Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Si1

The Failing Nhs And The Generations Who Will Need It Soon

Recommended Posts

Money is tight in this government. Except when it comes to molly coddling the elderly and in particular the boomers.

Yet the NHS is by any measure in a lot of trouble. Quite probably organisational problems. Definitely demographic issues owing to the growing ranks of the elderly needing expensive care. And probably financial too, as following the bank bailouts and the cost of the credit crunch and the economic cost of buying the last election off those very same elderly, there isn't much money left to fund it, at a time when its basic need is increasing.

Are the boomers really that blind that they'd vote for subsidies to allow them to live in large houses they couldn't afford otherwise, in preference to the basic medical care they will need in they encroaching senior years. The following generations won't pay for this since they can't afford to. So what's to become of boomers when they get ill and old?

Edited by Si1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, Errol. Will private/state pensions get cut down in future?

With the NHS we could save £5-10bn right now by scrapping the internal market alone. Then tackle PFI's. The £20bn something hole would probably be plugged in no time with no cuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am currently at the mercy of my local NHS, I had back surgery at the start of September.

My experiences are not good.

Essentially zero support from my GP's practice, they have one practice nurse and she was on holiday when I first had surgery and there was no cover.

I phone back when she had returned only to be told that they don't have any available appointments for three weeks.

I have a rather large hole in my lower back that needs to be packed everyday to allow it to heal correctly.

At the moment I have to use the local walk in centre, its ok four days a week because they run a wound clinic so I can get an appointment, the other three days I have to queue like everyone else except that it is not a queue, you are prioritised by the receptionist and I'm not certain they appreciate the size of the hole in me and the risk of infection so I constantly get bumped down the waiting list.

To say that the majority there are recent arrivals to this shore is an understatement, of course they probably don't have a GP so get pointed toward the walk in centre straight away.

I went to the local hospital yesterday to finally see the surgeon who performed the op, supposed to be two weeks after but ended up five weeks after because they didn't have any available appointments.

It was like something out of a zombie movie with all the shuffling going on except they all had grey hair, I was probably the only person in the outpatients department under 70.

The point I'm trying to badly make is that locally the NHS has long gone past the creaking stage, it is clearly failing to do what it is supposed to do, and it seems to me to be a lack of personnel.

The GP's I have been registered at since birth has changed out of all recognition to what it was like even ten to fifteen years ago, they have vastly more people on their books than they can hope to deal with, yet they are advertising for more!

I haven't managed to get an appointment with my GP since about 2001, every time now its a three week wait to see whichever trainee they have on their books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for your troubles, SirGaz. The NHS is very much a postcode lottery. From my experience, the best experience of the NHS was in west Yorkshire.

I reckon there is a strong correlation between age of local population and quality of care on offer. Parents down the south west report similar experiences to you. My Dad was once told "come back in 3 weeks", and he told the doctor the earliest he could get an appointment was six weeks according to the reception. Parents are convinced they don't care once you reach a certain age although my mum needs 2-4 appointments a week just to manage an ongoing condition which is unlikely to get better. Multiply that by likely several thousand in a small town, and you begin to get an idea of the scale of the problem.

Basically if you are in an area where there are too many older people requiring long term care of one kind or another, you are stuffed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The sooner people realise en masse that the NHS is broken, mainly because it cannot be expected to deliver a reasonable level of healthcare for the burgeoning old age population, the sooner we can have a proper debate in society about what we should do.

The problem is that the Tories aren't allowed to mention NHS reform as the left and all the VIs immediatley jump down their throat causing a lack of proper debate.

Budgets are protected but because of the balloning demand due to various demographic factors, in real terms service quality will decline markedly. The crises will be pretty accute in 2025, the first chance the Tories lose their power. and this will be a big catalyst.

Smart people will start to make their own plans and provisions early.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The TB clinic in LNWH trust spends around 50,000 pounds per patient long-term treatment. Those clinics are rammed. The chance of these people ever paying this money back via national insurance contributions is between nil and nothing and the chance of billing the countries they come from? I'll let you guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NHS may or may not be broken, but it is the only worthwhile endeavour in this country, where else should we spend our money, nuclear bombs?

Maybe we should spend more money on MPs or bankers. How about more money on the royal family, in fact stuff the NHS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NHS may or may not be broken, but it is the only worthwhile endeavour in this country,

Maybe, maybe not. There's no way of knowing if we can't find out what our money's being spent on, but if you're from Manchester there may be a way you can find out...

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?/topic/203610-mancunians-may-have-a-chance-to-find-out-what-the-nhs-spends-their-money-on/#entry1102691880

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NHS may or may not be broken, but it is the only worthwhile endeavour in this country, where else should we spend our money, nuclear bombs?

Maybe we should spend more money on MPs or bankers. How about more money on the royal family, in fact stuff the NHS.

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reduce immigration drastically.

Start making big changes in society so that we aren't encouraged to live lives that make us sick. Talking about junk food, no time for exercise, alcohol as the main pastime, smoking, chronic stress, loneliness.

We're doing it all wrong and nobody seems to notice, nobody seems to care.

There should be lots of TV time dedicated to making people more self aware with regards to how they could live better - would be more useful that the news which basically stresses people out over things they can't change.

If the population lived this way we'd be far better equipped to look after the sick.

Edited by JoeDavola

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reduce immigration drastically.

Start making big changes in society so that we aren't encouraged to live lives that make us sick. Talking about junk food, no time for exercise, alcohol as the main pastime, smoking, chronic stress, loneliness.

We're doing it all wrong and nobody seems to notice, nobody seems to care.

There should be lots of TV time dedicated to making people more self aware with regards to how they could live better - would be more useful that the news which basically stresses people out over things they can't change.

