In many societies aroung the world, a rapidly aging population trend has resulted in the escalating cost of public healthcare. This has sparked off a contentious debate on whether individuals should cover their own healthcare services. Despite putting the government under a lot of pressure, I agree that only personal payment is not a pragmatic solution.
Many people claim that the state budget will be strained if authourities bear the medical expenses. Consequently, this will produce a lack of investment in other areas such as education, economy, military, etc. Hence, there is a widely held belief that personal contribution would alleviate this pressure.
However, I would argue that there are two main reasons why government support also plays a prominent role. First of all, not everyone is eligible to afford the costly price of public healthcare, especially people with financial constraints. Due to the aging population, access to essential elderly care facilities may be restricted to those who couldn’t pay for the services. The higher the demand for wellness programs is, the greater the disparities between the wealth and the poor in medical treatments can be seen. Furthermore, healthcare provision is one of the fundamental civil rights. All citizens should have access to these facilities regardless of their personal backgrounds or socioeconomic status owing to the taxation system of their nations. By contrast, a government couldn’t look after the basic interests of its citizen may have undermined this principle.
In conclusion, while I acknowledge that individual responsibility would reduce the strain of authourities, I believe that goverment donation is far more critical due to the limited affordability of some people and the principle of taking good care of the nation’s population.