Blog Assignment #2
Healthcare comparison:
Go to the following website (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/indepth_coverage/health/uninsured/international.html)
and compare the US to another nation's healthcare. After you read and compare the 2 countries, write which country you believe has a better healthcare system. Defend your position with at least 3-4 reasons. Due Tuesday, Aug. 25.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The United States healthcare system vs. The United Kingdom healthcare system
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, the United States has a more efficient healthcare system than the United Kingdom's healthcare system. The U.S. offers high quality care to those who have good coverage. The United Kingdom's system offers universal coverage but some citizens have to wait a long time for elective surgery whereas U.S. citizens can get immediate medical attention. The U.S. also has the Medicare program in which the elderly and disabled are paid for and taken care of. The U.S. offers private insurance and public insurance, allowing citizens to choose what is best for them from a financial standpoint. The United Kingdom also offers public and private insurance. However the UK does not have a wide range of specialist physicians. The UK citizens can only get help from specialists if they have private insurance.
I compared the United States with Canada. I think the U.S. has a better healthcare system. While there are almost 50 million Americans without health insurance, we wouldn't be able to provide the quality care America is known for if we switched to a universal healthcare system. America offers choices as to what kind of healthcare you want. Most insurance plans cover dental and prescription drugs while many other countries don't, forcing you to pay extra for those things.
ReplyDeleteI compared US vs Canada
ReplyDeleteI think the US has a better healthcare system than Canada. I did more research and statistics show that lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Canadian patients also have to wait for care, where in America we usually get immediate attention. Also, the US has better access to new technologies than Canada does. There are fewer opportunities to integrate services between outpatient and inpatient care in Canada. That website was a little hard to understand..
I compared the United States' healthcare system with Mexico's healthcare system, and in my opinion, Mexico's is better. They may not execute it as well, but I think their idea is better. I think that more out-of-pocket payments are better, and Mexico has 51% while America has 14%. Many institutions in Mexico employ their own doctors and their own hospitals/clinics. For the uninsured in Mexico, "available resources sometimes limit some services, such as access to prescription drugs" but in America this is not the case. In contrast to America, Mexico's healthcare system tends to benefit the upper-class more than the underprivileged, which I think is one of the many problems with our government and healthcare systems in America.
ReplyDeleteI compared the United States with the United Kingdom. It totally depends on which side you are looking at it from. Overall, though, I think the general idea behind the UK's healthcare is better. Everyone receives the same level of healthcare, and it is paid for by everyone. In an ideal world, this would mean that everyone gets equal treatment. But, because we are a falled world, this plan does not work. People will always desire a "higher ranking" in the world, even if it means paying for private healthcare in addition to paying the government. Everyone should have decent healthcare available to them, but, at this point, it seems to have gone too far to mediate that level of decent. You have people who pay thousands of dollars each month for the best medicine available, and then you have those that have no way of getting any sort of medical help at all. The spectrum is way too broad to bring the two together. But, if it can one day even out, something like what the UK has would be better when it comes to everyone receiving quality healthcare.
ReplyDeleteI compared the United Kingdom's health care with our own and I believe that the United Kingdom's system is better. The United Kingdom uses less money for health care which, if the United States switches to universal health care we could use that money to help with the country's debt. The Government already pays for 30% of healthcare and spends more then the United Kingdom. Also, the United Kingdom's life expectancy for adults and infants is higher then that of the United State's. The waiting time for certain procedures in the United Kingdom does take longer but in order to help save another person's life ("Those who are uninsured have mortality rates 25 percent higher than those who are insured') and the injury isn't life threatening, isn't it worth it?
ReplyDeleteI compared the US healthcare system with the healthcare system of Japan. What surprised me most was number of uninsured Americans we have in our country. "America is the only system among wealthy nations that has such a large share of its population uninsured."
ReplyDeleteIn Japan the entire population is insured. What's actually covered is similar in both countries. However, in Japan long term and elderly care are covered. This type of coverage is very expensive in the US.
One amazing thing about Japan's system is the fact that the same fee is paid for the same service no matter what doctor you see. Doctors are not allowed to set their own prices. Bottom line- they spend much less in Japan and get the same if not better coverage .
i compared the Untied States with Japan's health care system. it seems that japan has the best health care. there health care system is rated number 1 in the world. the life expectancy seem to be longer. there health care system also seems covers every one. japan also has a group that sets a health car cost limit so that the cost of there health care will not go up. japans health care also uses less money.
