Thank you for your first affirmative speech, and now I will make a speech, which is going to be against to your claims and points. Most people do not even know what single-payer means. So let’s start with what we have. We can think of the American healthcare system as a series of tubes. We don’t have single-payer healthcare, we have thousands and thousands of payer healthcare. And each of them typically pays different amounts for the exact same medical service. For every 3 doctors in the U.S., you have to two billing staff standing behind them just handling all that paperwork. If we think of a single-payer system, it is just one tube of payments, which all money flows from the government to the doctors. So since the government is the one paying all bills, they get to decide what they will and will not. …show more content…
So I want to start with the disadvantages of a single payer healthcare. The money for a single payer system needs to come from somewhere. For countries that have already established a single payer system, the pool of cash that is used for care typically comes from taxation. These countries are; Afghanistan, Sudan, Somalia, Nigeria, Kenya, Jordan, Iraq, Cameroon, and Cambodia. If you guys have noticed that I did not mention any European country, and all countries that I mentioned they have the worse economy than the U.S., they are all 3rd world countries, but unfortunately, United States of America is on that list just because we do not have free healthcare and Universal Healthcare. Subpoint B is the higher taxes, this is seen in the US already as well through the Medicare salary withholding tax. Corporate and sales taxes are often raised to supplement the fund, for example, the gasoline prices have been increased 18 percent since last year. And the tax policy center estimates %53 of taxpayers will face higher bills. Just because the president of the United States has ended the Affordable Care Act, also known as
Today I want to tell you why adopting universal health care is the answer to the question of health care reform.
To find one work quoted multiple times in a novel, as is the case in Jane Eyre with The Lay of the Last Minstrel by Sir Walter Scott, should suggest to a reader that this quoted work can serve to shed some light on the work in which it is found. In this case, Charlotte Brontë alluded to Scott’s work at appropriate moments in the novel, both because of similarities in the plots at those moments, but also, more importantly, because of the theme of The Lay of the Last Minstrel. The Lay of the Last Minstrel tells the story of two lovers, who despite overwhelming obstacles, end up together. This is possible only after the pride which contributes to their separation is vanquished. Use of a story with this theme serves to foreshadow the eventual marriage between Jane and Rochester, but only after their pride is no longer an obstacle.
I. You might have heard politicians in the news, talk about overhauling our tax system with a new fix-all idea, the flat-tax. This would simplify our overly complicated tax system and might seem appealing at first glance, however there are serious problems with it.
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...
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.
With congress passing ObamaCare last year we are taking baby steps towards a health system overhaul we so desperately need. The skeptics, though, still argue against it, citing the costs as too much or that it’s un-american. Health care is a basic need for everyone, and as such should be right protected and provided for by the government. There are great, economic, moral, and social benefits to be reaped, and so it is important for our government to continue down this path its started and also important for Americans to provide our full support. There is much to overcome to completely reverse the direction of the health system, and I’m sure it will take many years for the results to pay off, but I’m glad we’ve at least provided the groundwork for future generations to build
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
In 2012 without universal healthcare medicaid and children's healthcare took up about 21%of the nations federal budget. The increase of universal healthcare could increase the wait time for medical services, medicaid is an example of a federally funded single payer health care system, according to a 2012 GAO report 9.4% medicaid beneficiaries had trouble obtaining necessary care due to longer waits. in conclusion universal health care would not be beneficial over all because it can cause just as many issues as it helps
The healthcare reform debate has been politicized in the United States for many years where there have been deliberate efforts by various stakeholders to ensure that they push for the reforms that are in line with the cost-benefit aspects that they have already envisioned. In this paper, I will attempt to prove that the reforms that have been witnessed in the healthcare in the recent years have not been effective and helpful to the society as a whole. When President Obama came into office, he promised to oversee great reforms in the healthcare which is his government he face much priority in the social policy aspects. The congress managed to pass the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA).
A universal healthcare system is a great idea in theory, but in actuality, no one has figured out a reasonable proposal for where the money should come from. Economists claim that more than 2 trillion dollars are spent on health care each year. That’s over $6,000 per person. It would be reasonable to assume that universal health care would cause the already grand cost of health care in the United States to increase even more. The most likely outcome is that taxpayers would have to pay into a large pool from which everyone would draw for their health needs. This would create several problems. First, it would raise taxes for everyone. It would also mean, fundamentally, that many people who choose a healthy lifestyle would be required to pay the same amount as people who choose to live an unhealthy lifestyle, which hardly seems fair. Finally, a universal healthcare system could lead to huge increases in unemployment. All of the Americans who are currently employed with private insurance companies could suddenly find themselves without work. Government regulation could lead to decreased salaries for doctors. This hardly seems like a more
The Affordable Care Act, more commonly known as Obamacare, is a new health policy created by the American federal government. Its purpose is to make healthcare more affordable and friendly for the people. Unfortunately in some way that does not prove to be the case. It is becoming apparent that Obama may have made some misleading statements to help get the ACA put into action. The ACA is sprinkled with many flaws that call for a reform such as people’s current plans being terminated, high costs, and at minimum some people’s hours being cut by their employers.
The government says if there was universal health care payroll taxes would double. Also if universal health care came into effect the wait time for a doctor visit would nearly double. These are good points but the wait time does not make a difference, all that matters is that most people in America will have health care. Many say it is to costly and limit service but studies constantly show when well managed to provide quality care it delivers better health outcomes at lower costs. Using a single payer health care system it would cover everyone under a single plan. What single payer does is gives access to prevention, early prevention, reducing insurance overhead, reduce provider overhead, and bulk purchasing power. Access to prevention and early Intervention is recieving access to primary care and can catch illness before its serious and costly. Reducing insurance overhead will stop advertising and competion. Reducing provider overhead will stop doctors from spending some much time on paperwork and pay more attention to actually care. One payer can bargain for the best prices this is bulk purchasing
In the United States of America, people view health care as a product to be bought and sold. Therefore, anyone who could not avail the health care would not have any coverage. Without any form of health care, someone could not achieve their outstanding potential when sick. United States has spent so much money in trying to make this country as one of the best in the world. There is economic growth if the health of the citizenry is safeguarded. In this nation that is known for its wealth, it is very ironic to find people without proper insurance due to high cost and therefore are denied health care (Bergen, Fultz, Kessie, & Osburn, 2015). Society is denying them the right to live. Butts & Rich (2005) stated that in order to achieve social
The main ones are increasing taxation, the effect it will have on the type of government in America, it will limit the choice in medical care, cause a longer wait for care, and there is the issue of people that are already "grandfathered" into plans that they have already purchased. There are many people that are concerned about the constitutional authority of the country by forcing universal health care upon the citizens. Maybe people believe that by doing this, the government of the United States is heading more toward a democracy and less of a constitutional republic. The next major problem is how the government will pay for the program that provides healthcare to every citizen. The two options are, the government pays for it with their own revenue or the taxpayers money goes towards it. The government is already in debt, which leaves the cost up to the taxpayers money. There is no possible way for medical care to be free and taxes to go up. The other major concern is how the people who have already purchased health insurance, or are grandfathered into a plan, get reimbursed for their
Life is full of uncertainties. Risk lurks in every nook and corner of human life. In short, life is unpredictable. We need to be prepared for such circumstances. Leading a happy life, involves good planning and analysis for your personal health. Accidents do happen and you need to be prepared for such situations. In times of high health cost, you need to get covered for health risks.