essay government should provide health care

Point Turning Point: the Case for Universal Health Care

An argument that the COVID-19 pandemic might be the turning point for universal health care.

Why the U.S. Needs Universal Health Care

As we all grapple with our new reality, it's difficult to think of anything beyond the basics. How do we keep our families safe? Are we washing our hands enough ? Do we really have to sanitize the doorknobs and surfaces every day? How do we get our cats to stop videobombing our Zoom meetings? Do we have enough toilet paper?

Win McNamee | Getty Images

The more we read the headlines, the more we feel the need to do something, or at least say something. Change is happening – ready or not. Maybe talking about some of these important issues can lead to action that will help us steer out of this skid.

Historically, Americans have found ways to meet their circumstances with intention, moving in mass to make heretofore unimaginable change that has sustained and improved our lives to this day. The Great Depression lead to the creation of the New Deal and Social Security. The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire brought about change in labor conditions. The Cuyahoga River fire lead to the founding of the Environmental Protection Agency.

Could the COVID-19 pandemic be the turning point for universal health care? We can't think of a more propitious time. In the first two weeks of April, 5.2 million Americans filed for unemployment. Economists believe that 30% unemployment is possible by fall. For most Americans, our health care is tied to our employment, and because of this, millions of Americans are losing their health care just when they may need it the most. Economists predict that health insurance premiums will likely increase by 40% in the next year due to less payers and more who are in need of care and the eventual collapse of private health care insurance .

Our current circumstances have illustrated the need for universal health care in a way that is obvious and undeniable. Below we have listed the most frequent arguments in opposition followed by an evidence-based rebuttal.

1. Point: "Governments are wasteful and shouldn't be in charge of health care."

Counterpoint: In 2017, the U.S. spent twice as much on health care (17.1% of GDP) as comparable Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development countries (OECD) (8.8% of GDP), all of whom have universal health care. The country with the second highest expenditure after the U.S. is Switzerland at 12.3%, nearly 5% less. Of all these countries, the U.S. has the highest portion of private insurance. In terms of dollars spent, the average per capita health care spending of OECD countries is $3,558, while in the U.S. it's $10,207 – nearly three times as costly.

Bottom line: Among industrialized countries with comparable levels of economic development, government-provided health care is much more efficient and more economical than the U.S. system of private insurance.

2. Point: "U.S. health care is superior to the care offered by countries with universal health care."

Counterpoint: According to the Commonwealth Health Fund , in the U.S., infant mortality is higher and the life span is shorter than among all comparable economies that provide universal health care. Maternal mortality in the U.S. is 30 per 100,000 births and 6.4 per 100,000 births on average in comparable countries, which is nearly five times worse.

In addition, the U.S. has the highest chronic disease burden (e.g., diabetes, hypertension) and an obesity rate that is two times higher than the OECD average. In part due to these neglected conditions, in comparison to comparable countries, the U.S. (as of 2016) had among the highest number of hospitalizations from preventable causes and the highest rate of avoidable deaths.

The Peterson-Kaiser Health System Tracker , which is a collaborative effort to monitor the quality and cost of U.S. health care, shows that among comparable countries with universal health care, mortality rate is lower across the board on everything from heart attacks to child birth. The U.S. also has higher rates of medical, medication and lab errors relative to similar countries with universal health care.

Bottom line: With our largely privately funded health care system, we are paying more than twice as much as other countries for worse outcomes.

3. Point: "Universal health care would be more expensive."

Counterpoint: The main reason U.S. health care costs are so high is because we don't have universal health care. Unlike other first world countries, the health care system in the U.S. is, to a great extent, run through a group of businesses. Pharmaceutical companies are businesses. Insurance companies are businesses. Hospital conglomerates are businesses. Even doctors' offices are businesses.

Businesses are driven to streamline and to cut costs because their primary goal is to make a profit. If they don't do this, they can't stay in business. It could mean that in the process of "streamlining," they would be tempted to cut costs by cutting care. Under the current system, a share of our health care dollars goes to dividends rather than to pay for care, hospitals are considered a "financial asset" rather than a public service entity and a large portion of their budgets are dedicated to marketing rather than patient care.

Given all these business expenses, it shouldn't be surprising that the business-oriented privately funded health care system we have is more expensive and less effective than a government provided universal system. In addition, for the health care system as a whole, universal health care would mean a massive paperwork reduction. A universal system would eliminate the need to deal with all the different insurance forms and the negotiations over provider limitations. As a result, this would eliminate a large expense for both doctors and hospitals.

The economist Robert Kuttner critiques the system this way: "For-profit chains … claim to increase efficiencies by centralizing administration, cutting waste, buying supplies in bulk at discounted rates, negotiating discounted fees with medical professionals, shifting to less wasteful forms of care and consolidating duplicative facilities." As he points out, "using that logic, the most efficient 'chain' of all is a universal national system."

Evidence to support these points can be found in a recent Yale University study that showed that single-payer Medicare For All would result in a 13% savings in national health-care expenditures. This would save the country $450 billion annually.

Bottom line: Universal health care would be less expensive overall, and an added benefit would be that health care decisions would be put in the hands of doctors rather than insurance companies, which have allegiances to shareholders instead of patient care.

