Public vs Private Healthcare
Public vs Private Healthcare: the advantages and disadvantages of both
As a first generation Canadian, due to the on-going debate about a possible public-private healthcare interface, I have become very familiar with the meaning of public vs private healthcare. In a socialist type government healthcare services are provided, funded and regulated by the government, which constitutes as a public healthcare system. On the other hand, entrepreneur-run (profit-based) clinics and hospitals that are privately owned would be considered part of a private healthcare sect.
As a Canadian I have experienced the benefits of a relatively efficient public healthcare system. When comparing this to our neighbor’s healthcare system, statistics have shown that although the majority of services provided in the U.S. are through the private healthcare sect, the US seems to spend much more on maintaining this system per capita than Canada. Somehow indicating that a government regulated system might be run a little more efficiently. Furthermore, from personal experience I have learned that a public health care system also provides access to everyone. It eliminates discrimination according to an individual’s income and class, when you are a patient you are treated with the same level of care whether you live in a million-dollar condo or in government housing. This in my opinion promotes equality and unification amongst Canadian citizens. I believe that with the government spending at stake the health of Canadians is more closely monitored. For instance, statistics provide that smoking leads to many health issues that in the end cause the government quite a bit of spending, this intern has encouraged many campaigns against smoking. For example, in Australia (another country with a publicly run healthcare system) persons born after a certain year will not be legally allowed to purchase cigarettes. Although in the opinion of some people, this is against human rights, in my personal
As a first generation Canadian, due to the on-going debate about a possible public-private healthcare interface, I have become very familiar with the meaning of public vs private healthcare. In a socialist type government healthcare services are provided, funded and regulated by the government, which constitutes as a public healthcare system. On the other hand, entrepreneur-run (profit-based) clinics and hospitals that are privately owned would be considered part of a private healthcare sect.
As a Canadian I have experienced the benefits of a relatively efficient public healthcare system. When comparing this to our neighbor’s healthcare system, statistics have shown that although the majority of services provided in the U.S. are through the private healthcare sect, the US seems to spend much more on maintaining this system per capita than Canada. Somehow indicating that a government regulated system might be run a little more efficiently. Furthermore, from personal experience I have learned that a public health care system also provides access to everyone. It eliminates discrimination according to an individual’s income and class, when you are a patient you are treated with the same level of care whether you live in a million-dollar condo or in government housing. This in my opinion promotes equality and unification amongst Canadian citizens. I believe that with the government spending at stake the health of Canadians is more closely monitored. For instance, statistics provide that smoking leads to many health issues that in the end cause the government quite a bit of spending, this intern has encouraged many campaigns against smoking. For example, in Australia (another country with a publicly run healthcare system) persons born after a certain year will not be legally allowed to purchase cigarettes. Although in the opinion of some people, this is against human rights, in my personal