Private healthcare vs public healthcare in the US Essay

Private healthcare vs public healthcare in the US - Essay Example Why Universal Healthcare Vouchers Is the Next Big Idea talks about the benefits of private healthcare over public and expresses the opinion that in the nearest future there will be no public health services at all. How will it work He explains: "Every household in America will receive a voucher entitling its members to enroll in a private health plan of their choice. All plans will be required by law to guarantee the basic features of what most Americans now receive from their insurers: doctors' visits, hospitalization, pharmaceuticals, and catastrophic coverage" (Emanuel 2005) Healthcare costs are rising dramatically and as the result the employers have to reduce the benefits offered to their employees because the healthcare expenses are too high. "By 2008, the country will spend more insuring retirees than on defense. By 2020, Medicare will gobble up 5 percent of the GDP" (Emanuel 2005). The private healthcare is not perfect as well. And it should be reformed in the future. Emmanuel is confident that the new system will be much better for several reasons: "First, it should cover every American, no exceptions. Second, it should pay for covering those who are currently uninsured by cutting waste, not by increasing the total amount our country spends on health care. Third, it should hold down the rate of increase of future health-care costs. Fourth, it should give Americans more choice of health plans, not less. Fifth, it should make our economy more productive, not less. Sixth, it should reduce, not expand, government bureaucracy" (2005). Private delivery system, Emmanuel continues, should not be changed and health insurance companies would continue to "contract with physicians, hospitals, rehabilitation facilities, pharmacies and other providers for services to the individuals who enroll in their plans" (2005). Public healthcare is much cheaper for consumers but the government will not be able to handle all payment, especially taking into account the aging baby boomers generation. Mintz does not support the claim that private healthcare provides less and less quality at the higher and higher costs. His opinion on the issue is similar to Emmanuel's and he as well has outlined the system that can make private healthcare more effective and calm down the supporters of public healthcare - "Publicly financed but privately run healthcare for all--including free choice of physicians--would cost employers far less in taxes than their costs for insurance. Universal coverage could also work magic in less obvious ways" (Mintz 20 04). Under the current public healthcare system the healthcare coverage decreases dramatically - fewer people are able to receive the service when they need it. The answer to the problem is more obvious that it might appear - the creation of the universal private healthcare. In the year 2001 the healthcare expenses have "accounted for 13.9 percent of US gross domestic product. (It constituted a much smaller share of GDP in countries with universal healthcare, such as Sweden, 8.7 percent; France, 9.5 percent; and Canada, 9.7 percent.)" (Mintz 2004). The healthcare is becoming to expenses for the employers who are forced to cover the healthcare costs of their employees. Therefore, general managers are losing the competitive advantage to foreign companies in the countries where the universal coverage is introduced. People "do not trust the government with healthcare"