4. Point: "I have to take care of my own family. I can't afford to worry about other people."

Counterpoint: It is in all of our best interests to take care of everyone. Aside from the fact that it is the compassionate and moral thing to do, viruses do not discriminate. When people don't have insurance, they won't go to the doctor unless they're gravely ill. Then, they're more likely to spread illness to you and your family members while they delay getting the care they need.

In addition, when people wait for care or don't get the prophylactic care then need, they end up in the emergency room worse off with more costly complications and requiring more resources than if they had been treated earlier. Taxpayers currently cover this cost. This affects everyone, insured or not. Why not prevent the delay upfront and make it easy for the patient to get treatment early and, as an added bonus, cost everyone less money?

In addition, the health of the economy impacts everyone. Healthy workers are essential to healthy businesses and thus a healthy economy. According to the Harvard School of Public Health , people who are able to maintain their health are more likely to spend their money on goods and services that drive the economy.

Bottom line: The health of others is relevant to the health of our families either through containment of infectious diseases such as COVID-19 or through the stability of the economy. Capitalism works best with a healthy workforce.

5. Point: "Entrepreneurship and innovation is what makes the U.S. a world leader."

Counterpoint: Imagine how many people in the U.S. could start their own businesses or bring their ideas to market if they didn't have to worry about maintaining health care for their families. So many people stay tethered to jobs they hate just so their family has health care. With workers not needing to stay in jobs they don't like in order to secure health insurance, universal healthcare would enable people to acquire jobs where they would be happier and more productive. Workers who wanted to start their own business could more easily do so, allowing them to enter the most creative and innovative part of our economy – small businesses.

In his book, "Everything for Sale," economist Robert Kuttner asserts that it's important to understand that businesses outside of the U.S. don't have to provide health care for their employees, which makes them more competitive. From a business point of view, American companies, released from the burden of paying employee insurance, would be more competitive internationally. They would also be more profitable as they wouldn't have to do all the paperwork and the negotiating involved with being the intermediary between employees and insurance companies.

Bottom line: Unburdening businesses from the responsibility of providing health insurance for their employees would increase competitiveness as well as encourage entrepreneurship and innovation, and allow small businesses room to thrive.

6. Point: "The wait times are too long in countries with universal health care."

Counterpoint: The wait times on average are no longer in countries with universal healthcare than they are in the U.S., according to the Peterson-Kaiser Health System Tracker . In some cases, the wait times are longer in the U.S., with insurance companies using valuable time with their requirements to obtain referrals and approvals for sometimes urgently needed treatments. On average, residents of Germany, France, UK, Australia, and the Netherlands reported shorter wait times relative to the U.S.

Bottom line: Wait times are longer in the U.S. when compared with many countries with a universal health care system.

7. Point: "My insurance is working just fine, so why change anything?"

Counterpoint: A comprehensive study conducted in 2018 found that 62% of bankruptcies are due to medical bills and, of those, 75% were insured at the time. Most people who have insurance are insufficiently covered and are one accident, cancer diagnosis or heart attack away from going bankrupt and losing everything. The U.S. is the only industrialized country in the world whose citizens go bankrupt due to medical bills. And, if you survive a serious illness and don't go bankrupt, you may end up buried in bills and paperwork from your insurance company and medical providers. All of this takes time and energy that would be better spent healing or caring for our loved ones. Besides, we don't need to abolish private health insurance. Some countries like Germany have a two-tiered system that provides basic non-profit care for all but also allows citizens to purchase premium plans through private companies.

Bottom line: Private insurance does not protect against medical bankruptcy, but universal health care does. The residents of countries with universal health care do not go bankrupt due to medical bills.

8. Point: "I don't worry about losing my insurance because if I lose my job, I can just get another one."

Counterpoint: We can't predict what will happen with the economy and whether another job will be available to us. This pandemic has proven that it can all go bad overnight. In addition, if you lose your job, there is less and less guarantee that you will find a new job that provides insurance . Providing insurance, because it is so expensive, has become an increasingly difficult thing for companies to do. Even if you're able to find a company that provides health care when you change jobs, you would be relying on your employer to choose your health plan. This means that the employee assumes that the company has his or her best interests in mind when making that choice, rather than prioritizing the bottom line for the benefit of the business. Even if they're not trying to maximize their profit, many companies have been forced to reduce the quality of the insurance they provide to their workers, simply out of the need to be more competitive or maintain solvency.

Bottom line: There are too many factors beyond our control (e.g., pandemic, disability, economic recession) to ensure anyone's employment and, thus, health care. Universal health care would guarantee basic care. Nobody would have to go without care due to a job loss, there would be greater control over costs and businesses would not have to fold due to the exorbitant and rising cost of providing health insurance to their employees.

9. Point: "Pharmaceutical companies need to charge so much because of research and development."

Counterpoint: It's usually not the pharmaceutical companies developing new drugs. They develop similar drugs that are variations on existing drugs, altered slightly so that they can claim a new patent. Or they buy out smaller companies that developed new drugs, thus minimizing their own R&D costs. Most commonly, they manufacture drugs developed under funding from the National Institutes of Health, and thus, the tax payers are the greatest funder of drug development via NIH grants provided to university labs.

