[Misc] The NHS

[Sussex Nomad]

How about, instead of paying in money and having the government dish it out, people pay into a health savings account which can only be used for medical expenses, but can be directed by the person to a health care provider of their choosing?

The idea that businesses only cut corners and try to reduce costs in order to make a profit isn't really true. By that logic Apples best bet would be take the camera out of the iPhone, it would be cheaper to make saving them money. Nobody wants an iPhone without a camera though do they? The market forces business to provide the highest quality product at the lowest possible price, that's a good thing not a bad thing.

I challenge anyone here to give an example of any product or service, ever, which has been efficiently delivered by government.

Imagine if we had a department of mobile phones, and all our mobile phones were produced and issued by a government run provider, the quality would go down, the price would go up and the distribution would reduce, year on year. Instead, we have a free market in technology, the price goes down, the quality goes up and the distribution increases, year on year.

Governments were never supposed to provide products or services, they are not capable of doing it, only an open and free marketplace can.

If you don't believe me, just watch as the NHS provides a poorer service next year, and will need more money than it did this year to do it. It doesn't work, it will never work.

Again, more eloquently than I could ever put it.

 

[Daddies_Sauce]

Private or NHS?

Can you define what you think a NHS doctor is?

 

[Hastings gull]

Keep it the way it is and and make all staff fulltime instead of consultants and agency staff as well as increasing the nurse pay dramatically as they're ridiculously under paid for what they do.
Also stop being abused and ripped off by large pharmaceutical companies who really do make a fortune by over charging.

It just needs a overhaul as it's been abused and mismanaged for many years....

I am sure that you are right when you say that it is abused and ripped off, but the question is why is this happening. Might it just be that it is taxpayer's money and easy meat for private firms. If one party is thinking of their own money and the other is spending somebody else's cash, there is usually only ever going to be one winner.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

So when we need health care, can we only use the amount of money we personally have put it, or can we use the overall pot everyone paid into. If the first, then poor people die, if the latter, how much can we use?

No Trig, we still pay into the pot as we have always done.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

No Trig, we still pay into the pot as we have always done.

What I am trying to say, from post 1, is we have a business that runs our NHS and not politicians, public run companies have gone catastrophically wrong for ever. We don't need to lose infrastructure, we just need to run the NHS slicker. Business knows how to run business, politicians know how to run f'ck all.

 

[Johnny RoastBeef]

Keep it the way it is and and make all staff fulltime instead of consultants and agency staff as well as increasing the nurse pay dramatically as they're ridiculously under paid for what they do.
Also stop being abused and ripped off by large pharmaceutical companies who really do make a fortune by over charging.

It just needs a overhaul as it's been abused and mismanaged for many years....

You obviously don't realise that half of all the money spent on R&D in the UK is done so by the pharmaceutical industry. Costs for medicines are high because there is a huge failure rate In the process of coming up with new efficacious drugs, these costs need to be factored into the price of those drugs which do make it to market.

Furthermore, only 8% of the NHS annual budget is spent on drugs. To try to cut that further would directly cost lives.

 

[sir albion]

I am sure that you are right when you say that it is abused and ripped off, but the question is why is this happening. Might it just be that it is taxpayer's money and easy meat for private firms. If one party is thinking of their own money and the other is spending somebody else's cash, there is usually only ever going to be one winner.

Yes it's easy pickings for private firms and apparently some pills have increased from 16p to over £9 etc....It clearly is being completely mismanaged and robbed blind.
Staff being poached because the wages is bloody embarrassing.Who would study for 5 years for 22k etc?

 

[dazzer6666]

There are people working with my girlfriend, 'consultants'. earning 1k a day.

Seems to be close to the going rate for management consultants.........similar to what we pay in banking for senior manager level people.

Meanwhile, nurses start on about 22k pa.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

Seems to be close to the going rate for management consultants.........similar to what we pay in banking for senior manager level people.

