Affordable Care Act Socialism

The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) is a healthcare program created by president Obama’s administration. The goal of the Affordable Care Act is to make sure every United States citizen has health insurance. The Affordable Care Act provides “affordable” health insurance plans to citizens that do not have any and make about $15,000 a year. While the idea of providing health insurance to the millions of American’s that cannot afford it is great, everything comes at a cost. According to Emily Miller, Obamacare is causing people’s health insurance premiums to rise by around 1 to 9 percent (Miller 15-15). Not only are insurance premiums rising, but ever since the Supreme Court declared the Affordable Care Act constitutional approximately 20 tax hikes have been approved (Battersby). All the aforementioned reasons are helping pay for Obamacare. Although providing health insurance for people that cannot afford it is important, the Affordable Care Act should be revoked because it will hurt the economy.

Long before the 1990s when Ms. Clinton fought for a Universal Healthcare system in America, the issue of America’s healthcare had been a political quandary. The enactment of the Republican administration’s Health Management Organization Act of 1973 was a weapon meant to address that crisis, yet, it did little to fix the problem. While the liberal Democrats are fighting for Universal Healthcare coverage for all Americans, the conservative Republicans are fighting to maintain the current private health insurance, however, with some revamping of the system, which preserves the capitalistic element of the status quo. The reason for the two opposing views stems from their differences in political ideologies, which theoretically is like pitting socialism against capitalism. While the liberal Democrats’ endorsement of Universal Healthcare system is socialistic in practice, the conservative Republicans’ fight to retain the private or market based plan is unarguably in support of their pro-capitalism stance. The truth, however, is that, though almost every American believes in capitalism, yet, almost none would vote to disband the Medicare and the Medicaid programs, both of which are socialistic. In that light, the argument of a pro-capitalist nation is negated, as we do already have a socialized healthcare program for the seniors and the poor. Extending that concept to include

Socialized medicine could make healthcare affordable, not only to the wealthy, but also to everyone else. According to Connect U.S., “the NHS ‘was set up on July 5th, 1948 to provide healthcare for all citizens, based on need, not the ability to pay’” (1). The NHS is Britain's National Health Service, and along with most of the rest of the world excluding America, they use socialized medicine as the standard of healthcare. A report by Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health revealed that “the UK’s socialized medical system performs better than the one in the US in terms of patient-reported perceptions” (Connectusfundadmin). This tells us that patients under a socialized medicine system are receiving better quality care at a better price. Health Care costs would also be lowered because prices wouldn’t be driven by supply and demand. Treatment costs fluctuate perpetually and vary from one city to

While the Affordable Care Act was implemented in 2010, the most significant changes in the healthcare system began in 2013 with the expansion of Medicaid. According to the ACA’s official website, the law’s main goals are to create cost efficient health insurance and medical services, as well as expand Medicaid so that the stated programs will be available to more Americans. (“Affordable Care Act (ACA)”). To do so, the ACA imposed many requirements on both sides of the health care system. The ACA has expanded federal regulations on private insurance providers by requiring that these companies cannot deny coverage based on the health of the beneficiary. The ACA has also established a marketplace for health insurance to be purchased by small businesses and individuals. Finally, the most noteworthy reform is the requirement for all Americans to purchase minimum coverage, or pay a penalty. However, those who cannot afford coverage and have “an income below 138% of the Federal Poverty Level eligible for Medicaid” will be paid for by the government (“The Affordable Care Act in the US”).

Fifty years ago if the reception on the television went bad, first you knocked on the side, then peered in back for bad vacuum tubes and finally tinkered with loose connections. Today we unplug and restart.

Socialized medical systems are designed to disregard the insurance industry and disregard income while providing health care for all. Healthcare in the United States is constantly changing and advancing, which requires the cost of health insurance to rise. The idea of socialized medicine is prominent, until the aspects of socialized medicine are brought to attention. Every aspect of a socialized health care industry is controlled and powered by the government; most doctors, nurses, medics and administrators are government employees, and the government decides when, where, and how services are provided. Even though socialized healthcare systems would save money, it is a prominent idea but not worth the problems because total government control over the way healthcare is distributed would result in complications of the citizens.

In 2010, congress enacted President Obama’s National Health Care Act; as a result, it allows Americans to receive affordable health care. President Obama’s National Healthcare plan, otherwise known as the Affordable Care Act, is anything but affordable. The Affordable Care Act is not affordable for citizens that are in the nation’s lower income brackets. The Affordable Care Act is a great government conscious decision for their citizens; however, the Affordable Care Act at the time of its inception was very fiscally irresponsible by our government. The Affordable Care Act must be affordable for Americans across multiple social and economic backgrounds and should take into account the ability to pay.