Oddly, this investment in R&D does not appear to extend any discount to the tax payers themselves. In "The Deadly Costs of Insulin, " the author writes that insulin was developed in a university lab in 1936. In 1996, the cost of a vial of insulin was $21. Today, the cost of a vial of insulin could be as much as $500, causing some without insurance to risk their lives by rationing or going without. The cost of manufacturing the drug has not gone up during that time. So, what accounts for the huge increase in price? In " The Truth About Drug Companies ," the author demonstrates that drug companies use the bulk of their profits for advertising, not R&D or manufacturing. A universal health care system would not only not need to advertise, but would also be more effective at negotiating fair drug prices. Essentially, the government as a very large entity could negotiate price much more effectively as one large system with the government as the largest purchaser.

Bottom line: Taxpayers contribute most of the money that goes into drug development. Shouldn't they also reap some of the benefits of their contribution to R&D? Americans should not have to decide between their heart medication and putting food on the table when their tax dollars have paid for the development of many of these medications.

10. Point: "I don't want my taxes to go up."

Counterpoint: Health care costs and deductibles will go down to zero and more than compensate for any increase in taxes, and overall health care needs will be paid for, not just catastrophic health events. According to the New York Times , “…when an American family earns around $43,000, half of the average compensation when including cash wages plus employer payroll tax and premium contributions, 37% of that ends up going to taxes and health care premiums. In high-tax Finland, the same type of family pays 23% of their compensation in labor taxes, which includes taxes they pay to support universal health care. In France, it’s 2%. In the United Kingdom and Canada, it is less than 0% after government benefits.”

Bottom line: With a universal health care system, health care costs and deductibles will be eliminated and compensate for any increase in taxes.

11. Point: "I don't want to have to pay for health care for people making bad choices or to cover their pre-existing conditions."

Counterpoint: Many of the health problems on the pre-existing conditions list are common, genetically influenced and often unavoidable. One estimate indicates that up to 50% – half! – of all (non-elderly) adults have a pre-existing condition. Conditions on the list include anxiety, arthritis, asthma, cancer, depression, heart defect, menstrual irregularities, stroke and even pregnancy. With universal health care, no one would be denied coverage.

It's easy to assume that your health is under your control, until you get into an accident, are diagnosed with cancer or have a child born prematurely. All of a sudden, your own or your child's life may rely on health care that costs thousands or even millions of dollars. The health insurance that you once thought of as "good enough" may no longer suffice, bankruptcy may become unavoidable and you (or your child) will forever have a pre-existing condition. Some people may seem careless with their health, but who's to judge what an avoidable health problem is, vs. one that was beyond their control?

For the sake of argument, let's say that there are some folks in the mix who are engaging in poor health-related behaviors. Do we really want to withhold quality care from everyone because some don't take care of their health in the way we think they should? Extending that supposition, we would withhold public education just because not everyone takes it seriously.

Bottom line: In 2014, protections for pre-existing conditions were put in place under the Affordable Care Act. This protection is under continuous threat as insurance company profits are placed above patient care. Universal health care would ensure that everyone was eligible for care regardless of any conditions they may have.

And, if universal health care is so awful, why has every other first-world nation implemented it? These countries include: Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Belgium, Brunei, Canada, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Singapore, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Arab Emirates and the U.K.

Changing collective minds can seem impossible. But there is precedent. Once unimaginable large-scale change has happened in our lifetime (e.g. legalization of gay marriage, election of the first black president of the U.S. and the #MeToo movement), and support for universal health care has never been higher (71% in favor, according to a 2019 Hill-HarrisX survey ).

Point: As Chuck Pagano said, "If you don't have your health, you don't have anything."

Counterpoint: If good health is everything, why don't we vote as if our lives depended on it? This pandemic has taught us that it does.

Bottom line: Launching universal health care in the U.S. could be a silver lining in the dark cloud of this pandemic. Rather than pay lip service to what really matters, let's actually do something by putting our votes in service of what we really care about: the long-term physical and economic health of our families, our communities and our country.

Photos: Hospital Heroes

Tags: health insurance , health care , Coronavirus , pandemic , New Normal

Most Popular

Patient Advice

OTC Medicine & Health Products

health disclaimer »

Disclaimer and a note about your health ».

Sign Up for Our 3-Day Guide to Medicare

Confused about Medicare? We can help you understand the different Medicare coverage options available to help you choose the best Medicare coverage for you or a loved one.

Sign in to manage your newsletters »

Sign up to receive the latest updates from U.S News & World Report and our trusted partners and sponsors. By clicking submit, you are agreeing to our Terms and Conditions & Privacy Policy .

You May Also Like

Medicare advantage hmos vs. ppos.

Paul Wynn March 29, 2024

Symptoms of Magnesium Deficiency

Elaine K. Howley March 29, 2024

How Chemotherapy Works

Payton Sy March 28, 2024

Stomach Bloating Causes and Relief

Tamara Duker Freuman and Gretel Schueller March 27, 2024

Medicare vs. Medicaid

David Levine March 27, 2024

Early Signs of Diabetes

Toby Smithson March 26, 2024

How to Request a Hospital Transfer

Elaine K. Howley March 26, 2024

Breastfeeding Tips

Vanessa Caceres March 22, 2024

Does Medicare Cover Home Health Care?

Paul Wynn March 21, 2024

Coming Soon: Best Senior Living Ratings

Ben Harder , Zach Adams and Joshua H. Sandefur March 18, 2024

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Intelligence Squared U.S.

Is the government responsible for health care.

Julie Rovner

The Edited Broadcast of the Debate

Should the government be responsible for ensuring everyone gets the health care they need? iStockphoto hide caption

Hear The Full Debate

The unedited debate, about the panelists, health care, panelists: is health care a federal responsibility.

