Cost Of Healthcare Research Paper

The economics of healthcare is not at all simple. What you put in is certainly not necessarily indicative of what you get out, as shown by the striking discrepancy between what we pay and what we get out of our healthcare system. This is demonstrated further by comparing our system to those of France and Italy, who come in first and second, respectively, in WHO’s international ranking of healthcare systems (“World Health Organization’s Ranking of the World’s Health Systems”). Counter to what many Americans may believe, a number of European nations do not have completely socialized medicine.

Globally, the United States has one of the largest and most convoluted healthcare systems, whereas universal healthcare coverage seems extremely farfetched. Annually, the US spends over $3 trillion on healthcare. Nevertheless, we have the worst health outcomes when compared to other industrialized countries. As stated by Anja Rudiger (2008), “Recent data suggest that around 101,000 deaths a year can be attributed to the underperformance of the US healthcare system.” Thus, the United States’ healthcare system greatly relies on revenue. Both funding and the distribution of services are commercially structured and held accountable by investors to increase financial gains. According to Andrew Jameton and Jessica Pierce (1997), “the US healthcare system increasing appears to have

Health care spending in the United States of America as a percentage of the economy has reached astonishing heights, equating to 17.7 percent. This number is shocking when compared to other counties; in Australia health care is 8.9 percent, in United Kingdom 9.4 percent, in Canada 11.2 percent. If the American health care system were to hypothetically become its own economy, it would be the fifth-largest in the world. While these statistics sound troubling, they lead us to look for answers about the problems surrounding our system. The first health insurance company was created in the 1930s to give all American families an equal opportunity for hospital care and eventually led to a nationwide economic and social controversy that erupted in the 1990s and continued to be shaped by the government, insurance companies, doctors, and American citizens. In this paper, I will go in to detail about the various opinions regarding the controversy, the history behind health insurance companies, and the main dilemmas brought out by the health care crisis. Greedy insurance companies combined with high costs of doctor visits and pharmaceutical drugs or the inefficient hospitals all over America can only describe the beginning to this in depth crisis. Recently, the United States health care industry has become know for the outrageous costs of insurance models, developments of various social and health services programs, and the frequent changes in medicinal technology.

Although the financial constraint was one of the initial triggers that made government to move toward privatization of health care, the argument of those who oppose to privatization remains at the prediction of future damages to the health care system caused by the privatization, not about the resolution of financial crisis. (Barkun, 2008; CBC, 2006; CNA, 2013; Deber, 2013; McDonald & McIntyre, 2014; ONA,

The healthcare system in the United States is a system composed of many private insurance companies who act independently from one another. These companies make their money through premiums which are paid by the insured; therefore a major part of the healthcare system is privately funded. This type of market is considered to be an imperfect market because it does not meet the true requirements of a free market where there is unrestrained competition between providers. In our healthcare system there is an absence of a central agency to govern healthcare. There are multiple payers and third party insurers serving as intermediaries between financing and the delivery of healthcare. The United States has a multi-payer, heavily private system in which thousands of private insurance companies are responsible for paying some claims, while federal and state

An issue that is widely discussed and debated concerning the United States’ economy is our health care system. The health care system in the United States is not public, meaning that the states does not offer free or affordable health care service. In Canada, France and Great Britain, for example, the government funds health care through taxes. The United States, on the other hand, opted for another direction and passed the burden of health care spending on individual consumers as well as employers and insurers. In July 2006, the issue was transparency: should the American people know the price of the health care service they use and the results doctors and hospitals achieve? The Wall Street Journal article revealed that “U.S. hospitals,

One of the issues that is widely discussed and debated concerning the United States economy is the healthcare system. Unlike in the majority of developed and developing countries, the healthcare system in the United States is not public, meaning that the state does not provide free or cheap healthcare services. This paper addresses many of the factors contributing to the rising cost of healthcare.

