NHS in a capitalist economy...

antrobus

TruckerT wrote: »

Yes, but the piles of money don't generally provide health care for all.

TruckerT

If the piles are big enough, then yes they do.

If you are worried about how we're going to pay for health care, then it is the case that the richer we are, the easier it will be to afford the cost.

lostinrates

zagubov wrote: »

It'd be worth comparing NHS systems across the home nations to see what works and what doesn't. Yes I know that sounds like more buireaucracy but it'd still be worth it. Much of the private sector involvement's advantages are wishful thinking and propaganda.

Exactly how the opposing arguement see the romancing and unassailable position those who refuse to hear any thing negative about nhs or its workers.

The truth is probably more like there is no one perfect solution, else more countries would have identical systems. Our expectations from the provision of a nhs are too high IMO. It's hard to draw a line as to what is truly requisite and thus must be considered part of an NHS as we know it, but IMO that's all it should be fairly expected to provide.

TruckerT

antrobus wrote: »

If the piles are big enough, then yes they do.

If you are worried about how we're going to pay for health care, then it is the case that the richer we are, the easier it will be to afford the cost.

If it comes down to which of us have piles, then I should be able to fund the NHS without any other contributions!

TruckerT

globalds

globalds wrote: »

I can't see how the health service can survive.

It is stretched at every end ..From staff who want top dollar to patients that want everything of a service that was never really defined ..
Is it emergency care , medical treatment , practical health care , preventative medicine ...All of this and more ..The list is endless , the cost of treatments never goes down. Every government sticks it's oar in for purely political motivation ..Did any one see the cost of out of date Tamiflu ?

It is not that I don't admire it ..But really society has to do something to protect it ..we help it out , or stop abusing it ..I think some kind of insurance interface makes real sense ..they will act as a kind of auditor ..stop the hypochondriacs and time wasters and also set out definite parameters of covered treatment and areas where extra insurance is needed.

BobQ wrote: »

I have to say if this is the only area of waste you can list in the NHS then they are not as wasteful as you imply

This is the second "Bit of waste" I mentioned ..But I never expected you to read all of my posts ..