The Universal Healthcare System

One of the most commonly debated topics in recent American history has been that of health care. Would Americans be able to reap more benefits if individuals continue to be independent in their pursuits of health care, or would it be beneficial for all if the government introduced more regulations regarding health care, changing our system to resemble those of other developed countries? As more solutions are offered, it becomes harder for people to reach a consensus on the best way to approach this issue. Despite this, America must decide what system of healthcare will benefit the most citizens and improve the quality of life the most. It is becoming increasingly apparent that a universal healthcare system would be the most effective and

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

Jenna Flannigan of healthline.com addresses this;
“After World War II, it was straightforward for other countries to move from minimal coverage to universal programs because they had few private interests to contend with. Americans, on the other hand, had a vested interest in their private system. Employers and employees wanted to keep insurance as a tax-free job perk, while healthcare providers wanted to protect their income.”
Now, many see this long-held tradition as an integral part of American philosophy. However, there is no need to hold on to such an antiquated moral. The United States needs to adapt to offer the best to its citizens. In sum, America needs to reevaluate the status quo surrounding medical care. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the current model only benefits a select few and causes insufferable costs for the rest of the world. If there is no reform for these issues, money will continue to be siphoned directly into the pockets of large, for-profit companies that benefit from the strife of