Nearly 50 million Americans are currently without health insurance, and many with insurance are still struggling to pay their medical bills. Everyone agrees that healthcare should be accessible to all, but the debate still rages on as to whether a universal system would be a wise or realistic solution. Is universal healthcare the remedy for what ails America?
Whenever a government attempts to guarantee a good or service such as health care as a "right", it must also necessarily control it, if only to keep costs down. If the government lets people have as much health care as they want, then the system will quickly go bankrupt.
In a free market, individuals, providers, and insurers decide how health care is allocated based on mutual self-interest. In contrast, in a system of universal health care, the government decides who gets medical care and what sort. Countries like Canada typically use waiting lists and rationing to keep costs down. A Canadian woman who feels a lump in her breast may wait months before she gets the surgery and chemotherapy she needs, with tumor cells multiplying with each passing week. An American woman can get the care she needs within days.
In countries with "universal health care", the allocation of resources and services is ultimately determined by politicians and bureaucrats, not by physicians and patients. Far from being a "right", health care becomes a privilege dispensed by the government on the government's terms.
Next Argument
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
Expert Verified
