In an era where people aren’t afraid of sharing their opinions, the topic of right to health care still brings up strong debates. The articles, Pro and Cons of Universal Health Care by Formosa Post and Promoting Health as a Human Right in the Post-ACA United States by Andrea S. Christopher and Dominic Caruso take opposing sides on the right to health care. Although both articles defended strongly, the second article contributed more detailed evidence in its argument promoting universal health care. The article siding with health care won simply because of its overall view on how the new health care system would improve the United States as a whole.“Universal is the type of health care plan where every member of society can receive health coverage..” (Formosa Post, Pros and Cons of Universal Health Care). Right to health care provides medical assistance to all legal citizens who need medical attention without questioning the patient in need. Although the opposing side stated “...universal health care systems suggests that a universal scheme may lead to enhanced access to care, improved efficiency and equity, and better health outcomes” (Christopher and …show more content…
With a society where healthcare is free, “people will work more when they live healthier lives which allow them to contribute as much as they can to the nation’s economy” (Formosa Post, Pros and Cons of Universal Health Care). Along the lines of helping the economy, “As of 2011, about 59.9% of Americans were enjoying health insurance through their employer in the private sector” (Formosa Post, Pros and Cons of Universal Health Care). Free health care will open doors for citizens to open small businesses freely without closing down due to fear of losing health care insurance, helping raise the self-employment rate in the United
The accessibility to health care due to the Affordable Care Act has saved so many lives, more than we can count. Furthermore, every beneficial concept has cons attached to it. The Affordable Care Act was also the cause of many workers losing their employment-based
Many Americans don’t want a free healthcare system to happen since they will be forced to pay more taxes. However, paying more taxes will ensure you and your family's safety and health in the long run. The first reason that healthcare should be free to everyone is that the unemployed people will benefit heavily. “Because of financial restraints, unemployed people suffer the most. They do not have any health insurance.”
The nature of the current debate surrounding the implementation of universal healthcare in America is troubling because it is comprised almost entirely of pragmatic arguments void of concern for the principles behind the project. Before one asks how much a thing will cost, how it will be organized, or whether “the uninsured” will benefit, one should ask whether enacting universal healthcare is in keeping with the values and principles of the American experiment. In other words, is universal healthcare good for America? Universal healthcare is not good for America.
However, when compared with other health care systems in the developed world, the U.S. is one of the few countries that doesn’t provide its citizens with universal coverage while also being the most costly (Dalen et al., 2015; Hirsch & Lyman, 2014). The individual mandate combined with provisions within the ACA guide the U.S. health care system towards universal coverage. Universal health care provides security to all people and it is in the best interest of public health. Despite the popular arguments made against the mandate, it is evident that it is not just economical but also, is in line with American values. The mandate ensures equitable health insurance for all which protects the rights of the American people to have access to quality health
The lack of health care for all in America is fundamentally a moral issue. The United States is the only industrialized nation that does not guarantee health care to all of its citizens. While other countries deem healthcare to be a basic right, the United States treats health care as a privilege (Universal Health Care). Healthcare is a fundamental right that should be guaranteed to all. A radical change in the current system and the implementation of a single payer universal healthcare system can provide healthcare access to all in the United States.
Healthcare is an important access we hold, but an issue is that not everyone can have that access to the healthcare they need. There are many arguments regarding the United States adopting a universal healthcare system. Although the universal system may reduce the quality of care the people receive, there are too many people not able to get any kind of care. Therefore a universal healthcare system would be more beneficial to the citizens of the United States than the limited access of care we have today.
Healthcare in the United States is in desperate need of reform. There are several rationales to further explain this proposition. As an illustration, the Declaration of Independence states our unalienable rights: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In other words, every individual should be entitled to healthcare as it preserves life and promotes the general welfare. The federal government should, therefore, enact a program of universal health to better protect and serve all of its citizens.
There are many governments outside of the United States that rely on a Universal Health Care System. Due to this being a very controversial topic, it is not uncommon to see many articles, papers and editorials written about it. Editorials are often written by authors that have opposing views on the subject, both hoping to argue and convince readers that they are correct. By evaluating two different editorials objectively, it is easy to determine which author made the best argument without taking a side. Writing an editorial argument is an effective way of convincing a reader of a certain viewpoint.
As the nation readies itself to make the transition from an Obama to Trump administration, Healthcare reform is at the top of the political agenda. Historically, healthcare reform proposals have been passionately debated with partisan politics, sometimes complicating or obfuscating attempts to reform. For example, in 1965, despite continued vocal opposition from the American Medical Association (AMA) and conservative Republicans, legislation establishing Medicare and Medicaid programs were signed into law under President Lyndon B. Johnson (Taylor, 2014). Most recently, of the 2010 Affordable Care Act (ACA) was adopted and subsequently implemented only after partisan divisiveness and bitter congressional fights. Despite its’ rocky history, health
Furthermore, the second editorial provides a brief glimpse into what will happen if a universal healthcare plan is instituted. This brief glimpse into a problematic future better justifies the claim stated in the second editorial. Editorial 2 more effectively argues its side and justifies its claims and reasons on the
Health care should not be considered a political argument in America; it is a matter of basic human rights. Something that many people seem to forget is that the US is the only industrialized western nation that lacks a universal health care system. The National Health Care Disparities Report, as well as author and health care worker Nicholas Conley and Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP), strongly suggest that the US needs a universal health care system. The most secure solution for many problems in America, such as wasted spending on a flawed non-universal health care system and 46.8 million Americans being uninsured, is to organize a national health care program in the US that covers all citizens for medical necessities.
The author of “ColoradoCare: [sci] Universal healthcare plan has democrats divided” is Josiah Hesse on Friday, May 20, 2016. The article “ColoradoCare” [sci] is slanted towards the supporting side of universal healthcare. The author only mentions democrats by name and hardly says anything about the republicans. However, you can also tell that the article is bias in the sense that he only talks about all of the politicians who are against the universal healthcare.
Universal Health care would eliminate the cost of monthly doctor visits, prescription refills, and emergency medical services. It would also greatly reduce some costs of surgery. This can be seen as an extreme benefit, especially for those who cannot afford those costs now. The opposing argument is that universal health care is also extremely expensive, and has to be paid for by a high tax rate. According to “Why Americans Can’t Have Universal Health Care Like Europeans”, countries with universal health care have a tax rate of about 45%.
Therefore, universal healthcare should be made available for every person regardless if they can afford it or not. Counterargument: P1: Universal healthcare would cause our taxes to go up.
In the presence of a free health service helps to boost the economy nation which is a lots of people will raise the standard of living by increase the economic productivity. People will contribute in the economy sector very well if they are healthy. From the source that I get, according to House research Department Universal Health Coverage an Economist Perspective 2007 the author says, health care costs may prevent some individuals from working or seeking higher earnings. Working harder to increase earnings may result in losing their subsidized coverage or having to pay more in premiums. So, the free healthcare for everyone will raise the standard which is can lead more to economic