On Oct. 7, panelists debate the proposition " America is finally winning the war in Iraq. "

It's a debate that has raged on and off in the United States for more than a century now, with no clear resolution in sight: whether to guarantee healthcare for every American.

During the past 100 years, medicine has advanced from a rudimentary craft to a scientific pursuit capable of near miracles. Its cost has increased accordingly: In 2006, U.S. health care spending hit $2.1 trillion, or roughly $7,026 for every man, woman and child in the nation.

As a percentage of the gross domestic product, that is substantially more than any other country. Yet a substantial portion of the American population — 47 million that same year — lacked any health insurance, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

As the number of people without insurance increased, so did concern over the problem. But Americans have never neared consensus about what role government in general, and the federal government in particular, should play in ensuring health coverage for all, despite the fact that every other industrialized country has long since established some system of universal insurance.

The stage appears set for yet another major national health insurance debate in 2009, so the Intelligence Squared U.S. series decided to get a head start by choosing it as the topic for its first event of the season. The organization sponsors Oxford-style debates featuring six experts — three on each side — who try to sway an audience that votes before and after the session.

The debate statement was "Universal health coverage should be the federal government's responsibility."

Two of the panelists were Canadian, but they presented sharply divergent views of that country's experience with government-guaranteed health care.

At the start of the event, held at New Yorks Rockefeller University and moderated by John Donvan of ABC News, 49 percent of the audience agreed with the motion that the government is responsible, 24 percent disagreed and 27 percent said they were undecided.

After the debate, the undecideds split almost equally. Fifty-eight percent of the audience agreed with the motion (a gain of 9 percentage points), 34 percent disagreed (a gain of 10 percentage points), and 8 percent remained undecided.

Highlights from the debate:

FOR THE MOTION

Art Kellermann , a professor of emergency medicine and associate dean for health policy at Emory University, says: "If everybody practiced medicine as efficiently as they do in Rochester; Minnesota; and Salt Lake City, Utah, Medicare could pay 30 percent less to doctors and hospitals and everybody would get better care. But it won't happen on its own because one person's waste is another person's revenue stream. That's why we need a cop on the beat, and the only cop with the clout to get the health care industry to play by the rules is the federal government."

Excerpts of Kellerman's argument

Paul Krugman , a professor of economics at Princeton University and a columnist for The New York Times , says: "The fact of the matter is that our health care system is wildly inefficient, largely because we have an insurance industry that devotes enormous resources to try to identify who really needs health insurance, so as not to give it to them. And we have health care providers devoting enormous resources, fighting with the insurance companies to actually get paid. ... It would be cheaper by far to just cover everybody. We pay this huge price because we've managed to convince ourselves or be convinced that somehow, something that every other advanced country does, and that we do ourselves for the elderly, is impossible."

Excerpts of Krugman's argument

Michael Rachlis , a doctor and health policy analyst and a professor at the University of Toronto, says: "In Toronto right now, because of public response to the concerns about waiting lists, if you need cataract surgery, if you need your knee replaced, if you need a hip replaced, phone one number. You can be seen in an assessment clinic within one week usually, and you can get your surgery within a month after that. And it doesn't cost you any money directly because you pay it in your taxes, and the taxes in Canada as a share of GDP are almost as low as they are in the United States."

Excerpts of Rachlis' argument

Against the motion.

Michael F. Cannon , the Cato Institute's director of health policy studies, says: "You can have a health care sector that guarantees universal coverage, or you can have a health care sector that continuously makes medical care better, cheaper and safer, making it easier to deliver on that moral obligation that we have to help the less fortunate among us. You cannot have both."

Excerpts of Cannon's argument

Sally C. Pipes , president and CEO of the Pacific Research Institute, says: "As my friend in Vancouver, Dr. Brian Day, orthopedic surgeon and head of the Canadian Medical Association, told The New York Times , Canada is a country in which your dog can get a hip replacement in under a week and in which humans wait two to three years. Is this the kind of government-run health care system Americans desire?"

Excerpts of Pipes' argument

John Stossel , an ABC News correspondent and co-anchor of 20/20 says: "When everything is free, when the government pays for it, everybody wants everything. But the government doesn't have infinite money, so the government then must ration. And they do it by not giving you the latest, most expensive stuff or they make you wait in line."

Excerpts of Stossel's argument

The Intelligence Squared U.S. series is produced in New York City by The Rosenkranz Foundation.

Read our research on: Abortion | Podcasts | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

Increasing share of americans favor a single government program to provide health care coverage.

A majority of Americans continue to say the federal government has a responsibility to make sure all Americans have health care coverage.

And since last year, there has been an increase – especially among Democrats – in the share saying health insurance should be provided by a single national program run by the government.

Pew Research Center asked these questions on a recent survey to understand Americans’ opinions about the federal government’s role in providing health care coverage. For this analysis, we conducted an online survey of 11,001 U.S. adults between July 27 and Aug. 2, 2020.

Everyone who took part is a member of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses. This way nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories. Read more about the  ATP’s methodology . Here are the questions used for this report, along with responses, and its methodology .

Among the public overall, 63% of U.S. adults say the government has the responsibility to provide health care coverage for all, up slightly from 59% last year. Roughly a third (37%) say this is not the responsibility of the federal government, according to a Pew Research Center survey conducted July 27 to Aug. 2 among 11,001 adults.

When asked how the government should provide health insurance coverage, 36% of Americans say it should be provided through a single national government program, while 26% say it should continue to be provided through a mix of private insurance companies and government programs. This is a change from about a year ago, when nearly equal shares supported a “single payer” health insurance program (30%) and a mix of government programs and private insurers (28%).

Most of the increase has come among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents. A 54% majority of Democrats and Democratic leaners now favor a single national government program to provide health insurance, up from 44% last year. Support for single payer health coverage has increased among most groups of Democrats, including those who describe their political views as very liberal (up from 66% to 77%), liberal (50% to 61%) and conservative or moderate (35% to 43%).

Among Republicans and Republican leaners, a 66% majority says the government does not have the responsibility to make sure all Americans have health care coverage. Among the one-third of Republicans who say the government does have this responsibility, opinion is divided over whether or not it should be provided through a single government program or a mix of private and government programs.

Although most Republicans say it is not the government’s responsibility to ensure health coverage for all, a 54% majority says the government “should continue to provide programs like Medicare and Medicaid for seniors and the very poor.” Only 11% of Republicans say the government should not be involved at all in providing health insurance.

While divisions remain within the Democratic Party about the best way to provide health insurance, increasing shares across most demographic and ideological groups support a single national government program.

Very liberal Democrats, who in 2019 constituted 15% of Democratic registered voters, are far more likely than liberal Democrats (32% of Democrats) and moderates and conservatives (51%) to say that health insurance should be provided by a single government program.

White Democrats remain more likely than those of other races and ethnicities to support a single national program, but White, Black and Hispanic Democrats have each increased their support for a single national program by about 10 percentage points since last year.

A similar pattern emerges with age: Younger Democrats are still more supportive than older Democrats, but Democrats of all ages have increased their support over the past year.

Note: Here are the questions used for this report, along with responses, and its methodology .

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivered Saturday mornings

Hospital emergency rooms see boom in patients around the Fourth of July

How far americans live from the closest hospital differs by community type, most continue to say ensuring health care coverage is government’s responsibility, for the first time, more americans say 2010 health care law has had a positive than negative impact on u.s., most popular.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

• Use Messenger
• Send us an email

Should Government Provide Free Health Care?

The issue of health care is one of the most important aspects of an election campaign of any political party, which certainly reflects the extent to what the society depends on a good healthcare service . A well-organized, efficient health care system is not that easy to provide and one of the key problems on the way to the ideal hospitals and medical help is proper funding. Nowadays, there are three basic types of funding: private, insurance and state. Nevertheless, many people believe that the government must bear full responsibility for providing the money our health care service needs . However, I do not completely agree with the idea.

The government will not be able to provide enough money to guarantee the use of the most innovative methods of treatment. It is not a secret that medicine and medical equipment are outrageously expensive. Moreover, government has several branches of the social sector, such as education and culture, which also do not produce anything, but need funding. Providing enough money for all these spheres will sooner or later result in the budget deficit and, as a result, in the increase of taxes, which means that the main financial burden is on an average citizen again .

In my opinion, an ideal variant will be a combination of all the existing sources of finance. Some rich people may prefer to pay for medical treatment , while the government must necessarily subsidize the health care for children , senior citizens, the unemployed and the homeless, as these social groups cannot provide for themselves and, thus, are extremely financially vulnerable. However, working adults can use the benefits of the medical insurance , which will give them an opportunity for a decent medical service and reduce the general taxation burden.

Firearm Control in U.S.

The mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School increased my interest on the essence of controlling firearm. I strongly believe that everyone is entitled to a safe environment and as such freedom of life in general. Currently, gun-related deaths have become rampant in the United States. There are various positive arguments that support the use…

Persuasive Speech: Is There a Need for More Gun Control?

At present we often find ourselves in flight or fight situations where our lives are under threat. No wonder, there are people who support the idea of owning a gun as a means to protect themselves and their possessions. But does gun ownership really make the world a safer place to live in? Bonuses and…

How to Write Essay on Civil Rights Movement in the USA

Writing is not everyone’s cup of tea. But following our simple tips on essay writing, you will make sure it is not true. The essay writing guidelines we are going to demonstrate will be based on the topic “Civil Rights Movement in the U.S.”. The topic is quite complex, but there is no need to…

Our Services

• Academic ghostwriting
• Admission essay help
• Article writing
• Assignment writing
• College paper writing
• Coursework writing
• Dissertation writing
• Homework writing
• Online classes
• Personal statement writing
• Report writing
• Research paper writing
• Speech writing
• Term paper writing
• Writing tips
• Write my paper

Home — Essay Samples — Government & Politics — Health Care Reform — Should the Government Provide Free Health Care in America

Should The Government Provide Free Health Care in America

• Categories: American Government Health Care Reform

About this sample

Words: 1226 |

Published: Apr 17, 2023

Words: 1226 | Pages: 3 | 7 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof. Kifaru

Verified writer

• Expert in: Government & Politics

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 1051 words

1 pages / 629 words

2 pages / 927 words

3 pages / 1742 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Health Care Reform

Infectious diseases have had a significant impact on human societies, shaping the course of events and influencing the development of public health policies. The Great Influenza, also known as the Spanish flu, was a devastating [...]

