Save the Economy? SCRAP the NHS!

andrina_nightshade

I nearly fell off my chair laughing at the comment about NHS doctors being paid £200K p.a. That's more in the realms of a private physician (and I don't mean an NHS doctor moonlighting, I mean a full-time Harley Street physician).

Silly question - what happens to all the doctors/nurses/physiotherapists/pharmacists, etc. who work in the NHS if it were to be scrapped? Is every single one going to be suddenly hired by private hospitals or GP surgeries? I would estimate that only 50-60% of them would be needed if services were to be "stream-lined" and fully privatised. So, in one day, we've just put another half a million people out of work. How exactly does that "save the economy"?

And we can all bleat about how private is better than public, but it's the partial privatisation of the NHS that has created so many of its contemporary problems. Take MRSA for example. PFI-funded hospitals typically have a third fewer beds than traditional NHS hospitals, but significantly higher rates of bed occupancy. But, as the occupancy rate of beds increases even slightly, the MRSA rates increase exponentially.

bumpoowee

chewmylegoff wrote: »

you didn't read my post - under the system i suggested there would be a cap on the maximum payment each year. the finnish system is that the most you can pay is €600 a year, after that all of your treatment is free. so if i needed a £100k drug treatment program, it would be fine, as i would only have to pay £500, or whatever the cap was.

This has got to be the way forward, the NHS in it's current form is unsustainable. I rarely go to hospital or the GP, but whenever I do it is rammed with oldies who are clearly there just to get some attention. If they were charged even £1 for an appointment (with a yearly cap as mentioned) you can bet suddenly a lot of them would find something better to do.

Before anyone starts, I'm not suggesting all old people in medical establishments are faking it, or that only old people waste NHS resources, but it's certainly one area where tax money is wasted.

Oldernotwiser

chewmylegoff wrote: »

or the state covers 100% of the costs in cases of chronic illness, but only a percentage of the costs (e.g. in france, 70%) in non-chronic cases.

You're absolutely right for certain, specific conditions.

Oldernotwiser

bumpoowee wrote: »

This has got to be the way forward, the NHS in it's current form is unsustainable. I rarely go to hospital or the GP, but whenever I do it is rammed with oldies who are clearly there just to get some attention. If they were charged even £1 for an appointment (with a yearly cap as mentioned) you can bet suddenly a lot of them would find something better to do.

Before anyone starts, I'm not suggesting all old people in medical establishments are faking it, or that only old people waste NHS resources, but it's certainly one area where tax money is wasted.

What a very nasty, ageist thing to think and say. Don't you have parents or grandparents?

SGE1

For an easy to read explanation of why private medical insurance doesn't work - http://www.amazon.co.uk/Economics-Welfare-State-Nicholas-Barr/dp/019926497X

rammy007

julieq wrote: »

Curiously I'm in the US and was talking to some US colleagues about this very subject today.

Healthcare in the US is OK if you're poor, and it's great if you're employed with health insurance, but if you're somewhere in the middle - out of work for some reason but having worked hard and saved - and you get ill, you're basically stuffed. If you're ill, you will find that insurance tends to increase and you may end up not covered for recurrences.


This is the same as the benefit system then,only those in the middle get stuffed we dont want that again.

bumpoowee

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

What a very nasty, ageist thing to think and say. Don't you have parents or grandparents?

Why is it ageist? I happily accept I will be old one day...

This is one of the reason problems like the NHS being unsustainable never get sorted out in this country - when somebody starts bringing up the actual problems theres always a very vocal minority who start whinging on and playing the 'ist' card, racist, ageist or whatever. What I said is factually correct, but of course that doesn't come in to it.

mewbie_2

bumpoowee wrote: »

Why is it ageist? I happily accept I will be old one day...

Being 'old one day' is not the same as being old.

bumpoowee

mewbie wrote: »

Being 'old one day' is not the same as being old.

What's your point? I'm a bit confused as to why it's being suggested I have anything against old people; they are just young people who got old, I don't really care - my frustration is with those who waste limited resources in the NHS. Less of the drama please.

lolly-i-pop

andrina_nightshade wrote: »

Silly question - what happens to all the doctors/nurses/physiotherapists/pharmacists, etc. who work in the NHS if it were to be scrapped? Is every single one going to be suddenly hired by private hospitals or GP surgeries? I would estimate that only 50-60% of them would be needed if services were to be "stream-lined" and fully privatised. So, in one day, we've just put another half a million people out of work. How exactly does that "save the economy"?

Fair point. But...

I work in the NHS. If it was scrapped, I would have less job security, poorer pension scheme, less training (totally essential for health care proffessionals), and in general, less perks.
This would make me finally do what I think about doing every day that I go to work, and apply for a job in tesco.

If I wasn't able to work in the nhs, I really couldn't be bothered with all the hard work i put in, and all the !!!! i get back from my job.

And I reckon I wouldn't be the only one