“In 2018, 8.5 percent of people, or 27.5 million, did not have health insurance at any point during the year”; that is a large portion of the population that would not be able to receive care if they got injured or needed assistance (Berchick et al.). A change in the current healthcare policies need to be reviewed, but would the United States be an ideal candidate for universal healthcare, or would it be more problematic?
The main problem with the current healthcare system is how expensive it is to receive care. There are three main reasons as to why the United States has increasingly high healthcare fees. According to author Liebowitz, who is a professor of finance and managerial economics, the three main issues that are affecting the price of the healthcare industry in the United States are the overuse of medical resources, the excess paperwork and administrative actions that are required, and lastly the fear of hospitals getting sued for malpractice by patients. The healthcare industry has severely disconnected the financial aspect of care from the consumer. Most individuals today have some form of health insurance either through their employer or the government in the form of Medicaid or Medicare.
When individuals have low copayments, they are more likely to overuse medical resources and ask for care when they do not necessarily need it. This causes an overuse of medical resources and increase in insurance premiums and healthcare cost in general. The excess administrative costs come from all of the required documentation required by the government and by the health insurance companies. Lastly, the fear of getting sued by patients if there is an unsatisfactory outcome increases the cost of general healthcare. Because medical centers fear getting sued, they assign doctors and medical professionals tests and practice procedures in order to make sure they are safe from litigation if there were an accident to occur. This causes a waste of resources and money as many of the test and procedures are redundant and do not help the medical professional to learn new methods or fix mistakes (Liebowitz 78). All of these points increase the cost of healthcare and are the main reason as to why healthcare in the United States is so expensive compared to other countries around the world.
From looking at countries that have already adopted a form of universal healthcare, we can see real results and data to find out if universal healthcare is the correct solution in fixing the current system in the United States. “Canada now spends about $2,600 per resident per year less than we spend on healthcare costs in the United States.” Canada achieves this by setting strict budgets to healthcare centers and lowering the general cost to see physicians (Halvorson 82). Canada spends less money per person but that comes with the cost of higher wait times and worse medical equipment when compared to the United States. Because the United States has higher fees associated with care, they are able to afford newer equipment and can update their facilities more frequently. When a healthcare center in Canada is about to hit their budget limit, care starts to slow and that increases wait times for everyone in that area. Based on what we see from Canada, the system they use for healthcare would not work at all because of the current state the United States medical facilitates are in. The healthcare facilities in the United States would not be able to operate on a tight budget that the government provides because of the updated facilities and high-tech machines that they utilize to provide care to the population (Halvorson 83).
Many healthcare professionals and politicians have voiced their opinions on whether or not the United States should move to a universal healthcare system or stay the way it is. “Despite rising healthcare costs and repeated calls for universal healthcare, nine in ten U.S. healthcare leaders say that a primarily taxpayer-funded healthcare system, as in Canada and Britain, is not the best way to solve the nation’s healthcare problems (“Majority of U.S. Health Leaders Reject”).” This quote found in an article about healthcare spending proves that professionals in the industry of healthcare do not agree with switching the United States into a single payer healthcare system like Canada is. Instead the professionals in the industry instead recommended that the cost of healthcare be brought directly to the consumer in the form of increasing deductibles and copayments. This method would decrease overuse of healthcare materials and overall decrease the cost of healthcare because people would be less inclined to visit healthcare facilities if they have to pay more (“Majority of U.S. Health Leaders Reject”). If people have to take more financial responsibility when receiving care, they will be less likely to visit healthcare facilities for minute reasons and that will cut down on a waste of resources and lower the administrative cost of care because there will be less patients to care for and less paperwork to fill out.
In conclusion, universal healthcare is a major topic of discussion in the United States and many people that do not understand the topic believe that the issue is simple, and the government just needs to fund healthcare. Many industry professionals and economic experts have voiced their opinions on the subject and agreed that a single payer system would not be beneficial to the United States. Instead the United States should focus on lowering the cost of general care and providing a mix of public and private funding. In order to accomplish this task, the cost of healthcare needs to be more evenly shared between the consumer and insurance companies. Insurance companies overpay on healthcare because people overuse the facilities over minute things. This causes an increase in the cost of care because of administrative reasons and also because of the cost of materials and staff. Overall, the best way to reduce the cost of healthcare is to fix the current system we have in the United States instead of switching to whole other single payer system like Canada has.
