mcteethinator
Idiosyncratic Muslim
I would rather have a free market so that almost everyone could afford the better private care.
Almost.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Record number of Britons go abroad for healthcare.
- Thread starter Comprehend
- Start date
Almost.
Mathematician
Reason, and reason again
Comprehend
Res Ipsa Loquitur
Comprehend
Res Ipsa Loquitur
Comprehend
Res Ipsa Loquitur
I think the article mentions that it is actually cheaper to go abroad to pay than to pay in the UK.
Price control will drive up the private prices artificially as has happened in the UK and the US.
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
The private prices are driven up by the ability of insurance companies to pay.
It has nothing to do with what the man in the street can or will pay, as they hardly use the service here.
Comprehend
Res Ipsa Loquitur
I said it is driven up by price controls, I didn't say anything about what the man in the street can pay.
Supply/demand.
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
There are no price controls ... that is illegal in Europe.
Comprehend
Res Ipsa Loquitur
Comprehend: How much does NHS healthcare cost for you out of pocket?
Terry: Well, it costs $0 out of pocket. The healthcare is "free".
Comprehend: Terry, who set the price at $0?
Terry: The UK government, they run the NHS and set the price at $0.
Comprehend: Um.... and you are saying there are no price controls?
Terry: Yes, that is illegal in Europe.
Comprehend: But you are also saying that your government controls what the price of healthcare is for the NHS?
Terry: Yes, the government runs the NHS and sets the price at $0.
Comprehend: ok....... :run:
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
That is an extraordinarily weak argument. and does not demonstrate anything.
The ongoing cost to an individual of the NHS is in the cost of national insurance and a portion of general taxation.
The charge on delivery is Zero. except for a contribution for prescription medicine's.This is waived for the long term sick, the young or old and those claiming benefit.
None of this impacts on either the costs or the charges for private health care.
Comprehend
Res Ipsa Loquitur
It isn't an argument at all. It is a fact.
The UK government controls the prices of healthcare in the UK.
Maybe you don't understand what a price control is?
yossarian22
Resident Schizophrenic
I assume you mean a higher mortality rate.
Last I saw any data about the mortality rate of white America, it was 5.7 per 1000.
This might just be Simpson's Paradox striking again.
Smoke
Done here.
Life expectancy at birth for males of any race in the UK is higher than for white males in the US (77.0 vs. 75.7). Life expectancy at birth for UK females of any race is about the same as for white females in the US (81.0 vs. 80.8).
The infant mortality rate in the United States is 7 per 1,000 overall, and 5.66 for non-Hispanic white women. The infant mortality rate in the UK for all races is 5 per 1,000.
On the other hand, we have have much higher adolescent fertility rate (4.3% for the US vs. 2.7% for the UK). Three cheers for abstinence-only education!
The infant mortality rate in the United States is 7 per 1,000 overall, and 5.66 for non-Hispanic white women. The infant mortality rate in the UK for all races is 5 per 1,000.
On the other hand, we have have much higher adolescent fertility rate (4.3% for the US vs. 2.7% for the UK). Three cheers for abstinence-only education!
Comprehend
Res Ipsa Loquitur
I'll restate incase you have forgotten:
1. The quality of healthcare is one of many many factors that go into determining the IMR and ALE.
2. I have said repeatedly that the US also has a poor healthcare system so knocking the US system doesn't really get you anywhere.
Comprehend
Res Ipsa Loquitur
I can understand why you guys keep trying to turn this into a "yeah but the US stinks worse!" argument.
You can say that all you want but I still have to ask; why is there a record number of people fleeing the UK system and it is projected to triple in 3 years? That sounds like the UK people are fed up with their healthcare. Free medical care has to REALLY stink before people will not only choose to pay for it, but travel to another country to get it.
You can say that all you want but I still have to ask; why is there a record number of people fleeing the UK system and it is projected to triple in 3 years? That sounds like the UK people are fed up with their healthcare. Free medical care has to REALLY stink before people will not only choose to pay for it, but travel to another country to get it.
Yerda
Veteran Member
If you happen to be loaded and can afford top private care then it will not be to your standards I would expect.
The most unsatisfactory feature is probably the waiting times. My ex had to wait 42 weeks to see a specialist, which is a long time if you are in discomfort. On the other hand, a friend of mine just had brain surgery on the NHS and it was perfectly good. Removed a blood clot and, it seems, his epilepsy in one four hour operation, with no apparent negative effects (although with this guy it's difficult to tell
).Health is the most important thing in our lives. Everything else is diminished in the absence of good health. So it's concerning that the public system is not performing as well as it has in the past.
What's the alternative?
A system open to markets? I know enough about private enterprise to know that profit is always centre stage and things like well being a peripheral. This is exemplified by the encroachment of privatisation on the NHS in recent years. Hospitals built on private money and for private profit (leased to the NHS over long periods) have performed disastrously in patient care and, importantly for you free market efficiency mantra chanters, appallingly in value for money. Public health has demonstrated it's value all over the world for quite a while now. If there's a better system, enlighten me.
Don Penguinoini
Modi.
Us Brits pay our taxes through the roof and the legalised corruption makes sure the NHS gets only a fraction their taxes. Spanish people, for example, pay a fraction of the taxes we pay here and their healthcare system is so much better.
So, the argument can be paraphrased as "if public healthcare is so great, why doesn't everyone with access to it use it?" We could just as well say:
Since so many people buy cars, public transportation must be a failure and we should dismantle the public bus and subway systems.
Since so many people send their children to private schools, there must be something wrong with public schools and we should get rid of them.
Since so many people buy bottled water, city-provided water sucks, and the government should no longer support that service.
Obviously that would leave many people without transportation, education and clean water, just like removing public healthcare leaves many people without medical treatment.
Since so many people buy cars, public transportation must be a failure and we should dismantle the public bus and subway systems.
Since so many people send their children to private schools, there must be something wrong with public schools and we should get rid of them.
Since so many people buy bottled water, city-provided water sucks, and the government should no longer support that service.
Obviously that would leave many people without transportation, education and clean water, just like removing public healthcare leaves many people without medical treatment.
Smoke
Done here.
Because everybody suspects that the real point of this thread is to make an indirect argument against having national health care in the United States by showing that there are serious flaws in the British system. That suspicion is reinforced by the fact that Terry made a number of cogent points about the British system early in this thread, and you never bothered to respond to them in any way. In that context, the fact that the British system, for all its flaws, is still better than ours is relevant.