The Student News Site of Traverse City West Senior High

The Occidentalist

The Occidentalist

The Occidentalist


Should School Personnel Be Armed?

  • No (55%, 17 Votes)
  • Yes (45%, 14 Votes)

Total Voters: 31

Loading ... Loading ...

The United States SHOULD NOT Adopt Universal Healthcare

Cartoon Credit: F. Douglass

Should the United States adopt universal healthcare?


Sorry, there was an error loading this poll.

healthcare. Many are factors that contribute from how large the United States population is, the cost of universal healthcare, the quality of universal healthcare and overall people in general. The United States should not have universal healthcare because it will be too expensive and the quality may not be up to par with current standards. 

  The topic of universal healthcare is one of the most significant on the socio-political scale. When it comes to if it would be effective, cost is a factor that should be considered high on the scale. According to the National Library of Medicine, “The cost of a universal healthcare system would depend on its structure, benefit levels, and extent of coverage. However, most proposals would entail increased federal taxes, at least for higher earners. One proposal for 

universal healthcare recently included options such as a 7.5% payroll tax plus a 4% income tax on all Americans, with higher-income citizens subjected to higher taxes.” If a tax system was not used, then in terms of the national economic toll, cost estimates for this idea range from 32 to 44 trillion USD over 10 years, with deficit estimates ranging from 1.1 to 2.1 trillion USD per year. The cost of any kind of universal healthcare is too high as it is almost three times more expensive than our current military spending per year. Even if we cut a portion of military spending, the cost of universal healthcare is significantly higher. The next question that would come is what would be the quality of this healthcare?

  Quality of healthcare today is defined by how much your provider offers and how much you pay for in terms of quality. With quality, it would be a fixed system where everybody would receive the same amount of care and quality. This includes drug addicts to the wealthiest. The World Health Organization defines universal healthcare as “ensuring that all people have access to needed health services (including prevention, promotion, treatment, rehabilitation and palliation) of sufficient quality to be effective while also ensuring that the use of these services does not expose the user the financial hardship.” According to The National Institutes of Health  “current evidence suggests that quality of care is suboptimal.” This applies to all countries. To achieve higher quality healthcare, it is too expensive as a form of “public” healthcare, so private parties are often used to compensate for that cost. The quality of healthcare would not be equal to everyone because those who can receive private sector healthcare would still ultimately receive the best form of treatment. 

  Universal health care would not be an adequate form of healthcare because it would be expensive and not all forms would be of the same quality because of the private sector influence. On top of that, if one was to pay taxes for this healthcare, the money would be going towards people in lower income areas that are more likely to experience drug addiction or robberies. Money should be paying for the quality of care. There are many factors to consider, and overall it is a complex system that is ultimately too expensive to pay for.  

Leave a Comment
More to Discover

Comments (0)

All The Occidentalist Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *