[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]

Return ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 89948)
File  []
>> No. 89948 Anonymous
8th June 2020
Monday 3:56 pm
89948 spacer
If the NHS is so great why haven't other countries around the world replicated it?

Would be be better adopting a healthcare model similar to, say, Germany? The way the debate on healthcare is framed in this country, with your two choices being either what we have here or what they have in America, seems dishonest.
Expand all images.
>> No. 89949 Anonymous
8th June 2020
Monday 4:03 pm
89949 spacer
But they have?
>> No. 89950 Anonymous
8th June 2020
Monday 4:14 pm
89950 spacer
Have they?
>> No. 89951 Anonymous
8th June 2020
Monday 4:52 pm
89951 spacer
>The way the debate on healthcare is framed in this country, with your two choices being either what we have here or what they have in America, seems dishonest.

The issue in a nutshell. The US and the UK are the two polar extremes between maximum corporate control and maximum state control. The NHS is the fifth largest employer in the world and uniquely monolithic, which isn't innately a bad thing but certainly has significant downsides.

The NHS is exceptionally cost-effective, but it's distinctly mediocre at actually keeping people healthy. A large part of the issue is undoubtedly the fact that we're doing healthcare on the cheap, but the ideological opposition to anything that smacks of privatisation is a significant barrier to many potentially beneficial reforms.

>> No. 89952 Anonymous
8th June 2020
Monday 5:19 pm
89952 spacer

I could be wrong but federal and state programs do inSURFere with the US system so it can't be called a fully private system (or an open market). An example of this is that you can't just build a new hospital, it usually has to be approved by a group from that state (essentially, the other hospitals get to chose if they want competition). That is a minute amount of state control that has a lot of ramifications.

There is an open market for LASIK eye surgery which has done very well in the US. It's become quite widespread and more affordable, given that it's quite easy to open and run clinics. That's often used to justify why private is better. They seem to be in a worse position than us, it seems half of them want a public program and the other half are completely opposed to it.
>> No. 89953 Anonymous
8th June 2020
Monday 5:36 pm
89953 spacer

> it can't be called a fully private system

That's the "maximum corporate control" bit. It's not a free market, it's a cartel.
>> No. 89954 Anonymous
8th June 2020
Monday 7:41 pm
89954 spacer

If a word filter for SURF causes words like inSURFere to break then this might be the worst worldfilter yet.
>> No. 89955 Anonymous
8th June 2020
Monday 10:18 pm
89955 spacer

>> No. 89956 Anonymous
8th June 2020
Monday 11:34 pm
89956 spacer
Don't be so bitSURFul you fragile butSURFly. It's no clusSURFuck or splatSURFest, you just have to inSURFace better. CounSURFeit your words. Then you'll have a masSURFul post worthy of winning a quarSURFinal, as robust as buckminsSURFullerene.
>> No. 89957 Anonymous
9th June 2020
Tuesday 12:02 am
89957 spacer
The German system is not too dissimilar, though the implementation is not quite the same. While there's no NI contribution there is instead a delightfully German word: "Krankenversicherungspflicht", which idiomatically translates to "insure yourself or we will do it for you". There's some additional paper work on top of this about the insurance institutions, e.g. you are in the "state system" by default but if you ever opt out[1] you cannot (usually) rejoin. For the end user it's not too different: if you need medical help, you can get it at nominal cost. If you want expedited treatment, your insurance or ability to pay matters.

So for these two examples, the reason Germany hasn't replicated the NHS is because the outcome is much the same. The same jokes about NHS treatment in the UK are being made about AOK treatment in Germany.

[1] Because you think you can do better in the private system.
>> No. 89958 Anonymous
10th June 2020
Wednesday 2:14 am
89958 spacer
I believe there is such a thing as a "best of both worlds" approach that mixes private and public healthcare. But I think you'd have to be very careful to make sure the competitive element of private providers stays, you know, competitive.

Despite the NHS being extremely cost effective, it currently has a horrible relationship with private contractors. PFI for instance is an unmitigated trainwreck. I can't help but notice the government has taken advantage of the covid crisis to drastically expand this relationship too- Instead of upgrading NHS lab services, they have instead outsourced and handed money to contractors to build new facilities. There's been understandable concern about oversight and accreditation in these labs, whereas the NHS has a very good track record for accuracy, auditing and accountability in its own.

The most important part is having things remain free at the point of access, I'm less concerned about who provides it than it being available, and not being a black hole for taxpayer money like a lot of private-public partnerships.

Return ]

Delete Post []