Meanwhile, nurses start on about 22k pa.

And it absolutely disgusts me mate. My girlfriend tells me they actually don't do much, private business would knock this shit on the head.

 

[Half Time Pies]

How about, instead of paying in money and having the government dish it out, people pay into a health savings account which can only be used for medical expenses, but can be directed by the person to a health care provider of their choosing?

The idea that businesses only cut corners and try to reduce costs in order to make a profit isn't really true. By that logic Apples best bet would be take the camera out of the iPhone, it would be cheaper to make saving them money. Nobody wants an iPhone without a camera though do they? The market forces business to provide the highest quality product at the lowest possible price, that's a good thing not a bad thing.

I challenge anyone here to give an example of any product or service, ever, which has been efficiently delivered by government.

Imagine if we had a department of mobile phones, and all our mobile phones were produced and issued by a government run provider, the quality would go down, the price would go up and the distribution would reduce, year on year. Instead, we have a free market in technology, the price goes down, the quality goes up and the distribution increases, year on year.

Governments were never supposed to provide products or services, they are not capable of doing it, only an open and free marketplace can.

If you don't believe me, just watch as the NHS provides a poorer service next year, and will need more money than it did this year to do it. It doesn't work, it will never work.

The comparison between a health service and mobile phones is a poor one. Mobile phones can of course be provided successfully within a free market economy, if apple was to remove the camera from its phones it would lose market share to Samsung etc. However a health service is a completely different beast there is unlikely to be multiple hospitals in an area to choose and those that provide specialist health care services for particular issues so if providers are performing badly there may not be the option for people to chose a different one.

What many people don't realise about the US privatised system is that the spend per capita on health is significantly more than anywhere else in the world, even their contribution through their taxes per capita is more than we contribute per capita for the NHS.

The general population in the UK wouldn't stomach that type of spend on health.

 

[dazzer6666]

And it absolutely disgusts me mate. My girlfriend tells me that actually don't do much, private business would knock this shit on the head.

Indeed. Those in the city are similar. Seen so many that are stealing a living, but too many senior managers that seem to think they are the answer to every problem. Does my effing head in. There are a few decent ones but most are irritating parasites.

When I retire I’m going to be one, just to make a bit of easy money to top up the pension.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

31 difference say keep the NHS political, ah well, an institution that isn't going away. Sad.

 

[dingodan]

So when we need health care, can we only use the amount of money we personally have put it, or can we use the overall pot everyone paid into. If the first, then poor people die, if the latter, how much can we use?

So you're saying that the NHS provides a worse service than it did in the 40s, 50s, 60s? That's obviously nonsense. Lots of my family have had great service from the NHS, curing problems they couldn't have hoped to achieve decades ago. A lot of this of course is due to the advancement in medical treatment (which comes at a cost), but I'm not the one saying the service will be worse year on year.

In a free market the costs would go down, not up, so healthcare would be more affordable. Healthcare costs today are insanely high, because it's a government run monopoly without competition where funds are directed politically. Also what I described could still work like a form of mutual insurance similar to how it works today, the only difference being that the patient directs the funds towards the service they want to use, forcing providers to compete with one another to provide services people want.

Yes healthcare is better than it was in the 50's, is that because the healthcare system is well run and efficient. Like you say, that's because of technology. Is the NHS providing a better service this year than last year? Will it be better next year than this year? Comparing apples for apples, things get worse over time not better, that's pretty clear I think.

I have my own anecdotes about people I love having their lives saved by the NHS too, the doctors and nurses are frankly amazing people for the work they do under the circumstances. I'm not saying the NHS doesn't save lives, but I think there are cases where lives are lost which don't have to be too. For every good story about the NHS there seem to be more horror stories, we aren't having this conversation because the NHS is working, we are having it because it's not.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

Indeed. Those in the city are similar. Seen so many that are stealing a living, but too many senior managers that seem to think they are the answer to every problem. Does my effing head in. There are a few decent ones but most are irritating parasites.