ReplyDeleteAfter comparing the healthcare system of US with Japan, I realized that even though entire population of Japan is covered due to national health insurance program, the healthcare system of US is better, which one can choose his own insurance program, instead choosing the insurance program or given the chosen insurance program. If the US has national health insurance program (universal healthcare the democrates are proposing), individuals will not be able to choose the fitting program for themselves. In Japan 4 percent of a person's salary goes to the average contribution of the funding. If some money is being taken away from a person's salary to pay the insurance program, what about the unemployeed? Since they are not working, they will not have salary, and therefore, they will be contributing less toward the entire funding. Another example of that is the fact that the largest share of healthcare financing in Japan is raised through payroll taxes: 34.6% through employees and 21.7% from employers. Again, if a person is not working, he is not paying as much money, yet getting all the health coverage he needs. Also, this national health insurance program will lower the quality of the program. One of the freedom of living in America is being able to choose what you want. National health program will not let us choose what we want, but rather choose everything themselves (government) and give the package to us. Some people will want higher quality insurance that some others, but if we have the insurance program Japan has, we will not be able to choose but have the same health program everyone else has. Rather than try to follow what type of healthcare other countries have, we should keep the current healthcare system, which should work itself out as the time goes by. If our healthcare system changes to universal healthcare, will everyone be satisfied and happy with "equality" among the people?
ReplyDeleteI
ReplyDeletecompared the United States' healthcare system versus the United
Kingdom. In my opinion, US has better healthcare. Although, the UKS'
population is covered under health insurance, it reguires waiting to
get help where as for US, you do not but, however it provides good care
as long as you have good coverage. Also, for those that are disabled
and or even old folks do have Medicare which provides their payment and
care. The UK does offer private insurance but only covers 12 percent of
population which accounts only 4 percent for healthcare. The US covers
86 percent and accounts 36 percent for healthcare.
i compared the USA to Canada. in the USA the public and private insurance covers 85% of the population, but Canada provides a national healthcare for all elagavl resedents of Canada. with the USA healthcare is for the inpatient and outpatient hospital care. with Canada the federal goverent makes the healthcare cover all medically necessary physitian and hospital services. the USA healthcare provides tremendous amount of choise for those who have good coverage. in Canada the whole nation is covered wich makes for very long wating times at the hospital.
ReplyDeleteI compared the Healthcare Systems of the United States and Canada. I liked the United State's system more. Here, you can get much higher quality of care if you have good coverage. Our system also gives you a large amount of choices of what you would like to have covered. There are a lot of insurance companies here that offer different coverages. You can pick the one that you feel fits your health needs best. In the United States, 68% of the citizens are covered by private insurance, whereas in Canada, 70% of the citizens are covered by public insurance. In Canada you can only buy heathcare coverage that the government doesn't offer, but in the United States, you can buy whatever kind of healthcare coverage you want. Also in Canada, there are waiting times to receive care in hospitals, but in the United States, you can get care when you need it.
ReplyDeleteWhen I compared the United States healthcare system to Canada's healthcare system, I found that the United States' healthcare is better. The United States offers options as to what healthcare an individual can receive, such as Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance companies, and out-of-pocket payments. Canada's healthcare system is national, meaning that all Canadians are covered by public insurance. This means that hospitals have longer waiting times and additional private insurance for things like dental and vision care is more expensive. The US allows for much more freedom as to what is covered by private companies and public insurance policies, including basic necessities such as prescription drugs and in and out patient hospital visits. Canada does not cover these items in their public healthcare services; to be covered you must pay for private insurance which is costly. Overall, the United States has better healthcare in private practices and hospitals and more freedom in the individual's choices of what they want or can afford for insurance than Canada does.
ReplyDeleteThe United States healthcare system vs. The Japan healthcare system
ReplyDeleteIn comparing the synopses of these two healthcare systems I found several interesting points. Both countries exhibit healthcare systems with significant flaws but Japan’s unique healthcare system seems to rise above on account of their surprisingly high life expectancy and low infant mortality. One can attribute this directly to Japan’s healthcare or to their discipline as race to stay in shape and be healthy (ranking 28 places behind U.S. in obesity).
