Universal Health Care is How Great?

The World Health Organization (WHO) today released a study calling for countries to provide universal health care.  As Reuters reports:

Major inequalities in health and life expectancy persist worldwide, according to an independent World Health Organization commission which on Thursday called for all countries to offer universal health care.

So the answer to solve these inequalities is universal health care?  Not so fast, as the study states:

Huge discrepancies also exist within countries, including Scotland where a boy born in the poor Glasgow suburb of Calton can expect to live to 54, 28 years less than one born in affluent Lenzie, just across town, [the study] said.

So the solution to the problem in Scotland is universal health care?  Sorry, apparently not.  Because the UK already has universal health care.  It's called the National Health Service and yes, it is in Scotland.

So if universal health care can't fix the problem, what can?  And is it worth all the other problems of single-payer universal health care when it won't even solve the inequities outlined in the study?

I don't think so.

Comments

[Harry]

Major inequalities in health and life expectancy persist worldwide, according to an independent World Health Organization commission which on Thursday called for all countries to offer universal health care.