The Realism of Rationing

Despite being ranked among the richest countries in the worldtopping the charts in terms of financial assets, the United States is often criticized for itscontinues to spend an excessive amount of money on healthcare. In fact, the GDP percentage spent on health care is outrageous percentage of GDP spent on health care. As this number rapidly nearing rises and nears a record high twenty percent. For this reason,, there is are reasonsis evidence to supportbelieve that there are several flaws in the our current system. The problem has escalated at such a rate that there is no longer a question of “if” we address the rising health care costs, but “how” we handle them. Many other Several other countries sustain a more productiverewarding health care system in terms of preventive and curative health services, family planning, nutrition activities and emergency aid while maintaining a lower health care cost per capita (Davidson)at a fraction of the cost of America’s. In order to bring this spending in line with other countries, the United States must be willing to make sacrifices in fields such as insurance, pharmaceuticals, and research among healthcare institutions. heathcare research. This has proven to be a very difficult issue to address due to a longn extensive list of ethical issues within the systemdifferences among American citizens. It has been generally accepted that American’s spending could be brought in line withdown to the level of these other countries if the distribution of medical goods was rationed at rate of 50%the rationing of medical goods was cut at a rate of roughly 50%. In order to provide the most constructive provisions to healthcare expenditureIn order to establish where these cuts could be most beneficial, it is important to understand where the major funds are being spent. The major sources of direct funds