Economic Issues in Health Services. Module 9-Chapter 15, 16 and 17

SUNY Empire State College;
Fall 2009 Economic Issues in Health Services; Module 9-Chapters 15-16 and 17; History
of Modern Medicine and International Comparisons Problems-Written
Assignment -VBKMasao

Chapter 15

Problem 3:

{externalities}
Why not charge people full price for vaccinations? Charging people full price for vaccinations is not right because it has such a large benefit for the population in prevention of disease versus only
helping the user for just a small price and protection. (Getzen 2006, p.353), it is not worth making it out of affordability for vaccinations due to it being a general benefit for the public’s health. History proves right that there are tangible benefits from immunizations, such as polio, chicken pox, MMR, and so on. These results are major because the vast use of vaccinations has tremendously reduced the number of people who get sick from diseases that can be prevented by vaccines; therefore the wide use of vaccinations can reduce the risk of exposure to disease from others who have been immunized and contain pandemics and epidemics.  However, when private market indicate shortage of the immunization as it is possible due to the capital and profit invested, it is imperative for the government to jump in and subsidize the shortage because its repacashion is fetal. For example the 2009 Swine Flue fear to the US and the world we witnessed US government and governments of the world efforts to make the vaccine available for its people and this is benefit for the all.

Problem 6:

{property rights} Caring for the poor costs money, much more than they are able to pay directly or in taxes. Why would different government jurisdictions compete to provide medical care for the poor?

Different government jurisdictions compete to provide medical care for the poor because they want the vote of the people and it gives them ideas on how to know what would be a necessary improvement in the lifestyles of the poor, to know what is needed most and what is not needed, to know the appropriate disbursements through the community and to make sure the government monies are spent right and what needs to be removed from the poor, who the government represents the most for. This means that competition is to maximize efficiency and production that is facilitating availability of resources by allocate and direct resources. Most government programs are originating from various forms of tax payers. The problems come from philosophical stand points such as who is benefiting? The rich, or the poor? These are the more arguable subject in the mankind history.

Problem 7:
{incidence, voting} Many goods are desired by some people and not by others. Since diversity of tastes is universal, why does it create more problems for public goods than for private goods?

Since diversity of tastes is universal, it creates more problems for public goods than for private goods ecause there are more people involved in the public goods division.  Public goods make most people better off, but few people happy. (Getzen 2006, p.359) Since public goods are provided at no charge, there is no way to use market behavior to engage demand. (Getzen 2006, p.360) In a real sense the public goods are difficult due diversity of tastes that is in the public consumption uniqueness. For instance, a person who is an environmentalist may vote for someone who will spend a lot of money on the environment, whereas another citizen may want the money sent to help those who are veterans. The different beliefs can deeply cause havoc if there is not a vote for the majority. Each person’s tastes are considered, but they are considered through a vote; thus public good is communal utilization that when goods are produced have to benefit all equally. This is a wild thought that in the US, capitalist, vote is engaged but in many other socialist countries, decisions are monotony based and equality means something different(Getzen 2006, p.360) 

However, diverse tastes in private goods do not have as much theoretical problems as public goods because mankind is pruned to make private choices that can lead them to participation or withdrawal(Getzen 2006, p.360)  . The private goods sector is at a charge, because people who want a leopard coat, for example, may want a coat that is customized to what they like. This type of customization is private, and there fore costs money.

Chapter 16

Problem 2:

{population
growth} How rapidly is the
population growing in the USA? Is
population growing more rapidly or less rapidly elsewhere in the world? Was it
growing more rapidly or less rapidly 100 years ago? 1,000 years ago? 

The population in the United
States is growing quite well the variances are maintained due to adults
expecting to live longer from investing in retirement and also because its per
capita income is one of the highest and it has great medical advancements to
make survival rates be maintained. People have an average of two children, to
stay economically balanced. Children are expensive and people usually want to
keep their fortunes as much as possible to keep up with their life styles. It
is not totally income that makes people healthy, but the things associated with
a higher income, such as more education, better nutrition, social connections,
family stability, and so on. (Getzen 2006, p.385)  A skilled industrial worker earning $40,000 a
year can probably afford $300 a month on health care for health insurance and
another $100 for vitamin supplements and a health club membership. 

 During the last 100 years population was
growing very rapidly all around the world, the value of life tends to increase
more than proportionately as income rises, since life itself is necessary to
enjoy the benefits of having goods. (Getzen 2006, p.386) Population in other
parts of the world are increasing steadily. The more people there is always a
concern for the scarcity of food, pollution and crime, so many people will
naturally maintain their family sizes, having less children, so that they can
invest in living longer, plus benefiting from a better lifestyle.  If current trends continue almost every
country in the world will be developed within 100 years by 2100 and have a
steady and shrinking population. (Getzen 2006, p.383) The population was growing
more rapidly 100 years ago. One thousand years ago the population was very poor
due to many serious contagious diseases.

