that middle-income countries like South Africa can't afford a tax-financed NHI, when evidence from countries such as Thailand, Brazil, Mexico and Turkey shows this is patently untrue. Moreover, the salutary lesson from America's failing and unpopular health system is that relying on private insurance is much more expensive than switching to a public system. Doing nothing and sleepwalking into a full-blown US health system will inhibit South Africa's economic development.
Therefore if South Africa wishes to use the G20 Presidency to demonstrate its commitment to solidarity, equality and sustainability, what better way can it do this than fast-track its own universal health reforms in 2025? Not only will this bring huge health benefits to the people of South Africa, it will also stimulate economic growth, create jobs, increase real wages and reduce levels of health and income inequalities. Implementing this policy alone could therefore simultaneously accelerate progress towards multiple sustainable development goals. This would provide a lasting legacy for the people of South Africa and enable the country to demonstrate global leadership in increasing equity and solidarity despite the divisive policies adopted by other powers. DM

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump's white South African resettlement plan and the global colour line
Trump's white South African resettlement plan and the global colour line

IOL News

time5 hours ago

  • IOL News

Trump's white South African resettlement plan and the global colour line

The narrative that white South Africans are victims of racial persecution has long circulated in far-right echo chambers, sustained by groups like AfriForum and amplified by conservative US media. Yet no credible human rights body has substantiated claims of systematic violence or oppression based on race in South Africa. Image: File/X THE arrival of over 3 000 white South Africans in the United States under President Donald Trump's fast-tracked refugee resettlement programme is a racial spectacle of historic proportions. Framed by Trump as a rescue mission from 'racial discrimination' and even 'genocide' in post-apartheid South Africa, the scheme repackages whiteness as victimhood while reasserting racial hierarchies through the veneer of humanitarian concern. Cheryl Harris's seminal concept of 'whiteness as property' is especially instructive here. This programme protects not the displaced, but the entitlements embedded in whiteness — land, social status, and the right to global mobility. These arrivals, facilitated under a controversial executive order, mark the first time in US history that white South Africans have been accepted en masse as refugees. The move has drawn intense scrutiny, with South African Foreign Minister Ronald Lamola dismissing the claims as 'unfounded and inflammatory'. He clarified that the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) had no involvement and had consistently found no basis for refugee status for white South Africans. 'The resettlement of South Africans under the guise of being 'refugees' is a political project to delegitimise our democracy,' Lamola asserted. The narrative that white South Africans — particularly Afrikaner farmers — are victims of racial persecution has long circulated in far-right echo chambers, sustained by groups like AfriForum and amplified by conservative US media. Yet no credible human rights body has substantiated claims of systematic violence or oppression based on race in South Africa. In February 2025, Trump signed Executive Order 14152: Addressing Egregious Actions of the Republic of South Africa, suspending non-essential aid. He cited South Africa's land reform policies and its support for Palestine at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as evidence of 'anti-white discrimination'. His language echoed apartheid-era rhetoric, framing land expropriation without compensation — a constitutional measure designed to redress historical injustice — as proof of racial targeting. This is not a story about humanitarian rescue. It is about the repackaging of privilege as persecution. Trump's administration, by reclassifying specific 'South African communities' for humanitarian parole, has revived the settler-native divide. As Mahmood Mamdani has noted, this manoeuvre casts descendants of apartheid's beneficiaries as 'refugees' and South Africa itself as the oppressor. Achille Mbembe's critique of global humanism is relevant here: the programme renders Black suffering invisible while privileging whiteness as a passport to refuge and