One of the foundations of every just society is the protection of every person’s right to healthcare. This statement underscores the importance of the discourse on whether working citizens ought to pay for healthcare. The debate has been in the limelight since the beginning of the 20th century. Successive governments in the United States have over the years attempted to institute a universal healthcare system for the United States citizenry, but repeatedly the proposals for a free healthcare system in the country has been fought and defeated. In light of this information, this paper seeks to answer the question on why the working citizens in the United States should not pay for healthcare. The paper draws statistical and empirical information in support of this thesis, as well as information that those opposed to the idea put forward. In essence, therefore, this argumentative paper seeks to discredit some of the ideas that the naysayers put forward in their opposition to the idea of a free healthcare system in the United States while at the same time providing solid arguments on why working citizens should not pay for healthcare.
The debate about whether or not the government should pay for healthcare begins earnestly with the understanding of the constitution. Particularly, the constitution provides for the inalienable rights to liberty, happiness, and life. Healthcare provision falls squarely under the right to life and the protection of the same (Emanuel, 2014). One can only remain alive if they are healthy. In other words, it is only through the provision of healthcare that a working citizen’s life gets protected. It means that if the government provides free healthcare services to all, then it will be protecting the lives of its citizenry. In any case, it will be a way or ensuring the proper implementation of the constitution and additionally, this ought to be considered one of the least services that the government can provide to its law-abiding citizens. Arguably, therefore, the provisions of the mighty constitution provide solid justification for why the working citizens should not pat for healthcare (Emanuel, 2014).
The working citizenry provides revenues for the government both through direct contributions to tax revenues and through growth in the economy. The citizenry does this through the payment of income taxes, as well as the value added taxes and the government in the provision of services including healthcare services utilize these funds. The problem is that at times, the government agencies misappropriate these funds and consequently, the core service sectors get affected. To deal with this problem, it would be appropriate for the government to consider more ways of ensuring that the contributions of the citizens to the national kitty are well utilized, and one way of ensuring this is by providing universal healthcare. In other words, it would make a lot of sense if the citizens were able to enjoy the benefits of their contributions to the revenues of the government (Gardner, 2016).
The third major reason why the working citizens ought not to be charged for the provision of healthcare services is the fact that in the modern day world, healthcare services are still considered a tool of trade meaning that it is now fully monetized. Some healthcare sectors have even gone to the extent of providing VIP service centers where resources are allocated not to the most deserving but to those that can pay for the services. The United States among many other countries across the world have large swaths of its population uninsured. For instance, at least 10% of the population in the United States was not insured by the end of 2015, and this accounts for more than 33 million people (Obamacarefacts.com, 2015). The implications of this are that most of the working citizenry are not able to afford healthcare insurance, and consequently, they are not able to get healthcare services. The working citizenry in the United States and across many other parts of the world struggles with the issue of low wages and the ability to meet the day-to-day needs. On the other hand, the healthcare right is no longer considered a right but rather it is just another commodity for sale but one that is beyond the reach of the working citizenry. To help in dealing with the healthcare menace. Therefore, it will be important for the government to consider footing the healthcare bills for the working citizenry. It ought to be one of the reasons why the working citizens should not pay for the healthcare services (Emanuel, 2014).
Many deaths across the world are because of the lack of a healthcare system that would ensure that a patient is provided with healthcare services in time of need, especially if such a patient does not have the money. Statistics indicate that there are about 44,789 deaths annually that result from the population that is not insured (Obamacarefacts.com, 2015). The implications of this are that the uninsured population has an increased risk level of more than 40% because of the lack of insurance. In another study, the statistics indicated that about 13,000 deaths occur every year among the older generations between 55 and 64 years and more so these are the people who do not have insurance as their minimum wage level do not allow them to get enough funds to insure themselves (Gardner, 2016). Notably, such deaths among the working population are preventable, and this creates the need for the creation of a healthcare system that enables this population to access health care services as and when the need for such arises. In other words, providing healthcare services without charging the working class would help in reducing the high numbers of preventable mortality.
The other factor and reason why the working citizens should not pay for healthcare services are the understanding that health care has been recognized as a human right internationally. The United States is one of the forty-seven countries that are signatories to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The declaration indicates that everybody has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of a person. World Health Organization (WHO) also recognizes healthcare as a human right under World Health Assembly resolution 58.33. The regulation asserts the position that every person should have access to healthcare services. Secondly, no person should suffer financial hardship or even get to the point of losing their life just because someone could not get to provide the healthcare services thus needed (Gardner, 2016). The mantra is carried in many declarations and acts between and among nations, yet there are still come countries that have consistently monetized healthcare. The implications of the monetization are that people lose lives just because they lack the funds, yet the government continues to assume that all is well. There is no way in which the right, such as health care can or ought to be considered for sale, and this explains why the working citizens should not pay for healthcare services (Emanuel, 2014). In other words, it would only be prudent for the government to adopt fully the agreements and declarations that place healthcare as a human right hence protecting the interests of the working population.