Being a doctor is a noble and rewarding profession that offers a multitude of benefits. Whether it's the satisfaction of helping others, the intellectual stimulation of diagnosing and treating patients, or the financial [...]

Penis size has been a topic of interest and concern for many men. It is often associated with masculinity, self-esteem, and sexual confidence. As a result, the market for penis enlargement products has grown significantly, with [...]

Nursing is a demanding and noble profession that requires individuals to possess a unique set of skills, including empathy, critical thinking, and strong communication abilities. However, for individuals with the ISTJ [...]

We all know going to the doctor’s sucks. Paying that $20 at front is your least favorite thing. Someone doesn't want to get the best pill, or the best surgery because of the prices. They think universal health care will help [...]

As a consequence of the success of decades of public-health investments and efforts that have reduced the burden of infectious disease, chronic diseases are rising as the top healthcare threat in emerging markets. Likewise, with [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Should Government Provide Health Care Essay Sample

In the United States, healthcare is one of the most expensive and controversial issues. Healthcare in America is a privilege, not a right. In this sample, you will learn about the pros and cons of government providing health care to citizens in the USA.

Essay Sample On Should Government Provide Health Care In USA

• Thesis Statement – Should Government Provide Health Care Essay
• Introduction – Should Government Provide Health Care Essay
• Main Body – Should Government Provide Health Care Essay
• Conclusion – Should Government Provide Health Care Essay

Thesis Statement – Should Government Provide Health Care Essay American citizens should be entitled to free health care at least in their senior years. Introduction – Should Government Provide Health Care Essay The United States is a country known for its high level of prosperity and abundance. Americans consume and burn up more than anyone else in the world and everyone has the right to enjoy this comfort, but not at the expense of people’s health – especially if they are living on limited means. Health care is one thing that every human being needs throughout his/her life and denying it because someone lacks money causes injustice as well as puts an individual’s life (and even those around him) at risk. Free health services for all seniors will ensure that those who cannot afford quality medical attention can now access it free of cost, especially those who have led a life full of hard work and good deeds. The United States should provide free health care to all senior citizens as it would be a humane step towards those who struggled so hard to earn their daily bread but could not afford the best medical assistance. Get Non-Plagiarized Custom Essay on Government Should Provide Health Care in USA Order Now Main Body – Should Government Provide Health Care Essay Health services are one of the most important things in life. People go to great lengths, even give up everything they own, just to ensure that their health is intact. But what happens when people who have worked throughout their lives and struggled hard to provide for themselves cannot afford the best medical assistance? The United States should make all senior citizens entitled to free health care at least in their senior years because it will help them live better lives by providing access to good medical facilities and doctors without having to worry about the cost factor. The National Association of Area Agencies on Aging (n4a) has done some valuable work in this direction and it is time that the US government should take some initiative to help senior citizens get affordable medical assistance. Many elderly people cannot afford to pay for quality health services and it does not matter if they have worked hard all their lives. This is especially true when people do not live until old age because their early demise robs them of enjoying retired life with peace of mind and safety even in the twilight years. People who need medical assistance badly but cannot afford good treatment can now be assured adequate care by the United States government, which will provide free health services at least in their senior years. country’s leading newspaper USA Today published that Dr. David L. Durenberger, a former US senator from Minnesota has also lent his voice to this cause and said that the US government should provide at least free medical assistance to senior citizens as it would make their lives much better without having them worry about how they can afford quality treatment or who will care for them after retirement. More than half of the population in the United States is over 50 years old today and by 2030, seniors will make up more than 20 percent of the country’s total population. So, instead of asking seniors just to be content with whatever healthcare facilities are available at their disposal, the government should ensure that all elderly people have access to good health services because who can know whether someone might need the best medical assistance in their lifetime. The United States should provide free health care at least in their senior years because it is a humane step towards those who have worked hard throughout their lives but could not finance good healthcare, which might cost them even all their property. Failing to help seniors or family members when they are in distress after retirement would be unfair and setting the right measures/rules for providing free medical services at least in senior years will make life easier for people when they cannot fend for themselves anymore. Buy Customized Essay on Government Should Provide Health Care At Cheapest Price Order Now Conclusion – Should Government Provide Health Care Essay The country’s economy is not bad enough that it can’t provide some subsidies for its elderly population. If you think about it, seniors have paid taxes on practically everything they have earned throughout their lives. So, it is only fair that they are entitled to free health care in their senior years. This will also be a good way to ensure the existence of good doctors and medical infrastructure in the future because they know people will always need them when they get older. Free health services for all seniors is an initiative that should be supported by everyone in the U.S. Hire USA Experts for Government Should Provide Health Care Essay Order Now

Don’t Waste Your Time! Try It Now, Buy An Essay At The Students Assignment Help

If you are looking for someone to write my essay from the Students Assignment Help, then look no further than us. We have over 50 professional writers who will work with your argumentative essay writing  and deliver a high-quality product on time!

We provide academic writing help for students who need to get their healthcare essays done. Our samples will give you an idea of the quality that we produce and how well our writers perform. Your custom writing should be written exclusively for you, needs to pass Anti Copying Software, and be 100% plagiarism-free. All our essay writers are qualified in their fields of study and have years of experience working with different types of essays.

