Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

reddog

Donald Trump slags off the sacred NHS

Recommended Posts

Can't blame him personally.

 

I find the love of the NHS bizarre, it must be one of the worst health services in developed world.

 

Typical example, friend on Facebook goes to hospital with sprained ankle, a pretty vanilla medical situation.  just because the hospital doesn't kill them or accidentally remove a kidney, said friend uses Facebook to lavish praise on the "amazing NHS"

 

I am constantly hearing cases of people dying because they their cancer went undetected despite multiple trips to the doctor's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, afly said:

"2nd rate service for a 3rd world price"

- some bloke off question time

 

 

Matthew Parris I think. I'm pretty sure he said "second rate service for the price of a fourth rate one"

I think we could do a lot better. As a prelude to the decision to massively increase funding in 2002 there was a sham consultation about changing the model. With relatives in Germany and France, I'm aware of better systems which don't cost that much more.

It's still a lot better than the model Trump espouses, though!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Total healthcare spending per capita according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

As pointed out by @spyguy the UK's healthcare spending doesn't include pensions, though.  In the past this has added up to 10% to the UK's total healthcare spending.

New Zealand's healthcare spending per capita appears to be consistently less than the NHS and is, by every account I've heard, better.  I'd like to find out what they're doing there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are all sorts of vultures waiting to take over parts of the NHS, insurance companies and private corporations/businesses when the green light given, will brexit help?.......just as we are talking about the benefits of re-nationalisation of trains and water.......can they afford the pension liability?;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really annoys me when politicians say that the NHS has 'improved' because their party spent an extra £x million on it. Wasted money is not an improvement and is often counter productive.

Almost everyone agrees that the NHS is bottomless pit wrt to spending. There's always more that can be done to keep a patient alive a bit longer. Extra resources would be welcome in non life threatening ailments like tinnitus, migraine etc. imo we should decide what % of our wealth/income gets spent on the NHS, carve it in stone and stick to it. 

Then it's a case of getting the best bang per buck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, John51 said:

It really annoys me when politicians say that the NHS has 'improved' because their party spent an extra £x million on it. Wasted money is not an improvement and is often counter productive.

Almost everyone agrees that the NHS is bottomless pit wrt to spending. There's always more that can be done to keep a patient alive a bit longer. Extra resources would be welcome in non life threatening ailments like tinnitus, migraine etc. imo we should decide what % of our wealth/income gets spent on the NHS, carve it in stone and stick to it. 

Then it's a case of getting the best bang per buck.

Funding is a big part of it. All the best systems spend more than us. I still think there are better systems though that we could look at.

As regards specifying an amount and sticking to it, then to be fair to Tony Blair (can barely believe I'm saying that!!) that's pretty much what he did in 2002. He decided to increase health spending from 5% of GDP to the "European average" of 9% of GDP. I think it was inevitable that with such a huge increase in a very short period of time that not all of it was spent efficiently. But there is no doubt that by 2010 when Labour left power there had been huge improvements in the NHS - I've not heard anyone dispute that. But since then other countries also increased their spending yet further to cope with the same issues we have here such as an ageing population. And the worsening crisis of bed blocking because of cuts to social care is another of George Osborne's disgraceful decisions coming home to roost. Everyone seems to agree the two systems need joining up better but they never get on with it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No complaints personally.  Baby grandson in particular has received fantastic care, in and out of hospital with bronchiolitis, so severe once that he was in ICU for a week, and has needed oxygen each  time.  

I know we've been lucky though.  

What is not often mentioned is that in certain other European countries, even those with similar or higher taxes, people still have to pay  - albeit small amounts - at point of use.  Swedish friend tells me they pay for GP, A&E, prescriptions regardless of age (annual cap for those who need a lot) , the 'hotel' element of hospital stays, etc. 

