Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
controlling health care benefits costs
medicare and medicaid difference bartleby
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: controlling health care benefits costs
Health care will shorten bankruptcy. It was said that over 50% bankruptcies are contributed from medical problems. Medical contributes 17% in bankruptcies. “This threatens the solvency of solidly middle-class Americans. They propose comprehensive national health insurance as a solution.” (Medical Bankruptcy: Myth Versus Fact) In 2008 politicians were used to show that the health care system needs to be changed. It needs to be changed so it can control costs and give more people coverage. “Debtors cited at least one of the following specific causes: illness or injury (28.3 percent of respondents), uncovered medical bills exceeding $1,000 in the past two years (27 percent), loss of at least two weeks of work-related income because of illness …show more content…
MRI, CT scan, or procedure is not always paid for by your health insurance either. Your health insurance always have to pre authorize before an expensive test. But when they authorize it your health insurance doesn’t always cover it. They can do this if your insurance feels that the test was not needed. What also aren’t paid for are travel vaccinations. Although your own health you need to get vaccines, when going on a vacation with tropical diseases they won’t cover those vaccines. If they are not a problem where you currently live then they will not pay for it. These are all health issues or situations that should be paid for but aren’t because of the choice by your health insurance (5 Surprising Things Not Covered by Health Insurance (About.com …show more content…
Since everyone will have the same rights and rules the administrative health care cost will be shortened. “Coverage would include all medically necessary services, including rehabilitative, long-term, and home care; mental healthcare, prescription drugs, and medical supplies; and preventive and public health measures.” The hospital will be less billed; instead the government will mail them their annual lump-sum payment. The government will be the administrator, no employees. This takes out the employers’ contributions to insurances, all individual premiums, co-pays, and deductibles and also relieves state and local government of all the medical coverage. Wallet biopsy will not be used anymore; wallet biopsy is fee for services for medical. Decisions about clinical would not be effected from insurances anymore. A global budget is what is going to be dealing with the expense. Hospitals would not get shut down because of unpaid bills, now that universal health care is active. “The General Accounting Office projects an administrative savings of 10 percent through the elimination of private insurance bills and administrative waste, or $150 billion in 2002. This savings would pay for providing medical care to those currently under served.” Doctors’ incomes would change. No one would need private insurance, which limits the billing to private insurances will be
On a global scale, the United States is a relatively wealthy country of advanced industrialization. Unfortunately, the healthcare system is among the costliest, spending close to 18% of gross domestic product (GDP) towards funding healthcare (2011). No universal healthcare coverage is currently available. United States healthcare is currently funded through private, federal, state, and local sources. Coverage is provided privately and through the government and military. Nearly 85% of the U.S. population is covered to some extent, leaving a population of close to 48 million without any type of health insurance. Cost is the primary reason for lack of insurance and individuals foregoing medical care and use of prescription medications.
The Lack of health insurance coverage is most often the result of a combination of things. These factors include employment status, financial conditions and even health problems.(Feldman 2012) These three things can been seen as reasons why coverage can be difficult to obtain. In most states, insurers may deny applicants for coverage completely. They often try to impose either a permanent or temporary existing condition that puts limitation on your coverage. some may even charge a higher premium based on your health status your occupation, and other personal characteristics . (Institute 2009) .For those people who consider themselves as self-employed who want to buy their own private health insurance, can be twice as expensive as that that is being offered through employers. (Feldman 2012)
The U.S. spending on health care is an outlier compared to other industrialized countries. On an individual basis heath care in the U.S is approximately double what other industrialized countries spend. On a total spend basis, the $3 trillion currently consumed in this sector represents the world’s fifth-largest economy. This high spending on healthcare is unsustainable in the long term. Businesses, individual consumers, and the government are consequently not insulated from the shrinking economic growth due to the ramifications of the high healthcare costs. In a global competitive market the U.S. business will lag behind other industrialized countries unless these high healthcare costs are curtailed. In addition, individuals, even those with insurance face the grim prospect of bankruptcy due to the high cost of care.
The first side to the health care system is the Single Payer system. Many European countries, and our neighboring country Canada, have this type of system. This system has every citizen put his or her money into a fund that would be controlled by a federal agency. That agency would then pay for the treatment. Private insurance companies would basically be die off. The difference from this and our current health care system...
In conclusion, there still needs to be a lot of work done to health care in the United States. Other nations provide universal health care to their citizens, but this would cause dilemmas in balancing two often conflicting policy goals: providing the public with equitable access to needed pharmaceuticals while controlling the costs. Universal health care probably would not work in the U.S. because our nation is so diverse and our economy is so complex. The system we have now obviously has its problems, and there is a lot of rom for improvement. HMO’s will still create problems for people and their medical bills, but they definitely should be monitored to see that their patients are receiving just treatment.
Every other country in the world that is on the same level as America industrially and developmentally offers universal health care to its citizens. Some Americans are worried about the rise in taxes if the government offers guaranteed care to everyone. The insurance companies will suffer, as well. But the sacrifice is more than worth it.
