Most of the proposed reforms of the US healthcare bill focus on ideologies and financing wider coverage. However, through comparison with countries like Canada and UK which have better functioning healthcare systems US can learn efficient means of implementing an effective healthcare system.
This research aims at examining the areas that US healthcare goes wrong in comparison to countries like Canada and the UK that have successful health care systems. One crucial problem is the fact that a great percentage of American population is not covered with insurance, and there is the issue of inequitable and inefficient incentives for the provision and purchase of insurance. Moreover, there are problems when it comes to what should be covered and what should not if universal healthcare insurance coverage is initiated. Moreover, there are also hindrances in terms of healthcare costs and administrative complexities that many people feel they are expensive and exhausting. The issue of low quality health care services offered, and the fact that most patients feel that their preferences are not adequately responded has been an outcry of American citizens for a long time (Luft, 8). US is one of the few industrialized countries that do not offer healthcare system that is universal as well as publicly funded, and this has been a major problem between the government and activists. It has also been pointed out that US spend an immense percentage of its capital income in health care compared to other nations, yet it does not cover an enormous part of its population, considering that most Americans are said to end up bankrupt because of health expenses.
Compared to US, Canada has healthcare that reaches wider coverage, it is known as single-payer system. The main difference between this system and America’s is how Canada healthcare is funded. Unlike US, where citizens pay their medical expenses