Problem 11:

{demographic
transition} Why do birth rates
fall during demographic transition? How can population growth be accelerating
if birth rates are declining?

Birth rates fell during
demographic transition due to many factors. Economic development became a broad
focus. Growing food was hard work, took along time, and food was scarce as
populations increased. Giving birth was becoming too expensive and timely,
people wanted to increase their earnings and standards of living. Children
ceased to be a productive farm asset and became a costly form of family
consumption and the need for investment grew, so slowing down family size was a
very effective option. (Getzen 2006, p.379) Women gained more
opportunities and spent less on child bearing. More children survived, thus fewer births were needed to make sure that
one or two children in a family lived to maturity and dependence on them in old
age was replaced by reliance on saving. (Getzen 2006, p.379)  Population growth accelerated as birth rates
declined by people delaying marriages, infanticide extended breast feeding, and
other methods to restrict population to desired levels in many countries
without recourse to contraceptives. People were living longer mainly because
there was enough food to live off for the seasons and the building of their
environment were preserved.  (Getzen 2006,
p.379)

              

Problem 15:

{dynamics}
Did the productivity of medical technology start to increase before or after improvements
in the productivity of industrial technology? Why? What determines the rate of
technological change in medicine?

The productivity of medical
terminology started to increase after the improvements of industrial technology
because organization and stability in society had to fall in place in order for
the concerns to be even thought of on health and medication. (Getzen 2006,
p.389)  Civilizations prospered from
rulers and needed organization before time, money and management could
clearance the ideas to allow the study of medicine to grow. Slaves grew every
foundation of economical and living standards for the wealthy. Slaves were an
investment because there were so many of them in one place to cook, farm, take
care of livestock, build, and hunt. The priests and rulers used their wealth
and time to research and experiment the aspects of the human body and its
environment. (Getzen 2006, p.374)  They
indulged in philosophers for research in mathematics, astronomy, chemistry,
physics and medicine. (Getzen 2006, p.375) Most of the interests in science were more of
fun, game and leisure. The money they used to spend on science was from taxes
from their locals, especially slaves. The high social classes maintained order
through their military and wealth. At the same time of getting all the good
from using slaves, many hierarchies did not want to be overthrown or attacked
by their slaves, so they had to take care of them.  Most of the money they used open doors to
treat and experiment on their wounded or even dead slaves.

Economic resources’ determines
the rate of technological change in medicine. The process of economic
development was mutually reinforcing, because the growth required more
government and investment, and made it possible to free up resources to support
medical science. (Getzen 2006, p.375)

Chapter 17

Problem 2:

{flow of funds} How
much is spent per person on health care in China? How much is spent per person
on healthcare in the U.S.?  In the U.K? What are the primary factors
accounting for these differences?

As of 2002, China spent an average of $205 per
person for health care.  As of 2002, the United States
has spent an average of $4,499 per person for health care. In the U.K.,
an average of $1,774 was spent per person in health care. (Getzen 2006, p.400)
The primary factors accounting for these differences are the national income
per capita. The more the country makes depends on how much is money will be
invested in health care. The way the health care policies are implemented is
still crucial.  In the U.S. the biggest problem is the
implementation of the financial sector in health care.  It has the best resources, but still does not
match with the health of the population. Health care is still extremely expensive and out of reach.  If a person does not have health insurance or
does not pay for it, it will go on their credit until it is paid for. This fear
makes many Americans stay away from their doctor until they get side effects
that keep them in bed to the ER. The problem is there is less spending on
routine care and prevention and more on catastrophic events. (Getzen 2006, p.405)

