So, could this be an indicator that the Canadian "socialized medicine" scheme of health care might be better than the American capitalist one?
Or, if the standard of success of a medical care system is fiscal economy, the book pointed out that Canadians spend a lower share of their GDP (Gross Domestic Product) -- 10%, as compared to 14% -- on health care than Americans.
Private firms run many nursing and retirement homes.
Still, while I concede all this, like many people I'm not sure that private forces should be running health care. In 1998 an important book was published comparing the Canadian and the American health systems.
For an advanced country, the United States has a fairly capitalist health care system.
Argumentative Essay Rubric Middle School - Essays On Socialized Medicine
While through federal programs like Medicare and Medicaid, the government pays a portion of the health care bills of elderly and impoverished people, and this adds up to tens of billions of dollars per year, most Americans deal with doctors and hospitals on their own, paying them out of their own pocket or through voluntary private medical insurance.Americans can count on 60 years of life without disabilities; Canadians can count on 66 years. .) And yet the American people are paying a higher percentage of their income to the specialist doctors to live less long or healthily than Canadians! But let us go back and take another look at the American "capitalist" model of healthcare.(It is fascinating how perverse and unexpected these results are . So clearly American capitalist health care, the American medical system, appears to have some bizarre and unexpected shortcomings. No one can dispute that the American system generates wonderful medical machinery, procedures, and drugs.Health care costs in the United States have greatly increased in recent years. In Canada, on the other hand, as in most of the most advanced countries, there is a single-payer health care scheme run by an agreement between the federal and provincial governments.Therefore a number of cost-containment measures have been taken, including the gathering together of doctors and other health care providers and hospitals in HMOs, Health Maintenance Organizations. Doctors, hospitals and other health care providers submit their bills to the local provincial government's health department.Thus the cost of benefits to employees is significantly less to private companies in Canada than it is to private companies in the United States.(But taxes to pay for medicare -- especially income taxes -- are therefore higher in Canada than in the United States.Good Republicans and capitalists, if they are interested in saving money, should take note of that, should they not?Or if the standard of success is economic competitiveness, the book pointed out that Canada enjoys an economic advantage in having universal medicare.(69% once had such insurance, but say it was too expensive.) This number is rising by one million per year. (They are still licenced by authorities in each state, of course, and to some extent controlled by bodies of doctors like state medical associations and the American Medical Association.) Among American doctors, medical specialists at least make much more money in the United States than they would in Canada. But note that American medicine's having so many expensive specialists has nevertheless not improved the average health of the American masses (if I may use a convenient Marxist term).Now it might be argued that the American system is nevertheless freer and more productive than the Canadian system, and, indeed, in some narrow respects it is. The broad American middle-class just doesn't live as long as Canadians. (Incidentally, a recent study indicated that American homeless people don't live as long as Canadian homeless people. I presume that the reason is that most Canadian homeless have access to medicare.