CDZ Socialized care melt down. NHS in crisis.

[Andylusion]

I think we've seen enough posts about how the NHS was already in dire trouble simply from the failure of socialism to magically provide the unlimited funds they need.

But now things are much worse....

NHS held to ransom: Hospitals in IT meltdown

NHS cyberattack: Is your hospital affected?

Operations being canceled. Delays at all levels of health care. People being turned away for treatment.

Now of course, have us hospitals ever been hit by a cyber attack? Sure. But unlike the union-government-employees that run cyber-security at government run hospitals, our capitalist based profit-motivated hospitals seem to have a better time dealing with it.

Of course that costs money. Thankfully the NHS is far cheaper. And we can see the results of that.

But what makes this particularly humorous to me, is that this is one of the areas where the left-wing claims our system sucks.

I have pointed out many times that various rankings used around the world to claim the US healthcare is terrible and everyone else has a better system, none of them actually look specifically at the quality of care.

They look at nearly everything except quality of care. As if the quality and results of care is a static thing, and all that matters is cost and amenities, as if we can cut costs in half and the quality will remain the same.

But related to this specific event, some rankings specifically look at how computerized the health care system is.

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/~/m...rt/2014/jun/1755_davis_mirror_mirror_2014.pdf

On page 22 of the Common wealth fund ranking they say:

"Efficiency indicators from the 2012 survey include whether or not primary care practices have “multifunctional clinical information technology.” To be defined as a primary care practice with multifunctional IT functionality, the practice must have an electronic medical record (EMR) system with two or more functions for ordering, patient information, panel information, and decision support."

In other words, if only we had computerized electronic medical record system, we could be as efficient as the NHS is now.

Granted that has nothing to do with the quality of care... I'll take a high quality doctor writing notes on paper, who can see me in a week instead of year, over anything the NHS has. But that's a negative in their comparison, and so our health care sucks.

If only we could be as computerized as the NHS.

By the way, doesn't this sound familiar? Like healthcare.gov?

Funny how we keep getting the same results with government intervention, but then everyone is constantly surprised by problems.

 

[Ringel05]

I can see why you put this in the CDZ............

 

[Tommy Tainant]

The OP is not framed in any way that encourages debate.

 

[miketx]

The OP is not framed in any way that encourages debate.

Not in the least of all when he proves you are all in denial, and told you so, right?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

The OP is not framed in any way that encourages debate.

Not in the least of all when he proves you are all in denial, and told you so, right?

Where does it say that ? He has a lack of understanding of how our healthcare system works and attributes the problems to "socialism".
Its as far off base as it could be.

 

[miketx]

You know where it says it.

 

[Andylusion]

The OP is not framed in any way that encourages debate.

Not in the least of all when he proves you are all in denial, and told you so, right?

Where does it say that ? He has a lack of understanding of how our healthcare system works and attributes the problems to "socialism".
Its as far off base as it could be.

First, my main point was that many of these ridiculous ranking systems, that all say US health care sucks, use how "computerized" the system is. Now that the very thing that these left-wing idiotic rankings point to (instead of quality of care), is the very thing that has crippled half the health care system in the UK.

But ok Tommy. Here's your chance. Go ahead and provide your explanation of how it works.

In a Capitalist system, we have the benefits of competition.

Now what this means in practical terms, is that each hospital has a profit-motivated incentive to make sure their system, computerized or not, has enough redundancy and fail-safes, to ensure proper operation during any kind of problem.

In this particular case, it means that each hospital has back-up servers, and some of the highest quality cyber-security on the market. That various systems are somewhat isolated from the rest of the system to reduce infection and hacking.

Of course that costs money. But that's why you don't see US hospitals shutting down, or diverting patients.

Now why is this worth it to hospitals?

It's real simple. In America..... you are the customer. See, if the hospital has some castrophic event, that makes them unable to help their customers... the customers (you) will leave. If the customers leaves.... they don't get paid.

If they don't get paid.... the hospital closes, and everyone is out of a job.

That's competition. It forces hospitals and CEOs and employees, to provide the best stable service they can, or they don't get paid.

Now think about that motivation at the NHS hospital. If you are sent away, do they lose money? No. If you are unhappy and leave, do they lose their job? No. If dozens of people die, and there is a massive tragedy, does anyone go out of business? No.

You say that would never happen? In 2003 a heat wave hit Europe. In France thousands of people died. Now, that alone isn't surprising. What is absolutely insane to an American, is that hundreds on hundreds of these deaths were INSIDE..... French hospitals.

If any hospital in the US had that happen, they would go out of business. No one would go to such a hospital. The people would be unemployed. The company would fold. Everyone would go to a different.... better hospital.

Tell me... how many doctors and nurses at these government run hospitals are unemployed for letting hundreds on hundreds of people die INSIDE the hospital under their care? None. How many hospitals that let these people die, are closed? None.

That's how that works. No competition. No threat of monetary loss. No reason to worry when patients die.

See under capitalism you are valued customer. Under socialism.... well you are just a problem. If the problem goes away because you died... that just.... solves the problem.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

The OP is not framed in any way that encourages debate.

Not in the least of all when he proves you are all in denial, and told you so, right?

Where does it say that ? He has a lack of understanding of how our healthcare system works and attributes the problems to "socialism".
Its as far off base as it could be.

First, my main point was that many of these ridiculous ranking systems, that all say US health care sucks, use how "computerized" the system is. Now that the very thing that these left-wing idiotic rankings point to (instead of quality of care), is the very thing that has crippled half the health care system in the UK.

But ok Tommy. Here's your chance. Go ahead and provide your explanation of how it works.

In a Capitalist system, we have the benefits of competition.

Now what this means in practical terms, is that each hospital has a profit-motivated incentive to make sure their system, computerized or not, has enough redundancy and fail-safes, to ensure proper operation during any kind of problem.

In this particular case, it means that each hospital has back-up servers, and some of the highest quality cyber-security on the market. That various systems are somewhat isolated from the rest of the system to reduce infection and hacking.

Of course that costs money. But that's why you don't see US hospitals shutting down, or diverting patients.

Now why is this worth it to hospitals?

It's real simple. In America..... you are the customer. See, if the hospital has some castrophic event, that makes them unable to help their customers... the customers (you) will leave. If the customers leaves.... they don't get paid.

If they don't get paid.... the hospital closes, and everyone is out of a job.

That's competition. It forces hospitals and CEOs and employees, to provide the best stable service they can, or they don't get paid.

Now think about that motivation at the NHS hospital. If you are sent away, do they lose money? No. If you are unhappy and leave, do they lose their job? No. If dozens of people die, and there is a massive tragedy, does anyone go out of business? No.