Explore More Relevant Posts

• Nike Advertisement Analysis Essay Sample
• Mechanical Engineer Essay Example
• Reflective Essay on Teamwork
• Career Goals Essay Example
• Importance of Family Essay Example
• Causes of Teenage Depression Essay Sample
• Red Box Competitors Essay Sample
• Deontology Essay Example
• Biomedical Model of Health Essay Sample-Strengths and Weaknesses
• Effects Of Discrimination Essay Sample
• Meaning of Freedom Essay Example
• Women’s Rights Essay Sample
• Employment & Labor Law USA Essay Example
• Sonny’s Blues Essay Sample
• COVID 19 (Corona Virus) Essay Sample
• Why Do You Want To Be A Nurse Essay Example
• Family Planning Essay Sample
• Internet Boon or Bane Essay Example
• Does Access to Condoms Prevent Teen Pregnancy Essay Sample
• Child Abuse Essay Example
• Disadvantage of Corporate Social Responsibilities (CSR) Essay Sample
• Essay Sample On Zika Virus
• Wonder Woman Essay Sample
• Teenage Suicide Essay Sample
• Primary Socialization Essay Sample In USA
• Role Of Physics In Daily Life Essay Sample
• Are Law Enforcement Cameras An Invasion of Privacy Essay Sample
• Why Guns Should Not Be Banned
• Neolithic Revolution Essay Sample
• Home Schooling Essay Sample
• Cosmetology Essay Sample
• Sale Promotion Techniques Sample Essay
• How Democratic Was Andrew Jackson Essay Sample
• Baby Boomers Essay Sample
• Veterans Day Essay Sample
• Why Did Japan Attack Pearl Harbor Essay Sample
• Component Of Criminal Justice System In USA Essay Sample
• Self Introduction Essay Example
• Divorce Argumentative Essay Sample
• Bullying Essay Sample

Get Free Assignment Quote

Enter Discount Code If You Have, Else Leave Blank

Welcome Guest!

• IELTS Listening
• IELTS Reading
• IELTS Writing
• IELTS Writing Task 1
• IELTS Writing Task 2
• IELTS Speaking
• IELTS Speaking Part 1
• IELTS Speaking Part 2
• IELTS Speaking Part 3
• IELTS Practice Tests
• IELTS Listening Practice Tests
• IELTS Reading Practice Tests
• IELTS Writing Practice Tests
• IELTS Speaking Practice Tests
• All Courses
• IELTS Online Classes
• OET Online Classes
• PTE Online Classes
• CELPIP Online Classes
• Free Live Classes
• Australia PR
• Germany Job Seeker Visa
• Austria Job Seeker Visa
• Sweden Job Seeker Visa
• Study Abroad
• Student Testimonials
• Our Trainers
• IELTS Webinar
• Immigration Webinar

IELTS Writing Task 2 Discursive Essay Topic: Government should give priority to health care

Updated On Dec 18, 2023

Share on Whatsapp

Share on Email

Share on Linkedin

IELTS Writing Prediction Questions for 2024

The Essay Writing section of the IELTS Writing Module can be a difficult task for many IELTS Aspirants. Thus, it is vital that you polish your essay writing skills before attempting the IELTS.

Below is a sample IELTS Essay for the IELTS Essay topic:

Some people say that government should give priority to health care whereas others say they should spend on other important priorities. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Get Evaluated for FREE:

Do you have an essay on this topic? Please post it in the comments section. One of our IELTS trainers will evaluate your essay from an examiner’s point of view and reply to the comment. This service is completely FREE of cost.

Discussion Essay

Introduction

Paraphrase the topic sentence.

Clearly mention the view on the essay topic.

Paragraph 1 – A certain amount of tax money has to go to healthcare services. Today, a number of particular diseases are on the rise in terms of popularity, and it would be costly to supply vaccines, medicines, or treatments.

Paragraph 2 – Healthcare is not the only industry that needs money to be kept running. Take education as an example. The quality of the schooling system is proportional to the competence of the future workforce.

Conclude the essay by summarizing the topic and the final view.

Sample Essay

People hold different views about how our tax money should be spent. While I agree that medical care is a field that requires huge investments, I believe that the government should also allocate the money for other priorities, such as education and transport.

On the one hand, a certain amount of tax money has to go to healthcare services. Today, a number of particular diseases are on the rise in terms of popularity, and it would be costly to supply vaccines, medicines, or treatments. For example, a large proportion of the population is now suffering from respiratory diseases or lung cancer due to exhaust fumes from vehicles and gas emissions from industrial factories. The remedies for those patients and the treatment facilities are often expensive, and the hospitals may find themselves in the struggle with financial problems without assistance from the tax system.

On the other hand, healthcare is not the only industry that needs money to be kept running. Take education as an example. The quality of the schooling system is proportional to the competence of the future workforce. Therefore, a country can benefit from such skillful human resources in the long-term if they invest the tax budget to build schools, provide lecturers with training courses, or hire native speakers to teach a foreign language. Moreover, the government should also spend money on solving transport problems. Traffic congestion is a global issue these days, and we can only handle the scenario if new highways are opened, and narrow public roads are expanded.

In conclusion, I believe that the government should use tax-payers’ money to improve not only the healthcare services, but also the education and transportation system.