We need to do the same here, not that any govt. will ever have the guts - it's such a sacred cow.  But I'm sure a lot of people do take the piss, going to the GP for trivia, expecting even things you can buy for pennies, e.g. paracetamol, for free.  Never mind old people stockpiling free prescriptions - a friend of ours regularly had over 60 free items piled up in his bathroom - yes, I counted more than once - all of which were later just thrown away. 

He wasn't remotely hard up but he was tight, and I'm sure that if he'd  had to pay even a couple of £ each time he'd never have taken so many items he didn't need.  And I bet he's far from the only one. 

Another thing - letter in the Times the other day said that when she lived in Switzerland, anyone turning up merely drunk at A &E would be taken off to a police cell to sober up - and charged £1000 for the privilege.  Maybe that's a bit steep, but I can't see why people who turn out to be merely drunk aren't  heavily fined for wasting NHS time, not to mention the aggression and chaos that often goes with pissheads at A&E. Mr B has a niece who's been an A&E doc for several years and it's a big problem.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Demographics. Most hc systems simply weren’t designed to cope with so many people living longer but with ever degrading health. Eire is part socialised/private but still has demand problems.

Its another issue which will ease away after the boomer die off. Using NHS current woes as evidence of its inadequacy is knee jerk to say the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NHS was designed to help with short-term illnesses, dispense drugs, undertake procedures and operations......it was not designed for long-term care, nursing, caring, housing......;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before I left a big problem was bed blocking. Old and vulnerable patients could not be disscharged due to inadequate social care provision...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, PopGun said:

Before I left a big problem was bed blocking. Old and vulnerable patients could not be disscharged due to inadequate social care provision...

Quite......the public sector do not have the money to support all the needs required, the private sector will not fill the gap without the public sector pumping continuous sums of money into it....... growing numbers of people can't afford their housing rent, let alone paying high insurance, or paying themselves for long-term adult care.......all indirect taxes they pay such as council tax, vat, fuel, ni, and others as a percentage of their income is already too high......the less you earn the more tax you pay......people need people, they will live better therefore if they have family and local support back up......;)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NHS 1948 - sewing up a mugging knife wound, chopping off a gangrenous leg, a course of penicillin for syphilis, a bed for the old geezer dying of consumption.

NHS 2018 - all of the preceding treatments plus mental health, high end surgeries, screenings, MRI scanners, suicidal alcoholics in A&E, cancer treatments, modern diseases, fake diseases, imaginary syndromes...

Add to that the mass immigration and health tourism, it's no wonder what a money pit the thing has become.

What's the deal with prescriptions?  I pay £8.60 regardless of item, whether it's an inhaler or pack of generic medicines costing pennies on the open market, but millions of people obviously get their stacks of statins and happy pills gratis.  Why is it all or nothing, could there not be tiered pricing or a maximum monthly cap?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NHS is a postcode lottery in more ways than one.....for example some places you can get a prescription for  enough medication for more than one month.....other places only give max one month's supply, even if repeat prescription....;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, winkie said:

The NHS is a postcode lottery in more ways than one.....for example some places you can get a prescription for  enough medication for more than one month.....other places only give max one month's supply, even if repeat prescription....;)

That's if you're lucky enough to see a GP in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, DrMartinSanchez said:

That's if you're lucky enough to see a GP in the first place.

I have never had that problem thankfully that would make a material difference.......I am not in favour of privatisation of the national health service, there are powerful forces in favour of this I understand, there is a lot of money to be made from health services, there are entities queuing up to gain from providing health services and insurance to the needy, unhealthy and the anxious and fearful.......this and the transport road system both under threat......where housing was thirty years ago, look where we are now......massive winners, many more losers....better services for special people, poorer more expensive limited service for the rest.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/02/2018 at 3:19 PM, PopGun said:

Demographics. Most hc systems simply weren’t designed to cope with so many people living longer but with ever degrading health. Eire is part socialised/private but still has demand problems.

 

Another thing I'd add is drugs and treatments are continually getting better, hence more to spend on plethora of medicine and treatment.... And this likewise is obviously funded by expensive research.  

