An Economic Justification for Universal Health Care

Higher taxes and lower quality health care are the generally-cited reasons against universal health care. These reasons are speculative at best and fraudulent at worst. That they are presented as fact does a disservice to all Americans. Many uninsured Americans do not get the health care they need. Many insured Americans do not get the health care they deserve. To make sure all Americans have access to the best health care they can afford, America needs to take a chance on universal health care.

It is necessary to make clear that the implementation of universal health care doesn’t necessitate the elimination of privatized health care. Privatized health care will exist as long as there is a market for privatized health care. Universal health care would coexist and act as a check and balance for privatized health care. Universal health care would ensure that Americans who can afford privatized health care receive top of the line health care because privatized health care should at least be better than universal health care.

The notion that universal health care means a tax hike for most working Americans is a falsehood spread by politicians on behalf of lobbyists for insurance and prescription drug agencies. There may or may not be an tax increase. But no matter how fiscally conservative a regime claims to be, the necessity of taxing remains and the question of how much to tax and how to spend those taxes becomes the issue. Effective governments execute policy effectively so that taxes are spent in ways that increase the overall welfare of a country. Taxes are an investment, and while we as Americans have little say in how much we are taxed, we can elect leaders who will make sound investment decisions and cut fatty spending. In fact, if fatty spending on things like campaign financing and advertising were cut and those budgets were shifted toward universal health care, citizens may avoid a tax hike altogether.

Universal health care is a sound investment decision. A healthy nation is a happy nation. A healthy nation is a smart nation. A healthy nation is a productive nation. A universal health care system gives health care workers a compelling incentive to cure patients the first time. A second round of treatments is a waste of time and additional work without a benefit. The current system of health care is predicated on ethics and insurance companies. The incentive for the doctors is backwards. It rewards doctors for prolonged treatment.

Even if there is a hike, the check and balance check and balance of universal health care may well be worth the extra taxes they pay levied the wealthiest Americans. The incentive for prolonged treatment might remain constant, but the check and balance of the universal system makes it necessary for your doctor to give you top-of-the-line treatment at a cost determined by the market instead of some combination of insurance and health care executives. After all, wealthy Americans won't pay more for expensive health care if that in the universal system is better.

We may never be able to assess the cost per person of a universal health care system versus the cost benefit to health care consumers in the private sector. But with proper execution, benefits like lowers costs and better service in the private sector should follow.
Other consumer benefits might result from the need to change the model for insurance companies and new incentives for drug companies.

To be clear, this is not a critique of the hardworking individuals in the health care profession who dedicate their lives to bettering others’ lives. Rather, this is to suggest that a universal health care system can serve all Americans better.

Dustin Newcombe
8/6/2008