• Allocate : Distribute (resources or duties) for a particular purpose ==>in past years we didn’t allocate enough funds to infrastructure maintenance
• Respiratory : Relating to or affecting respiration ==>We transferred the patient to the intensive care unit for respiratory and inotropic support.
• Fumes : An amount of gas or vapour that smells strongly or is dangerous to inhale ==>clouds of exhaust fumes spewed by cars
• Emissions : The production and discharge of something, especially gas or radiation ==>the effects of lead emission on health
• Remedy : A medicine or treatment for a disease or injury ==>Once estrogen replacement is prescribed, a medical practitioner calibrates the remedy.
• Proportional : corresponding in size or amount to something else ==>the punishment should be proportional to the crime.

Band 9 Sample Essay

The debate among tax-payers on whether healthcare should be prioritized for government spending or other sectors should be given more priority has been a dilemma for ages. Although both these areas are crucial for a nation, I believe that there should be a balance in the allocation of public resources and this system should be adjusted as needed. In the following paragraphs, I will explore both sides of the argument and justify my views with relevant instances.

First and foremost, the need for advanced medical facilities is rising with each passing day. This is quite evident in the number of health issues that middle-aged and senior citizens are facing lately. The condition of government hospitals and the dire need for improvement in the quality of such vital public services needs to be acknowledged by the authorities. Thus, the need for the allotment of added funding for the medical sector has become critical.

Nevertheless, there are other sectors in the economy that are also in a crippling monetary state and need aid from the administration. Education, public transportation and sanitation are some of the sections under government administration that need to be uplifted and developed immediately. Government spending in ventures like the education of the youth is of utmost importance as they are the future of the country. Therefore channelling public resources into the expansion of a single domain will lead to complications in the others.

Finally, it is essential to understand that government resources are already stretched thin and raising additional funds is a herculean task to accomplish. On that account, an equilibrium must be maintained when planning the annual budget so that every economic sector flourishes uniformly.

More Writing Task 2 Essay Topics

• Some Believe That More Action Should Be Taken To Prevent Crime
• Health Experts Believe That Walking Is A Good Exercise For Health
• Studies Show That Many Criminals Have A Low Level Of Education
• Students Today Can Access Information Online So Libraries Are Not Necessary
• Nations Should Spend More Money On Skills And Vocational Training For Practical Work

Also check :

• Tips to write introduction in IELTS Writing Task 2
• Tips to write great writing essay
• IELTS Sample essays
• IELTS Writing task 2 Tips
• Tips to Improve IELTS Writing Skills
• How to get band 8 in IELTS Writing Task 2
• IELTS Writing recent actual test
• Band 9 essays
• Advantage and Disadvantage Essays
• IELTS Writing Answer sheet
• IELTS map vocabulary
• IELTS Writing Task 1 Connectors

Practice IELTS Writing Task 2 based on Essay types

Effective IELTS Essay Connectors for Writing Task 2 & Task 1

Janet had been an IELTS Trainer before she dived into the field of Content Writing. During her days of being a Trainer, Janet had written essays and sample answers which got her students an 8+ band in the IELTS Test. Her contributions to our articles have been engaging and simple to help the students understand and grasp the information with ease. Janet, born and brought up in California, had no idea about the IELTS until she moved to study in Canada. Her peers leaned to her for help as her first language was English.

Explore other Discussion Essays

Nehasri Ravishenbagam

Courtney Miller

Janice Thompson

Post your Comments

Olubukola Damilola Famakinwa

Posted on Apr 19, 2022

The government of a Nation oversees the affairs of its citizens and are seen to be responsible for many factors accounting for growth and development. It is a question for debate whether the people in power should focus more on medical care or divert their attention to other parastatal In the following paragraphs, I will go further to explore the topic from both perspectives and justify why I think giving priority to health is Paramount.

To begin with, a common adage says “health is wealth”. According to the Oxford advanced learner’s dictionary, health is defined as a state of complete physical, social and mental wellbeing and not just the absence of disease or infirmity. Investing in people’s health invariably increases the population of work force available thereby boosting the economy of a Nation. Also, having a stable health Nationwide tend to attract more foreign investors as they are assured of getting a satisfactory result from their investment.

On the other hand, giving priorities to other areas such as Education, Transportation and Agriculture is beneficial as it tends to hasten National development. For instance, countries like Australia are termed developed because it’s citizens get access to good roads, quality education and are well equipped in the practice of mechanized farming. Likewise, the standard of living of the populace is improved when more attention is directed towards these sectors.

In conclusion, giving priority to health care and other sectors are equally important. However, from where I stand medical care should take more preference for the above reasons stated.

Posted on Apr 20, 2022

Band Score – 6

Concentrate on the correct usage of subject-verb agreement, prepositions and punctuation.

Pay attention to spellings and maintain proper paragraph order.

Follow the conventions. Only the first letter of the word in a sentence and proper nouns must be in capitals and there should be proper space between words.

Posted on Jul 1, 2016

That is a nice essay. But the question in the actual exam is slightly different. I am aware of it because this was the question in my IELTS exam and it went like this:

It is more important to spend money on the promotion of healthy lifestyle than spending it on treatment for already ill patients.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Recent Articles

Kasturika Samanta

Our Offices

Gurgaon city scape, gurgaon bptp.

Step 1 of 3

Great going .

Get a free session from trainer

Have you taken test before?

Please select any option

Get free eBook to excel in test

Please enter Email ID

Get support from an Band 9 trainer

Please enter phone number

Already Registered?

Select a date

Please select a date

Select a time (IST Time Zone)

Please select a time

Mark Your Calendar: Free Session with Expert on

Which exam are you preparing?

Great Going!