What Are The Pros And Cons Of Universal Health Care
1. I see many pros and cons to universal health care but with people dying because they lack health insurance, I cannot in good conscience say that the good wouldn't outweigh the bad.
Our deficit would increase by a large percentage but maybe it doesn't have to. Pharmaceutical companies charge outrageous amounts because they can. What if they couldn't? If the government was footing the bill I would imagine that they would expect fair prices. According to Healthcare ProCon in 2008 the UK approved any drug that provided someone with 6 months "good quality" life and cost under $15,150 was automatically approved whereas the more expensive drugs may not be. This would have to be modified. I don't want just any drug for my family so if that were the case I would need to do a great deal of research before allowing for treatment of myself or kids. …show more content…
Particularly for anything that may run in their family. This could bring earlier detection for some which would save lives. Those that do not have healthcare coverage are denied preventative care as well as care/medication for diseases such as asthma, heart disease, cancer, HIV and other diseases that without proper care can be fatal (Kornblum & Julian, 2012, pp. 33-34).
Many people scoff at the pay what you want system that Panera, for example, participates in. Though it doesn't make loads of money, it can make enough to sustain your company and complete the task at hand. Everyone wants to be rich but when your mother, or your child is the one who is sick and dying is it your bank account that comforts you or the knowledge that you have done/are doing everything that you can? Everyone deserves that
Our deficit would increase by a large percentage but maybe it doesn't have to. Pharmaceutical companies charge outrageous amounts because they can. What if they couldn't? If the government was footing the bill I would imagine that they would expect fair prices. According to Healthcare ProCon in 2008 the UK approved any drug that provided someone with 6 months "good quality" life and cost under $15,150 was automatically approved whereas the more expensive drugs may not be. This would have to be modified. I don't want just any drug for my family so if that were the case I would need to do a great deal of research before allowing for treatment of myself or kids. …show more content…
Particularly for anything that may run in their family. This could bring earlier detection for some which would save lives. Those that do not have healthcare coverage are denied preventative care as well as care/medication for diseases such as asthma, heart disease, cancer, HIV and other diseases that without proper care can be fatal (Kornblum & Julian, 2012, pp. 33-34).
Many people scoff at the pay what you want system that Panera, for example, participates in. Though it doesn't make loads of money, it can make enough to sustain your company and complete the task at hand. Everyone wants to be rich but when your mother, or your child is the one who is sick and dying is it your bank account that comforts you or the knowledge that you have done/are doing everything that you can? Everyone deserves that