idb
Gold Member
- Dec 26, 2010
- 14,986
- 2,590
- 265
Way to misrepresent my point!No I don't.Every system has its problems.You really are an idiot if you think that any commercial service, just by virtue of being commercial, is automatically better than a government-provided service.
That's true, however I have never heard of a commercial ambulance company making a patient wait for 62 hours. You? Add to that the fact that because of the way they have to report when a patient arrives at the hospital it is not uncommon to have the ambulances driving around for hours so that they don't have to count the patient as delivered to the ER. Once again, please provide a link to ANY commercial company doing the same.
16,900 people in a week kept in NHS ambulances waiting for hospital care
Highest number of people this winter were forced to wait in back of ambulances during Christmas week in England
Record numbers of patients were forced to wait in the backs of ambulances last week as hospitals in England struggled to cope with demand for medical treatment as the NHS’s winter crisis began in earnest.
In all, 16,900 people – the highest number this winter – were stuck in the backs of ambulances waiting to enter an A&E unit to be assessed and treated in the week from Christmas Day to New Year’s Eve.
Of those, 4,700 – again the most in any week this winter – had to endure a delay of at least an hour, according to NHS England’s latest figures, published on Thursday, on how the service is performing under the extra pressure that winter brings.
Theresa May, on a visit to Frimley Park hospital in Surrey, apologised for delays to operations and hospital admissions, saying she recognised it was difficult for somebody who had had their operation postponed, and hoped procedures could be rescheduled “as soon as possible”.
16,900 people in a week kept in NHS ambulances waiting for hospital care
Making the blanket statement that government servces are bad and commercially-run services are good is just wrong.
You equate having to pay money for service as bad. I can bet you a large sum of cash that people forced to wait in an ambulance for hours would disagree with you.
I'm saying that no system is flawless.
It's pretty shitty if you don't have the momey to pay for service.
How about quoting some of the millions of happy NHS customers?
You are complaining about costs, costs which have NO IMPACT on the quality of service. Yet you give a pass to a government run system that ACTIVELY HARMS ITS PATIENTS. Like I said, you're pretty silly to even try and make that comparison.
Simply put - no system is perfect.
There's plenty of IMPACT on the quality of service if you can't afford said service.
Brits still have the option of private insurance, just the same as the US.
The difference is that they have the backup option of free healthcare (flawed or not) if they don't have/want or can't afford insurance.