You say that would never happen? In 2003 a heat wave hit Europe. In France thousands of people died. Now, that alone isn't surprising. What is absolutely insane to an American, is that hundreds on hundreds of these deaths were INSIDE..... French hospitals.

If any hospital in the US had that happen, they would go out of business. No one would go to such a hospital. The people would be unemployed. The company would fold. Everyone would go to a different.... better hospital.

Tell me... how many doctors and nurses at these government run hospitals are unemployed for letting hundreds on hundreds of people die INSIDE the hospital under their care? None. How many hospitals that let these people die, are closed? None.

That's how that works. No competition. No threat of monetary loss. No reason to worry when patients die.

See under capitalism you are valued customer. Under socialism.... well you are just a problem. If the problem goes away because you died... that just.... solves the problem.

I find it difficult dealing with ideological standpoints like this.

The problems with the NHS stem from systematic underfunding by the current tory regime. By and large they hate the NHS. They opposed it when it was introduced and back an american "XXXX the poor" system of health care.

So you see the problems in the NHS are directly attributable to right wing capitalists and it will be saved when decent socialists regain control.

Apart from a few millionaires nobody wants an American type system. Its inhumane,expensive and lacks a spiritual grounding.

 

[Andylusion]

The OP is not framed in any way that encourages debate.

Not in the least of all when he proves you are all in denial, and told you so, right?

Where does it say that ? He has a lack of understanding of how our healthcare system works and attributes the problems to "socialism".
Its as far off base as it could be.

First, my main point was that many of these ridiculous ranking systems, that all say US health care sucks, use how "computerized" the system is. Now that the very thing that these left-wing idiotic rankings point to (instead of quality of care), is the very thing that has crippled half the health care system in the UK.

But ok Tommy. Here's your chance. Go ahead and provide your explanation of how it works.

In a Capitalist system, we have the benefits of competition.

Now what this means in practical terms, is that each hospital has a profit-motivated incentive to make sure their system, computerized or not, has enough redundancy and fail-safes, to ensure proper operation during any kind of problem.

In this particular case, it means that each hospital has back-up servers, and some of the highest quality cyber-security on the market. That various systems are somewhat isolated from the rest of the system to reduce infection and hacking.

Of course that costs money. But that's why you don't see US hospitals shutting down, or diverting patients.

Now why is this worth it to hospitals?

It's real simple. In America..... you are the customer. See, if the hospital has some castrophic event, that makes them unable to help their customers... the customers (you) will leave. If the customers leaves.... they don't get paid.

If they don't get paid.... the hospital closes, and everyone is out of a job.

That's competition. It forces hospitals and CEOs and employees, to provide the best stable service they can, or they don't get paid.

Now think about that motivation at the NHS hospital. If you are sent away, do they lose money? No. If you are unhappy and leave, do they lose their job? No. If dozens of people die, and there is a massive tragedy, does anyone go out of business? No.

You say that would never happen? In 2003 a heat wave hit Europe. In France thousands of people died. Now, that alone isn't surprising. What is absolutely insane to an American, is that hundreds on hundreds of these deaths were INSIDE..... French hospitals.

If any hospital in the US had that happen, they would go out of business. No one would go to such a hospital. The people would be unemployed. The company would fold. Everyone would go to a different.... better hospital.

Tell me... how many doctors and nurses at these government run hospitals are unemployed for letting hundreds on hundreds of people die INSIDE the hospital under their care? None. How many hospitals that let these people die, are closed? None.

That's how that works. No competition. No threat of monetary loss. No reason to worry when patients die.

See under capitalism you are valued customer. Under socialism.... well you are just a problem. If the problem goes away because you died... that just.... solves the problem.

I find it difficult dealing with ideological standpoints like this.

The problems with the NHS stem from systematic underfunding by the current tory regime. By and large they hate the NHS. They opposed it when it was introduced and back an american "fuck the poor" system of health care.

So you see the problems in the NHS are directly attributable to right wing capitalists and it will be saved when decent socialists regain control.

Apart from a few millionaires nobody wants an American type system. Its inhumane,expensive and lacks a spiritual grounding.

Several years back the UK government put up a bond sale, and the sale failed. People didn't buy the bonds.

This shocked your government into the realization of what everyone else on the face of the Earth knew. You can't borrow endlessly.

Of course your NHS would work better if you just had endless amounts of money to make it work. Obviously.

The problem with all left-wing ideology is that you don't have endless amounts of money. And when you are faced with this universal problem of all left-wing ideology, you default to "it's so-and-so's fault".

This is why every left-wing ideology ends with tyranny and oppression.

The logical conclusion of your left-wing beliefs, is Venezuela. Instead of saying "price controls are not working" you send military troops to guard stores. Send police to confiscate farm land. Send investigators to track down black market food. There is always someone to blame.

North Korea blames South Korea. Cube blames the US Embargo. Iran blames Israel.

Socialism always runs out of other people's money to spend, but never accepts that it's flawed system, they simply turn into 2-year-olds pointing fingers and screaming that it's someone else's fault.

So in the UK, it's not because the NHS is facing the same problems that every other socialized care system is facing.

No no... that can't be it. It's not possible that the system itself is bad... nope... it's gotta be that the evil Tories (who are attempting to avert a possible UK sovereign default), they just hate the NHS, and they are trying to destroy the country.

If only the Tories were not there, then magically all the money in the world would be able to pay for everything you want.

They tried that once. Over in a European country. What was that name again? Oh, right right.... Greece. How did that work for them?

 

[Dragonlady]

The OP is not framed in any way that encourages debate.

Not in the least of all when he proves you are all in denial, and told you so, right?

Where does it say that ? He has a lack of understanding of how our healthcare system works and attributes the problems to "socialism".
Its as far off base as it could be.

First, my main point was that many of these ridiculous ranking systems, that all say US health care sucks, use how "computerized" the system is. Now that the very thing that these left-wing idiotic rankings point to (instead of quality of care), is the very thing that has crippled half the health care system in the UK.

But ok Tommy. Here's your chance. Go ahead and provide your explanation of how it works.

In a Capitalist system, we have the benefits of competition.

Now what this means in practical terms, is that each hospital has a profit-motivated incentive to make sure their system, computerized or not, has enough redundancy and fail-safes, to ensure proper operation during any kind of problem.

In this particular case, it means that each hospital has back-up servers, and some of the highest quality cyber-security on the market. That various systems are somewhat isolated from the rest of the system to reduce infection and hacking.

Of course that costs money. But that's why you don't see US hospitals shutting down, or diverting patients.

Now why is this worth it to hospitals?

It's real simple. In America..... you are the customer. See, if the hospital has some castrophic event, that makes them unable to help their customers... the customers (you) will leave. If the customers leaves.... they don't get paid.

If they don't get paid.... the hospital closes, and everyone is out of a job.

That's competition. It forces hospitals and CEOs and employees, to provide the best stable service they can, or they don't get paid.

