Pros And Cons Of A Universal Healthcare System

The discussion on whether the United States should implement the universal care has become a big controversial issue. Especially in the recent election it was the center of topic, candidates debated over the Obama care and whether they should change it or keep it. Few days ago, the new president introduce a new healthcare which still not fully implemented yet since they must wait for the senate vote but as for now it is on its way to becoming the new heath system in the united states. But is this what the United States need or should they rather try implementing a more efficient system.

           Although there are many positives that go along with universal health care, there are negatives aspects as well. Some of the cons include longer wait times, caps on provider costs, and care that is unequally distributed. First of all, universal health care puts treatments in order based on priority. This means that those with conditions that are not life threatening get pushed back by those who are in urgent need of treatment. The outcome for many turn into long wait times. Along

Should the United States have Universal healthcare? Healthcare is a huge part of everyone's daily lives, from receiving check-ups, to acquiring care for medical emergencies such as cancer, or other things we can not control. Sadly, these services all cost an absorbent amount of money and a lot of insurance plans may not cover all services. Many people die from not receiving the proper medical care they need. High out of pocket expenses can force people into medical bankruptcies. These problems would not occur if the United States would have Universal Healthcare. Having Universal Healthcare will result in many benefits. Everyone would have access to the care they need, the government would pay for the services, and the services would still

Firstly, universal health care would allow for everyone to get the necessary care they need regardless of their medical problem or financial background. Privatised health care, like in the United States, can not be afforded by everyone as it is very expensive. In the documentary, SiCKO, by Michael Moore it explains how many American’s do not have health care and, “nearly 18,000 of them will die this year simply because there uninsured” (SiCKO, 2007). The fact that health care is so expensive leads to people trying to live without it preventing them from getting the care they need to live healthily. There are also some cases where people have to make choices because it is so expensive. For example, Rick in the documentary SiCKO cut off

Although it does mean that citizens will have medical coverage and financial protection. The coverage is not free. Before the healthcare laws were revisited and subsequently changed the uninsured often sought care and without the ability to pay that cost was taken by the insured. As a result this caused their premiums to rise. Having access to medical coverage would then encourage citizens to inquire about preventive measures. In doing so treatments would become less invasive if the illness is diagnosed in its early stages. Universal Healthcare is a moral and just obligation, by promoting the health of our citizens we then promote our infrastructure as well.

It is really hard to say whether or not Universal healthcare is a good idea. There are good and bad parts to this plan. It is hard to just get rid of it and start something new when so many people are currently taking advantage of the plan now. Everyone has the right to have healthcare, and we just need to figure out how everyone can afford it without it hurting the country.

Despite people’s fears that a universal healthcare approach would cost them more money, the truth is it would cut overall healthcare spending by billions of dollars yearly.

Next, I will discuss the opposing side of the argument.people and articles that oppose the statement made above say that the idea will not reduce prices and the quality of the health care they are receiving will decrease.

Universal healthcare in the U.S. would be a bad idea for the reason that the government would have to spend more money, which means that the American people would have to pay higher taxes than we already do. In the U.S.A. the public pays $4,103.82 per person and the private cost per person is $4,609.18 which put together is more than $8,000.00 dollars per person.If you are to have universal health care in America government spending would have to increase. But you can't just take a country where the government spends about 47% of the health care cost in the U.S. to a single-payer. Universal health care, government spending would have to increase and if government spending increased taxes would be higher.

Firstly, offering universal programs will make sure that everyone gets the benefits they need; however, this can be seen as both a positive and negative outcome, depending on who it is effecting. The people who need it the most will get what they need. For example, the poor and working class needing free health care and other universal benefits, but the universal system also provides the middle class, upper middle class, and top 1% classes these same benefits even though they make a greater income than the poor and working class (Nelson, 2004). This could make it more costly for the government to provide these benefits, making it necessary to raise taxes, or to implement new taxes to pay for the program. It may even cause families that do need assistance to ask why the “rich” are getting the benefits without paying for them causing an uproar in the

The wait time in a hospital for an operation is also effected by over population. In the United States there is already about a 2 hour wait time in each hospital that you go to (Mortal Peril). Adding a universal health care system would only cause that time to increase. There are some cases where the operation cannot be delayed because of excessive bleeding or a lady about to give birth. Both of these examples need to be treated within a certain amount of time or the patient could possibly die. The graph below shows how other countries wait times with a universal healthcare system compare to the United

The United States is one of the only remaining developed countries that does not provide Universal Health Care. Universal Health Care supplies all of a countries residents with free health care, meaning that going to the doctor and receiving treatment costs the individual nothing. Introducing Universal Health Care coverage would cut insurance companies out of the health coverage picture. Universal Health care will leave doctors with one focus, treating the patient to the best of their abilities. Universal Health Care should be implemented in to the American Health Reformation Plan.

Opponents of the universal healthcare system have several concerns about its implementation. First is the cost. The funding for the new system would most likely come from further taxation or a mandatory premium, which will place a strain on many Americans budgets. Additionally, the federal government does not seemed to be any better equipped to administer a healthcare system then the private sector is. The government will be exposing itself to legal liabilities as they are likely to face malpractice suits. Patient/doctor flexibility will become limited if the government mandates procedures. Finally, with a centralized system, our health records and other pertinent personal information will be administered by the government, leading to the possibility of a likely confidentiality breach.

Also, everyone would be equal, no one would have better health care. This would help people and it would pretty much be a peacemaker. But since everyone has health care, people would go to the doctor for reasons that aren?t as important as others. This would also mean the wait for check-ups, surgeries, and visits at the hospital would be extremely long. ?Health tourists? fly to countries such as India, Turkey, Hungary, Germany, Malaysia, Poland and Spain to have surgeries performed without a wait. Doctors estimate that by the end of the decade, patients in Britain would be flying to places as far as South Africa and South America to have surgeries performed. People seem to be willing to pay extra money to be cured. Many patients in America say they would have died waiting to have their surgery. People like Donald Hilgendorf tell those wishing for universal health care to be careful. His doctor told him he should have a very serious and life-threatening surgery. He thought about what he should do and decided to get a second opinion and asked another clinic. They said he shouldn't do the surgery. He later found out that someone went ahead with the surgery and they died within months. So if there was universal health care in the country, no one would be able to get a second opinion. And thanks to a second opinion, a man lived.

A big argument against universal healthcare stems from the impatience and selfishness we embody as a society. For some people, long and dreadful wait times are the greatest socialism-induced evil possible. In a universal healthcare system, these extended wait times exist as the byproduct of giving everyone the equal opportunity to receive care. With more money going towards doctors and hospitals, it’s possible to cut back on these wait times but despite this it is still a more beneficial than not being able to receive a service at all. This happens in the United