Which One is better between Governments Fund Free Healthcare through Taxes or

Citizens Pay Themselves with Private Health Insurance?

Health as part of human rights and is one of the elements of welfare that must be realized in
accordance with the ideals of the nation. Who pays for healthcare? The answer varies from country
to country. While in some nations it is government fund free healthcare through taxes, in other you
can pay private insurance. This essay will identify two main models of healthcare through the
world, noting some advantages and disadvantages.
Tax plays an important role in the life of the nation and state. About 80 percent of state revenue
comes from taxes. The income is allocated to national development, covering various fields, from
education, health, economy, and also infrastructure. Denmark is one of the highest tax countries
in the world. In each month an average of 45 percent of Danish citizens' income is collected to
pay taxes. In Denmark, citizen are entitled to health care costs, doctor visits, and hospitalizations
in quality hospitals. The advantages of systems, the health costs of citizens are truly guaranteed by
government in a neat system without pursuing profits. However, this system relies heavily on the
number of tax-compliant citizens. Undoubtedly, if a lot of citizen not dutifully pay taxes the
government will face unsustainable financial burdens or a drop in the quality of services and
facilities provided.
In the private model, healthcare is only available to patient who pay for it and healthcare
providers are commercial companies. In United States (US), most citizens take out health
insurance to cover their potential medical costs. It is estimated only around 15 percent until 20
percent of the population in the US that is not protected by health insurance. The US adheres to
the idea that people are responsible for their own destiny. The state only protects those who are
thrown from the system, for example, because of poverty and old age. Private insurance systems
allow health care providers to increase their ability and profits, thereby triggering health cost
inflation. To compensate for market forces on the part of insurers and service providers, large
companies that have to bear their employees have developed a managed competition system. In
other nation, there is no such safety net, and those who cannot pay simply do not get the healthcare
they need, unless they can get help. The disadvantages of this system of this obvious: not only are
individuals deprived of the medical attention they need, but also the lack of preventative medicine
means that infectious disease can quickly spread. One advantage however, is that a higher quality
of care provision can sometimes be maintained by commercial organizations than by struggling
government-funded ones.
This essay has compared two models of healthcare provision, advantages, and disadvantages
of each. As no system is perfect, several countries are now considering a combination of the models
for the national health system. The challenge is to find a system the provides a good level of
healthcare all citizens, but which is also affordable and practical.