Now think about that motivation at the NHS hospital. If you are sent away, do they lose money? No. If you are unhappy and leave, do they lose their job? No. If dozens of people die, and there is a massive tragedy, does anyone go out of business? No.

You say that would never happen? In 2003 a heat wave hit Europe. In France thousands of people died. Now, that alone isn't surprising. What is absolutely insane to an American, is that hundreds on hundreds of these deaths were INSIDE..... French hospitals.

If any hospital in the US had that happen, they would go out of business. No one would go to such a hospital. The people would be unemployed. The company would fold. Everyone would go to a different.... better hospital.

Tell me... how many doctors and nurses at these government run hospitals are unemployed for letting hundreds on hundreds of people die INSIDE the hospital under their care? None. How many hospitals that let these people die, are closed? None.

That's how that works. No competition. No threat of monetary loss. No reason to worry when patients die.

See under capitalism you are valued customer. Under socialism.... well you are just a problem. If the problem goes away because you died... that just.... solves the problem.

The US system is rated so very low because it costs twice as much as everyone else is paying, and doesn't have quantifiable better results. In fact, prior to the ACA, 45,000 Americans per year died due to lack of access to quality health care. This doesn't happen in any other first world country because the rest of us have socialized medicine and universal coverage.

The US and Canada have similar survival rates and outcomes for cancer, heart attack, and other illnesses, but we spend a little more than 50% per capita to the US.

You have insurance companies dictating what tests and treatments you will receive, and even with good health insurance coverage, co-pays and lifetime caps will result in you going bankrupt if anyone in your family suffers a catastrophic illness or accident.

Sucks to be you, if you get old and develop a ore-existing condition.

Me, I have a knee replacement coming up, and a hip replacement. Not looking forward to either. Out of pocket hospital, doctors and rehab costs to me? $0.00. I have a $2.00 copayment on prescriptions.

Paperwork and pre-approvals: None. I just have to turn up at my appointments and make arrangements for home care when I get out of hospital. In my case, that means staying with my daughter after I get out of hospital.

All I have to worry about is following doctors orders, not pushing my luck, and doing my exercises.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

The OP is not framed in any way that encourages debate.

Not in the least of all when he proves you are all in denial, and told you so, right?

Where does it say that ? He has a lack of understanding of how our healthcare system works and attributes the problems to "socialism".
Its as far off base as it could be.

First, my main point was that many of these ridiculous ranking systems, that all say US health care sucks, use how "computerized" the system is. Now that the very thing that these left-wing idiotic rankings point to (instead of quality of care), is the very thing that has crippled half the health care system in the UK.

But ok Tommy. Here's your chance. Go ahead and provide your explanation of how it works.

In a Capitalist system, we have the benefits of competition.

Now what this means in practical terms, is that each hospital has a profit-motivated incentive to make sure their system, computerized or not, has enough redundancy and fail-safes, to ensure proper operation during any kind of problem.

In this particular case, it means that each hospital has back-up servers, and some of the highest quality cyber-security on the market. That various systems are somewhat isolated from the rest of the system to reduce infection and hacking.

Of course that costs money. But that's why you don't see US hospitals shutting down, or diverting patients.

Now why is this worth it to hospitals?

It's real simple. In America..... you are the customer. See, if the hospital has some castrophic event, that makes them unable to help their customers... the customers (you) will leave. If the customers leaves.... they don't get paid.

If they don't get paid.... the hospital closes, and everyone is out of a job.

That's competition. It forces hospitals and CEOs and employees, to provide the best stable service they can, or they don't get paid.

Now think about that motivation at the NHS hospital. If you are sent away, do they lose money? No. If you are unhappy and leave, do they lose their job? No. If dozens of people die, and there is a massive tragedy, does anyone go out of business? No.

You say that would never happen? In 2003 a heat wave hit Europe. In France thousands of people died. Now, that alone isn't surprising. What is absolutely insane to an American, is that hundreds on hundreds of these deaths were INSIDE..... French hospitals.

If any hospital in the US had that happen, they would go out of business. No one would go to such a hospital. The people would be unemployed. The company would fold. Everyone would go to a different.... better hospital.

Tell me... how many doctors and nurses at these government run hospitals are unemployed for letting hundreds on hundreds of people die INSIDE the hospital under their care? None. How many hospitals that let these people die, are closed? None.

That's how that works. No competition. No threat of monetary loss. No reason to worry when patients die.

See under capitalism you are valued customer. Under socialism.... well you are just a problem. If the problem goes away because you died... that just.... solves the problem.

I find it difficult dealing with ideological standpoints like this.

The problems with the NHS stem from systematic underfunding by the current tory regime. By and large they hate the NHS. They opposed it when it was introduced and back an american "fuck the poor" system of health care.

So you see the problems in the NHS are directly attributable to right wing capitalists and it will be saved when decent socialists regain control.

Apart from a few millionaires nobody wants an American type system. Its inhumane,expensive and lacks a spiritual grounding.

Several years back the UK government put up a bond sale, and the sale failed. People didn't buy the bonds.

This shocked your government into the realization of what everyone else on the face of the Earth knew. You can't borrow endlessly.

Of course your NHS would work better if you just had endless amounts of money to make it work. Obviously.

The problem with all left-wing ideology is that you don't have endless amounts of money. And when you are faced with this universal problem of all left-wing ideology, you default to "it's so-and-so's fault".

This is why every left-wing ideology ends with tyranny and oppression.

The logical conclusion of your left-wing beliefs, is Venezuela. Instead of saying "price controls are not working" you send military troops to guard stores. Send police to confiscate farm land. Send investigators to track down black market food. There is always someone to blame.

North Korea blames South Korea. Cube blames the US Embargo. Iran blames Israel.

Socialism always runs out of other people's money to spend, but never accepts that it's flawed system, they simply turn into 2-year-olds pointing fingers and screaming that it's someone else's fault.

So in the UK, it's not because the NHS is facing the same problems that every other socialized care system is facing.

No no... that can't be it. It's not possible that the system itself is bad... nope... it's gotta be that the evil Tories (who are attempting to avert a possible UK sovereign default), they just hate the NHS, and they are trying to destroy the country.

If only the Tories were not there, then magically all the money in the world would be able to pay for everything you want.

They tried that once. Over in a European country. What was that name again? Oh, right right.... Greece. How did that work for them?

You approach this from an ideological stance that blinds you to the truth.
This little pic explains the way that the Tories have squeezed the NHS.

When you also factor in that almost all the cabinet have interests in private health providers it is clear to see why things have collapsed under the tories.
Its great to live in a country where medical treatment doesnt cause you to lose your house. A year ago I broke my ankle. I was off work for 6 months and I estimate that I got $55k of treatment had I been charged under the American system.

