Log out Go to App
Go to App

Learning Materials

Features

Discover

Chapter 7: Problem 5

An article in the Economist noted that the National Health Service (NHS) in the United Kingdom "provides health care free at the point of use." a. What does "free at the point of use" mean? Is health care actually free to residents of the United Kingdom? Briefly explain. b. The same article suggested that funding problems at the NHS could be alleviated by "reducing demand for unnecessary treatments" and noted that while two-thirds of the 35 countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) charge patients for an appointment with a general practitioner, the NHS does not. Is there a possible connection between the NHS's funding problem and its failure to charge patients for doctor appointments? Briefly explain.

Short Answer

Expert verified
a. 'Free at the point of use' essentially means that residents do not have to pay when receiving the services. However, it's funded through resident’s tax contributions. So, it isn't entirely free. b. The connection between the NHS's funding problem and the failure to charge for doctor appointments is that by not charging, the service can be overutilized thereby escalating costs which could worsen funding problems. Charging could deter unnecessary appointments, thus reducing demand and aiding the alleviation of funding problems.

Step by step solution

01

Understanding 'Free at the Point of Use'

'Free at the point of use' means that services provided by the NHS, include visits to the doctor, hospital treatment etc., do not require users to pay at the time they receive the service. Health care isn't entirely free for residents of the UK because it is funded through taxes. So, while residents do not pay directly for the services, they indirectly fund it through their tax contributions. The idea is to distribute the cost across the population, so nobody is denied healthcare due to inability to pay.
02

Understanding NHS's funding problem

The NHS's funding problem refers to the lack of resources to cater to the health needs of the entire UK population. This could be a result of inadequate tax revenues or increased demand for medical services or a combination of both.
03

Understanding the Connection Between NHS's Funding problem and failure to charge for doctor appointments

By not charging for doctor appointments, the NHS is increasing the ease with which people can avail medical services. This can lead to overutilization of medical resources, which in-turn can escalate their costs. Charging an appointment fee can act as a filter to deter individuals from seeking unnecessary medical treatments. By implementing charges for appointments, the number of people seeking such services would likely decrease, helping reduce the excess demand and alleviate funding problems.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Start your free trial

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

What are the main sources of health insurance in the United States?

Briefly discuss the most important differences between the market for health care and the markets for other goods and services.

Some economists and policymakers have argued that one way to control federal government spending on Medicare is to have a board of experts decide whether new medical technologies are worth their higher costs. If the board decided that they are not worth the costs, Medicare would not pay for them. Other economists and policymakers argue that the costs to beneficiaries should more closely represent the costs of providing medical services. This result might be attained by raising premiums, deductibles, and copayments or by "means testing," which would limit the Medicare benefits that high-income individuals receive. Political columnist David Brooks summarized these two ways to restrain the growth of spending on Medicare: "From the top, a body of experts can be empowered to make rationing decisions.... Alternatively, at the bottom, costs can be shifted to beneficiaries with premium supports to help them handle the burden." a. What are "rationing decisions"? How would these decisions restrain the growth of Medicare spending? b. How would shifting the costs of Medicare to beneficiaries restrain the growth of Medicare spending? What does Brooks mean by "premium supports"? c. Should Congress and the president be concerned about the growth of Medicare spending? If so, which of these approaches should they adopt, or is there a third approach that might be better? (Note: This question is normative and has no definitive answer. It is intended to lead you to consider possible approaches to the Medicare program.

Briefly compare the health care systems in Canada, Japan, and the United Kingdom with the health care system in the United States.

The late Nobel Laureate Robert Fogel of the University of Chicago argued, "Expenditures on health care are driven by demand, which is spurred by income and by advances in biotechnology that make health interventions increasingly effective." a. If Fogel was correct, should policymakers be concerned by projected increases in health care spending as a percentage of GDP? b. What objections do some economists raise to Fogel's analysis of what is driving increases in spending on health care?
See all solutions

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free