 Another problem is the competition between
private insurance companies, Americans usually have health care problems that
require attention, if they have a preexisting condition, they will have to pay
extra for having a health care problem and or will not be able to get
insurance.  The other disparity is that
Americans spend more on health care than any other necessity.  Even if they make a good amount of money,
like the average, $30,000 a year, they may have an average family of 4 and pay
up to $500 a month on health insurance not including their other bills and
payment requirements, like housing, car, gas, food, taxes and of course
medication. It still is not fair, so they become debtors. Remember, insurance
is just in case you get sick, so where is the money going when you don’t see
the doctor, or the other monies collected when you finally go.  The monthly payments for health insurance are
still not enough to cover other unexpected medical care, like hospital stay or
diagnostic tests.   This is insufficient
and bad for the middle class who is not making enough or making a little too
much, so they will not go see a doctor because it may be too expensive or they
are afraid to incur more unexpected costs, like an x ray or an MRI, that should not be so expensive, or used as
often as the way it has been.  The amount
that the U.S. uses an MRI and open heart surgery is ridiculous compared
with the other top countries of the world like Germany
and Canada, who used the
technology thousands less than the U.S.  (Health Getzen 2006, p.412) Health care is not
mandatory in America.
Buying health care is normal and expensive. Because the prestigious status is
so high in the U.S.
overspending is easy to gain looks of attraction.  Most hospitals compete in America for the best technology and
looks, not the best physicians, building state of the art with modern
technology and capability of research, even when doing so drains the funds from
the clinics and nursing care that can do more to aid in prevention.  This leads to spending out of the means
disrupting the normal functions of the hospital and not giving enough
investments in prevention.  Greed is
leading to problems in America,
letting profit get over on individuals health can lead to failure and robber of
a healthy society. A nation can have money, but the issue is if they are
spending it right. In China,
the U.S. and UK
there are some similarities with the way money is invested in health care,
private hospitals and insurance seem to be the best and offer better services. China
is the world’s largest population in the world and the tactics for health care
seems to be a privilege and not a right. China’s
government spends only a 2 % share, compared to America’s 42 %. (Getzen 2006, p.398)
This shows the differences in economical classes between each individual.  UK uses a better system because
insurance is mandatory and premiums are with held from wages by a public
agency. Purchasing of expensive new diagnostic and therapeutic technology is
restricted. (Getzen 2006, p.411)

Problem 4:

{correlation vs causality}
Is more spending on health care associated with more health?

Spending more on health care does
not necessarily mean that there is better health.  Many factors associated with higher incomes,
such as education, nutrition, and sanitation is also known to improve health. (Getzen 2006,
p.401) Life expectancy has improved greatly in many poor countries even when
the amount of doctors and per capita declined. With no knowledge of what to do, money is worthless, and medical
knowledge alone is useless in the face of extreme poverty, which leads to death
from starvation. (Getzen 2006, p.401)  Studies
in childhood mortality in the U.S. is a great example because children of
wealthy physicians were just a likely to die before age five as children from
poor laborers living in tenements, since both the poor and wealthy used the
same ineffectual health practices. (Getzen 2006, p.401) High rates of illness are a
function not of poverty, but of extreme deprivation.  The greater the degree of inequality the more
likely the families will die from simple illnesses and even hunger. (Getzen 2006,
p.402)  For example, America loves its easy free for all
lifestyle, and eating un healthy foods, like fast food, or sugary substances
more often than sparingly will make health problems incur, such as heart
problems and cholesterol. The number one killers in America are obesity and heart
issues.  These issues can make simple
habits like these become deadly.  Living
in some countries are inhumane, such as, most parts of Africa, and Sudan
where people are almost guaranteed to die. If there is no government, medications or medical help, then there is no
life.

Problem 5:

{incidence} As an
officer of the World Health Organization with a budgetary allocation of $100
million, which programs would you fund if you wished to make the greatest
impact on health, measured as the increase in life expectancy multiplied by the
number of people affected?

As an officer of the World Health
Organization with a budgetary allocation of $100 million, I would invest in
religious programs, such as Catholic, or Christian for example, because I
believe health care is definitely something that needs improvements. Catholic
clinics seem to educate and implement ways to change the lifestyle of people,
especially children. I would develop fitness centers and health classes to
those who need it. I believe that we need to first find out what we can do to
improve the organization and flow of funds. People need to be treated like they are individuals and they need to
take education on what their lifestyles need. People who Smoke and drink is something that I would not invest in to
treat, but will help them quit or educate them because it is a waste of money.
I will only help those who want a

Reference:

Getzen,
T. (2006). Health economics : fundamentals and flow of funds. [S.l.],
Wiley, John & Sons.

The Fatherhood Life Reader(s) Signature and Disclaimer. Content of this Blog (The Fatherhood Life) is intended for the use of reader(s) only and may contain privileged, confidential, or proprietary information that is exempt from disclosure under law. Reader(s) discretion is required. If you have received this link in error, please inform us promptly by profile e-mail, and then exit the link immediately. Content of this blog are protected under the privacy, 1st amendment and private property laws. Do not distribute, print, download and or copy content of this Blog without Blog administrator’s permission. Thank you and may God bless you and The United States Of America. "In God we Trust"