Our NHS discussions. Covid19 related or not

[steptoe]

Ohh.. that's an interesting point, how does the family fund the healthcare of s sick newborn in the USA? Must be a solution there somewhere if they don't have the NHS there?

they dont fund it, they pay for it at point of use,
or, and here is a surprise,
their insurance pays for it at point of use,
I dont think you grasp the difference between funding something, and paying for something.
let me use small words, if I can,
when you pay for something it is a direct contract between you and one other person or entity,
when you fund something it is a collective, between many people, and one, or more, entities, or people,
this is how taxes work, people that can afford to pay more to fund something, do so, in order to help those than cannot pay as much,
its the one part of Socalism that actually works when applied correctly.

 

[bonus2010]

In comparison with our countries...although 2018 figures







Source

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/audio-video/key-facts-figures-nhs

 

[steptoe]

😆

you still dont understand this do you,
spending is NOT the same as funding
you dont fund Tesco (other supermarkets are available) , you SPEND money there
the UK spent below the average because most of their health service is FUNDED,
they only needed to spend on health services that werent immediately necessary, like, aethestics , maybe a better prothestic limb, a fancy wheelchair etc
all urgent, critical services etc, are FUNDED

the mind boggles , as I said before, baseless arguments abound on the internet, and people that dont understand what they are rersearching is why myths and conspiracy theories are believed by idiots everywhere.

 

[channelking]

I may not be 100%.accurate here but going by what family has said to me over there revolutionary changes are being made in Pakistan in terms of the health care system.

The leader and his ruling party wants to bring a welfare system for the poor there and for the first time ever there they are issuing cards to every citizen albeit its taking affect province by province atm which will allow them to have free health care which the card will pay for and whatever extra they would pay for.

But the government there is trying to make sure they cover the treatment etc for every citizen.

 

[steptoe]

I may not be 100%.accurate here but going by what family has said to me over there revolutionary changes are being made in Pakistan in terms of the health care system.

The leader and his ruling party wants to bring a welfare system for the poor there and for the first time ever there they are issuing cards to every citizen albeit its taking affect province by province atm which will allow them to have free health care which the card will pay for and whatever extra they would pay for.

But the government there is trying to make sure they cover the treatment etc for every citizen.

good to here that, 👍

 

[teddybloat]

Abolishing the NHS model should be top priority post pandemic

It won't be top priority as it bizarrely held in almost religious awe

 

[steptoe]

Abolishing the NHS model should be top priority post pandemic

It won't be top priority as it bizarrely held in almost religious awe

what would you suggestbit gets replaced with.?
people resorting to back yard doctors and dying in the streets.?

 

[channelking]

My thinking exactly.

Yes NHS isnt perfect but what exactly do those people want in place of the current NHS model that is held in "religious awe" as some have put it?

 

[teddybloat]

what would you suggestbit gets replaced with.?
people resorting to back yard doctors and dying in the streets.?

You do realise that barely any countries have an NHS model and just about every democracy has universal coverage.

We have a below average health service and we deserve better

 

[steptoe]

You do realise that barely any countries have an NHS model and just about every democracy has universal coverage.

what countries are they then,?
just give me a few european examples.
because I work in Europe mainland, and I dont know of any that have a free at the point of use healthcare system

 

[teddybloat]

They all have universal coverage.

The majority of countries in the world manage this trivial feat.

America is an outlier in managing to fail to have universal coverage amid developed nations.

One might wonder why other countries don't adopt our model?

We have very poor outcomes, have horrendous waste and the NHS has been a disgrace through the pandemic

 

[steptoe]

They all have universal coverage.

The majority of countries in the world manage this trivial feat.

America is an outlier in managing to fail to have universal coverage amid developed nations.

One might wonder why other countries don't adopt our model?

We have very poor outcomes, have horrendous waste and the NHS has been a disgrace through the pandemic

so, yet more rubbish being spouted on the internet
no one has yet to give me the name of one European country that has a health service that is free at the point of use,
just the same old regurgitated rubbish about universal coverage, whatever that means, does that mean its free.?
nobody is saying the NHS is perfect, far from it, it is top heavy, and needs sorting, and properly,
but the model is there, for FREE at the POINT OF USE HEALTHCARE , no other country has this available, either by universal coverage, or selectively.

 

[teddybloat]

If people cannot afford they still get treated, yes.

Free at the point of use does not mean free.

Our services are oversubscribed and substandard, often due to the system we use.

It is akin to a religion as the suggestion that we adopt a more modern system is met with "do you want people treated in back alleys" nonsensical hysteria.

The guardian best summed up this religious / cultish worshipping of a substandard service with the immortal quote

"The only serious black mark against the NHS was its poor record on keeping people alive"


Yes, quite.

But being free at the point of use is the only measure people care about

Strange other countries are not burdened by this central tenet of belief

 

[steptoe]

If people cannot afford they still get treated, yes.

Free at the point of use does not mean free.

Our services are oversubscribed and substandard, often due to the system we use.

It is akin to a religion as the suggestion that we adopt a more modern system is met with "do you want people treated in back alleys" nonsensical hysteria.

The guardian best summed up this religious / cultish worshipping of a substandard service with the immortal quote

"The only serious black mark against the NHS was its poor record on keeping people alive"


Yes, quite.

