Some people claim that the government should provide free health care. Others think that the government will not provide the most innovative methods of treatment and it's better to invest those funds in education and culture. What is your opinion?

Everyone desires better health. It is argued that either the government should provide complete healthcare for free or avoid some special treatments. In my opinion, the authorities should provide basic healthcare free of cost and they should avoid treating rare diseases. In this essay, the role of the states in facilitating medical services will be discussed. To begin with, all the citizens are entitled to receive the basic treatments without any cost. Because every individual pay taxes, the states have the responsibility of providing services to its tax-payers. Therefore, If people do not receive the needed facilities, they may feel being betrayed by the authorities. For example, a study done by the University of Oxford, England eludes that the society feels that it's their fundamental right to have essential medical services without any charge. Thus, elementary healthcare must be made available for all by the government. Furthermore, the taxpayer’s money should not be spent to treat rare diseases. Because they require specialized medicine and machines, it is not pragmatic to spend people’s money on it. Instead, the funds should be invested in other compelling sectors like education and culture. For instance, a survey conducted by the University of Cambridge, United Kingdom shows that the resources required to treat bone marrow diseases are 15% of the total health services funds which could be used to cure the several other common illnesses. Hence, the states must avoid curing less common well-being issues. In summary, Even though the elective health issues are important, their treatment should not be funded by the government. I think the budget should be allocated to facilitate essential medical services because it is not wise to provide all the facilities costless.