Healthcare : The United Kingdom 's And Brazil 's Systems That Are Failing

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.

A national health care system in the United States has been a contentious topic of debate for over a century. Social reformists have been fighting for universal health care for all Americans, while the opposition claims that a “social” heath care system has no place in the ‘Land of the Free’.

This movie went around the world to different countries to show the comparisons and differences in healthcare compared to each other and the U.S. The first country that was visited was the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom spends 8.3% of their GDP on healthcare. The citizens pay nothing for premiums, all of it is paid trough taxation. Some services require co-pay, but all young people and all elderly are exempt from drug co-pays. The United Kingdom calls their healthcare system “socialized medicine”; the government provides for and pays for all healthcare. The taxes that Britons pay gets distributed up to different healthcare providers. Since the United Kingdoms’ system is taxed,

Health care systems are different in every country around the world. There are four main components that complete a health care delivery system, described by Shi and Singh (2015) as the quad-function model, which includes insurance, financing, payment and delivery of care (p. 5). Along with the components of the quad-function model it is important to analyze a countries access to care, their health outcomes and how public health is integrated into the health care delivery system. The United States has a unique health care system that is like no other country. Great Britian, in contrast, also has a unique system that is very different than the United States.

Some health care costs may be paid by the patient and some health care costs may be covered by the universal health insurance program. There is perhaps no domain of economic activity that has generated more controversy in the United States than health care. In the advanced capitalist world, the United States is the only country within which the market plays a substantial role in the delivery of health care services; all other countries have one form or another of universal, publicly supported health care policies. In other intance if we differ from what is universal health from socialized heatlh. Some people refer to universal health care as socialized medicine. The term “socialized medicine” is primarily used for only in the United States by those who do not support the idea of universal health care(cite). Given the understanding that outside the US, is a different situation saying that the terms most used are universal health care or public health

In “The American Health Care Paradox”, Elizabeth H. Bradley and Lauren A. Taylor explore why the American health care system achieves mediocre results, despite spending a higher percentage of its gross domestic product than any other country in the world on health care. They explain that health care is more than just getting medical treatment, but there are social factors that affect a person 's health. The authors claim that more government spending on medical treatments is not the solution to the health care paradox, but we should focus more on social needs that have a greater impact on health. Case studies and interviews with physicians, other health care providers, and social service providers are used to support the authors’ claims. Though the authors do not explicitly state the path they believe the American health care system should follow, they give examples of foreign health care systems and domestic health care projects that may point in the right direction.

Countries that outperform the U.S. address these issues through universal health insurance, stronger primary care systems, payment approaches that minimize billing conflicts, and greater investment in social supports that lead to better health” (Squires,2017).

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

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 Canada or Great Britain, the government funds healthcare providers through taxes, and such a system is called social. The United States, on the other hand, being a profoundly capitalistic country, opted for another route and passed the burden of healthcare spending on private consumers as well as other

According to Squires and Chloe, the United States of America is considered as the greatest country in the world, with the largest economy, military powers, freedom of religion and speech, and one of the most successful democrats (2). However, the United States in the only western modernized nation that does not offer free healthcare services to all its citizens. Apparently, the costs of the healthcare services to the uninsured individuals in the US are prohibitive, where the insurance companies are interested in making higher profit margins than providing adequate health care to the insured (Squires and Chloe 4). These conditions are unexpectable and incompatible with the United States

Socialized medicine, when the healthcare is provided by the government, has many benefits including: reducing Americans’ financial struggles, improving the American economy, and allowing Americans to live healthier lives The American people must support the creation of socialized medicine in the United States. The United States currently lacks any true form of socialized medicine. Obamacare and Medicare for All, Bernie Sander’s proposal for socialized medicine, are the closet systems the United States has to socialized medicine. Obamacare was estimated to save tens of thousands of lives by expanding the number of people with access to healthcare and prohibiting insurance companies from discriminating against people with existing conditions (Alter).

This paper outlines the differences between the healthcare systems of the United States and the United Kingdom and expands on what that means for the health and wealth of the citizens of these countries. The U.S. and the U.K. are two different countries with two very different healthcare systems. The U.S. healthcare system is the Affordable Care Act, (ACA) and is the attempt by the U.S. to provide affordable healthcare coverage. he U.K. healthcare system is publicly financed and managed by the National Health Service, (NHS). The U.S. healthcare system is largely private sector whereas the healthcare in the U.K. is public. “The U.S. spends more on health care than any other country in the nation while the U.K. is a country that spends

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

Imagine a nation where one did not have to worry about deductibles, high monthly insurance rates, and being denied health care. Is this possible? Can the United States (U.S.) have this or is such a nation fiction? Michael Moore, known documentary filmmaker, set out on a mission. This mission was featured in his documentary, Sicko. The mission consisted of multiple rhetorical strategies to disclose the positive and negative effects of socialized health care. The great thing about this topic is that it’s applicable to a wide audience. From teenagers just starting to get health insurance, to people midway through their life that may have been burned by the industry, to seniors that need to still work in their eighties to pay off their health care bills. Moore gives good insight to both sides of the argument, and allows the audience to examine all factors. Through many accounts of Moore’s credibility, emotional connections, and pure facts; the audience is strongly convinced that the U.S. should move to a socialized health care system.