Social problems exist all around us, one that seems to be quite prevalent right now is the Affordable Care Act is also known as ACA or more commonly known as Obama Care, which is a derogatory term meant to lessen or negate the President who founded it. There are many issues with this particular act that it’s difficult to pinpoint just one. However, I feel as though the utmost obvious is the negative shadow that is cast upon the Affordable Care Act, this is the real problem. The greatest common insurance that is utilized through this plan is Medicaid, which is insurance that is issued by the state that you live in, and is determined by income (CMS.gov, 2013). The main objective of this policy is to provide medical care for the

First and Foremost , the Affordable Care Act also know as Obama Care was created so our citizens in the United States can all have affordable insurance for the people of this country. The Obama Care is very similar to Canada’s healthcare system. For example , the healthcare system in Canada system is a group of socialized health insurance plans that provides coverage to all Canadian citizens. It is publicly funded and administered on a provincial or territorial basis, within guidelines set by the federal government ( Canadian Health Care n.d. 2016 ). The United States wanted a similar health care system to make sure the americans who don’t have insurances have the ability to be insured .

Obamacare, also known as the Affordable Care Act, is an attempt by the Obama administration to provide affordable healthcare to all Americans. The act attempts to accomplish this feat by standardizing healthcare and making specific groups of Americans pay more for universal healthcare plans while other groups, mainly the unfortunate, are made to pay less. The system is designed to have wealthier Americans give more money to the national government, which in turn would lower the cost of healthcare for the unfortunate (Obamacare Facts). The problem with this system is that as the wealthy class loses money and the lower class gains money, eventually the classes will become equal. Obamacare could possibly turn America’s democratic society into a socialistic society.

Quality health care is an issue in America for everyone, despite our numerous tests and advances in technology. In his article, “Overkill,” Atul Gawande argues against a common assumption that our healthcare system is the best because of these medical advances. In fact, Gawande claims that our health care provides much unnecessary care that often causes harm and that costs a lot . He follows that claim by redefining “low-value care” as “no-value care” and provides considerable scientific data along with his own experience with his own patients to support his claim. He also states logical reasons by referring to expert authorities who critique our health care by viewing it from an economic perspective: like talking about information asymmetry where a doctor is more informed than the patient, thus the doctor has more power over the patient. All of these emphases strongly defend his controversial claim. But what stands out most is how Gawande uses several stories showing vastly different outcomes, depending on how informed the patient and doctor are including offering non invasive treatments. We need to explore how his unusual storytelling strategy exposes how surgeons and patients should care more about quality than the mere quantity of tests and what alternatives are available to change the unnecessary over testing and over-diagnosis which prevent good health care.

The health care system in the United States is one of the greatest concerns facing Americans today and is an issue both moral and economic in nature. Some think the system should stay, for all intents and purposes, the same. They believe that the right to healthcare is a stepping stone toward socialism, and that it is the responsibility of the individual to obtain health care. These are usually the more ideologically conservative citizens and politicians who believe that medicine should remain a free enterprise, not to be constrained by government interference. Then there are those who believe that healthcare is a right, and the federal government has a responsibility to make sure it is available to all citizens, not just those who can afford

The affordable Care Act implemented in March of 2010 by president Obama reform the way health care was previously run in the United States. The law went into effect, which allowed many Americans who did not currently have insurance and health care coverage to the ability to purchase coverage and access to health care. “ According to the CDC “ the affordable care act of 2010 is designed to provide access to coverage for previously uninsured Americans “ Center of Disease Control (2014).

Has the time come to consider socialized health care or some hybrid, why or why not. To help answer this question, we need understand what the definition of “socialized health care” means. According to definition found in Wikipedia (2016), “medical and hospital care for all at a nominal cost by means of government regulation of health care and subsidies derived from taxation.” The phrase “care for all at a nominal cost” sound like a goal that everybody wants, but when you add the phrase “by means of government regulation” after it, now the whole definition changes. The notion that government need to intervene to provide health care cost to all automatically instill in our psyche that our “freedom” is restricted to some degree. It says

Written about the structure and culture of biomedical heath care and a society that is attempting to prolong aging, Medicare funding, funding and development of research, and today’s definition of standard care, Sharon Kaufman brings to light the many dilemmas posed to the American health care system. Her ethnographic story, Ordinary Medicine: Extraordinary Treatments, Longer Lives and Where to Draw the Line reveals the booming biomedical research and clinical trials industry, the power held by Medicare and private insurance, and a rapidly changing standard of care once a medical treatment is considered reimbursable. This leads to systematic changes in the standard of care result in a massive amount of pressure being placed upon doctors, patients and families to make an ethically and medically sound decision in refusing or accepting therapy. Kaufman exposes the driving forces behind the expansion of biomedicine, society’s response to the growing industry on a personal and bureaucratic level.