But being free at the point of use is the only measure people care about

Strange other countries are not burdened by this central tenet of belief

you cant answer the question so you do the politician response of babbling on about other stuff

it really wasnt a hard question,
and now 2 people that are arguing the point cant answer it.
everyone knows that NOTHING is free, but free at the point of use is what matters for a health service, and that is what the NHS provides.

 

[teddybloat]

Free at the point of use absolutely is NOT what matters

Virtually no other country agrees with us on that.

Outcomes matter too. Uniivesal coverage matters. You perfectly embody the guardian quote

It doesn't matter if people die, as long as they don't pay at the hospital for their poor treatment.


We do not have the best health service in the world. It is not the envy of the world, there is no clamour to copy our system.

Here is a list of countries that manage to ensure all of their people receive health care when they need it

List of countries with universal health care - Wikipedia

 

[steptoe]

Free at the point of use absolutely is NOT what matters

Virtually no other country agrees with us on that.

Outcomes matter too. Uniivesal coverage matters. You perfectly embody the guardian quote

It doesn't matter if people die, as long as they don't pay at the hospital for their poor treatment.


We do not have the best health service in the world. It is not the envy of the world, there is no clamour to copy our system.

Here is a list of countries that manage to ensure all of their people receive health care when they need it

List of countries with universal health care - Wikipedia

just another politician babbling answer
I only asked for 1 European country that had a FREE at the point of use health service
you cannot give me one
so stop trying to defend your indefensible opinionsand inaccurate statements

 

[teddybloat]

Why are you obsessed with free at the point of use?

Let's say I concede that zero euro nations have 100% free at the point of use care

It doesn't change the fact that all of them manage to ensure that 100% of their people get health care when they need it. ( For people that cannot afford care the government nsteps in making it what some might say is free at the point when they are, ahem, using it)

That's's nothing special, botswana and Burkina Faso have also worked out that conundrum.

It doesn't change the fact that many countries do a better job at keeping people alive.

It doesn't change the fact that none of them are scrambling to implement an NHS model.

Our service is bloated, under performing, inefficient, staff rather than patient focused and resistant to change.

What's worse the public are fervant in their belief we have the best health service in the world and will defend the principle of free at the point of use over patient outcomes

A religion

"The only serious black mark against the NHS was its poor record on keeping people alive"

Its central mantra

 

[smiffy46]

"The only serious black mark against the NHS was its poor record on keeping people alive"

And in the same article the above quote came from, you find this....

"The NHS has been declared the best healthcare system by an international panel of experts who rated its care superior to countries which spend far more on health."

"The United Kingdom ranks first overall, scoring highest on quality, access and efficiency," the fund's researchers conclude in their 30-page report. Their findings amount to a huge endorsement of the health service, especially as it spends the second-lowest amount on healthcare among the 11 – just £2,008 per head, less than half the £5,017 in the US. Only New Zealand, with £1,876, spent less."

NHS is the world's best healthcare system, report says.

I have always been happy with the service I have received from the NHS - long may it continue
Had my anti-covid vaccine yesterday -- Hugely efficient service.
(Just in passing -- no after effects...)

 

[teddybloat]

that report prioritises funding methods and it being free at the point of use above metrics like how likely you are to live 5 years after receiving cancer treatment, or how many people pick up infections after an operation.

its the same thought process that Steptoe exhibits and is endemic in the UK: the principle of the NHS being free at the point of use is more important than the health outcomes of the people that rely on the service.

and its why that quote is so jarring to people who dont hold the nhs in high regard

can you hazard a guess as to why so few countries use our model?

 

[bonus2010]

he UK doesn't have a 'free' health service. I'm just talking about what's spent per head of population equivalence on h

😆

you still dont understand this do you,
spending is NOT the same as funding
you dont fund Tesco (other supermarkets are available) , you SPEND money there
the UK spent below the average because most of their health service is FUNDED,
they only needed to spend on health services that werent immediately necessary, like, aethestics , maybe a better prothestic limb, a fancy wheelchair etc
all urgent, critical services etc, are FUNDED

the mind boggles , as I said before, baseless arguments abound on the internet, and people that dont understand what they are rersearching is why myths and conspiracy theories are believed by idiots everywhere.

Its not the case of me not understanding what you are going on about, although I accept I've obviously not used the right terminology, and I think its all to do with the
use of this word "funding" that I've used.

I'm constantly hearing that the NHS is underfunded, i.e. it hasn't got enough money.

For me, to determine whether the NHS has enough money or 'funding' or resources to do what it does or needs to do, then surely we have to compare with some other health services
and as NHS forms a monomply in the UK, it has to be with other country's health service solution.
OK, I've said off the cuff, other country's health care funding, which has led you to demand names of country's which are the same as NHS in terms of the way users fund it.

I accept there isn't the same as the NHS anywhere else to my knowledge. However, I don't believe its particularly important, the way in which
the NHS or any other health provider across the world is resourced if we are going to compare that health provision with the NHS in order to
establish whether the NHS is adequately funded or not.

So if I took two hospitals one in the UK and one in Germany of similar size, and completely disregarded the method in which they achieved their income/money/funding whatever
you want to call it that resourced the services they provided to their patients then a comparson could be made. between the NHS. For me, I don't know
how people are able to claim the NHS is underfunded without comparison to something else. We need to do that so it can be determined
whether its a funding/money issue or waste of money issue, i.e bad management.