One hundred fifty million people in the world are in the midst of financial meltdowns due to their health care costs, according to World Health Statistics 2008, an annual report issued by the United Nations World Health Organization. Of those, 100 million are impoverished because they must pay for their own medical needs.

"Catastrophic spending and impoverishment are strongly associated with the use of OOPs (out-of-pocket payments) to finance health care," the report said. "Fewer households are affected by financial catastrophe where there is less reliance on OOPs. In systems where OOPs make up less than 15 percent of total spending on health care, fewer households tend to face financial catastrophe due to the cost of health care."

Leading up to the presidential election, more seem to be engaged in debates about the efficacy of a universal health care system for the United States. But would such a system pass muster here? Would it weaken or uphold the quality of care Americans have come to expect?

State Farm agent Laura Duvall highlighted the seeming challenge behind delivering cost-efficient coverage.

“A lot of the reasons why health care is so high is because people can’t afford it, and they’ve got to have it," she said. "... I think what makes it so high for other people is those people who can’t pay for it, others have to end up paying for it.”

The World Health Organization offered the solution of eliminating out-of-pocket systems, such as commercial insurance programs, and moving toward what the report called prepayment methods.

"Prepayment can take the form of taxation, with health care costs paid for by the government or through publicly or privately managed insurance premiums," the report said. "Either can be effective, and countries may choose their own approach, taking into account their current institutional structures, culture and traditions, and stage of economic development."

For Gene Atkins with Gene Atkins & Associates, a universal system is not the solution and noted that quality of care in some countries with universal programs is lesser. He said some living in Canada come to the U.S. because the quality of care is higher.

“It would be a mistake," he said about a universal system. "I totally believe it would be a mistake. Does something have to happen? Absolutely yes, but universal health care is not the answer.”

“It’s a multi-faceted problem, and I'm just not believing that we’re going to have government solve it,” he said, pointing to numerous elements, like the energy crisis and job outsourcing, that, if handled better, could alleviate concerns in other areas.

“You go to Wal-Mart, just to name a store, and you find a dozen items that were made in the United States,” he said. “What we’re doing is taking countries that have typically been Third World countries and turning them into industrialized nations. And industrial giants are hungry for making materials to sell to us. If we had more things made in the U.S., this wouldn’t be hurting us this bad.”

Locally, he said numerous companies are stepping in to bat for their employees, covering 75-100 percent of premium costs. "I do have many companies that do that, that pay 100 percent of the cost."

He suggested the government offer tax incentives to employers so they could take an even greater role in covering their workers. Currently, small business taxes hurt, not help, the economy, he said.

“When you tax the business owner, you're hurting yourself as a country. ... If you can help the small business owner in some way, you're going to help the nation.”