Recent orders
Healthcare Spending And GDP
Healthcare Spending And GDP
The availability of healthcare that is affordable to citizens is a dream of every nation. The issue of healthcare spending has been a topic for debate over the past few years. Today, there is a lot of concern on healthcare issues one of them being the healthcare spending. The cost of healthcare has been going up and it is still projected to rise. Presently it is about a fifth of the economic activity of the U.S. There are many factors that contribute to the rising costs of healthcare. This include first the fact that many people in America lack health insurance at any costs and they can not even manage to afford what is termed as the most basic health coverage.
There has been a rise of people who are not insured due to the fact that the per capita healthcare spending has gone up. It can also be attributed to the fact that many people have lost their jobs and the fact that the economy is poor. Rise in healthcare spending can also be attributed to the use of improved technology, vaccine improvement, antibiotics, introduction of heart disease care as well as advances in surgery. There have also been improved medical devices like CT scanners, MRI, ultrasounds and defibrillators that can be implanted. At the same time there are developments in pharmaceuticals and administration costs have also contributed to the rise in costs of healthcare. Mostly the heath care costs are due to medical technology which is approximately over 200 billion per year (Wayne, 2012). The lifestyles of people in America also impact the health care industry in a big way almost sixty percent of the population is over weight and childhood obesity is a very rampant issue in today’s health. Other factors that have an impact on the healthcare spending are; poor diets, high blood pressure, smoking, lack of exercise, drugs and drinking. It is the people themselves who have pushed the costs of health care up. The high healthcare spending ahs effects not only to families but also to businesses and public budgets. Expenditure on healthcare is seen to rise at a rate that is fast even faster than the state of the economy entirely and the wages of the working people.
In 2011 spending on medications, hospital visits as well as other medical care went up with an estimated percentage of 3.9 this consumed about 17.9% of the GDP. This is more than three times the deficit. Much of the money is considered to be spent appropriately which is keeping people alive and healthy but of course this is a very big problem. If only the health care spending can be reduced to a certain level then the deficit will be offset and free by almost half-trillion dollars in a year which can be used to invest in other areas of the economy particularly economic growth. These increases in the expenditure will continue outpacing the projections of economic growth. It is projected that by 2020 healthcare spending will be about $4.64 trillion which is a representation of close to 20% of the GDP. This therefore means that health care spending commands a great percentage of the overall GDP.GDP will therefore continue to go up as long as the spending in healthcare goes up or continues to rise. If the trends that have been seen for the previous years go on then health care spending will eat up the GDP in the lifetime of the future generation. Health care spending will use up the federal government budget which is the root cause of the debt problem in the U.S. With health care spending eating too much into the GDP will mean that there will be no room for spending on security, defense or any other roles by the government (Hixon, 2012).
References
Wayne, A. (2012). -Care appending to reach 20% of U.S Economy by 202 BloombergBusinessweek.Health 1.Retrieved march 28,2013 from http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-06-13/health-care-spending-to-reach-20-percent-of-u-dot-s-dot-economy-by-2021Hixon,T.(2012).The U.S Does Not Have A Debt problem….It has a Health Care Cost problem.retrieved march 28,2013 from http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddhixon/2012/02/09/the-u-s-does-not-have-a-debt-problem-it-has-a-health-care-cost-problem/
Should the Legal Drinking Age be Lowered
Should the Legal Drinking Age be Lowered?
Student’s name
Institutional affiliation
Should the Legal Drinking Age be Lowered?
Introduction
In the United States, the Minimum Legal Drinking Age laws (MDLA) dictate that the legal drinking age is 21. All 50 states have set their minimum drinking age to 21 years, although exceptions tend to apply from state to state. Exceptions to MDLA law include medical necessity, adult supervision, and basic home consumption. Proponents argue that the minimum drinking age should be lowered from 21 years, while opponents insist that teenagers should not be allowed to take alcohol before age 21. In my viewpoint, the legal drinking age should be reduced from 21 years to 18 years because as is, this law does not prevent drinking but only pushes individuals to drink in less controlled environments. This essay discusses why reducing the legal drinking age is better than maintaining it at 21 years.
Supporting arguments
Reduced Accidents
The first reason I support lowering the legal drinking age from 21 years is that it reduces the number of drunken driving-related traffic accidents and fatalities. According to research, many countries with a minimum legal drinking age of 18 registers fewer accidents caused by drunken driving compared to those with a legal drinking age of 21. Research shows that 31% of road traffic deaths in the United States have to do with alcohol (Saffer & Grossman, 2017). This is higher in numerous countries whose legal drinking age is below 21, including Germany (9%), France (29%), China (4%), Great Britain (16%), and Israel (3%). Worth noting, the legal drinking age varied across states before 1984 after the enactment of the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984. Despite the United States raising the legal drinking age to 21 in 1984, its rates of fatalities and accidents reduced by less than that registered by European countries, whose minimum legal drinking age is less than 21.
At 18 One is an Adult
The second reason why I support lowering legal drinking age from 21 to 18 years is because everybody is an adult at the age of the 18. If 18 years marks adulthood, then why would adults be restricted from accessing alcohol? In my viewpoint, adults have the mandate to make informed decisions concerning alcohol consumption. They should not be restricted from accessing alcohol at 18 years because, after all they should be able responsible enough to drink responsibly and make informed decisions. Essentially, suppose 18 is when a person earns the right to vote, get married, serve as a juror, join the military, and get prosecuted as adults. In that case, there is no reason to prevent them from purchasing and accessing alcohol. All the aforementioned adult responsibilities involve putting their life at risk and so does alcohol consumption.