legitimacy. Consequently, while Black refugees languish in camps, whiteness is deemed inherently worthy of protection, effectively enacting a form of apartheid within the asylum system itself. The 1951 Refugee Convention defines a refugee as someone fleeing a 'well-founded fear of persecution.' Neither the Convention nor US law has ever interpreted this to include the loss of economic dominance or historical privilege. Fleeing land redistribution or reduced social status does not amount to persecution, especially when these changes are legally enacted by a democratic society seeking to correct historical wrongs. The parallels to earlier racial engineering are striking. In 1932, the US-sponsored *Carnegie Poor White Study* analysed the 'problem' of poor whites in South Africa. The initiative was not rooted in concern for poverty but in preserving white supremacy. The report warned that poor whites threatened the racial order and recommended state interventions to uplift them, while black South Africans were systematically excluded from similar support. This laid the foundation for apartheid's white welfare state and established a pattern of American intervention when white South Africans faced hardship, real or perceived. Trump's resettlement scheme is the 21st-century iteration of this pattern. White South Africans are framed not as beneficiaries of a violent racial order, but as victims of transformation, worthy of rescue. South Africa's Constitutional Court recently affirmed that acquiring foreign nationality — whether through refugee resettlement or otherwise — does not automatically strip someone of South African citizenship. In a landmark ruling, the Court struck down a section of the Citizenship Act that had quietly revoked citizenship without due process, calling the move irrational and unconstitutional. However, the case of these white South Africans is unique. Their refugee claims are based on false premises and a political agenda. South Africa may therefore have grounds to argue that accepting the US offer constitutes a voluntary renunciation of citizenship. The Constitutional Court's ruling on dual citizenship might not protect them in this politically charged context. Nowhere is the hypocrisy more glaring than in the American South. In the Mississippi Delta, six Black farmworkers filed a federal lawsuit in 2021 after being replaced by white South Africans brought in under the H-2A visa programme. The plaintiffs, many descended from enslaved people who built Southern agriculture, earned just $7.25 per hour — the federal minimum wage — while their white South African replacements were paid over $11. The lawsuit alleges that these Black workers were forced to train their replacements, who were then housed in better accommodations and elevated in status simply because they were white. Between 2011 and 2020, the number of South Africans on H-2A visas increased by 441%, making them the second-largest national group in the programme. The majority are white. The message is clear: in the racial calculus of US capitalism, white foreign labour is worth more than black American lives. Mexican seasonal workers, once the backbone of US agriculture, are also increasingly excluded — both by border walls and by labour policies that privilege whiteness over need. The result is a reshuffling of the global racial order, disguised as economic necessity. Trump's South African refugee programme is less about humanitarian concern and more about reaffirming a hierarchy of global suffering, where privilege continues to mask itself as victimhood. What we are witnessing is the reinforcement of a global colour line — one where whiteness retains its claim to mobility, safety, and opportunity, while blackness and brownness are rendered threats to be contained. The implications are profound: Refugee systems that prioritise whiteness over need. Economic visas favour white foreign farmers over Black citizens. Historical privilege is purposely mistaken for victimhood. This is not humanitarianism. It is neo-colonialism in motion. As the world watches Trump engineer the next stage of global apartheid, we must ask: What kind of refugee is it when only the privileged are welcome? When does skin colour ration citizenship, safety, and opportunity? If the notion of 'refuge' is to mean anything, it must centre justice, not historical comfort. Siyayibanga le economy! * Siyabonga Hadebe is an independent commentator based in Geneva on socio-economic, political and global matters. ** The views expressed here do not reflect those of the Sunday Independent, Independent Media, or IOL.

