A causal claim about the relation between governments’ policies and the livelihood of people It is not a secret that appropriate healthcare offered in time is one of the most credible chances to extend a human life. This is why the governments try to develop the most important implications on the citizens’ livelihood. The leaders truly believe that their policies may considerably improve the lives of people they represent and rule. Still, it is very important to understand that lengthy and sometimes conflicting negations considering the interests of different politically powerful medical subcultures should take place in order to introduce the required portion of healthcare (Arbuckle 2012). The role of government in the life of each citizen is crucial indeed, and the way of how healthcare is presented to people may influence the quality of life. However, it is hard to define the nature of a causal relationship between healthcare spending and life expectancy in different countries due to the presence of such factors like social inequality (Navarro, Muntaner, Borrell, Benach, & Quiroga 2006), pharmaceutical issues (Shaw, Horrace, & Vogel 2005), or the necessity to meet the other demands of society. Each country has its own peculiarities, social norms, and citizens’ expectations. On the Figure 1, the data about some countries and their life expectancy and healthcare spending indicators from 1968 to 2013 is given. At a glimpse, it is evident that the Americans are the nation that is in need of certain healthcare reforms. Nevertheless, the other representatives help to create a more or less certain causal claim that, as a rule, higher level of OECD governments’ healthcare spending (x-axis) causes a higher level life expectancy (y-axis), still, some expectations should be taken into consideration. Of course, there are a number of hurdles that define the quality of such claim, and their evaluation is a good chance to comprehend the essence of the relations better (Kellstedt & Whitten 2008). Hurdles in establishing a relation between healthcare spending and life expectancy According to Kellstedt and Whitten (2008), there are four main hurdles that should be taken into consideration while evaluating the chosen causal claim. Our claim is that higher level of OECD governments’ healthcare spending leads to a higher level life expectancy. So, it is high time to answer the following questions: is it possible to prove life expectancy’s dependency on healthcare spending? Yes, it is. There are many developed countries that find it necessary to spend much money on health care in order to improve population health (Funtleyder 2008). However, each year, financial needs necessary for health care increase considerably, and the governments want to know whether it is still beneficial to support the chosen spending. Figure 1, as well as the investigations introduced by Anderson and Fronger (2008), Goldsmith (2010), or Williams (2010), proves that the United States spent about $6000 per capita on health care in 2005 and demonstrated one of the lowest results in life expectancy. The other countries demonstrated the opposite results and proved that healthcare spending influen