The government is always concerned about the issues of policy in public health. However, the government remains silent when issues of declaring health care services as free are mentioned. There is empirical evidence indicating that the provision of free healthcare services and broad health insurance coverage leads to the increased access to necessary care and the improved health of the population. It means that the provision of health coverage ought to be included in the policies on the public policies. It will lead to better handling of the health issues that many people in the population go through. In other words, it should be the policy of the government that the working citizens should not pay for healthcare services in light of the government attempting to improve the health of the population (Gardner, 2016).
The other reason why the working citizens should not pay for healthcare is the fact that the government already realizes the need for the provision of a universal healthcare system in the country. As a matter of fact, the government has in the past attempted to institute and put in place a universal healthcare system either through the recommendation for free healthcare services or the provision of universal health coverage. The implications of a universal healthcare system include the possibility of shocks in the private healthcare business. These possibilities have always had the elite class in the United States and other parts of the world opposing the idea of a universal healthcare system. The opposition has usually been for the protection of the business interests of the business class and reason; the elite class has always had their way in fighting for their business interests. Notably, it would take the government to take strong and intentional moves in ensuring that they provide free healthcare services for the citizenry and makes the business for the nation (Mahar, 2015). Considering the goodwill of the government to provide free healthcare services and a universal health coverage system, it would be important for the authorities to provide the care required and for the working citizens not to pay for the services thus mentioned.
The debate on whether or not the working citizens is two-sided with the opposite side of the rift providing a lot of information in opposition to the possibility of providing free healthcare and also universal health coverage. The first point advanced by the opponents is the observation of the economics of government involvement in business. Keynesian economists have in the past argued against the involvement of government in services such as healthcare indicating that this hurts business. For instance, if the government venture into providing free healthcare and the private businesses in this field would be hurt leading to several negative implications on the environment (Mahar, 2015). However, what the opponents fail to recognize is the fact that better population health increasing the productivity of the nation and this would lead to the development of business sin other sectors of the economy. Notably, just because the elite people in the society fear of the negative implications on the industry does not mean that the working class should continue paying for healthcare services (Malhotra, 2009).
The second major point raised by those opposed to free healthcare services and universal healthcare coverage is the observation that such a program is likely to turn the nation from a capitalist nation to a socialist nation. There are various ideological concerns with a country being either capitalist or socialist with the country’s development being among the key factors emanating from the two frontiers. However, those saying that the universal health platform turns the country into a socialist nation fail to recognize the fact that being a capitalist or a socialist can only be changed by changing fundamental areas of the government (Mahar, 2015). Secondly, such people fail to recognize healthcare as a human right protected by the constitution and by a declaration by the government. Thirdly, these people fail to recognize that healthcare is both a necessity and a public good whose provision is best controlled by the government for the overall good of the nation. In other words, the argument fails to recognize that thinking the move to provide universal healthcare does not necessarily translate to a socialist perspective on the nation. This further underscores the importance of the working citizens not paying for healthcare. Notably, the government has been providing free services to the education sector, and this has not raised the socialist issues as herein identified. This acts as a pointer to the issue that the socialist country reasons are just a scheme to try and ensure that the proposals to have free healthcare in the country. In essence, it is notable that the education sector is not considered to be as lucrative as the healthcare sector, and; hence, the industry players in the healthcare sector would like to continue enjoying the supernormal profits while denying the working citizens the human right that is the access to standard and necessity care. Consequently, it is paramount for the government to consider the implementation of a way or ensuring that the provision of healthcare does not only remain in the signed contracts but also that these provisions are also implemented in the improvement of livelihoods in the region (Gardner, 2016).
In conclusion, this paper asserts the position that the working citizens should not pay for the healthcare services. This is because healthcare services are provided for in the constitution under the rights to life and happiness. Secondly, health care services are internationally recognized as a human right, and the nation is a signatory to various declarations on the same issue. Thirdly, the provision of universal healthcare helps in the improvement of healthcare, as well as the public health in the nation. Lastly, the provision of universal healthcare would ensure that the population enjoys the fruits of their contribution to the revenues of the nation.
References
Emanuel, E. (2014). Reinventing American health care: How the Affordable Care Act will improve our terribly complex, blatantly unjust, outrageously expensive, grossly inefficient, error prone system. New York: Perseus Books Group
Gardner, A. (2016). Health insurance for cheapskates: Why you shouldn't just pay the fine. Health.com. Retrieved 5 June 2016, from http://www.health.com/health/article/0,,20750053,00.html
Mahar, M. (2015). Will you owe a penalty under Obamacare? Health Insurance Resource Center. Retrieved 5 June 2016, from https://www.healthinsurance.org/obamacare/obamacare-penalty-calculator/
Malhotra, U. (2009). Solving the American Health Care Crisis. New York: iUniverse Inc
Obamacarefacts.com. (2015). Forced to have coverage, can't afford ot - Story - Obamacare Facts. Obamacare Facts. Retrieved 5 June 2016, from http://obamacarefacts.com/2015/03/23/forced-to-have-coverage-cant-afford-it-story/
