Question 1

The video contains some information that comes as a surprise. The three major surprises are that;

• A majority of the countries worldwide opt for health insurance
• Healthcare costs take at least 12 percent of each country’s economy
• Healthcare costs are rising globally with each passing year

Question 2

The primary assumption is that countries would give its citizens the free will to enroll either for health insurance or not depending on their needs and their financial abilities. It is expected that some citizens would prefer to pay for their health expenses in cash whenever they get sick, rather than incur monthly costs all of which they would not end up using. The second surprise comes from the high percentage of economic expenditure that goes to health care. The segments of the economy are broad such that it is completely unexpected of health expenses to take up more than 10 percent of it. This indicates that healthcare is charged highly compared to other costs. It could also mean that the world’s population is not living a healthy lifestyle. The constant rise in health care costs is contrary to expectation for there is supposed to be a reported improvement in health as more and more people seek medical attention.

Question 3

The US rates poorly in the overall population health score. The same reflects in the nation’s high expenses in health. The high health costs may also be a sign of exorbitantly high charges in the US health sector, or it could mean that greater population of people in the US is seeking medical attention. As Metzgar (2017) points out, the high costs and the large population of health seekers raises questions about the affordability and quality of health care provision.

Question 4

It is worth noting, however, that just 5 percent of the population accounts for 50 percent of the costs (Zakaria, 2017). With regard to that ratio, it is vital to reevaluate the rationing of coverage, to cover everyone, subsidization of costs, provision of quality care to reduce the average number of hospital visits and the limitation of insurers in the market.

Question 5

Antos and Capretta (2017) point out a bipartisan approach, which involves the stabilization of individual insurers and allowing room for governmental experimentation. The core proposal is the enforcement of reform that would not jeopardize quality while at the same time keeping a sustainable level of tax payment and covering the unemployed. The proposed options should allow refund credits to the enrollees not included under an employer. However, these choices are limited by political constraints.