Universal healthcare is a system used in numerous countries to provide health insurance to all of its citizens. To do this, most countries use a single-payer system, which typically requires a country's citizens to pay for their healthcare through taxes. Some of the many countries that are currently under a universal healthcare system now include—but are not limited to—Japan, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, France, Canada, and Australia; however, the United States still does not have universal coverage. For decades, people have been trying to change this. John Conyers, a then-Representative of Michigan, introduced a bill in 2003 called H.R. 676, which essentially proposed universal healthcare and a single-payer system. This was ultimately …show more content…
shut down, however, and—despite multiple attempts at revising and reintroducing the bill—there has been no success at passing it. Such an occurrence would not suppress others from attempting to expand coverage, though. President Obama in 2010 passed the Affordable Care Act, which effectively gave health insurance to tens of millions of Americans (Mangan). In the face of all of these efforts, though, millions of Americans still remain uninsured today. It's no surprise that so many people want universal healthcare in the United States. While there are still many who do not believe that free universal healthcare should be implemented in the United States, it would be much more affordable in the long run and would save the lives of U.S. citizens. Because a single-payer system requires citizens to pay for healthcare through taxes, it would eventually make healthcare cheaper for everyone—even for those who pay for their own healthcare right now. Those people who pay for healthcare at the moment are already spending thousands of dollars a year, while the government is also spending billions of dollars on health coverage. “The federal government will spend more than $980 billion in fiscal year 2015. In addition, tax expenditures for health care will total nearly $260 billion” (“How Much Does”). Gerald Friedman, an economics professor at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, reports that single-payer could cost less for 95% American households while significantly shrinking America's deficit by $154 billion in just the first year it would be put in place (Friedman). The billions of dollars saved by the government could allow money to be reallocated or even used in improving healthcare further. Furthermore, a large portion of Americans would also be saving money by paying through taxes instead and not having to pay high premiums. In addition, a single-payer plan could save thousands through preventative healthcare, which basically means treatment will cost less when getting it earlier in. In 2015, approximately one-third of citizens put off seeing a doctor because of costs (Dugan). Putting off doctor visits or treatment because it's unaffordable can cause the problem to worsen severely, thus causing treatment to cost more. For example, a study released by American Drug and Health Benefits states that stage 0 breast cancer chemotherapy can cost $5,170 while the cost of treating stage four cancer can cost nearly $36,000, which is about a $30,000 increase (Blumen et al.). Obviously the $30,000 difference between treating stage zero cancer versus stage four cancer is a lot. When citizens are unable to reach a doctor or are frightened by the high costs of treatment, they'll generally be more likely to brush a problem off until it is life-threatening (which could be cancer, such as in this case, a slight infection, or a multitude of other unfortunately common occurrences). Quite clearly, when healthcare becomes more affordable, so does visiting a doctor. This means that more Americans will be able to prevent what could potentially become far more hazardous and save themselves money in the process. Opponents may argue that taxes will skyrocket to ridiculously large amounts. For instance, Paul Gregory, a researcher from the Hoover Institution, states that paying for universal healthcare would require doubling the current payroll tax and would require Americans to pay approximately 45% of their income (Gregory). However, this simply isn’t true. According to Friedman, Americans would only have to pay a three-to-six percent payroll tax depending on income (Friedman). With a three-to-six percent increase in payroll taxes, it would cost a family only about half of what is currently paid by the average American family. According to Ester Bloom's analysis of an eHealthInsurance report done in 2016, the average family paid nearly $10,000, and that number is rising overtime. The average American, then, would only be paying approximately $5,000 out of their income in order to cover a single-payer plan. This means cheaper insurance for the same level of coverage (Bloom). Without a doubt, switching to a single-payer system would guarantee that nearly all Americans end up saving money, whether it be through taxes or preventative healthcare. When healthcare is more accessible to everyone, it can end up saving the lives of thousands of American citizens every year.
