In a capitalistic society, the extent of one’s ability to enjoy material possessions available in the marketplace heavily relies on their financial capacity. Those with greater wealth have greater access to various goods and services. However, modern-day developed societies are not purely capitalistic; they employ social programs to support individuals who lack the means to access life’s basic necessities like food and shelter. While some societies may rely on the charity of others, most developed countries recognize the importance of establishing social safety nets to aid those in severe financial need.
Health insurance is one such social program designed to provide support. Rather than depending solely on the generosity of individuals, developed countries create health insurance systems that ensure even those with no financial means can obtain essential medical services. While these programs may face criticism and encounter issues like abuse, the overall consensus is that some form of support system should be in place to help those in need, even if the specific implementation might require ongoing adjustments and improvements.
Apart from health insurance, welfare programs also play a vital role in assisting those in significant financial need. These programs provide funds to help individuals manage their daily lives, especially when they lack sufficient resources. Although subject to criticism and potential misuse, the concept of welfare programs is widely accepted as a necessary measure to prevent people from falling into extreme poverty and destitution.
Additionally, developed societies have set up social programs to benefit the elderly. These often involve managed and subsidized annuity programs, where individuals contribute to the system during their working years and receive payments after reaching a certain age. Moreover, certain benefits may be extended to those who have never contributed to the program to assist those in dire financial situations, ensuring that they are not left without sufficient means of support during their later years.
How Health Insurance Fits into This
Healthcare has been recognized as a basic need in many societies, and providing assistance with major medical events is seen as crucial to prevent premature deaths or worsened health conditions due to lack of access to care. This support for healthcare can be viewed as an extension of the welfare system, aimed at helping individuals who are unable to afford necessary medical expenses on their own, either due to financial limitations or the unavailability of adequate insurance coverage.
While it is generally preferred to cover healthcare expenses that individuals cannot afford, the reality is that those with low incomes, who struggle to afford insurance, may find it challenging to manage even smaller healthcare expenses, such as routine doctor visits. As a society, the decision to assist such people with their healthcare needs, as is done in many countries, is not unreasonable. Critics, like Libertarians, may argue that this should be left to voluntary charity, but this approach may not always be sufficient and could leave some individuals without the necessary care, potentially leading to severe consequences.
Social programs, including public healthcare, operate as a form of forced charity, funded through taxation based on individuals’ means. Although some may view this as an infringement on personal liberty, it is the mechanism through which governments finance various projects and expenses for the overall benefit of society.
However, when implementing such social programs, it is essential to maintain a focus on their objectives. Public healthcare, for instance, goes beyond providing assistance based on financial need and aims to serve and support everyone, regardless of their ability to pay. Whether this comprehensive approach is appropriate and efficient remains an open question that requires careful consideration and evaluation. Balancing the desire to provide adequate healthcare for all with the practicality of funding and managing such a system is a complex societal challenge.
The Disconnects with Public Health Care
One significant challenge in confining public healthcare to its intended purpose of providing for those in need is the common perception that it comes without any costs for its users. This misconception can lead to demands for extensive coverage and access to healthcare services without a full understanding of the financial implications. As a result, public healthcare spending can escalate due to public pressure, turning it into a major political issue. Even though governments may strive for fiscal restraint, the disconnect between public perception and fiscal reality can lead to overspending on the healthcare system.
Another critical concern is that social assistance, including public healthcare, sometimes benefits individuals who do not truly require such support, including the extremely wealthy. While some argue that the wealthy should be entitled to benefit from the system since they contribute through higher taxes, others question the fairness of such an arrangement. Moreover, in certain countries, the existence of a multi-tiered healthcare system creates further controversies. Some individuals may have to seek medical services abroad, like in the United States, due to limitations in their home country’s public healthcare system. This situation may be seen as highly undesirable and unfair, as certain people may be heavily subsidizing healthcare coverage for others but do not want these beneficiaries to access higher-cost services using their additional wealth. This disparity can fuel debates about the fairness and effectiveness of the healthcare system.
How We May Address These Problems
To strive for a more sensible and reasonable public healthcare system, the first step is to provide participants with better information about the true costs of the program. Making per capita costs transparent would be a good starting point. Additionally, it’s essential to question why individuals who do not have a financial need for certain aspects of the social program are included in it. While hiding costs through taxation might initially seem better, a proper analysis should be conducted to assess whether direct payment for certain expenses would result in savings, particularly when administrative costs of insurance schemes are considered.
However, passing on the corresponding tax savings to the public would be crucial to make any changes in the healthcare system more acceptable and manageable. If the government merely spends the money elsewhere, it may result in higher net costs for individuals, as they would still have to spend from their own resources without a reduction in taxes. This challenge underscores the importance of garnering sufficient public support for the changes to avoid potential political backlash in the future.
The issue of public health care only covering certain things can leave people who prefer alternative methods of managing their health with insurance costs but without reaping many benefits. As the shift towards holistic approaches in healthcare increases, this issue will become more prominent, warranting careful consideration and timely reform.
To use public health insurance as a social program effectively, the focus should be on providing for those who genuinely cannot afford healthcare on their own. While some level of protection for everyone against major financial burdens is essential, making the system excessively inclusive may lead to a state-run healthcare insurance monopoly with mandatory participation. This level of inclusivity could also extend beyond the typical standards of socialism in modern-day democracies, becoming a tool for income redistribution.
Although public health insurance is widely accepted and cherished in countries that offer it, there is always room for improvement. The false perceptions surrounding the system must be addressed, and a clear understanding of the issues is crucial for effective reforms. Rather than providing comprehensive coverage for everyone, the system should primarily focus on supporting those who truly need it, striking a balance between protecting against catastrophic costs and ensuring accessible care when required.
