Comparing The U.S. Health Care System with that of The United Kingdom Essay

Comparing The U.S. wellness Care System with that of The United Kingdom - Essay Example(United Nations Development Programme recognize circuit card 1). This means that wellness bearing is a luxury that people with more money peck procure more of and a better tincture of. Choosing to utilize a system of semiprivately funded wellness complaint may be a result of the attitude of the United States of being free, which can be taken to mean free from government control or interference in the free market. While there is public funding available for the elderly and the extremely poor, many people still do not receive the health allot they need. This lack of health take for citizens who need it is currently a composition of much debate.The United Kingdom, on the other hand, funds its citizens health fear publicly, through taxes. According to the 2007-2008 man Development Report, 7% of GDP in the United Kingdom is worn out(p) on public health care while just 1.1% must be spent privately. (United Nations Development Programme See prorogue 1). This difference in expenditures in the United Kingdom translates to the view of health care as a fundamental human right rather than a money-based privilege. When health care began to be publicly funded, the psyche was that if Britain could work towards full employment and spend huge sums of money during the war clock time effort, then in a time of peace equitable measures of social solidarity and financial resources could be redirected towards fostering public goods. (Wikipedia, 2008). Although publicly funded health care provides more health care to a greater number of people, some people believe that the quality of health care provided is lower. In some cases people choose to seek private health care, if they can afford it, entirely they are often upset about having to pay for both private health care and the public health care they are opting out of. Many people do not like the feeling that they are paying for the health care of other people who get grim more frequently or are less healthy. Another concern with the United Kingdoms public health care system is that patients are often waitlisted to see doctors for pressing matters this has led to unnecessary deaths. (Browne, 2001).Putting the private versus public funding debate aside momentarily, there appears also to be discrepancy in the entirety amount of combined public and private money spent on health care in the midst of the United States and the United Kingdom. Based on the previously discussed statistics, the United States spends 15.4% of GDP on its health care while the United Kingdom spends a considerably lower 8.1% of GDP on health care. In terms of what this means for each individual residing in these countries, while per capita GDP in the United States is $41,890 and $6,096 of that is spent on health care, per capita GDP in the United Kingdom is a slightly lower $36,509 but a significantly lower amount, only $2,560 per cap ita is spent on health care. (United Nations Development Programme See Table 1). By having everyone contribute a little bit to the entire societys health care, it appears that health care becomes significantly cheaper for everyone. It is also interesting to note that the United States, with a GDP (in millions) of $12,416.5, as compared to the United Kingdoms $2,198.8, would provoke a lot of GDP to spend elsewhere if only 8.1% was spent on health care instead of 15.4%.Because there are many mixed feelings