There is a wide spectrum of views on what the extent governments should be responsible for mandating healthcare for its citizens. On one side there are people that believe that governments should supply one hundred percent of its citizens will full coverage for all health needs, using only the citizen's (higher) taxes. On the other end, there are the people that feel as if everyone should be able to provide for themselves and that their own personal tax money should not be going towards somebody else's care. There are also people in the middle who may believe that the government should give programs or offer services to help, yet people are still responsible for signing up for and paying for those programs themselves. In my opinion, the government …show more content…
should definitely be involved when it comes to supplying and formulating healthcare systems, yet should also leave some responsibility to the citizens. This will create the simplest and most fair systems for everyone involved. One view that many people have is that the government should have no involvement whatsoever in the healthcare system. This is seen as good because it can lower taxes, increase competition between private businesses, and ensure you only pay for what you use. A slightly less extreme version of this system is currently being used in the USA, and includes many of these traits. Its system uses privately funded hospitals and privately paid doctors, and users of those hospitals pay as they go. You can also buy health care insurance from private businesses, who will pay for most of your health needs, as long as you continue to pay them every month. The issues are, because they are a private business, they are only about profit, and will find any way, any possible fine print violation, to not have to pay for your care. People think this system works well, as it creates competition, and ensures that you only pay for what you use, and not for anyone else. However, Its system is set up for corruption, as all private businesses care about are profits, and because being frugal on treatments and denying patients care makes them more money, that is what happens. Because the government doesn't want to become involved in this, very little regulations are in place to standardise pay of employees, cost of treatments, or even the quality of care given. Furthermore, health insurance is expensive, and many can’t afford it. In 2009 alone, over fifty million americans didn’t have health insurance, and because of that, more than eighteen thousand died of treatable causes (ThoughtCo). It is so corrupt in fact, that in most healthcare companies, employees will get bonuses for denying the coverage for policy owners(ThoughtCo). For these reasons, the system of no government involvement and complete privatization of business will never work and will stay corrupt forever. On the complete other end of the spectrum is the model with one hundred percent government involvement, similar to what citizen two agrees with..
This model is based around using tax money to set up and build hospitals, pay doctors, and cover everything anybody would and ever will need. One of the better real-life examples of this system is the Canadian healthcare system, although Canada’s is less extreme. In theory this is a perfect system, as it eliminates all competition, so no hospitals have to outperform any other ones with unique services, and hospitals can just work on being good hospitals and providing quality service. This system is theoretically the most fair, the easiest, and even the most equitable, but unfortunately, in theory rarely translates into real life. The main problems with this system are that it can make payments unfair, and can also can lead to people taking advantage of the system. The payments can be seen as unfair because of the way it works. Everybody, every year, pays their taxes. A portion of those taxes, equal for everyone, will go towards a large pot of money, which is divided between whatever is needed to supply citizens with healthcare. Some people argue that this system is unfair or too beneficial to some people, as they pay too little or too much for their taxes to account for what they use for their healthcare. Because some people are healthier or less healthy than others, someone in perfect health and somebody on the opposite end of the scale pay the same amount in their taxes for their healthcare. However, the person in perfect health might only need a checkup every one of two years whereas the other one might be accessing the hospital weekly. Even worse, some people make the choice to not care about themselves, which causes them to need that healthcare. This brings up the argument of why somebody who chooses to be healthy must (in theory) pay for the extra strain that is put on the system because other people choose not to
be as healthy. This is the argument that citizen three would like to argue. The other issue with the fully public, tax-funded healthcare model is its weaknesses when it comes to non-taxpayers using the system for their own health care. This can happen mainly for the way that the system works. If everyone receives full coverage for everything, hospitals and other healthcare providing places have no reason to check to make sure the person utilising the service is a citizen of that place. Similar to what we saw in the movie Sicko, people can use the system without being a resident of the place. While this may not seem like such a bad thing, taxpayers would likely get annoyed that their tax dollars to pay for people to get healthcare, even though those people aren't putting anything towards it. This could also lead to over-congestion of healthcare provides and could delay wait times for everyone, which are already bad enough. In conclusion, a healthcare system with full government involvement,, funded by tax money is a system with too many downfalls, even though in concept it is a perfect system with many benefits. Not until the system gets more organised and equal will the model ever work well, or even at all.
Healthcare in the United States is an extremely often discussed topic on whether it is morally a right or just a charity to those who cannot afford it. Plenty claim that health care is too expensive and not affordable so they demand aid from the government. On the other hand, the rest presume that the state is not morally accountable to take this type of action, since not every citizen and human being is equally eligible to receive the same healthcare.
The author includes that there would be no way to pay for the system and then lists logical reasons as of why paying for the health care system would fail. The author also includes that creating a universal health care system would cause unemployment to those who are employed in the insurance industry, appealing to his readers with pathos. Finally, the author argues that universal health care would dramatically decrease the quality of health care because more patients would be going in to see the small amount of doctors that are in the US, causing the system to get backed
The United States is projected to spend nearly 20 percent of the Gross Domestic Product on healthcare by 2020.According to a Mckinsey study $447 billion of the 1.7 trillion the U.S. spent on healthcare in 2003 was in excess of what it should have spent based on its wealth. A 1 % increase in the rate of health-spending results in an increase of about $2 trillion in spending on health over the next 10 years.