If the population lived this way we'd be far better equipped to look after the sick.

Don't be so facking sensible. Get with the NuLab/Tory agenda! Privatise by stealth to increase costs, reduce effectiveness and staff engagement through shit work conditions and create a case for full privatisation.

Edited by Tin Foil Hat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they seem to be improving in my area.

I was run down at a petrol station in 2013...emergency services dealt with me well enough, but there were queues at A+E and the 4.45Pm incident had me going home about 10pm.

A+E said they would report to my GP and I should see them within a week.

I made the mistake of thinking I could book a time ahead, just as my customers do with me...no, I had to ring first thing and get in the queue. This I did, which meant me reserving a whole day in advance as I didnt know what time my GP appointment was going to be.

Anyway, what I found out was that it is up to me to take possession of my treatment...they dont follow up, its like they process you and thats it...bye bye.

I needed follow up...I took control myself... got the drugs, investigations I needed, and advice I didnt want to hear, much along the lines of SirGaz...A triple laminectomy with a year off work.

today, I am being followed up and receive reasonably regular calls from the GP. Other minor issues are followed up. Long lead times for consultants, but then again, when urgent, the NHS was there.

I start work for the NHS in November....see it from the inside. The recruitment process was a complete mess...offered job subject to x and y in April (I think)..7 months on and they have a new replacement for the Agency worker they would have needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering the baby boomers were never interested in covering their costs during their working lives then it's no surprise they're not interested now...

Edited by Si1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering the baby boomers were never interested in covering their costs during their working lives then it's no surprise they're not interested now...

I am sure they didn't bank on the economy to be playing out to be like an exponential chessboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they seem to be improving in my area.

I was run down at a petrol station in 2013...emergency services dealt with me well enough, but there were queues at A+E and the 4.45Pm incident had me going home about 10pm.

A+E said they would report to my GP and I should see them within a week.

I made the mistake of thinking I could book a time ahead, just as my customers do with me...no, I had to ring first thing and get in the queue. This I did, which meant me reserving a whole day in advance as I didnt know what time my GP appointment was going to be.

Anyway, what I found out was that it is up to me to take possession of my treatment...they dont follow up, its like they process you and thats it...bye bye.

I needed follow up...I took control myself... got the drugs, investigations I needed, and advice I didnt want to hear, much along the lines of SirGaz...A triple laminectomy with a year off work.

today, I am being followed up and receive reasonably regular calls from the GP. Other minor issues are followed up. Long lead times for consultants, but then again, when urgent, the NHS was there.

I start work for the NHS in November....see it from the inside. The recruitment process was a complete mess...offered job subject to x and y in April (I think)..7 months on and they have a new replacement for the Agency worker they would have needed.

You're describing a system where it would be best for the patients involved to buy their own health services.

If a system that consumes ~15% (?) of GDP and delivers a service for ~80% which can be beaten by google then its doomed.

A large problem is that the NHS has come to be a job creation scheme for relatives of the people working there.

My SIL is a German hospital doctor. Had to take another e relative in.

She was shocked by

1) the number of people present.

2) how little they did, and how poor they were at knowing their responsibilities.

3) Just how slow it was.

She said it was a 3rd world setup and 1st world costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The TB clinic in LNWH trust spends around 50,000 pounds per patient long-term treatment. Those clinics are rammed. The chance of these people ever paying this money back via national insurance contributions is between nil and nothing and the chance of billing the countries they come from? I'll let you guess.

Imo the NHS is one of the most prized assets we could ever have.

However it's plain to see that demand and pack of real term resource increases to match, something has to give.

People didn't really think about the greatest demographic in human history getting old and ill. Or a population approaching 70 million in the 1950s.

There's going to have to be some heavy heart decisions regarding the millions spent prolonging zombie life, and the open door policy to anyone without any questions of qualification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're describing a system where it would be best for the patients involved to buy their own health services.

If a system that consumes ~15% (?) of GDP and delivers a service for ~80% which can be beaten by google then its doomed.

A large problem is that the NHS has come to be a job creation scheme for relatives of the people working there.

My SIL is a German hospital doctor. Had to take another e relative in.

She was shocked by

1) the number of people present.

2) how little they did, and how poor they were at knowing their responsibilities.

3) Just how slow it was.

She said it was a 3rd world setup and 1st world costs.

Again we're one of the cheapest per capita healthcare systems in the developed world, as pointed out countless times on this forum.

People expect 1st world healthcare with 2nd world budgets, not the other way round.

There's plenty of flaws in the NHS, but your arguments are frankly just utter boll0cks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again we're one of the cheapest per capita healthcare systems in the developed world, as pointed out countless times on this forum.

People expect 1st world healthcare with 2nd world budgets, not the other way round.

There's plenty of flaws in the NHS, but your arguments are frankly just utter boll0cks.

I understood there was a problem where every extra penny of funding just ended up in pay packets and as a result NHS is under resourced in capital investments, so politicians (except Frank Dobson) are loathe to release more money to the NHS if it simply isn't actually going to go into the NHS itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understood there was a problem where every extra penny of funding just ended up in pay packets and as a result NHS is under resourced in capital investments, so politicians (except Frank Dobson) are loathe to release more money to the NHS if it simply isn't actually going to go into the NHS itself.

Clever what they've done I have to admit it..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clever what they've done I have to admit it..

And then the question is what do you do about it.

I think the sacred cow of free healthcare needs to be slain. What was relevant for an austere and socially cooperative society at the end of two world wars is not necessarily relevant now. Or rather Bevan's oft quoted point about free healthcare is misapplied now imho.

The French and Swedish systems provide effective universal healthcare, I understand, in countries that are considered socially progressive, but do charge here and there in order to control demand.

Edited by Si1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   59 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.