As mentioned in the previous paragraph, many Americans are currently too frightened to visit the doctor or get treatment because of its costs. Health insurance costs an astronomical amount to many in the United States. Zac Auter, an analyst at Gallup, notes that a surprisingly large amount of Americans actually do not have health insurance—in fact, about 12 percent of Americans are left without any form of health insurance (Auter). Furthermore, according to a study done in 2009, Americans without insurance have a 40% higher risk of death—this number is 15% higher than a study done in 1993 (Cecere). This shows that the number could likely continue to rise, or simply that more Americans now are uninsured. A lot of this could be remedied through a single-payer system, which could set in motion preventative healthcare for those who find themselves currently unable to afford private health insurance or for those who do not have everything covered by Medicare. Unfortunately, 12% of Americans is a shockingly large number, proving that far too many people currently find themselves stuck in a situation like the aforementioned. Secondly, looking towards other countries proves that having a single-payer system leads to more lives being saved. The United States is already behind other countries in potentially preventable deaths through universal …show more content…
healthcare. America stands at approximately 112,000 potentially preventable deaths and all countries with a single-payer system have much smaller numbers (“What Would Happen”). Even still, one does not have to look to other countries for proof of a single-payer system working better. According to Aviva Rutkin, Massachusetts essentially made insurance a necessity for nearly all residents. After 10 years, a study done reveals that hundreds of lives a year were saved, amounting to approximately a three percent decrease in deaths per year in the state (Rutkin). This Massachusetts study only further proves that a single-payer system will save lives. While approximately three percent does not seem like a whole lot of lives saved, imagine this on a national scale instead. Expansion of health care coverage is an important step to saving the lives of Americans. Although many who oppose universal healthcare believe that it would cause wait times to increase dramatically and point to Canada as an example, Canada is only one of many countries that currently have a single-payer system set in place. One such person is Scott Atlas, who writes that Canada’s wait for neurosurgery was nearly ten months, while the wait for orthopedic surgery could be up to 38 weeks. He also reports that 17% of patients wait more than four months for cancer treatment (Atlas). While it may be true that Canada does have a longer wait time than the United States, most countries under a single-payer system actually wait less than that of the average American. For example, 51% of Americans are able to see a doctor the same or next day of needing medical care, while 77% of people in the Netherlands, 76% of people in New Zealand, and 67% of people in Australia had the ability to see a doctor the same or following day (“What Would Happen”). All three of those countries and many others lead to the conclusion that Canada is not the place to point to when speaking of healthcare. A decrease in wait time is inevitable through a single-payer plan and would only cause lives to be saved. Canada’s extreme wait time problem simply isn’t due to the fact that they have a single-payer plan in place. On the whole, millions of Americans lives can be saved through a single-payer system being implemented in the United States. Because it causes healthcare to be more affordable and causes lives to be saved, universal healthcare is clearly the way to go.
Even now, great strides are being taken in Congress to implement a single-payer system or, in some cases, simply expand coverage through Medicare and the Affordable Care Act. Expanding healthcare coverage to all Americans is no simple task, of course. Even if we start small and attempt to provide healthcare to a single state, such as with what was implemented in Massachusetts, it could spread to other states. To pitch into the ongoing fight for a single-payer system, you can contact your district's representatives or your state’s senators and tell them how you feel about it. To find out contact information for your representative, you can go to https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative and simply enter your ZIP code. However, if you instead wish to contact a senator, you can get their information at
https:// www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm by choosing the state you live in. Such a large task cannot be completed alone, it requires all of us to work together towards a common cause. Your voice matters, and your actions could save the lives of many of your fellow Americans and maybe, one day, even your own.
While most countries around the world have some form of universal national health care system, the United States, one of the wealthiest countries in the world, does not. There are much more benefits to the U.S. adopting a dorm of national health care system than to keep its current system, which has proved to be unnecessarily expensive, complicated, and overall inefficient.
On a global scale, the United States is a relatively wealthy country of advanced industrialization. Unfortunately, the healthcare system is among the costliest, spending close to 18% of gross domestic product (GDP) towards funding healthcare (2011). No universal healthcare coverage is currently available. United States healthcare is currently funded through private, federal, state, and local sources. Coverage is provided privately and through the government and military. Nearly 85% of the U.S. population is covered to some extent, leaving a population of close to 48 million without any type of health insurance. Cost is the primary reason for lack of insurance and individuals foregoing medical care and use of prescription medications.
