HCA 255 Topic 6 DQ 1
Many communist or socialist countries have a department that addresses public health as well as the health care of their citizens. Research one of these programs and compare it to programs in countries that do not follow communism or socialism. Discuss the upsides and downsides to each program.
Many communist or socialist countries have a department that addresses public health as well as the health care of their citizens. Although some people think that these programs are positive because they provide health care for everyone, this is not always the case. Research one of these programs and compare it to programs in countries that do not follow communism or socialism. Discuss the upsides and downsides to each program.
Comparing programs in socialist and communist countries to those not following these doctrines shows some upsides, but mostly downsides. Socialist countries have greater access for their citizens for health care. While the health care may be more affordable or free in these countries, there is a much higher tax burden that must be assumed by their citizens to pay for this cost.
Through this assignment, students will learn to compare and contrast the public health methods used in countries that follow communism or socialism to those of democratic governments. Which programs are more successful? Why is the United States failing behind other countries in life expectancy?
Communist and socialist countries promote a greater social responsibility to provide health care for the citizens of their country. These countries often require their citizens to pay less out of pocket for health care than in countries that do not follow these practices. This is because communistic and socialistic societies require all able-bodied people to participate in working and paying into the system. The downside, however, is that these individuals often have little choice in what services they receive or where they receive them, since the government tends to control these factors.
There are many benefits to having a public health department that addresses the needs of all members of the public. In this section I will discuss how one such country has benefited from their public health department, as well as some disadvantages that have arisen from it.
Team up with an institution that has a great department of public health such as the Harvard School of Public Health or Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Convince companies and individuals to support the effort in order to improve the health and well-being of your target audience and society at large.
Consider the healthcare systems in China and in the U.S. The China health care system is a socialist model that relies heavily on government intervention. It is comprehensive in terms of services offered and has strengthened rural health care and the availability of generic drugs. However, those who can afford it often prefer to seek treatment because public hospitals are known for long waits, low staff morale, and sometimes dirty conditions.
Vietnam’s health care system is centered on universal, comprehensive publicly funded health coverage. The public healthcare system is predicated on a “medical station in every village” structure, with each village having its own health station that can provide primary healthcare services.
You will love the diversity of countries around the world and feel empowered with a strong sense of how government health policy works (or doesn’t work) in different settings.
The idea is to make health care affordable and accessible to everyone. The downsides are that your tax dollars pay for it and there may be a shortage of doctors and other services.
Socialism has a long list of benefits which proves the superiority of the system. Looking at an idealized democratic socialist point of view, we can see democracy being used to dismantle the capitalist state. The first mention of socialism appeared in the book The Communist Manifesto, which was written by Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx. The basics of socialism are common ownership, as opposed to private ownership, and production for use instead of profit.