Other Cost Drivers

In addition to the market-based cost drivers, there are some population-based cost drivers that influence the costs of U.S. healthcare as well. Namely, population changes as we continue to grow as a population (0.7% annually) and we have an aging population (thanks Boomers). In addition, we have a sedentary lifestyle and have high rates of obesity nationwide. Along with these come high levels of chronic illness which are both expensive and long-lasting. Take a look at the images (and gif) below and respond to the "Other Cost Drivers" prompts below.

While market-based drivers seem quite difficult to address, especially when considering the iron triangle. Addressing rising healthcare costs based on population-based changes seems to be more plausible. It seems easier to stop people from smoking vapes than it does to restructure how physicians are compensated for example. Or does it?

1) Are population-based cost drivers easier to address than market-based drivers? Why or why not?

2) Population-based initiatives typically fall under the umbrella of public health initiatives. Some of these initiatives are wildly successful, access to potable water, for example, and others are not (vaccines come to mind). Is there something unique to American culture or the U.S. healthcare system that might help to explain why some public health initiatives work while others do not?