I didnt receive a bill for any of it.

But heres the thing. It wasnt free. I have been paying a small amount of tax every year since I started work. Everybody does.

And for that I get peace of mind. Whatever happens I know that my family is covered. Even better, my neighbour and his family is covered.

Rich or poor we all get a great service.

No insurance companies making huge profits. No private hospitals giving us drugs we dont need.Oh, and no pharma companies screwing us. Our medication costs a fraction of the cost in the US where your systems are bizarre to say the least.

You point to Venezuela as an example of a failed system. I could point to the NHS or Sweden or Norway as examples of how it works.

I could also point to the US as an example of a health service that does not meet the needs of its society and is going to get worse.

It is a moral and ethical issue.We all pay in and we all benefit. It binds us together as a society. It is light years ahead of your beggar my neighbour philosophy.

 

[Andylusion]

Not in the least of all when he proves you are all in denial, and told you so, right?

Where does it say that ? He has a lack of understanding of how our healthcare system works and attributes the problems to "socialism".
Its as far off base as it could be.

First, my main point was that many of these ridiculous ranking systems, that all say US health care sucks, use how "computerized" the system is. Now that the very thing that these left-wing idiotic rankings point to (instead of quality of care), is the very thing that has crippled half the health care system in the UK.

But ok Tommy. Here's your chance. Go ahead and provide your explanation of how it works.

In a Capitalist system, we have the benefits of competition.

Now what this means in practical terms, is that each hospital has a profit-motivated incentive to make sure their system, computerized or not, has enough redundancy and fail-safes, to ensure proper operation during any kind of problem.

In this particular case, it means that each hospital has back-up servers, and some of the highest quality cyber-security on the market. That various systems are somewhat isolated from the rest of the system to reduce infection and hacking.

Of course that costs money. But that's why you don't see US hospitals shutting down, or diverting patients.

Now why is this worth it to hospitals?

It's real simple. In America..... you are the customer. See, if the hospital has some castrophic event, that makes them unable to help their customers... the customers (you) will leave. If the customers leaves.... they don't get paid.

If they don't get paid.... the hospital closes, and everyone is out of a job.

That's competition. It forces hospitals and CEOs and employees, to provide the best stable service they can, or they don't get paid.

Now think about that motivation at the NHS hospital. If you are sent away, do they lose money? No. If you are unhappy and leave, do they lose their job? No. If dozens of people die, and there is a massive tragedy, does anyone go out of business? No.

You say that would never happen? In 2003 a heat wave hit Europe. In France thousands of people died. Now, that alone isn't surprising. What is absolutely insane to an American, is that hundreds on hundreds of these deaths were INSIDE..... French hospitals.

If any hospital in the US had that happen, they would go out of business. No one would go to such a hospital. The people would be unemployed. The company would fold. Everyone would go to a different.... better hospital.

Tell me... how many doctors and nurses at these government run hospitals are unemployed for letting hundreds on hundreds of people die INSIDE the hospital under their care? None. How many hospitals that let these people die, are closed? None.

That's how that works. No competition. No threat of monetary loss. No reason to worry when patients die.

See under capitalism you are valued customer. Under socialism.... well you are just a problem. If the problem goes away because you died... that just.... solves the problem.

I find it difficult dealing with ideological standpoints like this.

The problems with the NHS stem from systematic underfunding by the current tory regime. By and large they hate the NHS. They opposed it when it was introduced and back an american "fuck the poor" system of health care.

So you see the problems in the NHS are directly attributable to right wing capitalists and it will be saved when decent socialists regain control.

Apart from a few millionaires nobody wants an American type system. Its inhumane,expensive and lacks a spiritual grounding.

Several years back the UK government put up a bond sale, and the sale failed. People didn't buy the bonds.

This shocked your government into the realization of what everyone else on the face of the Earth knew. You can't borrow endlessly.

Of course your NHS would work better if you just had endless amounts of money to make it work. Obviously.

The problem with all left-wing ideology is that you don't have endless amounts of money. And when you are faced with this universal problem of all left-wing ideology, you default to "it's so-and-so's fault".

This is why every left-wing ideology ends with tyranny and oppression.

The logical conclusion of your left-wing beliefs, is Venezuela. Instead of saying "price controls are not working" you send military troops to guard stores. Send police to confiscate farm land. Send investigators to track down black market food. There is always someone to blame.

North Korea blames South Korea. Cube blames the US Embargo. Iran blames Israel.

Socialism always runs out of other people's money to spend, but never accepts that it's flawed system, they simply turn into 2-year-olds pointing fingers and screaming that it's someone else's fault.

So in the UK, it's not because the NHS is facing the same problems that every other socialized care system is facing.

No no... that can't be it. It's not possible that the system itself is bad... nope... it's gotta be that the evil Tories (who are attempting to avert a possible UK sovereign default), they just hate the NHS, and they are trying to destroy the country.

If only the Tories were not there, then magically all the money in the world would be able to pay for everything you want.

They tried that once. Over in a European country. What was that name again? Oh, right right.... Greece. How did that work for them?

You approach this from an ideological stance that blinds you to the truth.
This little pic explains the way that the Tories have squeezed the NHS.

When you also factor in that almost all the cabinet have interests in private health providers it is clear to see why things have collapsed under the tories.
Its great to live in a country where medical treatment doesnt cause you to lose your house. A year ago I broke my ankle. I was off work for 6 months and I estimate that I got $55k of treatment had I been charged under the American system.

I didnt receive a bill for any of it.

But heres the thing. It wasnt free. I have been paying a small amount of tax every year since I started work. Everybody does.

And for that I get peace of mind. Whatever happens I know that my family is covered. Even better, my neighbour and his family is covered.

Rich or poor we all get a great service.

No insurance companies making huge profits. No private hospitals giving us drugs we dont need.Oh, and no pharma companies screwing us. Our medication costs a fraction of the cost in the US where your systems are bizarre to say the least.

You point to Venezuela as an example of a failed system. I could point to the NHS or Sweden or Norway as examples of how it works.

I could also point to the US as an example of a health service that does not meet the needs of its society and is going to get worse.

It is a moral and ethical issue.We all pay in and we all benefit. It binds us together as a society. It is light years ahead of your beggar my neighbour philosophy.

How much was your average wage over the last 10 working years?

 

[FA_Q2]

The OP is not framed in any way that encourages debate.

Not in the least of all when he proves you are all in denial, and told you so, right?

Where does it say that ? He has a lack of understanding of how our healthcare system works and attributes the problems to "socialism".
Its as far off base as it could be.

First, my main point was that many of these ridiculous ranking systems, that all say US health care sucks, use how "computerized" the system is. Now that the very thing that these left-wing idiotic rankings point to (instead of quality of care), is the very thing that has crippled half the health care system in the UK.