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 title of the book being reviewed is Critical Condition: How Health Care in America Became Big Business and Bad Medicine written by Donald Barlett and James Steele in 2004. This title explains what will be described in the book; how health care was transformed into more of a business and reduced the quality of care to the communities served. The main audience was to Americans in general. The purpose of this book was to show Americans the flawed health care system and explain how it grew out of control. The quality has decreased significantly, access to care has been restricted by the insurance moguls and lack of paying providers. Lastly, the cost of going to see a provider for any treatment has skyrocketed while the economy was unstable. The argument was that changing United States health care to a single-payer system will benefit Americans with better, more quality care and also reduce cost overall by eliminating private insurers.

Affordable healthcare for citizens remains at the forefront of debate for American policymakers and the complex network of privatized institutions, which provides said healthcare for those fortunate enough to afford such coverage. According to data provided from the World Bank, an assessment of generated revenue shows that the United States generates 17.1% of its GDP on health expenditures (data.worldbank.org 2017). There looms the question of: How can a nation with one the highest percentages of GDP stemming from healthcare offer free, or very low cost, healthcare? It is

Healthcare in the United States is rooted in the private sector. The private sector directly funds 56% of the expenditures through private health insurance, household expenditures and copays, and other private expenditures. (CMS, 2014) The US healthcare system can thank the private sector for providing much strength such as new diagnostic technologies, innovative treatments and procedures, and dynamism. American hospitals and physicians are regarded internationally as being of high quality. Americans can also be proud that the physician- patient relationship is among the most trusted and valued relationships in the country. By allowing the private sector to take a lead role in the healthcare system, the United States values

Nationalized health care is cost effective because more healthy people are buying into health insurance, helping to pay for the money insurance companies will have to spend on a chronically ill population. Moreover, increased federal subsidies are also helping the poorest afford premium prices. 86% of those who participated in the exchanges set up by the ACA received a subsidy. Increased affordability under the ACA has led to the smallest growth in health care spending in over 50 years (Vaida). Nationalized health care leads to greater efficiency in the health care system and was found by the CBO to actually reduce costs. Additionally, the system of the ACA reduces premium prices by supporting competition through state and federal exchanges that directly pit private plans against each other and against a public option. This system is also key because it prioritizes efficiency. Hospitals are financially incentivized to provide high-quality care. Our current health care has shifted towards avoiding long-term, costly health complications through prevention: “The cost-cutting sections contain provisions designed to essentially reengineer health care to favor efficient, effective treatments and preventive medicine over expensive but relatively ineffective services”

The healthcare system plays a key role in the economic stability of our country, as every year trillions are spent in attempt to combat disease and health issues that plaque humanity. As it makes up a significant amount of the expenditures in the economy, so the costs associated with health care of those in pain from illness and injury, including lost productivity, increased need of assistance in living and also the cost of death in some cases, is important to the economic stability and over all standard of living in our country. The key to economic prosperity is balancing the need for care with the costs of illness to keep as many people healthy and well without breaking the bank of collective society. The costs of healthcare have been increasingly problematic in recent years with so many issues surrounding the current system. With the “total health care spending in the United States expected to reach $4.8 trillion in 2021, up from $2.6 trillion in 2010 and $75 billion in 1970, meaning that health care spending will account for nearly 20 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), or one-fifth of the U.S. economy, by 2021” (Aetna). With this in mind it is apparent that as we look at the trillion-dollar industry of the medical community it seems that it needs to be a major focus of our nation as a whole and with the many issues come many creative solutions. First let us analyze the reasons behind the current cost and the major problems facing this industry and than discus what

In US healthcare, the open market has provided us a situation where we consume twice as abundant as other developed countries but end up at the low end of health status. That arise a market failure in medical markets, and there must be some particular steps taken for reconstructing the United States health care system to avoid market failures in such a prominent sector. In fact, the rising medical costs in the nation appears to influence negatively on the medical markets across the land, the role of government is to reform heath care system, pass laws, and regulations that should reduce the cost and provide the care to all to prevent such market failures. However, there are certain other recommendations implemented by many regarding mitigating

Many have the believed that health care is inherently different from other industries and cannot operate in a normal market. Most people are of the view that government regulations however substandard it maybe, seems better than a dysfunctional marketplace to allocate resources ineffectively. It is prudent that the health care system become market driven, this is because free market will make the health care system inefficient for all.