51, No. 1, 1973 (pp. 95-124). OECD has 30 member countries in its elite panel and in that survey they have identified that Public spending (5.8 GDP) is almost identical to that of Great Britain or any other countries. It also compared Pharmaceutical spending, Health care spending by the Government and Health care status in the country etc to produce the research. While they have observed that IN U.S the spending more than other countries in Health care it is not producing the desired results. One of the main reasons for this being the relatively greater cost in US of health care services when compared to other countries.
This makes Health care services in US to many of its citizens and many others who are working in their country virtually unreachable. During the mid 1990's when there is a software craze going on around the world and In US also, they recognized the need for policy modifications in their Health care systems, which is a result of crisis already existing.
The problem with the policy making is that it only reveals what policies need to modified so as to design a suitable policy or them. However the important part that is how to execute these policies is never taken into count. Also in a country like U.S planning a health service suitable for the entire population it self is a big challenge. The reason being the older populations are growing because low mortality rate especially in old people. Also the older people despite the fact they are living for a longer duration are also direly in need of medical supplies.
Andersons' Principles of planning:
1. Business ethics
2. Need Vs the demand
4. Equity theory
While Anderson discussed at the length about the market penetration and Pricing models the strategies suggested by Anderson had implications on the U.S Social structure, their economy and the people's economy too.
The reason for change:
One of the prime reasons why the US wanted a change in the health care system is due to the low potential index of the health care system. Quality surveys done by organizations such as OECD reveal exactly these implications. In the sense, the US health care is a victim of poor monitoring and the failure of supply chain mechanism.
Like in many other countries the US health care has to cater its services to large middle class section and affordability of the services is a criterion for change. Also the US wanted discrimination to end and the only way to beat it is by furthering the market potential of the health care services.
However while initiating the change process not enough study has been done according to the writer to nullify the consequences. In one way the consequences are unforeseen, even by the industry experts and to add to the existing woes the weakening of the economy caused further trouble.
The Government has taken measures to ensure a certain change is possible and they thought that by maximizing the net returns on the health care can lessen the burden on the already weak and depleted economy. For this they have chosen change agents for continuous and consistent supply of the health care services even in the farthest corners of U.S.
More over they have taken steps to cut down on the expenditures to minimize losses the health care is incurring for a period of time. Inorder to ensure that costs are reduced they have