Decreased Unsafe Drinking
The third reason the legal drinking age should be reduced is that it helps reduce unsafe drinking activities among young adults. Letting up to 18-year-olds purchase and consume alcohol in environments that are regulated would help address irresponsible drinking. When these young adults drink under adult supervision, they are bound to drink responsibly, which translates into safe drinking. Come to think of it, when 18-year-olds are denied entry in clubs and bars and other licensed alcohol-taking locations, it only makes them result in secret drinking, which can be irresponsible. They end up resulting in drinking in unsupervised locations such as house parties or fraternity houses where they are more prone to binge drinking and irresponsible behavior.
Counterarguments
Reducing Legal Drinking Age is Medically Irresponsible.
Opponents of reducing the legal drinking age to 18 years argue that doing would be irresponsible. Research shows that alcohol consumption interferes with the development of the brain in young adults. It affects the frontal lobes that are responsible for functions such as organization, emotional regulation, and planning. When alcohol tampers with early brain development, there is a possibility of causing more severe chronic problems, including memory loss, vulnerability to addiction, reduced decision-making ability, dangerous risk-taking behavior, violence, depression, and suicide (Nguyen‐Louie, Matt, Jacobus, Li, Cota, Castro, & Tapert, 2017). While this reasoning is justified, I still believe that reducing the legal drinking age is the right move because, after all, the reality is that laws do not make much of a difference. Even though the legal drinking age is 21, teenagers tend to access alcohol regardless. When it comes to medical responsibility, there should be education for young adults to sensitize them to drink responsibly to avoid adverse brain development issues.
Conclusion
In closing, the debate about whether the legal drinking age should be reduced has been going on for a while. While proponents support lowering the drinking age, opponents are not convinced that it would be a good move. Legal drinking age should be reduced from 21 to 18 years because at 18, a person is already an adult and it helps reduce unsafe drinking activities. Additionally, reducing the drinking age translates into reduced drunken driving-related accidents and fatalities. Parents should supervise their children and talk to them about responsible drinking if the legal drinking age is reduced.
References
Nguyen‐Louie, T. T., Matt, G. E., Jacobus, J., Li, I., Cota, C., Castro, N., & Tapert, S. F. (2017). Earlier alcohol use onset predicts poorer neuropsychological functioning in young adults. Alcoholism: clinical and experimental research, 41(12), 2082-2092.
Saffer, H., & Grossman, M. (2017). 13. Beer Taxes, the Legal Drinking Age, and Youth Motor Vehicle Fatalities. In Determinants of Health (pp. 509-533). Columbia University Press.
Should Marijuana Be Legalized
Should Marijuana Be Legalized?
Student’s name
Institutional affiliation
Should Marijuana Be Legalized?
Introduction
The current debate regarding the legalization of marijuana has been going on for a while now, and there is a chance that it will not come to an end in the foreseeable future. Marijuana is a drug obtained from Cannabis sativa, a herbal plant. It is known to grow in many climates worldwide and is used by people for numerous purposes. While proponents support the legalization of marijuana, its opposers are against its legalization. In my viewpoint marijuana should be legalized. This essay discusses the reasons why legalizing marijuana is better than prohibiting it.
Supporting arguments
Increased Revenue
The first reason why marijuana should be legalized is that it would make the country extra income. It is estimated that making marijuana legal would earn the country up to $18 billion annually. The benefits would come from tax revenue from the sale of marijuana and saving from the justice system, including the high cost of keeping smokers in jail. It has already been established that even with marijuana being illegal, people are still going to smoke it, so the state might as well earn money from it.
Marijuana is Better than Alcohol
Another reason why marijuana should be legalized is that it is better than alcohol. Compared to other legal drugs such as tobacco and alcohol, marijuana is less harmful (Tanco, Dumlao, Kreis, Nguyen, Dibaj, Liu, & Bruera, 2019). As such, keeping it illegal is hypocrisy. As a matter of fact, cannabis has been found to have health benefits such as easing sclerosis symptoms, preventing epilepsy, and treating glaucoma. Additionally, there is no viable health ground to keep it illegal, and gone are the days when it was deemed dangerous. Tobacco is deemed more addictive than cocaine and there is no proof that cannabis leads to physiological addiction. If the state bans marijuana, they might as well ban other moderately risky pastime activities such as bungee jumping and eating burgers.
Opposing Arguments
Majiruana leads to Worse.
Opponents of legalizing marijuana are of the opinion that marijuana should be illegal because it is a getaway drug to other worse drugs. They argue that hard drug abusers start with using soft drugs like marijuana before proceeding to the hard ones. Addiction experts posit that marijuana has the potential to introduce its users to other serious substances. A study carried out in New Zealand showed that regular marijuana users were sixty times more at risk of trying out other drugs than young individuals that have never smoked marijuana in their life. Cannabis seems to be getting stronger by the day. In the 1960s, hippies puffed cannabis that has about 1% of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the chemical ingredient responsible for psychological effects (Pacula & Smart, 2017). Currently, some marijuana strains have up to 30% THC levels. While this reasoning is justified, it does not take away from the fact that marijuana is much less harmful than alcohol and can boost the economy if legalized.
Conclusion
In closing, marijuana should be legalized because, compared to alcohol, it is less harmful. Additionally, the country can benefit from the tax sales if made legal. On the downside, opposers argue that marijuana is a gateway drug to other hard drugs. People should keep an open mind in this debate as nobody knows the turn it will take in the future.
References
Pacula, R. L., & Smart, R. (2017). Medical marijuana and marijuana legalization. Annual review of clinical psychology, 13, 397.
Tanco, K., Dumlao, D., Kreis, R., Nguyen, K., Dibaj, S., Liu, D., … & Bruera, E. (2019). Attitudes and beliefs about medical usefulness and legalization of marijuana among cancer patients in a legalized and a nonlegalized state. Journal of palliative medicine, 22(10), 1213-1220.