Affluence is the greatest determinant of an individual’s health, and the United States is among the most affluent nations in the world; but how does a nation’s prosperity affect the entirety of its citizens, and what factors of wealth affect health? The idea that one can progress in society if they work hard enough, a deep-set American belief, depends on an individual’s health. The advancements in health associated with affluent nations, such as the United States, are distributed inequitably, providing care to those that can afford it. One must wonder how core democratic values of liberty, equality, and justice can be upheld in a system that hinders the success of those that cannot afford care: So what causes this in the first place, and how …show more content…
I then looked at health care in the United Kingdom so I could compare it to health care in the United States, because the United Kingdom has a universal health care system that is very well studied, and choose two contrasting sources: The Single-Payer Option: A Reconsideration by Adam Oliver and The British Experience with Socialized Medicine by David Marsland. At this point, I was unfamiliar with the public sentiment surrounding health care in the United States, and came across an appropriate newspaper article: U.S. Urged to Test Solutions to a 'Crisis' in Health Care by Robert Pear. In this essay I will utilize my sources to provide summary and association, establish context, recognize issues, evaluate the U.K. health care system, evaluate the U.S. health care system, and discuss possible solutions to issues regarding healthcare in the United …show more content…
In universal health care system, health care is equivocally rationed, yet in a quasi-market system it is rationed according to one’s ability to pay (Oliver 518). Unsurprisingly, the United States spends considerably more on health care as percentage of its gross domestic product than any other nation (Oliver 214; Pear). The high spending in the United State is partially due to adverse selection. Oliver defines adverse selection as “the phenomenon of bad risks driving out good risks...” To clarify, insurance premiums are attractive to unhealthy people but unattractive to healthy people. And risk selection, “also known as cream skimming or cherry picking,” as rational action of insurance companies to maintain profit in the market. “Here, insurance companies will make efforts to exclude bad risks from their insurance pool…, thus contributing to the high administrative costs”