But ok Tommy. Here's your chance. Go ahead and provide your explanation of how it works.

In a Capitalist system, we have the benefits of competition.

Now what this means in practical terms, is that each hospital has a profit-motivated incentive to make sure their system, computerized or not, has enough redundancy and fail-safes, to ensure proper operation during any kind of problem.

In this particular case, it means that each hospital has back-up servers, and some of the highest quality cyber-security on the market. That various systems are somewhat isolated from the rest of the system to reduce infection and hacking.

Of course that costs money. But that's why you don't see US hospitals shutting down, or diverting patients.

Now why is this worth it to hospitals?

It's real simple. In America..... you are the customer. See, if the hospital has some castrophic event, that makes them unable to help their customers... the customers (you) will leave. If the customers leaves.... they don't get paid.

If they don't get paid.... the hospital closes, and everyone is out of a job.

That's competition. It forces hospitals and CEOs and employees, to provide the best stable service they can, or they don't get paid.

Now think about that motivation at the NHS hospital. If you are sent away, do they lose money? No. If you are unhappy and leave, do they lose their job? No. If dozens of people die, and there is a massive tragedy, does anyone go out of business? No.

You say that would never happen? In 2003 a heat wave hit Europe. In France thousands of people died. Now, that alone isn't surprising. What is absolutely insane to an American, is that hundreds on hundreds of these deaths were INSIDE..... French hospitals.

If any hospital in the US had that happen, they would go out of business. No one would go to such a hospital. The people would be unemployed. The company would fold. Everyone would go to a different.... better hospital.

Tell me... how many doctors and nurses at these government run hospitals are unemployed for letting hundreds on hundreds of people die INSIDE the hospital under their care? None. How many hospitals that let these people die, are closed? None.

That's how that works. No competition. No threat of monetary loss. No reason to worry when patients die.

See under capitalism you are valued customer. Under socialism.... well you are just a problem. If the problem goes away because you died... that just.... solves the problem.

I find it difficult dealing with ideological standpoints like this.

The problems with the NHS stem from systematic underfunding by the current tory regime. By and large they hate the NHS. They opposed it when it was introduced and back an american "fuck the poor" system of health care.

So you see the problems in the NHS are directly attributable to right wing capitalists and it will be saved when decent socialists regain control.

Apart from a few millionaires nobody wants an American type system. Its inhumane,expensive and lacks a spiritual grounding.

Funny that you claim it is difficult dealing with an ideological standpoint right before launching into an ideological standpoint...

 

[Tommy Tainant]

The OP is not framed in any way that encourages debate.

Not in the least of all when he proves you are all in denial, and told you so, right?

Where does it say that ? He has a lack of understanding of how our healthcare system works and attributes the problems to "socialism".
Its as far off base as it could be.

First, my main point was that many of these ridiculous ranking systems, that all say US health care sucks, use how "computerized" the system is. Now that the very thing that these left-wing idiotic rankings point to (instead of quality of care), is the very thing that has crippled half the health care system in the UK.

But ok Tommy. Here's your chance. Go ahead and provide your explanation of how it works.

In a Capitalist system, we have the benefits of competition.

Now what this means in practical terms, is that each hospital has a profit-motivated incentive to make sure their system, computerized or not, has enough redundancy and fail-safes, to ensure proper operation during any kind of problem.

In this particular case, it means that each hospital has back-up servers, and some of the highest quality cyber-security on the market. That various systems are somewhat isolated from the rest of the system to reduce infection and hacking.

Of course that costs money. But that's why you don't see US hospitals shutting down, or diverting patients.

Now why is this worth it to hospitals?

It's real simple. In America..... you are the customer. See, if the hospital has some castrophic event, that makes them unable to help their customers... the customers (you) will leave. If the customers leaves.... they don't get paid.

If they don't get paid.... the hospital closes, and everyone is out of a job.

That's competition. It forces hospitals and CEOs and employees, to provide the best stable service they can, or they don't get paid.

Now think about that motivation at the NHS hospital. If you are sent away, do they lose money? No. If you are unhappy and leave, do they lose their job? No. If dozens of people die, and there is a massive tragedy, does anyone go out of business? No.

You say that would never happen? In 2003 a heat wave hit Europe. In France thousands of people died. Now, that alone isn't surprising. What is absolutely insane to an American, is that hundreds on hundreds of these deaths were INSIDE..... French hospitals.

If any hospital in the US had that happen, they would go out of business. No one would go to such a hospital. The people would be unemployed. The company would fold. Everyone would go to a different.... better hospital.

Tell me... how many doctors and nurses at these government run hospitals are unemployed for letting hundreds on hundreds of people die INSIDE the hospital under their care? None. How many hospitals that let these people die, are closed? None.

That's how that works. No competition. No threat of monetary loss. No reason to worry when patients die.

See under capitalism you are valued customer. Under socialism.... well you are just a problem. If the problem goes away because you died... that just.... solves the problem.

I find it difficult dealing with ideological standpoints like this.

The problems with the NHS stem from systematic underfunding by the current tory regime. By and large they hate the NHS. They opposed it when it was introduced and back an american "fuck the poor" system of health care.

So you see the problems in the NHS are directly attributable to right wing capitalists and it will be saved when decent socialists regain control.

Apart from a few millionaires nobody wants an American type system. Its inhumane,expensive and lacks a spiritual grounding.

Funny that you claim it is difficult dealing with an ideological standpoint right before launching into an ideological standpoint...

Its not ideological. Its an accurate summary of the problems facing our right to healthcare.

 

[Andylusion]

Not in the least of all when he proves you are all in denial, and told you so, right?

Where does it say that ? He has a lack of understanding of how our healthcare system works and attributes the problems to "socialism".
Its as far off base as it could be.

First, my main point was that many of these ridiculous ranking systems, that all say US health care sucks, use how "computerized" the system is. Now that the very thing that these left-wing idiotic rankings point to (instead of quality of care), is the very thing that has crippled half the health care system in the UK.

But ok Tommy. Here's your chance. Go ahead and provide your explanation of how it works.

In a Capitalist system, we have the benefits of competition.

Now what this means in practical terms, is that each hospital has a profit-motivated incentive to make sure their system, computerized or not, has enough redundancy and fail-safes, to ensure proper operation during any kind of problem.

In this particular case, it means that each hospital has back-up servers, and some of the highest quality cyber-security on the market. That various systems are somewhat isolated from the rest of the system to reduce infection and hacking.

Of course that costs money. But that's why you don't see US hospitals shutting down, or diverting patients.

Now why is this worth it to hospitals?

It's real simple. In America..... you are the customer. See, if the hospital has some castrophic event, that makes them unable to help their customers... the customers (you) will leave. If the customers leaves.... they don't get paid.

If they don't get paid.... the hospital closes, and everyone is out of a job.

