No-one profits from health, only from sickness. And how else, please tell me, would medications, treatments, nursing, medical support, OTs, Physios etc be funded without a bit of business savvy?
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
round and round and round
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
But those questions are crucial to what is being discussed. And to be honest no one is really responding to them other than to keep up the old NHS mantra free at the point of delivery. Which is a delusion.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
oh dear
so barryw's thoughts on free at point of delivery then?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
It is a fact that we don't pay upfront when we go to the GP etc, but how does that happen do we all think? And what about before and afterwards - those prescription charges, for example. What is the point of free at the point etc if the patients don't then have the treatment prescribed because they can't/won't pay the prescription charges. And how are those treatments developed? By profit making companies. It is, as you remarked on another thread, a bigger picture. And some.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Nobody has ever explained to my satisfaction why healthcare should be free to everybody, even those who can afford to pay for it.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
peter;
you wont be surprized(or maybe you will) that i support your view that those able to afford it should pay.
maybe private medicine is one of these routes.
what is wrong is then N.H.S. lists are affected by private health care using the N.H.S.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
MMMmmmmmmm.
If healthcare was not 'universally' free, people would begin to wonder why they pay for it which in turn would cast an even more powerful search-light upon tax & NI avoidance. Not that it is anywhere near as free as it once was:prescription charges, dental, opticians and care for the elderly.
"Why is a Doctor like a Stork? Because they can both stick there bills up..."
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
'free and the point of need' is the mantra frequently repeated by defenders of the NHS system.
We do not need the NHS to ensure 'free and the point of need'. What we do need is a more up-to-date healthcare system such as the insurance funded systems in Germany and other continental countries.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
barry
you have previously espoused the importance of free at the point of use.
besides people have the option of paying for private healthcare if they wish to.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
That is true Howard and it illustrates my point - we do not need the NHS and the over the top adoration of the great god NHS is preventing the UK from having healthcare to match the best in the world.
The system should be completely changed to an insurance funded one and, as I said, that does not have to mean anyone has to go without the best care. Look at Germany's system.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
slight change there howard glad you noticed it.
the german health insurance scheme is compulsary
where you pay in 14% of your monthly earnings!!!!!!
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
An insurance based scheme would certainly mean rich pickings for the Agency Sector, but no benefit to the unwell/injured.
If the NHS suffers from anything it's Politicians mouthing-off. The NHS is both cheap and efficient until you factor-in the political place-men.
Alas there seem to be more and more US companies getting their foot in the door and it is plain for all to see just how well they perform back home. The US (un)healthy system does offer one boon to the Politicos...funding.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Keith - it is more complex than that - mind you your quoted figure is less than NI with employee contributions of 12% and 13.8% employer. Here is a Wiki link that explains a lot more.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_in_Germany You will note the 'cap' on cost and protection for the low paid in place. Incidentally a cost of over 15% is quoted by Wiki not 14%.
The fact is you cannot compare the costs of two very tax systems and healthcare systems in that fashion. Clearly the objective is less cost, though the insurance based model should help with that overall and for individual costs too where any saving made by the government should be passed on in tax cuts. The real objective is better healthcare.
The principals of the German system are sound but I can see where a British version could be better but I will not go into that now.;
Tom - it would make a massive difference. When I had a problem a few years ago I got a referral to a private doctor and was subject to a whole range of expensive tests and all they found was high blood pressure but not a stone was left unturned to check just about everything possible. The point is the cost was not a concern for the doctor as it was not coming from a NHS budget but was paid for by an insurance company. It would have been a very different matter if it was NHS, a longer process because they would have had a concern about costs. In this case it didn't matter but if there was something more serious wrong then it may well have made a crucial difference to recovery.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
Barry, you play the game with two part decks.
As with any insurance scheme;health, motor, home and pet. At the point of treatment cost is not the major concern, earnings and profit are.
Your love of insurance does not stretch itself to the ambulance chasing claims market. Is there not to be a clamp-down on whip-lash payouts?
"not a stone was left unturned" Why does that not translate as, Not a procedure covered by the insurance left unperformed and claimed for?
There is nothing special about being pleased to, and expert in, spending other people's money. It's just always wrong when Governments do it?
"The fact is you cannot compare the costs of two very [different?] tax systems and healthcare systems ..."
The system the German's have for paying bankers does not show 'our' system in a good light either.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
tergiversation if only I was clever enough to hide behind this , but what can I do ,little fluffy headed me , swayed by the free sausage rolls of evil megacorps , Bless !
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
funny isnt it
i was asked to checkj out the german system so did so
then barryw tells me you cant compare the two
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Par for the course # 745 and # 749 then all the gobbledegook of Germany/NHS #750 and # 755 spot on.
