Universal Health Care System in America

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Arguments
Foreign experience
Significance
American experience
Conclusion
References

Introduction

Universal health care means the HC coverage which is expanded to all citizens. Universal health care programs differ broadly in their arrangement and funding tools, chiefly the extent to which they are openly funded. Characteristically, most health care charges are met by the citizens by the means of required health insurance or assessment.

Universal health care systems necessitate government participation, characteristically in the forms of legislation, permissions and ruling. Sometimes, government participation also entails directly managing the health care structure, but lots of countries use joint public-private systems to deliver universal health care.

Universal health care system is a form of government-made system in which every citizen has unhindered availability of diverse shapes of medical care. This is true even for those who do not have their personal resources to spend for them. While the citizenry may not be able to afford the expenditures, a large amount of these costs will come from taxes and insurance money. Countries of Western Europe were the first to demonstrate the utility of the universal health care systems by enforcing them in their countries in true letter and spirit.

Almost all the industrially advanced nations have coined their brand of the universal health care system, but the United States remains the single exception. The broader methods have been agreed upon by all these countries, but the structure for every country may be distinct. The systems also become different when the interference of government is added.

It is my personal opinion that the United States must own a universal health care structure. Even if the diseases are not infectious, the consequences may be crucial. America is in the range of these effects. Rationally speaking, a lively social surrounding is vulnerable to large numbers of people who are physically and mentally strained. The expenses for these hazards are huge. It will amount to unemployment to offer that America has a rigid human environment. The old melting pot has been turned into a pressure cooker. Medical expenditures are at the extreme for most people. Few can have the capacity for appropriate treatment.

Therefore, an essential amount of money is being dissolved out of the economy. “In the United States, people without insurance may live experiencing disease or pain, with conditions that prevent them from getting jobs or decent pay, putting many on a permanent poverty track. They have more difficulty managing chronic conditions — only two in five have a regular doctor ‑ leading to poorer health and greater cost” (Doug Pibel and Sarah van Gelder, Fall 2006: Health Care For All”).

Arguments

First of all, it is necessary to define that universal health care is a concept with a very wide range. There are scores of methods by which this system can be advantaged. However, the most common attribute of all these is that the citizenry has wide access to health care. The costs remain within their reach and even if this is not the case the government can come to their rescue. It has worked so well in other parts of the world that there has been persistent demand to enforce it in America too.

The elevated expenditures of profitable insurance are the confirmation that such a structure will become effectual. Millions of Americans are deprived of health insurance every year and in case they become ill or injured the expenditures of medical care may become the reason for their bankruptcy. The people who have high incomes are opposed to this idea for obvious reasons as it will become a drain on their amassed wealth.

Large segments of the population are without any shadow of health care and they need it. “At a time when businesses are facing increased competition and workers rarely stay with one company throughout their lives, we also have to ask if the employer-based system of health care itself is still the best for providing insurance to all Americans. We have to ask what we can do to provide more Americans with preventative care, which would mean fewer doctor’s visits and less cost down the road. We should make sure that every single child who is eligible is signed up for the children’s health insurance program, and the federal government should make sure that our states have the money to make that happen” (Senator Obama, The Time Has Come For Universal Health Care).

Currently, there are more than forty million people who do possess health insurance and this turns out to be a huge proportion of the American population. Still depressing is the fact that those who have this facility are not well quipped as they might ponder. There are many cases in which claims for life-saving have been refused. There are scores of tragedies spread everywhere. Those who oppose the universal health care system claim the opinion that these initiatives will be working to the disadvantage of the capitalist regulations that maintain our economy.

I think the objective of the economy dies down if we do not have the healthy people to cherish it. “In 2006, the number of Americans without health insurance coverage increased to 47 million up from 39.9 million just eight years ago. This includes 9 million children under the age of 19 and 12.6 million women of childbearing age. To many critics, it’s inexcusable that a country as wealthy and powerful as the United States does not provide comprehensive health care, particularly when many other industrialized capitalist democracies have proven that it can be done.

Advocates of a single-payer system under which a government-run organization collects all health care fees and pays out all health care costs ‑ argue that it would provide comprehensive care, improve the doctor-patient relationship and reduce costs” (E. Kelley, A Life of One’s Own: Individual Rights and the Welfare State).

There is no valued GDP if we go on decreasing the quality of life in our homeland. The insurance industry should have no other significant purpose than to save the lives of Americans. It is the only way to generate profits even at the cost of the lives of our citizens.

The opponents stress that dark times are surely bound to come if the health care system is given in the claws and clutches of socialism. The police system, education for children, home security are all heavily subsidized and in other words, socialized but nobody objects to these spheres of our lives. The whole community is offered services and everybody pays for all of these services, which are facilitated at the costs paid by every community member. The health care system which is the logical conclusion of all these services has become the exception.

Foreign experience

The countries which have this system have been able to amass huge taxes. “As the saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and preventing illness and disease costs a whole lot less than performing major surgeries or administering life-long treatments do. Even people who do have health coverage are often hesitant to visit their doctors, even for a basic check-up, because of the demands of deductibles and caps. If that element were removed, more people would go to have their suspicious lumps, their odd tingles, and their queasy feelings checked out before they turn into cancer, a stroke, or heart disease” (Bryan Belrad, The Case for Universal Health Care).