That's competition. It forces hospitals and CEOs and employees, to provide the best stable service they can, or they don't get paid.

Now think about that motivation at the NHS hospital. If you are sent away, do they lose money? No. If you are unhappy and leave, do they lose their job? No. If dozens of people die, and there is a massive tragedy, does anyone go out of business? No.

You say that would never happen? In 2003 a heat wave hit Europe. In France thousands of people died. Now, that alone isn't surprising. What is absolutely insane to an American, is that hundreds on hundreds of these deaths were INSIDE..... French hospitals.

If any hospital in the US had that happen, they would go out of business. No one would go to such a hospital. The people would be unemployed. The company would fold. Everyone would go to a different.... better hospital.

Tell me... how many doctors and nurses at these government run hospitals are unemployed for letting hundreds on hundreds of people die INSIDE the hospital under their care? None. How many hospitals that let these people die, are closed? None.

That's how that works. No competition. No threat of monetary loss. No reason to worry when patients die.

See under capitalism you are valued customer. Under socialism.... well you are just a problem. If the problem goes away because you died... that just.... solves the problem.

I find it difficult dealing with ideological standpoints like this.

The problems with the NHS stem from systematic underfunding by the current tory regime. By and large they hate the NHS. They opposed it when it was introduced and back an american "fuck the poor" system of health care.

So you see the problems in the NHS are directly attributable to right wing capitalists and it will be saved when decent socialists regain control.

Apart from a few millionaires nobody wants an American type system. Its inhumane,expensive and lacks a spiritual grounding.

Funny that you claim it is difficult dealing with an ideological standpoint right before launching into an ideological standpoint...

Its not ideological. Its an accurate summary of the problems facing our right to healthcare.

Yeah, everyone says that. Everything you claimed I have seen and read, and heard the endless problems that counter it.

I have already posted some on this thread, and dozens more throughout this forum.

The only thing I can't counter is that your system is cheaper. Of course you get worse care. So I would expect crappy care to be cheaper.

But I'm even wondering how true that is.

I want answer to my prior question. I want to know just how much money you make, to give me an estimate on how much in taxes you pay.

My bet is that you paid far more in taxes, than I have ever paid in insurance premiums.

Even then, your taxes are not all the taxes you pay. Wages in the UK are lower than in the US. People who immigrate to the US from the UK, routinely say they get a pay-hike coming here.

The primary reason for that, is the higher taxes you levy against employers, results in them paying employees less.

So you are in effect paying taxes that you never actually see on your pay stub. My bet is that UK citizens pay a ton more than most Americans for your lesser quality care. And I am almost 100% certain that YOU as individual have paid tons more than I have for care.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Where does it say that ? He has a lack of understanding of how our healthcare system works and attributes the problems to "socialism".
Its as far off base as it could be.

First, my main point was that many of these ridiculous ranking systems, that all say US health care sucks, use how "computerized" the system is. Now that the very thing that these left-wing idiotic rankings point to (instead of quality of care), is the very thing that has crippled half the health care system in the UK.

But ok Tommy. Here's your chance. Go ahead and provide your explanation of how it works.

In a Capitalist system, we have the benefits of competition.

Now what this means in practical terms, is that each hospital has a profit-motivated incentive to make sure their system, computerized or not, has enough redundancy and fail-safes, to ensure proper operation during any kind of problem.

In this particular case, it means that each hospital has back-up servers, and some of the highest quality cyber-security on the market. That various systems are somewhat isolated from the rest of the system to reduce infection and hacking.

Of course that costs money. But that's why you don't see US hospitals shutting down, or diverting patients.

Now why is this worth it to hospitals?

It's real simple. In America..... you are the customer. See, if the hospital has some castrophic event, that makes them unable to help their customers... the customers (you) will leave. If the customers leaves.... they don't get paid.

If they don't get paid.... the hospital closes, and everyone is out of a job.

That's competition. It forces hospitals and CEOs and employees, to provide the best stable service they can, or they don't get paid.

Now think about that motivation at the NHS hospital. If you are sent away, do they lose money? No. If you are unhappy and leave, do they lose their job? No. If dozens of people die, and there is a massive tragedy, does anyone go out of business? No.

You say that would never happen? In 2003 a heat wave hit Europe. In France thousands of people died. Now, that alone isn't surprising. What is absolutely insane to an American, is that hundreds on hundreds of these deaths were INSIDE..... French hospitals.

If any hospital in the US had that happen, they would go out of business. No one would go to such a hospital. The people would be unemployed. The company would fold. Everyone would go to a different.... better hospital.

Tell me... how many doctors and nurses at these government run hospitals are unemployed for letting hundreds on hundreds of people die INSIDE the hospital under their care? None. How many hospitals that let these people die, are closed? None.

That's how that works. No competition. No threat of monetary loss. No reason to worry when patients die.

See under capitalism you are valued customer. Under socialism.... well you are just a problem. If the problem goes away because you died... that just.... solves the problem.

I find it difficult dealing with ideological standpoints like this.

The problems with the NHS stem from systematic underfunding by the current tory regime. By and large they hate the NHS. They opposed it when it was introduced and back an american "fuck the poor" system of health care.

So you see the problems in the NHS are directly attributable to right wing capitalists and it will be saved when decent socialists regain control.

Apart from a few millionaires nobody wants an American type system. Its inhumane,expensive and lacks a spiritual grounding.

Funny that you claim it is difficult dealing with an ideological standpoint right before launching into an ideological standpoint...

Its not ideological. Its an accurate summary of the problems facing our right to healthcare.

Yeah, everyone says that. Everything you claimed I have seen and read, and heard the endless problems that counter it.

I have already posted some on this thread, and dozens more throughout this forum.

The only thing I can't counter is that your system is cheaper. Of course you get worse care. So I would expect crappy care to be cheaper.

But I'm even wondering how true that is.

I want answer to my prior question. I want to know just how much money you make, to give me an estimate on how much in taxes you pay.

My bet is that you paid far more in taxes, than I have ever paid in insurance premiums.

Even then, your taxes are not all the taxes you pay. Wages in the UK are lower than in the US. People who immigrate to the US from the UK, routinely say they get a pay-hike coming here.

The primary reason for that, is the higher taxes you levy against employers, results in them paying employees less.

So you are in effect paying taxes that you never actually see on your pay stub. My bet is that UK citizens pay a ton more than most Americans for your lesser quality care. And I am almost 100% certain that YOU as individual have paid tons more than I have for care.

A lot of guessing going on here Andy. US healthcare is more expensive because it is s complicated and there are so many people who need to make a profit out of your illness.
Thats why the cost of medication in the US dwarfs the cost of those countries with sensible health policies. Just google it.

