"The Economic Burden of Health Inequalities in the United States," from the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies

The figures are stark: A new study by researchers at Johns Hopkins and the University of Maryland reveals:

And those are just the "direct" costs of providing care to a disproportionately (for racial-discrimination reasons) sicker and more disadvantaged population that, among other things, doesn't have equal or affordable access to health insurance, according to "The Economic Burden of Health Inequalities in the United States." (Download the full report PDF.)

That doesn't count, as the report notes, "indirect costs of health inequities such as lost productivity, lost wages, absenteeism, family leave, and premature death."

The report's brief. Check it out while you're mulling over the health-care "reform" package and "public options" being debated in Congress.

In other words, try to provide at least equal opportunity and access to health care and health-care insurance, and you'll have fewer perpetually sick, malnourished people requiring greater medical resources when they do need to be treated. They are not sicker segments of the population because of the color of their skin; they're sicker because of discrimination on a wide variety of fronts (housing, employment, education, etc.) on the basis of the color of their skin.

See the Kaiser Family Foundation for more on this topic, especially a fascinating fact sheet called "Key Health and Health Care Indicators by Race/Ethnicity and State."