For decades, one of the many externalities that the government is trying to solve is the rising costs of healthcare. "Rising healthcare costs have hurt American competitiveness, forced too many families into bankruptcy to get their families the care they need, and driven up our nation's long-term deficit" ("Deficit-Reducing Healthcare Reform," 2014). The United States national government plays a major role in organizing, overseeing, financing, and more so than ever delivering health care (Jaffe, 2009). Though the government does not provide healthcare directly, it serves as a financing agent for publicly funded healthcare programs through the taxation of citizens. The total share of the national publicly funded health spending by various governments amounts to 4 percent of the nation's gross domestic product, GDP (Jaffe, 2009). By 2019, government spending on Medicare and Medicaid is expected to rise to 6 percent and 12 percent by 2050 (Jaffe, 2009). The percentages, documented from the Health Policy Brief (2009) by Jaffe, are from Medicare and Medicaid alone. The rapid rates are not due to increase of enrollment but growth in per capita costs for providing healthcare, especially via Medicare.
The U.S. Constitution is a good foundation for implementing health care for people all over the world and article 1 section 8 clause 1 explains the power of government when it comes to health care. According to the Enduring Democracy book, "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States..." (Dautrich, C-5). In other words, the government has the power to allow everyone the right to health care since our taxes are already being collect for the common defense and general welfare. General welfare refers to health care in which the government may provide.
The first side to the health care system is the Single Payer system. Many European countries, and our neighboring country Canada, have this type of system. This system has every citizen put his or her money into a fund that would be controlled by a federal agency. That agency would then pay for the treatment. Private insurance companies would basically be die off. The difference from this and our current health care system...
America is known for democracy, freedom, and the American Dream. American citizens have the right to free speech, free press, the right to bear arms, and the right to religious freedom to name a few. The Declaration of Independence states that American citizens have the rights including “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” America promises equality and freedom and the protection of their rights as outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. But with all the rights and freedoms that American citizens enjoy, there is one particular area where the United States seems to be lacking. That area is health care. The United States is the only industrialized nation that doesn’t have some form of legal recognition of a right to health care (Yamin 1157). Health care reform in the United States has become a major controversy for politicians, health care professionals, businesses, and citizens. Those in opposition to reform claim that health care is not a human right, therefore the government should not be involved. Supporters of reform believe that health care is most definitely a human right and should be available to everyone in the United States instead of only those who can afford it, and that it is the government’s responsibility to uphold that right.
There are several issues concerning the uninsured and underinsured patient population in America. There are many areas of concern the congressional efforts to increase the availability of health insurance, the public image of the insurance industry illustrated by the movie "John Q", the lack of good management tools, and creating health insurance coverage for all low income Americans. Since the number of uninsured Americans has risen to 43 million from 37 million in the flourishing 1990s and could shoot up even more severely if the economy continues to decrease and health care premiums keep increasing (Insurance No Simple Fix, 2001).
America is facing a healthcare crisis! In town hall meetings across America, brawls have broken out during speeches given in an attempt to promote government run healthcare. When looking at the big picture, healthcare is only a small portion of the current problems, but a very big one, in the eyes of Americans, considering how it affects every citizen. The healthcare system in the United States is experiencing hard times, but does that mean, we, as Americans, should just step aside and let government take over? Absolutely not! Government will claim that the numbers of uninsured Americans are high because of the prices insurance companies charge, but are these numbers correct and who makes up these numbers? What will a government run healthcare service provide as far as doctors and treatments are concerned? Where do we think the money to run government healthcare will come from? Americans can help turn the economy around by eliminating this healthcare crisis from the list of many. Americans should stop government from passing such a bill for government run healthcare, and let government know exactly what we need and how we need it done.
Health care should be a human right. It shouldn’t be a privilege that individuals have to pay for, it should be provided to everyone. In 2017 Bernie Sanders said, “Every man, woman and child in our country should be able to access the health care they need regardless of
Healthcare is a complicated thing, but there are lots of things that need to be addressed. There is controversy about whether healthcare is a right, responsibility, or a privilege. This essay is going to explain examples of each. The word right can be defined simply as “something to which one has a just claim” (merriam-webster.com). According to the online legal dictionary, the word privilege is defined as “a special benefit, exemption from a duty, or immunity from penalty, given to a particular person, a group or a class of people”. Google dictionary describes responsibility as “The state or fact of being accountable or to blame for something”, or “The state or fact of having a duty to deal with something.”
In many other countries the health care is government controlled and all citizens are provided government assisted health care. Most systems over in Europe are indeed government controlled and are taxed my wages. The United States government does not pay for most of its citizens healthcare in contrast. If you are fournate enough to afford insurance it's usually through your employer. In comparssion almost all government operated insurances provide better care for babies and pregant mothers than the United States system of health care. The United States system are more flexible than government aided systems though.
Access to health care refers to the ease with which an individual can obtain needed medical services. Many Americans face barriers that make it difficult to obtain basic health care services. These barriers to services include lack of availability, high cost, and lack of insurance coverage. "Limited access to health care impacts people's ability to reach their full potential, negatively affecting their quality of life." (Access to Health Services, 2014) Access to health services encompasses four components that include coverage, services, timeliness, and workforce
...ue to numerous medical errors. With the amount of medical errors that currently do occur which is a current health care issue it cost the health care billions of dollar each year to fix the mistakes that were made.
Health care has always been an interesting topic all over the world. Voltaire once said, “The art of medicine consists of amusing the patient while nature cures the disease.” It may seem like health care that nothing gets accomplished in different health care systems, but ultimately many trying to cures diseases and improve health care systems.