Access to healthcare provides financial stability by assuring people that they will not be financially destroyed by injury or illness. Additionally, when people can afford regular medical care they tend to avoid chronic problems and financial stress. In a study provided by the American Medical Students Association, researchers reviewed the costs and benefits of universal health care. They came to the conclusion, after reviewing other articles and statistics from multiple sources, that, “The annual cost of diminished health and shorter life spans of Americans without insurance is $65-$130 billion.” (Chua 5) This comes from people not having adequate health care and then losing their jobs because they...
Out of all the industrialized countries in the world, the United States is the only one that doesn’t have a universal health care plan (Yamin 1157). The current health care system in the United States relies on employer-sponsored insurance programs or purchase of individual insurance plans. Employer-sponsored coverage has dropped from roughly 80 percent in 1982 to a little over 60 percent in 2006 (Kinney 809). The government does provide...
Universal health care refers to any system of health care managed by the government. The health care system may cover different programs including government run hospitals and health organizations and programs targeted at providing health care. Many developed countries such as Canada and United Kingdom have embraced universal health care with the United States being the only exception. The present U.S health care system has often been considered inefficient in terms of cost control as millions of Americans remain uncovered. This has made it the subject of a heated debate characterized by people who argue that the country requires a kind of socialized system that will permit increased government participation. Others have tended to support privatized health care, or a combined model of private and universal health care that will permit private companies to offer health care for a specific fee. Universal healthcare has numerous advantages that remain hidden from society. First, the federal government can apply economies of scale in managing health facilities which would reduce health care expenses. Second, all unnecessary expenses would be eliminated by requiring all states to bring together all the insurance companies into a single entity whose mandate would be to provide health insurance to all people. Lastly, increased government participation will guarantee quality care, improve access to medical services and address critical problems relating to market failure.
Health insurance, too many American citizens, is not an option. However, some citizens find it unnecessary. Working in the health care field, I witness the effects of uninsured patients on medical offices. Too often, I see a “self-pay” patient receive care from their doctor and then fail to pay for it. Altogether, their refusal to pay leaves the office at a loss of money and calls for patients to pay extra in covering for the cost of the care the uninsured patient received. One office visit does not seem like too big of an expense, but multiple patients failing to pay for the care they receive adds up. Imagine the hospital bills that patients fail to pay; health services in a hospital are double, sometimes triple, in price at a hospital. It is unfair that paying patients are responsible for covering these unpaid services. Luckily, the Affordable Care Act was passed on March 23, 2010, otherwise known as Obamacare. Obamacare is necessary in America because it calls for all citizens to be health insured, no worrying about pre-existing conditions, and free benefits for men and women’s health.
“Homelessness can be the cause as well as the result of poor health” (Wise, Emily, Debrody, Corey &ump; Paniucki, Heather, 1999, p.445). This is a reoccurring theme that has existed within the homeless population for decades. While programs to help reduce this constant circle are being put in place all over the country to provide medical services for the homeless to be able to go to, many are still finding that health care needs for individuals as well as homeless communities are not being met. Many studies have been completed that study both the opinion on healthcare by those who have access to sufficient health care and homeless people’s perceptions on health care administration. While many companies are working to provide more personal health care systems, it appears that the larger problem is with a lack of people know about the health care systems that are in place to help them. Companies are trying to advertise more often to inform homeless people that there is health care out there for them.
In recent years, the number of Americans who are uninsured has reached over 45 million citizens, with millions more who only have the very basic of insurance, effectively under insured. With the growing budget cuts to medicaid and the decreasing amount of employers cutting back on their health insurance options, more and more americans are put into positions with poor health care or no access to it at all. At the heart of the issue stems two roots, one concerning the morality of universal health care and the other concerning the economic effects. Many believe that health care reform at a national level is impossible or impractical, and so for too long now our citizens have stood by as our flawed health-care system has transformed into an unfixable mess. The good that universal healthcare would bring to our nation far outweighs the bad, however, so, sooner rather than later, it is important for us to strive towards a society where all people have access to healthcare.