(But) In Japan the employer pays premiums for their employees to be covered, typically 4% of ones income. For a particular procedure, the same fee is paid to all insurers and all providers. These two points illustrated here, remove competition in the medical field, thus reducing the number of highly qualified doctors. Also the successful end of paying much more for healthcare than the poor or even unemployed! Just like in the United Kingdom, people complain about the quality and comfort of their care and maybe that is why millions of people from around the world flock to the U.S. to have procedures in the hands of highly skilled and intelligent doctors. I think we can use Japan’s system to guide our ideas in cost saving techniques but at the same time, refrain from removing the choice to accept high quality healthcare. The lower 25% of our population that doesn’t receive proper attention needs to be taken care of, but not in a manner that steps on the lines of socialism.
I compared the United States'and the United Kingdom's health care systems.
ReplyDeleteI think that the US'system is better. First of all, under the UK's system, doctors would have little incentive to become better at their profession because they will be paid the same as any other doctor who may even be far less skilled than themselves. Also, the wait for health services would be incredibly long in the UK because everyone gets the services. And if someone were to choose to pay for private insurance for better services, they would still be paying for the entire rest of the nation's medical care on top of their own. That is the same with the US but to a greater degree. Lastly, the government sets the budget, and because it has the money, it has far more control over the citizens than in the US.
Japan and the United States appear to have opposite health care systems. Japan uses a form of socialized heath care in which the government or companies and corporation provide a form of insurance for each and every citizen. The heath insurance provided by these sources is very extensive and covers almost any medical related bill that the individual encounters. The system requires the individual to share the costs with the government or other source but makes insurance much more affordable. the government also limits the amount that doctors can charge patients. America has both private and government coverage but only a mere 15.3 percent of Americans are insured. The uninsured are paid for by taxpayers dollars and the costs for treatment differs all over the states with no restrictions.
ReplyDeleteThe American health system is so confused and covers so little of the population that Japan appears to have a better system. I don't agree with limiting costs or with the government providing insurance to people with taxpayers dollars because this is a form of communism. There is also a hint of communism in our culture since taxpayers are forced to support the uninsured. Japan just seems to have a more stable and organized system than America.
China's health care is a death wish. Compared to America's 14%, China's "out-of-pocket expenses" is at 58%. Most of the insurence is obtained through employment in a business that offers health benefits. This leaves most farmers and small business owners uninsured. Originally China had a more socialistic form of health care that worked well for them, but when they turned it over to the free market it spiraled downhill rapidly. Basically the more money you have, the better health care you can afford. I'd definitely say America's system is better at this point because we offer quality coverage to any person.
ReplyDeleteI Compared the United States' health care system with that of Canada. The US has better health care. Canada has universal coverage. Everyone pays for everone and individually end up paying roughly 30% of the expenditures. They have very few choices about their health care plan whereas Americans have many choices. Often times in Canada, people end up waiting on life saving operations for months if not years. That would not happen in the US. Even our illegal aliens have better care. Of course, we have the pleasure of paying for all their ER visits.
ReplyDeleteThe UK's health care system looks externally idealistic. They have universal health care, whereas there are roughly 45 million uninsured people in the United States. Especially coming from a Christian perspective, there's nothing better than everyone getting cared for, right? The difficult comparison comes when you look at depth v. width, especially in personal situations. The UK may cover a broader area-- giving care to 100% of its population, but the care is shallow. The US covers a smaller area, having 84.7% of the population insured, but the care is deeper and better. If your family member has a nearly fatal illness, do you want to settle for mediocre care, being content in knowing that everyone else is getting the same care, or do you want the best care possible? Selfish as it may be, if someone I love became terminally ill, I'd want the most talented doctors and the absolute best care in the world, held under my private insurance company, even if that meant someone else was living uninsured.
ReplyDeletewho has two thumbs and compared america's health system to japan's? this guy! japan is rated number one out of 191.. that is remarkable. however the japanese health care system, which is universal coverage, is the lack of functional integration. they also lack any management across different levels of care and widespread complaints about quality. even though they are number one they're quality is still no where near that of america. however we must strive to find a system that keeps that good quality while still can help the lives of those uninsured.
ReplyDelete