I've personally had fairly recent treatment for very severe asthma attack.  Honestly if this was somewhere else not sure I'd be writing this.  I have heard people say before that for life threatening situations NHS is great.  I'm definitely very lucky!

I do wonder if it's inevitable in the future that it will be very much a two tier system ( not specifically UK) where for example the very wealthy can live indefinitely with superhuman modifications and the old medical field that up to now has been concerned with keeping people up to a recognised level of health detaches.  Anyone else watching altered carbon?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Dogtanian said:

Another thing I'd add is drugs and treatments are continually getting better, hence more to spend on plethora of medicine and treatment.... And this likewise is obviously funded by expensive research.  

I've personally had fairly recent treatment for very severe asthma attack.  Honestly if this was somewhere else not sure I'd be writing this.  I have heard people say before that for life threatening situations NHS is great.  I'm definitely very lucky!

I do wonder if it's inevitable in the future that it will be very much a two tier system ( not specifically UK) where for example the very wealthy can live indefinitely with superhuman modifications and the old medical field that up to now has been concerned with keeping people up to a recognised level of health detaches.  Anyone else watching altered carbon?!

Yes indeed equipment ten fold. As for drugs their inception and intial up front costs can potentially be massive. Yet overtime most dwindle down to negligible. If a pharma is still demanding top dollar for a twenty year old drug, then questions need asking.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Dogtanian said:

Another thing I'd add is drugs and treatments are continually getting better, hence more to spend on plethora of medicine and treatment.... And this likewise is obviously funded by expensive research. 

I think this is where it all starts getting complicated. We're quite some way down the path where the easy medical improvements have been made, the result is any improvement comes with an ever-hefty price tag and benefits fewer. Nothing will have the impact that changes that meant women now very rarely die in childbirth, giving birth to children who were lucky to survive to adulthood had. Can you (should you?) somehow separate out that relatively cheap part of medicine that's made so much difference from the ever-more expensive developments of today?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Riedquat I think that's what may happen when you put it like that, in they'll be a separation between basic things like child birth and say more advanced cancer treatments.  It doesn't sound very fair but nevertheless seems obvious that this may become more pronounced going forward.  

From friends in the US their system sounds like hell, I do hope we don't move closer to their -broken- way of doing things!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Riedquat said:

I think this is where it all starts getting complicated. We're quite some way down the path where the easy medical improvements have been made, the result is any improvement comes with an ever-hefty price tag and benefits fewer. Nothing will have the impact that changes that meant women now very rarely die in childbirth, giving birth to children who were lucky to survive to adulthood had. Can you (should you?) somehow separate out that relatively cheap part of medicine that's made so much difference from the ever-more expensive developments of today?

Ever increasing diminishing returns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

America has a even worse healthcare system (I'd more inaccurately say very inconsistent since their cancer care is better if you can afford it or it's covered) and this is coming from a obnoxious leader of a fading superpower that may go the go the way of the Soviet Union this century.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL. Trump will have problems then if he builds that wall... most surgery gets done on the cheap in Mexico so the insurance companies don't have to fork out. 

USA!

USA!

Feck off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/02/2018 at 12:40 AM, Big Orange said:

America has a even worse healthcare system (I'd more inaccurately say very inconsistent since their cancer care is better if you can afford it or it's covered) and this is coming from a obnoxious leader of a fading superpower that may go the go the way of the Soviet Union this century.

Next door neighbour's brother lives near New York. Was doing pretty well until he got cancer - had to sell his house to cover treatment. Regrets not keeping dual citizenship.

I have a pretty simple rule -

if you don;t need it: mobile phones, cars, TV etc. - private sector (things you can opt out of if need be).

If you do need it: Healthcare, public transport etc. - public sector. 

It's not hard is is - just fund it properly and introduce more accountability and stop tourism (unless you are going to rename it the International Health Service). Health is the most important thing you have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 406 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

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.