nhs

  • Thread starter Thread starter morganist
  • Start date Start date
M

morganist

i have noticed a lot of news in the us about the nhs. a lot of it is false.

for example it was stated pensioners could not get stents and bypasses on the nhs. however about a month ago my neighbour 76 had one done. he says the treatment was excellent. his wife 75 had the same and agreed the service was good.

i would also like to make further points. the first being in relation to waiting times. it would not matter how much money is put into the nhs there are only so many surgeons to perform certain operations if the nhs was privatised it would not create more surgeons because only a set amount of people will have those skills or the ability to attain them. even if that was not an obstacle most surgeons in the uk earn very rewarding salaries creating incentive. this makes me assume the figures in america in relation to waiting times are only better because large numbers of people are not treated because the elite few who can become surgeons are paid more to work for the wealthy instead of every one.
 
Quote from MohdSalleh:

but if i have money why shoudl i wait???
More...

you wait because everyone else needs treatment too.
 
thats the problem with europe, everyone scrounging on benefits and you accept it as normal.

Not in America.

those who produce the most earn the most. those who can pay the most are productive members of society who deserve the fastest and best treatment.

After all this is the greatest country in the world.
 
Quote from morganist:

i have noticed a lot of news in the us about the nhs. a lot of it is false.

for example it was stated pensioners could not get stents and bypasses on the nhs. however about a month ago my neighbour 76 had one done. he says the treatment was excellent. his wife 75 had the same and agreed the service was good.

i would also like to make further points. the first being in relation to waiting times. it would not matter how much money is put into the nhs there are only so many surgeons to perform certain operations if the nhs was privatised it would not create more surgeons because only a set amount of people will have those skills or the ability to attain them. even if that was not an obstacle most surgeons in the uk earn very rewarding salaries creating incentive. this makes me assume the figures in america in relation to waiting times are only better because large numbers of people are not treated because the elite few who can become surgeons are paid more to work for the wealthy instead of every one.
More...

Maybe there only so many surgeons because of the destruction of grammer schools by the liberal elite. There are 2.7 million on disability benefit, 2.5 million on unemployment benefit, and over a million young not in education, employment or training. The woes of the welfare state go deeper than just the healthcare system.
 
Quote from just21:

Maybe there only so many surgeons because of the destruction of grammer schools by the liberal elite. There are 2.7 million on disability benefit, 2.5 million on unemployment benefit, and over a million young not in education, employment or training. The woes of the welfare state go deeper than just the healthcare system.
More...

i agree. however getting treatment should not be for the elite also if you look at the american model there are people not treated at all no matter how long they wait.
 
Take a look at the French, German, Singapore or Australian systems. Do not emulate the UK in any way. Only Cuba and North Korea have followed the UK.
 
one thing about the NHS for the individual and collectively it won't bankrupt you:
"Indeed, a more recent piece describes a study published in The American Journal
of Medicine. Posted July 15 at examiner.com, the article calls the study “surprising”
because it “showed that 62.1% of personal bankruptcies filed in 2007– before the
economic downturn – were due to medical debt associated with healthcare costs.”
Furthermore, the article says, “[m]ost Americans who filed for personal bankruptcy
due to health care costs were middle-class, homeowners who had gone to college”
and that of those, “75% reported having health insurance.” "
http://www.bankruptcycorner.com/ban...ed-to-medical-costs-role-in-u-s-bankruptcies/

google: 'us healthcare bankruptcies' and you'll realize that a 'for profit' health care
system is truly expensive-to-the-nation system, not only financially and how high
costs impact so many areas of the personal and national economy, but also how
detrimental it is to the individuals' and nation's health - not being able to afford to
take care of their health and the subsequent consequences

it never occurs in the UK nor here in Canada that an individual is refused medical
treatment because they can't afford to pay, or that they won't seek medical
attention because they know they cannot afford to pay
if the 50 or so million uninsured Americans came online for treatment - that is the
treatment of the whole population as in the UK etc then wait times would likely
rise significantly no matter how much one could afford to pay
another matter is the cessation of some medical treatment in US hospitals due
to 'budgetary constraints', further the closure/relocation of large business from
smaller populations that results in the cancellation of healthcare insurance and
thereby massive drops in hospital budgets - no employment, no healthcare

unfortunate Americans are trying to find fault in other health care systems as a
way of justifying the for-profit status quo of their system
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top