What is socialist health care? Should people pay for health care services? What is the best model of health care service? Socialist health care is medical care financed by the government of the country and the money gained with the help of taxation. Many countries claim that they have free health care service for their citizens. Frankly speaking, health care is the most expensive branch of economy of every country; therefore, it is hard to say that the policy of free health care is reasonable. Many experts criticize this policy saying that people should pay for health care service if they want to receive high quality medical assistance.

The term ‘socialist health care’ is associated with socialism and communism and is often treated like pejorative. In the early 1900s, the term was accepted without any connotations. With the spread of socialistic movements in Europe, socialist health care sounded suspiciously. The main idea of social health care is to provide people with the free access towards medical assistance. Many European countries and the USA introduced this policy. Free health care system worked in socialistic countries, like the USSR or China.

The idea of socialist health care is very noble and positive. It is good to provide people with free medical service, because it demonstrates care of the government about its people. Moreover, years ago, free health care assistance was very relevant, because it helped defeat such diseases as tuberculosis, poliomyelitis, diphtheria, etc. People were asked to check whether they were not ill in order to avoid the transmission of these diseases in the society. Consequently, many people were cured for free and it helped to defeat these dangerous diseases once for all.

Naturally, socialist health care is a controversial issue. There are many problems, which are associated with this type of health care. To begin with, when something is free, people begin to use it more frequently. When we make food free for everyone, people will not limit themselves to the consumption of hot dogs and light dishes. They will consume various kinds of meat and exotic fruit, because it is free. Furthermore, they will not eat only one apple. They will eat at least two or three apples, because they can. We can apply this idea to the field of health care.

Secondly, when health care service is paid by the government, the state budget loses enormous sums of money, because health care is extremely expensive. It is impossible to provide every citizen with the proper assistance. Every hospital has a limited number of physicists, beds and equipment. When everyone decides to take advantage of free health care service, hospitals will be overloaded with patients. Many patients will demand to cure their serious diseases, like cancer or AIDS. Obviously, the budget is not able to cover such expenditures.

Next, I should say that free health care service is a bad idea because of its quality. When you provide someone with free help, you will not try to fulfil your job effectively. When a professional physicist works for nothing, he will not try to treat his patients in the right way. Balance is very important in every issue. If you want quality, you should pay for it.

Although I agree that healthcare is very expensive to an average citizen, it is not right to make it free. The best decision is to make health insurances, which will cover at least the half of your expenditures. One should pay at least 50% of the cost of the definite type of health care assistance. The second half will be paid by the government or insurance companies. People should pay at least something; otherwise, the entire health care system cannot exist. When this branch of economy is financed by the government, there is no money for education, the development of infrastructure and other purposes.

This short essay is published by  WriteMyPaperHub designed to provide UK students with quality writing assistance.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  1. Robert Jones says:

    With great respect and all due sympathy, if this has been published with assistance, I tremble to think how it would have read without it.

  2. Jean Hardiman Smith says:

    The only reason I have a number of life shortening (I have about 2 years to go according to my prognosis) genetic conditions is because I know I will get my healthcare free? I would of course have limited them had I realised how easily I could do so. It is, according to your argument, just like going on a diet. All of us disabled really should have thought it through. Of course we are not very wealthy (being sick and disabled does that to you – the breadwinner also becomes a carer, and you are not able to work until old age, even if you do so very happily earlier on), so we won’t get quality, and will probably die off. Nor will children in poorer families get good quality care, but so what, if the parents want it they should pay or let their children die. Happened to my aunt Stella. She died at only 2 years old, much loved and mourned, because the family had no money for a doctor. If parents die, well more kids for adoption? If you get cancer in the US you work til you die, or have no chemo, and no palliative care. Half the costs of something like cancer would bankrupt your family, and insurance companies are notorious for refusing to pay out. Healthcare is the highest cause of bankrupsy in the US,even of people who thought they had good insurance. I know married couples and their families back with their parents, having lost their house, and parents back living with their kids and families in inadequate accomodation, the alternative being homelessness. And the US is at the bottom of the health league tables, while costing many times more. People routinely have to wait months for a doctor’s appointment, where we wait days or at worst a couple of weeks. Have you REALLY thought this through. We can afford it. Even if we keep on leasing American hardware, which only they can actually let us use (so why not let them have it back, and we can ask them for money to base it here if they want?), Even if we continue to allow companies like Amazon to negotiate not to pay any tax – they won’t really leave and give up their profits no matter what you are told, and if they do, we have a space for a home grown company to step in and keep the profits here – we can still afford the NHS.

    We had the best system in the word for the price, and could afford to improve it even more if we weren’t leaching out billions of pounds of taxpayers money for hospitals under PFI and PF2, some of which have interest rates that make Wonga look philanthropic. Not to mention paying over the odds to give contracts for lower quality at a higher price to the private sector, when the NHS has put in by far the better bid all round. The political will is not there. What are a few dead babies when there is a profit to be made – is it worth the cost? Would it be worth your brother or sister? child? Parent? grandparent?. I really feel sorry for you., I wonder how you will cope with your aged frail and sick parents when society doesn’t collectively support you to do so via an NHS free at the point of use? I hope you never have a disabled child. My US experience tells me unless you are going to be very rich indeed (and haven’t you just had your student loan increased retrospectively?) or are partnered to a caring unselfish woman/man prepared to give up work to be a nurse/carer, or earning enough to keep you all and pay the medical expenses, and that is an awful lot, you are going to bitterly regret this essay when you are older.

    PS people who die in the USA without insurance are not usually PMd, so the stats for cancer deaths, for example, are very underreported and innacurate. It is not in the healthcare providers interests to publicise this. Some of their companies have been caught out and fined for performing operations where the only reason is profit – even down to removing the lungs of the worried well with a cough. A clear profit motive driving a culture detrimental to people like you and me,and more expensive. One hospice only took fit and well older people as the dying ones cost them their profits. The government took them to court in that case. Check out the litigations!!.

    PPS The NHS has saved my life on a number of occasions. Without it, I would have ceased typing years ago. A few years ago it was brilliant, and with the will to keep it going as a service for the public (the public is you too btw), not the shareholders and big business, it can be so again. If you had an accident right now, who would pick up the bill? Are you SURE your credit card will always cover the excess. What if it happens when you have just exceeded your limits as you/your wife have just had a baby, and you have an accident? What if your insurance company decides to stop your cover because you or your family are too sick? (happened to a friend, an academic, who ended up in a tent, with her Rheumatoid arthritis, and newly diagnosed cancer – and no treatment for either as her cover was stopped due to the RA having gone on too long (its a lifelong often life shortening condition btw). When the NHS is gone, and there are no rivals, what will the big insurance companies charge then? Around one thousand pounds per month for a healthy family of 4 according to US friends.

    Repeat: The NHS is affordable, and one really should think this through in more depth before clicking on the submit button – sorry!!.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 830 other subscribers.

Follow us on Twitter