[test]
In many societies in the world, the population is ageing rapidly and this is leading to an unsustainable increase in the cost of public healthcare.
A nation’s population should pay for their healthcare provision in the future.
Advances in medical science are resulting in prolonged lifespans but there is a knock-on effect for public health services with many hospitals struggling to cope with an aging populace. Many countries enjoy the benefits of free or subsidised national public health services. However, there are some within senior health management who claim that such provision will become unsustainable, and I firmly agree that changes need to be made in order to reflect this changing reality.
Despite the notion that healthcare should be ‘free’, such care is predominantly funded by the taxpayer. To give a specific example, a recent report in my country established that almost 40% of the nation’s tax spending is distributed to healthcare and some 80% of that figure is reserved for treating the elderly. This is a disproportionate amount of money which has greatly increased the burden on the state and existing funding is no longer sufficient to meet these needs. This is turn impacts on the standard of care that can be provided as shown by numerous negative media reports about the conditions for both staff and patients. If we want quality healthcare then, clearly this financial burden needs to be alleviated.
One way to do so would be to increase the contributions made by citizens through increased taxation. Alternatively, governments could encourage those who can afford it to take up private healthcare arrangements. By switching to a private model, the well-off can afford a higher quality of care, while at the same relieving pressure on public services for those who do not have the means to go private.
One thing is for certain, an ageing population has increased the pressure on existing health provision. If we are going to maintain the standards of healthcare that we are used to, more funding needs to be found either through taxation and alternative forms of provision should be considered. Otherwise, standards will fall and people’s lives will be put at risk.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-02 | anhthuthcsht@gmail.com | 84 | view |
| 2022-08-02 | anhthuthcsht@gmail.com | 84 | view |
| 2022-04-05 | samandarkumar | 73 | view |
| 2022-04-05 | samandarkumar | view | |
| 2022-04-05 | samandarkumar | 73 | view |
- The world today is a safer place than it was a hundred years ago and governments should stop spending large amounts of money on their armed forces 56
- In many societies in the world the population is ageing rapidly and this is leading to an unsustainable increase in the cost of public healthcare A nation s population should pay for their healthcare provision in the future 56
- Studies suggest that many teenagers these days prefer socialising online to meeting one another in person Why do you think this is the case What measures could be taken to encourage teenagers to spend more time meeting one another in person Give reasons f 73
- Recently published figures show that the wildlife population around the world has decreased by around fifty per cent over the last fifty years What can we do to help protect the wildlife round the world 73
- Many people work from home using modern technology today Some people think that only the workers benefit from this and not the employer To what extent do you agree or disagree 56
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, so, then, well, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1667.0 1615.20841683 103% => OK
No of words: 323.0 315.596192385 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16099071207 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23936324884 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92900855997 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 176.041082164 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.600619195046 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 513.0 506.74238477 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.3489003816 49.4020404114 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.071428571 106.682146367 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0714285714 20.7667163134 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.78571428571 7.06120827912 39% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.227448248558 0.244688304435 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0751258498269 0.084324248473 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0456238985143 0.0667982634062 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12726323042 0.151304729494 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0294054235822 0.056905535591 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.0946893788 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 50.2224549098 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.4159519038 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.37 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 78.4519038076 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.