 

[task0778]

All you have to do is look at the VA that our gov't runs to provide HC to our Vets. It's disgraceful and how anyone can think a national version of gov't run HC would be any different is beyond me. And then there's this, every country that has sociaIized medicine has to pay through the nose for it, and not just the rich guys either. It's EVERYBODY that pays, via higher income taxes or a VAT to the tune 20-25%. Or both. All I ask is, be straight with the American people about what it's going to cost them when you tell them what a great deal a single payer system is.

 

[Andylusion]

First, my main point was that many of these ridiculous ranking systems, that all say US health care sucks, use how "computerized" the system is. Now that the very thing that these left-wing idiotic rankings point to (instead of quality of care), is the very thing that has crippled half the health care system in the UK.

But ok Tommy. Here's your chance. Go ahead and provide your explanation of how it works.

In a Capitalist system, we have the benefits of competition.

Now what this means in practical terms, is that each hospital has a profit-motivated incentive to make sure their system, computerized or not, has enough redundancy and fail-safes, to ensure proper operation during any kind of problem.

In this particular case, it means that each hospital has back-up servers, and some of the highest quality cyber-security on the market. That various systems are somewhat isolated from the rest of the system to reduce infection and hacking.

Of course that costs money. But that's why you don't see US hospitals shutting down, or diverting patients.

Now why is this worth it to hospitals?

It's real simple. In America..... you are the customer. See, if the hospital has some castrophic event, that makes them unable to help their customers... the customers (you) will leave. If the customers leaves.... they don't get paid.

If they don't get paid.... the hospital closes, and everyone is out of a job.

That's competition. It forces hospitals and CEOs and employees, to provide the best stable service they can, or they don't get paid.

Now think about that motivation at the NHS hospital. If you are sent away, do they lose money? No. If you are unhappy and leave, do they lose their job? No. If dozens of people die, and there is a massive tragedy, does anyone go out of business? No.

You say that would never happen? In 2003 a heat wave hit Europe. In France thousands of people died. Now, that alone isn't surprising. What is absolutely insane to an American, is that hundreds on hundreds of these deaths were INSIDE..... French hospitals.

If any hospital in the US had that happen, they would go out of business. No one would go to such a hospital. The people would be unemployed. The company would fold. Everyone would go to a different.... better hospital.

Tell me... how many doctors and nurses at these government run hospitals are unemployed for letting hundreds on hundreds of people die INSIDE the hospital under their care? None. How many hospitals that let these people die, are closed? None.

That's how that works. No competition. No threat of monetary loss. No reason to worry when patients die.

See under capitalism you are valued customer. Under socialism.... well you are just a problem. If the problem goes away because you died... that just.... solves the problem.

I find it difficult dealing with ideological standpoints like this.

The problems with the NHS stem from systematic underfunding by the current tory regime. By and large they hate the NHS. They opposed it when it was introduced and back an american "fuck the poor" system of health care.

So you see the problems in the NHS are directly attributable to right wing capitalists and it will be saved when decent socialists regain control.

Apart from a few millionaires nobody wants an American type system. Its inhumane,expensive and lacks a spiritual grounding.

Funny that you claim it is difficult dealing with an ideological standpoint right before launching into an ideological standpoint...

Its not ideological. Its an accurate summary of the problems facing our right to healthcare.

Yeah, everyone says that. Everything you claimed I have seen and read, and heard the endless problems that counter it.

I have already posted some on this thread, and dozens more throughout this forum.

The only thing I can't counter is that your system is cheaper. Of course you get worse care. So I would expect crappy care to be cheaper.

But I'm even wondering how true that is.

I want answer to my prior question. I want to know just how much money you make, to give me an estimate on how much in taxes you pay.

My bet is that you paid far more in taxes, than I have ever paid in insurance premiums.

Even then, your taxes are not all the taxes you pay. Wages in the UK are lower than in the US. People who immigrate to the US from the UK, routinely say they get a pay-hike coming here.

The primary reason for that, is the higher taxes you levy against employers, results in them paying employees less.

So you are in effect paying taxes that you never actually see on your pay stub. My bet is that UK citizens pay a ton more than most Americans for your lesser quality care. And I am almost 100% certain that YOU as individual have paid tons more than I have for care.

A lot of guessing going on here Andy. US healthcare is more expensive because it is s complicated and there are so many people who need to make a profit out of your illness.
Thats why the cost of medication in the US dwarfs the cost of those countries with sensible health policies. Just google it.

First you haven't actually proven the claim.

How much were your last 10 years of wages on average?

I want to see how much you have spent in taxes, paying for the NHS, and compare that to how much I have paid for private health insurance.

I'll give you a hint. My private insurance is $80 a month. How much are your taxes?

Every time I compare the numbers, I'm not seeing that your system is all that much cheaper.

The average wage in the UK is just £27,600. That's only $35,800 a year. The average here in $50,000.

And most of that can be traced to taxes on business, the largest of which goes to NHS.

Additionally out of your income, you'll pay £3,000 in income taxes, and an additional £2200 in national insurance "contributions"... The irony is that your "contributions" do not pay for the majority of NHS care. Your income taxes do. So most of that money is all for health care.

That doesn't include services and fees on patients at the time they get health care.

Nor does it include people who pay money to get expedited services. Thousands of UK citizens pay the fees, to get their surgeries and needs, pushed to the front of line.

Nor does it include the hundreds of thousands of UK citizens that travel outside the UK for health care.

Treatment costs in the UK, are vastly more expensive than elsewhere in Europe. Is it because of all the profiteering that is happening in the NHS?

Even better, most of the hospitals these patients are going to, are private explicitly for-profit hospitals. Interesting that you claim it's the for profit motive that is driving up prices, when in reality, it's the for-profit hospitals that people in YOUR country are going to.

I have already given a detailed answer on why US care is more expensive. And the biggest reason is government programs. Medicare and Medicaid do not pay enough money to cover the cost of treatment. This is by design. In order for hospitals to stay open, they must charge private patients a higher price.

Every time you see a quoted price from an American hospital, that's the price of care, plus covering the cost of all the hospitals government patients.

Regardless, my point still remains. You are paying far more in taxes, than I ever have for health insurance. By a massive margin I wager.

 

[westwall]

The OP is not framed in any way that encourages debate.

Not in the least of all when he proves you are all in denial, and told you so, right?

Where does it say that ? He has a lack of understanding of how our healthcare system works and attributes the problems to "socialism".
Its as far off base as it could be.

First, my main point was that many of these ridiculous ranking systems, that all say US health care sucks, use how "computerized" the system is. Now that the very thing that these left-wing idiotic rankings point to (instead of quality of care), is the very thing that has crippled half the health care system in the UK.

But ok Tommy. Here's your chance. Go ahead and provide your explanation of how it works.

In a Capitalist system, we have the benefits of competition.

