Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Economics of healthcare
Economics of healthcare
Economic factors healthcare expenditure
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Economics of healthcare
Economic good is defined as any good that is scarce relative to our wants for it, and which also has an opportunity cost associated with it. Economic good can also be characterised by the fact that it has a value, so people are willing to pay for it. Thus, if we look at this definition of an economic good, it seems that healthcare fits it rather well: the resources used for production of healthcare, such as human resources and capital, are finite; our wants of healthcare have no bounds – no healthcare system in the world has yet achieved the level where it can satisfy all wants for healthcare; and of course, healthcare has a great value for us.
Yet, even before the days when Kenneth Arrow gave rise to the term health economics in his article
…show more content…
Ultimately, stating that healthcare is an economic good like any other implies a change to the way that we think about healthcare on several levels: all the way from the entire microeconomic level, down to the solely individual level – our own attitude to healthcare as patients or consumers.
UK’s NHS, from the moment it was founded and up until now, clearly reflects a view of healthcare as a social or common good, which is defined, in economic sense, as a good that could be delivered as private good, but is delivered instead by the government, for various reasons (usually social policy). Therefore, if we put at the core of our attitude to healthcare the fact that it is a social good, this implies that everybody has to have equal access to it in order to achieve equitable and socially optimum allocation of resources. As a result, as soon as we start thinking of healthcare as an economic good like any other, then there is no more moral/ philosophical argument present, that everyone has to have equal access to healthcare, which is in line with the social attitude towards the majority of economic
…show more content…
Particularly in the UK, due to the long history of NHS with the motto “free, from the cradle to the grave”, there is a common mind-set that healthcare is completely free. For a long time, the treatment prescribed by the doctor to the patient normally incurs zero cost both to patient and the doctor, as it is paid out of the state budget. As a result, patients and doctors usually have little or no awareness of the costs incurred by the treatments. Thus, thinking of healthcare as an economic good like any other would make consumers and doctors more conscious of medical price tags. This could result in the increase of the burden of the decision of whether or not to bear the cost of treatment on the patient, just like with any other economic good, leading to increased patient cost
The United States has often been praised for its free market economy that is entrepreneur friendly and provides consumer freedom. However this type of economy can lead to corruption and greed. Many basic necessities become not readily available but rather only to those who can afford them. The U.S. health care system
The original ethos behind the NHS was the belief that, through the provision of universal and complete health care, free at the point of provision, the NHS would eliminate significant disease and thereby work itself out of a job. Clearly a naive view by today's standards, this ethic remains one of the problems of the NHS today: the electorate still believes that there is intrinsic value in a universal and complete NHS, although no-one can agree on exactly what constitutes 'complete' health care, and none can say what the actual benefit of attempting to provide this (rather than rationed care)...
An issue that is widely discussed and debated concerning the United States’ economy is our health care system. The health care system in the United States is not public, meaning that the states does not offer free or affordable health care service. In Canada, France and Great Britain, for example, the government funds health care through taxes. The United States, on the other hand, opted for another direction and passed the burden of health care spending on individual consumers as well as employers and insurers. In July 2006, the issue was transparency: should the American people know the price of the health care service they use and the results doctors and hospitals achieve? The Wall Street Journal article revealed that “U.S. hospitals, most of them nonprofit, charged un-insured patients prices that vastly exceeded those they charged their insured patients. Driving their un-insured patients into bankruptcy." (p. B1) The most expensive health care system in the world is that of America. I will talk about the health insurance in U.S., the health care in other countries, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, and my solution to this problem.
Common Sense Economics: What Everyone Should Know About Wealth and Prosperity, written by James Gwartney, Richard Stroup, Dwight Lee and Tawni Ferrarini, explains the foundation of economics and how it all works in all aspects of our lives from the role of the government trickling down to personal credit cards and savings. This book was written with clear language for the audience to understand and comprehend the large amount of information within its condensed size. The authors’ target audience for this book seemed to be for those individuals wanting to learn the mechanics of economy including economic growth and stability. Gwartney separates his book into four parts: Part I, Twelve Key Elements of Economics, Part II Seven Major Sources of Economic Progress, Part Three Economic Progress and the Role of Government, and Part IV Twelve Key Elements of Practical Personal Finance.
The U.S. expends far more on healthcare than any other country in the world, yet we get fewer benefits, less than ideal health outcomes, and a lot of dissatisfaction manifested by unequal access, the significant numbers of uninsured and underinsured Americans, uneven quality, and unconstrained wastes. The financing of healthcare is also complicated, as there is no single payer system and payment schemes vary across payors and providers.
The development of value based healthcare reimbursement systems between healthcare payers and healthcare providers is evolving from the need to provide patients with beneficial healthcare technologies under conditions of significant economic uncertainty. The concept examined centralizes on shifting the focus of the healthcare system from volume to value. Value is measured by outcomes achieved based on a full cycle of care not volume of services rendered based on each service performed.