One can go on enumerating the benefits of the health care system and at the same time, the debits side must also be counted if any. I think there is nothing more important in the world than safeguarding our lives.

Significance

Health care is very significant for society and citizens and perhaps more than other services provided. Capital exercised on medical treatment is transferred to others, but that one is stuck with the industry and there is no proof that the huge expenditures are taking the shape of something becoming less costly. However, quite opposite things are happening which is that the higher prices are pressurizing the costs to maintain increasing upward trends. The situation is causing persistently difficult problems for the economy and the people no other damage can rival this damage in the comparative analysis. The causalities that result from this ignorance are massive and can outnumber those that result in many wars combined. Pharmaceuticals are especially very costly and since they count much in the system, lots of people are left without having any access to them.

Universal health care is in trend with a range of utilities in many parts of the world. Britain remained a world pioneer in the universal health care system. The system is working most effectively in Sweden. The universal health care system as a concept has been plagued with a conventional political position. The “Nanny State” (in “New Dimensions, 2007”) was sometimes taken as the ideological wish to safeguard things like health and literacy. This has done lots of harm to the Americans and to the whole of the world as well. Millions of people in America have health requirements even if some ideology likes it or not.

This is a very ludicrous state. Any party whether that is conservative or progressive has no right to think otherwise. Perhaps nobody has an ideological position, who is opposing it except enormously uncertain conception of business selling products which amounts to unbridled capitalism. What is the problem to some people if it is ensured that people have access to the health care system without paralyzing the economy? I think there is nothing ambiguous to comprehend the situation.

The universal health care system prescribes one condition that revenue has to be associated with it. Expenditures are hence to be workable. The PBS system as executed to the remaining health care is one option. The subsidy is often the norm of health insurance. There is no logic why the federal government or the states and the insurance industry cannot chalk out a scheme for health. After the burden is divided into small pieces, its impact can be undergone.

In America, this would be executed with a view to slash hits on state earnings which have become so obvious in the bigger states. Those expenses are likely to become heftier and thus unbearable and are good logic to be done something immediately in a state where it can be looked after. State taxes can be lost into the stratosphere. “Health care has become a major problem in the United States, the only industrial country without universal health insurance. In fact, over 46 million people (16% of the population) have no insurance at all. The cost of health premiums has become excessively high, averaging over $12,000 a year for a family of four, after rising at more than double the inflation rate for several years” (Linda Lewis Alexander, Judith H. Larosa, New Dimensions in Women’s Health).

American experience

America has the most intricate and progressive economy on the earth. It is also composed of the most demanding society. The fact that health care expenditures have been cutting the organs of the U.S. economy and society and doing the same with revenues for a long period of time is a spiteful call that even huge revenue is susceptible. I will stress even if universal health care takes away a dollar in terms of taxes, to shield a thousand in private and social costs; it makes up each and everything. I further think that the next generations will be flooded with many health issues and a blank cheque for this vital part of our lives mean a very dangerous scenario.

The argument really does not pertain to management or regulation but it is about realism which means to protect the lives of Americans and to give them a better quality of life. It is an advantage of nobody to persist with this system.

Even the drug companies and the medical profession cannot bear the brunt of the dangers of the capital scarce sector and extremely overburdened and drenched health system. In theory, things still work as services can still be facilitated. The services can feel overstretch as the capital required to keep them in function may no longer be available. It is also a problem for many countries in the world as they are no heaven for health care.

These countries have begun to face the problems with which America has been long familiar. This brings into the picture a very sad situation for the global economy and its consequences on trade are deadly. These would directly affect the American economy if similar huge expenditures begin taking away global capital as they have done in other places. If the fine has the gall and gumption to deal with this situation the rest of the world will follow suit.

Conclusion

There is no doubt to the fact that universal health care system is the need of the hour. Despite all arguments on the other side of the fence, the urgent need for such a system is all the more essential for saving American lives. There can be no bigger argument that the sanctity of life is suffering in the absence of such a system. If other nations can have this system working to the advantage of their citizenry why should we be kept deprived of its fruits?

Our next generations will be loaded with health problems and we must collectively do so something to leave a secure future for them so that they live here with all possible comfort. It will be a legacy of benevolent and right foresight which will be transferred from generation to generation. The credit side of the universal health care system outweighs its debit side by a very big margin and America will be lucky to have this one.

Finally, it is necessary to emphasize, that in spite of obvious merits, there are some essential disadvantages. Income taxes would enlarge and private insurance companies may be put out of the health care managerial industry. Most would not state that general health care should be an obtainable human right to all Americans and most would also concur that our contemporary structure is not working and we should all get joined on health care in the U.S. The universal national health care ponder will be with our community for an expected amount of time, or as a minimum until healthcare is attainable to more Americans, so expect this to be a topic for officials in any further elections.

References

Bryan Belrad, “The Case for Universal Health Care”. 2008. Web.

Doug Pibel and Sarah van Gelder, “Fall 2006: Health Care For All” YES!. Web.

E. Kelley, A Life of One’s Own: Individual Rights and the Welfare State. Cato. 1998.

Senator Obama, “The Time Has Come For Universal Health Care”. 2007. Web.

New Dimensions in Women’s Health, New Dimensions in Women’s Health. Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2007.

Click Here To Order Now!