Now what this means in practical terms, is that each hospital has a profit-motivated incentive to make sure their system, computerized or not, has enough redundancy and fail-safes, to ensure proper operation during any kind of problem.

In this particular case, it means that each hospital has back-up servers, and some of the highest quality cyber-security on the market. That various systems are somewhat isolated from the rest of the system to reduce infection and hacking.

Of course that costs money. But that's why you don't see US hospitals shutting down, or diverting patients.

Now why is this worth it to hospitals?

It's real simple. In America..... you are the customer. See, if the hospital has some castrophic event, that makes them unable to help their customers... the customers (you) will leave. If the customers leaves.... they don't get paid.

If they don't get paid.... the hospital closes, and everyone is out of a job.

That's competition. It forces hospitals and CEOs and employees, to provide the best stable service they can, or they don't get paid.

Now think about that motivation at the NHS hospital. If you are sent away, do they lose money? No. If you are unhappy and leave, do they lose their job? No. If dozens of people die, and there is a massive tragedy, does anyone go out of business? No.

You say that would never happen? In 2003 a heat wave hit Europe. In France thousands of people died. Now, that alone isn't surprising. What is absolutely insane to an American, is that hundreds on hundreds of these deaths were INSIDE..... French hospitals.

If any hospital in the US had that happen, they would go out of business. No one would go to such a hospital. The people would be unemployed. The company would fold. Everyone would go to a different.... better hospital.

Tell me... how many doctors and nurses at these government run hospitals are unemployed for letting hundreds on hundreds of people die INSIDE the hospital under their care? None. How many hospitals that let these people die, are closed? None.

That's how that works. No competition. No threat of monetary loss. No reason to worry when patients die.

See under capitalism you are valued customer. Under socialism.... well you are just a problem. If the problem goes away because you died... that just.... solves the problem.

The US system is rated so very low because it costs twice as much as everyone else is paying, and doesn't have quantifiable better results. In fact, prior to the ACA, 45,000 Americans per year died due to lack of access to quality health care. This doesn't happen in any other first world country because the rest of us have socialized medicine and universal coverage.

The US and Canada have similar survival rates and outcomes for cancer, heart attack, and other illnesses, but we spend a little more than 50% per capita to the US.

You have insurance companies dictating what tests and treatments you will receive, and even with good health insurance coverage, co-pays and lifetime caps will result in you going bankrupt if anyone in your family suffers a catastrophic illness or accident.

Sucks to be you, if you get old and develop a ore-existing condition.

Me, I have a knee replacement coming up, and a hip replacement. Not looking forward to either. Out of pocket hospital, doctors and rehab costs to me? $0.00. I have a $2.00 copayment on prescriptions.

Paperwork and pre-approvals: None. I just have to turn up at my appointments and make arrangements for home care when I get out of hospital. In my case, that means staying with my daughter after I get out of hospital.

All I have to worry about is following doctors orders, not pushing my luck, and doing my exercises.

If single payer were so great why would Canadian politicians come to the USA for their lifesaving operations? On two seperate occasions that is what they have done rather than use their "free" healthcare. So... Tell us why they would come to the USA and pay out of their own pocket instead of using their "free" oh so great healthcare system.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

I find it difficult dealing with ideological standpoints like this.

The problems with the NHS stem from systematic underfunding by the current tory regime. By and large they hate the NHS. They opposed it when it was introduced and back an american "fuck the poor" system of health care.

So you see the problems in the NHS are directly attributable to right wing capitalists and it will be saved when decent socialists regain control.

Apart from a few millionaires nobody wants an American type system. Its inhumane,expensive and lacks a spiritual grounding.

Funny that you claim it is difficult dealing with an ideological standpoint right before launching into an ideological standpoint...

Its not ideological. Its an accurate summary of the problems facing our right to healthcare.

Yeah, everyone says that. Everything you claimed I have seen and read, and heard the endless problems that counter it.

I have already posted some on this thread, and dozens more throughout this forum.

The only thing I can't counter is that your system is cheaper. Of course you get worse care. So I would expect crappy care to be cheaper.

But I'm even wondering how true that is.

I want answer to my prior question. I want to know just how much money you make, to give me an estimate on how much in taxes you pay.

My bet is that you paid far more in taxes, than I have ever paid in insurance premiums.

Even then, your taxes are not all the taxes you pay. Wages in the UK are lower than in the US. People who immigrate to the US from the UK, routinely say they get a pay-hike coming here.

The primary reason for that, is the higher taxes you levy against employers, results in them paying employees less.

So you are in effect paying taxes that you never actually see on your pay stub. My bet is that UK citizens pay a ton more than most Americans for your lesser quality care. And I am almost 100% certain that YOU as individual have paid tons more than I have for care.

A lot of guessing going on here Andy. US healthcare is more expensive because it is s complicated and there are so many people who need to make a profit out of your illness.
Thats why the cost of medication in the US dwarfs the cost of those countries with sensible health policies. Just google it.

First you haven't actually proven the claim.

How much were your last 10 years of wages on average?

I want to see how much you have spent in taxes, paying for the NHS, and compare that to how much I have paid for private health insurance.

I'll give you a hint. My private insurance is $80 a month. How much are your taxes?

Every time I compare the numbers, I'm not seeing that your system is all that much cheaper.

The average wage in the UK is just £27,600. That's only $35,800 a year. The average here in $50,000.

And most of that can be traced to taxes on business, the largest of which goes to NHS.

Additionally out of your income, you'll pay £3,000 in income taxes, and an additional £2200 in national insurance "contributions"... The irony is that your "contributions" do not pay for the majority of NHS care. Your income taxes do. So most of that money is all for health care.

That doesn't include services and fees on patients at the time they get health care.

Nor does it include people who pay money to get expedited services. Thousands of UK citizens pay the fees, to get their surgeries and needs, pushed to the front of line.

Nor does it include the hundreds of thousands of UK citizens that travel outside the UK for health care.
View attachment 128265

Treatment costs in the UK, are vastly more expensive than elsewhere in Europe. Is it because of all the profiteering that is happening in the NHS?

Even better, most of the hospitals these patients are going to, are private explicitly for-profit hospitals. Interesting that you claim it's the for profit motive that is driving up prices, when in reality, it's the for-profit hospitals that people in YOUR country are going to.

I have already given a detailed answer on why US care is more expensive. And the biggest reason is government programs. Medicare and Medicaid do not pay enough money to cover the cost of treatment. This is by design. In order for hospitals to stay open, they must charge private patients a higher price.

Every time you see a quoted price from an American hospital, that's the price of care, plus covering the cost of all the hospitals government patients.

Regardless, my point still remains. You are paying far more in taxes, than I ever have for health insurance. By a massive margin I wager.

Andy you make a lot of assumptions. Back them up with links.