Arguably, all three situations met by the end of the 20th century. The rise of managed care, the increase of health care costs, and the growing number of uninsured patients place economic and political pressures on individuals (and governments) to find a cost-containment resolution. Additionally, since the late 1970s, the medical profession has faced the dominating principle of patient independence as a challenge – first to medical paternalism and then extending even to the principle of beneficence. More so, the usage of the Internet and other global media has expanded the ability of patients to access an...
2. The twin problems of the health care industry as viewed by society are cost and access. First of all, the cost of getting health care is very high and it is getting higher each day. This has been mostly caused by the combination of high cost and an increase in quantity of services provided to the communities. The other problem involves access to health care. American enjoy limited or no access to health care. Many efforts have been done to reform this, but still but still many people are left without access to the care. These two problems are related due to the fact that if the health care industry gets to high off course people no longer will be able to have any access to it. The higher prices are, the lower access people have to it.
However, according to Jenna Flannigan, write at Healthline.com, America’s current for-profit system allows for competition between medical and pharmaceutical companies which drives prices up astronomically. “In countries where health insurance is government-run or nonprofit-run, there is no profit factor to drive up prices…For example, a typical bypass surgery in the Netherlands costs about $15,000 while in the United States it costs about $75,000” (Flannigan). This figure illustrates how the US’s needless competition between private, for-profit organizations make medical care unnecessarily unattainable to those who aren’t very affluent or do not have comprehensive medical care. These bloated prices do not even contribute to better care a majority of the time, as pointed out by political consultant Karin J. Robinson. “Here in Britain, for instance, we spend about 8% of the country's annual GDP on health care, compared to 15% in the US, and yet the overall health of the population is similar, with perhaps even a slight advantage for the UK” (Robinson). America’s current system is far more expensive, but for what reason? A healthcare system should be driven a will to help those in need, not for the personal gain of companies that are rife with greed. America needs to follow the path of other first-world nations and take a different approach to
In a perfect world all patients would receive the same level of healthcare and they would all be treated equally based on their illness. Although, living in a capitalist society not everything is meant to be equal. Our country was founded by settlers looking to escape from punitive taxation and were looking to be free from all other countries and start a new country. The United States is known as the place for people to chase the American Dream, where you work hard and the fruits of your labor can potentially payoff, overwhelmingly in some cases. However, not everyone can or will realize their American Dream since space is limited at the top. The richest Americans are able to enjoy larger homes, nicer cars, and lavish vacations. These are material items, but there is something else that they are able to buy that is not material, that is the right to life. The best healthcare can be viewed as subjective, but having more money you can buy almost anything, including the best care and options that people with less resources cannot. Therefore, people at all income levels experience different levels of healthcare. Many Americans are given access to healthcare, including those living in poverty, but that does not mean they receive the best or equal care as those who are wealthy, which is unethical.
The patient has to be completely free to make this decision, with absolutely no power whatsoeverin the insurance company's hand to force it. On the other hand, giving the opportunity to the patient to consider the expenses against the advantages and them make this decision about their own health care would be morally incorrect.. Indeed, only the patient can justify the morality in the situation which makes this hard decision for himself or herself, instead of some third party government or insurance company bureaucracy. Also, basic economic logic tells people that somebody should be making this decision.
“Free medical services would encourage patients to practice preventive medicine and inquire about problems early when treatment will be light; currently, patients often avoid.” (Messerli)
There will always be this controversy over things that cannot be proven; as always there are many opinions about healthcare. The biggest debate lies in the question of whether healthcare is considered a right or a privilege. If health care was a universal right, health care would not be the number one cause of bankruptcy. In the United States, statistics, data, and experience show that health care is offered to us as a privilege. CONFIDENTIAL: If we look to the ideas of the past about what should be a universal right, the ideas that the Enlightenment painted for men were pretty straight forward.
Externalities are considered to be any impact on people who are not involved in an economic transaction. Externalities can be positive or negative. In the healthcare industry, there are positive and negative externalities due to the care that’s provided to other people. The people who are not directly involved in the treatment benefit from others being healthy because it decreases the chance of them catching the same illness. This is one of the many positive externalities that exist from others receiving health care services.
The cost of US health care has been steadily increasing for many years causing many Americans to face difficult choices between health care and other priorities in their lives. Health economists are bringing to light the tradeoffs which must be considered in every healthcare decision (Getzen, 2013, p. 427). Therefore, efforts must be made to incite change which constrains the cost of health care without creating adverse health consequences. As the medical field becomes more business oriented, there will be more of a shift in focus toward the costs and benefits, which will make medicine more like the rest of the economy (Getzen, 2013, p. 439).