Health insurance, too many American citizens, is not an option. However, some citizens find it unnecessary. Working in the health care field, I witness the effects of uninsured patients on medical offices. Too often, I see a “self-pay” patient receive care from their doctor and then fail to pay for it. Altogether, their refusal to pay leaves the office at a loss of money and calls for patients to pay extra in covering for the cost of the care the uninsured patient received. One office visit does not seem like too big of an expense, but multiple patients failing to pay for the care they receive adds up. Imagine the hospital bills that patients fail to pay; health services in a hospital are double, sometimes triple, in price at a hospital. It is unfair that paying patients are responsible for covering these unpaid services. Luckily, the Affordable Care Act was passed on March 23, 2010, otherwise known as Obamacare. Obamacare is necessary in America because it calls for all citizens to be health insured, no worrying about pre-existing conditions, and free benefits for men and women’s health.
Universal healthcare: a term feared by many politicians due to the communist connotation, but is it really all that bad? Over 58 countries have some sort of universal health coverage, such as England and France which have single payer healthcare meaning the government provides insurance for all citizens and pays for all healthcare expenses. The United States of America has insurance mandated healthcare meaning the government requires all citizens to purchase insurance, usually provided through their jobs. In America, over 45 million people are uninsured, 20,000 of which will die by the end of the year compared to England or Frances were all residents, legal or not, are covered.
In 2012 without universal healthcare medicaid and children's healthcare took up about 21%of the nations federal budget. The increase of universal healthcare could increase the wait time for medical services, medicaid is an example of a federally funded single payer health care system, according to a 2012 GAO report 9.4% medicaid beneficiaries had trouble obtaining necessary care due to longer waits. in conclusion universal health care would not be beneficial over all because it can cause just as many issues as it helps
The healthcare systems that seem to be the most beneficial would be the Beveridge Model. The Beveridge model would allow people to receive healthcare by paying into just like social security. They wouldn’t even miss the money coming out of their pay checks and it would allow for everyone to have health insurance. By having this system, it would allow for hospitals and other physicians to have a set price or insurance they would have to accept. It would also take away all the confusion on what insurance does each doctor accept and whether or not you have coverage for a certain procedure. Everyone would have relatively the same plan which would allow everyone equal access to healthcare. According to the book “the United Sates healthcare is the
A universal healthcare system is a great idea in theory, but in actuality, no one has figured out a reasonable proposal for where the money should come from. Economists claim that more than 2 trillion dollars are spent on health care each year. That’s over $6,000 per person. It would be reasonable to assume that universal health care would cause the already grand cost of health care in the United States to increase even more. The most likely outcome is that taxpayers would have to pay into a large pool from which everyone would draw for their health needs. This would create several problems. First, it would raise taxes for everyone. It would also mean, fundamentally, that many people who choose a healthy lifestyle would be required to pay the same amount as people who choose to live an unhealthy lifestyle, which hardly seems fair. Finally, a universal healthcare system could lead to huge increases in unemployment. All of the Americans who are currently employed with private insurance companies could suddenly find themselves without work. Government regulation could lead to decreased salaries for doctors. This hardly seems like a more
Universal health care refers to any system of health care managed by the government. The health care system may cover different programs including government run hospitals and health organizations and programs targeted at providing health care. Many developed countries such as Canada and United Kingdom have embraced universal health care with the United States being the only exception. The present U.S health care system has often been considered inefficient in terms of cost control as millions of Americans remain uncovered. This has made it the subject of a heated debate characterized by people who argue that the country requires a kind of socialized system that will permit increased government participation. Others have tended to support privatized health care, or a combined model of private and universal health care that will permit private companies to offer health care for a specific fee. Universal healthcare has numerous advantages that remain hidden from society. First, the federal government can apply economies of scale in managing health facilities which would reduce health care expenses. Second, all unnecessary expenses would be eliminated by requiring all states to bring together all the insurance companies into a single entity whose mandate would be to provide health insurance to all people. Lastly, increased government participation will guarantee quality care, improve access to medical services and address critical problems relating to market failure.
One of the most commonly debated topics in recent American history has been that of health care. Would Americans be able to reap more benefits if individuals continue to be independent in their pursuits of health care, or would it be beneficial for all if the government introduced more regulations regarding health care, changing our system to resemble those of other developed countries? As more solutions are offered, it becomes harder for people to reach a consensus on the best way to approach this issue. Despite this, America must decide what system of healthcare will benefit the most citizens and improve the quality of life the most. It is becoming increasingly apparent that a universal healthcare system would be the most effective and
In many other countries the health care is government controlled and all citizens are provided government assisted health care. Most systems over in Europe are indeed government controlled and are taxed my wages. The United States government does not pay for most of its citizens healthcare in contrast. If you are fournate enough to afford insurance it's usually through your employer. In comparssion almost all government operated insurances provide better care for babies and pregant mothers than the United States system of health care. The United States system are more flexible than government aided systems though.
The main ones are increasing taxation, the effect it will have on the type of government in America, it will limit the choice in medical care, cause a longer wait for care, and there is the issue of people that are already "grandfathered" into plans that they have already purchased. There are many people that are concerned about the constitutional authority of the country by forcing universal health care upon the citizens. Maybe people believe that by doing this, the government of the United States is heading more toward a democracy and less of a constitutional republic. The next major problem is how the government will pay for the program that provides healthcare to every citizen. The two options are, the government pays for it with their own revenue or the taxpayers money goes towards it. The government is already in debt, which leaves the cost up to the taxpayers money. There is no possible way for medical care to be free and taxes to go up. The other major concern is how the people who have already purchased health insurance, or are grandfathered into a plan, get reimbursed for their