When I retire I’m going to be one, just to make a bit of easy money to top up the pension.

I just wish I had the income of Mick Jagger and I wouldn't give a shit.

 

[Hampster Gull]

There is a clear gap between what people expect from the NHS, the impact of an ageing population hit further by Brexit removing young immigrants and the ability if the gorpvernment to fund. Something has to change as it’s heading towards a real mess. For me something along the lines of those who can’t afford are given free services, others pay.

 

[Half Time Pies]

In a free market the costs would go down, not up, so healthcare would be more affordable. Healthcare costs today are insanely high, because it's a government run monopoly without competition where funds are directed politically. Also what I described could still work like a form of mutual insurance similar to how it works today, the only difference being that the patient directs the funds towards the service they want to use, forcing providers to compete with one another to provide services people want.

Yes healthcare is better than it was in the 50's, is that because the healthcare system is well run and efficient. Like you say, that's because of technology. Is the NHS providing a better service this year than last year? Will it be better next year than this year? Comparing apples for apples, things get worse over time not better, that's pretty clear I think.

I have my own anecdotes about people I love having their lives saved by the NHS too, the doctors and nurses are frankly amazing people for the work they do under the circumstances. I'm not saying the NHS doesn't save lives, but I think there are cases where lives are lost which don't have to be too. For every good story about the NHS there seem to be more horror stories, we aren't having this conversation because the NHS is working, we are having it because it's not.

There is no evidence that costs go down because of health care privatisation, see previous graph on US per capita health care costs.

 

[Hampster Gull]

There is no evidence that costs go down because of health care privatisation, see previous graph on US per capita health care costs.

Why does eg an investment banker need free medical support from the NHS?

 

[Sussex Nomad]

There is a clear gap between what people expect from the NHS, the impact of an ageing population hit further by Brexit removing young immigrants and the ability if the gorpvernment to fund. Something has to change as it’s heading towards a real mess. For me something along the lines of those who can’t afford are given free services, others pay.

It's not a free service, people make this misconception. We pay into it, we are the managers of this fund. However it is our inept politicians that make the decisions. We are using a 1940s system on 2018 and it doesn't work. We need to either get up to speed or hand it out to someone that knows what they're doing. Because, really, for the past 50 years, politicians have no idea what they are doing.

 

[Hampster Gull]

It's not a free service, people make this misconception. We pay into it, we are the managers of this fund. However it is our inept politicians that make the decisions. We are using a 1940s system on 2018 and it doesn't work. We need to either get up to speed or hand it out to someone that knows what they're doing. Because, really, for the past 50 years, politicians have no idea what they are doing.

It is free at point of use, mainly

 

[dingodan]

The comparison between a health service and mobile phones is a poor one. Mobile phones can of course be provided successfully within a free market economy, if apple was to remove the camera from its phones it would lose market share to Samsung etc. However a health service is a completely different beast there is unlikely to be multiple hospitals in an area to choose and those that provide specialist health care services for particular issues so if providers are performing badly there may not be the option for people to chose a different one.

What many people don't realise about the US privatised system is that the spend per capita on health is significantly more than anywhere else in the world, even their contribution through their taxes per capita is more than we contribute per capita for the NHS. View attachment 93321

The general population in the UK wouldn't stomach that type of spend on health.

Why would you not have multiple service providers competing with one another? We don't have that today, but that's because all healthcare spending is directed through the state to the provider it runs. There is no marketplace. If their was a marketplace, and there was a lack of quality in this or that area, that's an opportunity for someone to come in and provide the quality service which was lacking. Of course by doing so, they would in turn force those providers who were not providing a good service to up their game or lose their ability to compete. If they didn't up their game they would go out of business and bye bye poor quality service provider. That's how the market sorts things out, bad services don't survive, good services thrive.