These situations have many tough decision and opportunity costs to think about. With universal health care specifically, one must consider the pros and cons of potentially adopting a plan of this magnitude. Looking at the positive side, everyone in the U.S. would be guaranteed healthcare. No matter the amount of wealth or immigration status, everyone is covered by the U.S. government under a single payer system. Americans would be entitled to any medical necessity such as emergencies, check-ups, screenings, treatments, rehabs, and medications (“Bernie Sanders on Healthcare”). Now at what cost one may ask? Surely cost would increase right? Actually, medical cost would become overall cheaper for one to pay according to one proposed plan. Given that more Americans will be paying, less will be required to pay per person to cover the expenses (“Bernie Sanders on Healthcare”). Additionally, with more insured Americans, overall public health will improve and lead to more eligible working Americans. In the long term, this plan will help grow and stimulate the economic growth that the United States has been looking for so desperately. To add on to economic growth, this proposed plan will create jobs in the medical field and lift the financial burden off businesses. This means businesses would no longer be required to pay health benefits to their employees. Instead, businesses can focus on investing into their company’s growth and infrastructure (“Health Care for All”). Lastly, by adopting a universal health care system, Americans would no longer have to deal with medical bankruptcies. All expenses and bills would be covered by the U.S. government ("Right to Health Care ProCon.org”). This would leave the American people to focus on paying for other essential expenses and living costs. Now why hasn’t the U.S. adopted a similar plan already? First, one must consider the potential flaws in a
Universal healthcare: a term feared by many politicians due to the communist connotation, but is it really all that bad? Over 58 countries have some sort of universal health coverage, such as England and France, which have single payer healthcare, meaning the government provides insurance for all citizens and pays for all healthcare expenses. The United States of America has insurance mandated healthcare, meaning the government requires all citizens to purchase insurance, usually provided through their jobs. In America, over 45 million people are uninsured, 20,000 of whom will die by the end of the year, compared to England or France. All residents, legal or not, are covered.
Health care is one of the most debated issues in the United States today and it 's necessary to understand the basics of this problem. Approximately 50 million people living in the United
The need for universal health care within the United States has been evident, and needed to be addressed. The old healthcare system was plagued with issues, including expensive premiums that were on the rise, along with an inflated average infant mortality rate and limited average life expectancy, which ultimately led to many people being left uninsured (“Affordable” 2). In the 2012 presidential election, one key issue was how to reform America’s broken health care system, and to instate a successful universal healthcare system that has resolved the previous issues. Being one of the last influential and competitive countries in the world without universal healthcare, the pressure was on for the United States to develop their own system. Since Barack Obama became president, Obamacare, instead of the proposed Romneycare, was born.
With the United Nations listing health care as natural born right and the escalating cost of health care America has reached a debatable crisis. Even if you do have insurance it's a finical strain on most families.
Universal health care is medical insurance provided to all the residents of a country by their government. Out of all the major industrial countries, The United States is the only country without a universal health care system. In 2010, President Barack Obama signed a health care reform law making it illegal to be uninsured in America, which is a major step towards it. Universal Health Care should be mandatory in America because it gives everyone an opportunity to receive more equal care, the overall health of the population would increase and current insurance plans are unaffordable for many Americans.
Health insurance facilitates entry into the health care system. Uninsured people are less likely to receive medical care and more likely to have poor health. Many Americans are foregoing medical care because they cannot afford it, or are struggling to pay their medical bills. “Adults in the US are more likely to go without health care due to cost” (Schoen, Osborn, Squires, Doty, & Pierson, 2010) Many of the currently uninsured or underinsured are forced accept inferior plans with large out-of-pocket costs, or are not be able to afford coverage offered by private health insurers. This lack of adequate coverage makes it difficult for people to get the health care they need and can have a particularly serious impact on a person's health and stability.