posted by Taylor on .
Read essay below and explain how effectively did the author persuade you and why?
The United States is the only modernized Western nation that does not offer publically funded health care to
all its citizens; the costs of health care for the uninsured in the United States are prohibitive, and the practices of insurance companies are often more interested in profit margins than providing health care. These conditions are incompatible with U.S. ideals and standards, and it is time for the U.S. government to provide universal health care coverage for all its citizens. Like education, health care should be considered a fundamental right of all U.S. citizens, not simply a privilege for the upper middle classes.
One of the most common arguments against providing universal health care coverage (UHC) is that it will cost too much money. In other words, UHC would raise taxes too much. While providing health care for all U.S. citizens would cost a lot of money for every taxpaying citizen, citizens need to examine exactly how much money it would cost and, more importantly, how much money is “too much” when it comes to opening up health care for all. Those who have health insurance already pay too much money, and those without coverage are charged unfathomable amounts. The cost of publicly funded health care versus the cost of current insurance premiums is unclear. In fact, some Americans, especially those in lower income brackets than the most wealthy, could stand to pay less than their current premiums.
However, even if UHC would cost Americans a bit more money each year, we ought to reflect on what type of country we would like to live in, and what types of morals we represent if we are more willing to deny health care to others on the basis of saving a couple hundred dollars per year. In a system that privileges capitalism and rugged individualism, little room remains for compassion and love. It is time that Americans realize the amorality of U.S. hospitals forced to turn away the sick and poor. UHC is a health care system that aligns more closely with the core values that so many Americans espouse and respect, and it is time to realize its potential.
Another common argument against UHC in the United States is that other comparable national health care systems, like that of England, France, or Canada, are bankrupt or rife with problems. UHC opponents claim that sick patients in these countries often wait in long lines or long wait lists for basic health care. Opponents also commonly accuse these systems of being unable to pay for themselves, racking up huge deficits year after year. A fair amount of truth lies in these claims, but Americans must remember to put those problems in context with the problems of the current U.S. system as well. It is true that people often wait to see a doctor in countries with UHC, but we in the United States wait as well, and we often schedule appointments weeks in advance, only to have onerous waits in the doctor’s “waiting rooms.”
Critical and urgent care abroad is always treated urgently, much the same as it is treated in the United States.
The main difference there, however, is cost. Even health insurance policy holders are not safe from the costs of health care in the United States. Each day an American acquires a form of cancer, and the only effective treatment might be considered “experimental” by an insurance company and thus is not covered. Without medical coverage, the patient must pay for the treatment out of pocket. But these costs may be so prohibitive that the patient will either opt for a less effective, but covered, treatment; opt for no treatment at all; or attempt to pay the costs of treatment and experience unimaginable financial consequences. Medical bills in these cases can easily rise into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, which is enough to force even wealthy families out of their homes and into perpetual debt. Even though each American could someday face this unfortunate situation, many still choose to take the financial risk. Instead of gambling with health and financial welfare, U.S. citizens should press their representatives to set up UHC, where their coverage will be guaranteed and affordable.
Despite the opponents’ claims against universal health care coverage, a universal system will save lives and encourage the health of all Americans. Why has public education been so easily accepted, but not public health care? It is time for Americans to start thinking socially about health in the same ways they think about education and police services, as rights of U.S. citizens.
The persuasive essay example on Universal Health Care Coverage for the U.S. was very informative. It explained in great detail both sides of the story, but continued to sway me to believe that all U.S. citizens should receive Universal Health Care. The writer provided wonderful examples as to why Universal Health Care is the best route to follow and the ideas behind that. However; he/she did not cite or reference any of the material that he/she provided; making me believe that it could be an opinion or biased view of the topic. I also think that the author may have gone into too much detail on the opposing side. Even though I tend to lean on the side of the author; there were several strong points made as to why we should not have Universal Health Care. I do not think that much information (on the opposing side) should have been put into the essay. He/she needed to focus more of their argument so they reader will believe what he/she is saying.
Does this sound alright? Is there anything that you would add?