Strengthening the Global Fight Against Corruption
Strengthening the Global Fight Against Corruption

The Citizen

time6 hours ago

  • The Citizen

Strengthening the Global Fight Against Corruption

Brazil, Brasilia – The 2nd G20 Anti-Corruption Working Group (ACWG) under the South African Presidency convened in Brasilia from June 9 to 12, 2025, uniting delegates to address critical issues in preventing and combating corruption. Co-Chaired by South Africa and Brazil, the meeting aimed to reinforce the Working Group's priorities to strengthen the public sector by promoting transparency, integrity, and accountability, increasing the efficiency of asset recovery measures, enhancing participation from the public sector, private sector, civil society, and academia, and improving whistleblower protection mechanisms. The South African Ambassador to Brazil, Mr. Vusi Mavimbela, delivered the opening remarks during the inaugural session. He highlighted the importance of international collaboration in the fight against corruption and stressed South Africa's dedication to advancing collective goals, stating, 'Through our G20 Presidency theme, 'Solidarity, Equality, and Sustainability', we reaffirm our commitment to advancing collective efforts toward inclusive global economic growth and sustainable development.' Brazil's Minister of State for the Office of the Comptroller General, H.E. Mr. Vinícius Marques de Carvalho, delivered the keynote address, stressing the significance of inclusive approaches in anti-corruption efforts. He underscored the complex nature of corruption, requiring diverse perspectives and expertise. H.E. Carvalho called for a multi-agency strategy, urging the involvement of civil society, academia, and the private sector in shaping effective anti-corruption policies. At the heart of the meeting were the discussions of the draft G20 High-Level Principles on the Management of Seized and Confiscated Assets. These draft principles aim to provide a framework for G20 countries to manage seized assets, closing gaps identified by the ACWG to strengthen asset recovery. The Group also considered the Zero Draft Ministerial Declaration, encapsulating the commitment of G20 countries to address corruption through prevention. This draft will be presented for adoption at the Ministerial Meeting in October 2025. In addition to the main sessions, a side event was held on measuring integrity in public procurement, exploring challenges in quantifying corruption, and the necessity for evidence-based methodologies, co-hosted by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP). The UNDP informed that it is establishing a framework for measuring integrity, collecting data from 60 countries by the end of 2025. This initiative aims to provide objective tools to gauge the effectiveness of anti-corruption measures. Another side event was held to address the preventive dimension in the fight against corruption and new forms of organised crime, co-hosted by EL PACTO 2.0, a partnership with the European Union focused on justice and security. The G20 ACWG and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Working Group on Bribery held a joint meeting aimed at supporting the shared commitment to combating the bribery of foreign public officials in international transactions. The 2nd G20 ACWG l Meeting provided an opportunity for delegates to exchange views, share experiences, and deepen their understanding of the evolving challenges and opportunities in the fight against corruption through the lens of the Presidency's theme of solidarity, equality, and sustainability. The Working Group acknowledged that there remains considerable work ahead to fully realise the deliverables committed to at the start of the year, including timely responses to the questionnaires, substantive inputs toward the draft Ministerial Declaration, and the High-Level Principles on the Management of Seized and Confiscated Assets. Through these efforts, the G20 seeks to instil confidence in its commitment to combating corruption and promoting sustainable development, ensuring a brighter future for all. As South Africa and Brazil lead this charge, the hope is that the momentum generated from this meeting will translate into tangible actions that resonate beyond borders, creating a global environment where corruption has no place. At Caxton, we employ humans to generate daily fresh news, not AI intervention. Happy reading!

Macron urges renewed nuclear dialogue after Israel's Iran strikes
Macron urges renewed nuclear dialogue after Israel's Iran strikes

eNCA

time7 hours ago

  • eNCA

Macron urges renewed nuclear dialogue after Israel's Iran strikes

France's President Emmanuel Macron on Friday urged the US and Iran to resume nuclear talks following a wave of Israeli strikes against Iran. "Iran bears a heavy responsibility in the destabilisation of the whole region," he said after Western nations in recent days accused Tehran of deliberately escalating its nuclear programme, despite several rounds of US-Iran talks. "We call for the resumption of dialogue and the reaching of a deal." US President Donald Trump's Middle East pointman Steve Witkoff had been set to hold a sixth round of talks with Iran on Sunday in Oman. After Israel's deadly strikes early on Friday, Trump afterwards urged Iran to "make a deal, before there is nothing left", warning of "even more brutal" attacks to come. Macron, who earlier on Friday defended Israel's right to protect itself, said France could help in the case of an Iranian retaliation against Israel. "If Israel were to be attacked in retaliation by Iran, France, if in a position to do so, would take part in protection and defence operations," he said. Macron earlier in the day spoke by phone to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Elysee said, following a spike in diplomatic tensions. The French presidency said the phone conversation took place but did not provide details. Relations between Macron and Netanyahu have been strained in recent months over Israel's blockade of Gaza and France's plans to recognise a Palestinian state. - UN meeting postponed - France and Saudi Arabia have been planning to co-chair a UN conference on a two-state solution for Israel and the Palestinians next week in New York. But Macron said on Friday evening that meeting had been postponed. "While we have to postpone this conference for logistical and security reasons, it will take place as soon as possible," Macron said at a press conference. Israel pounded Iran in a series of air raids, striking 100 targets including nuclear and military sites, as well as killing the armed forces' chief of staff. In the aftermath of the strikes, Macron also spoke with leaders including Trump and the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. Earlier Friday, Macron said Israel had the right to defend itself and ensure its security but also called for de-escalation. "To avoid jeopardising the stability of the entire region, I call on all parties to exercise maximum restraint and to de-escalate," he said on X. Macron spoke after convening a meeting of the National Defence and Security Council. "All necessary steps will be taken to protect our nationals and our diplomatic and military missions in the region," Macron said. Iran has gradually broken away from its commitments under the nuclear deal it struck with world powers including the United States and France in 2015. The landmark deal provided Iran sanctions relief in exchange for curbs on its atomic programme, but it fell apart after the unilateral withdrawal of the United States during Trump's first term in 2018.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store