• Current Donation Goals

CFCnet Admin

Media / Press

Recommended Posts

chara   
5 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

The US system cost pre vivid as I recall 8% of GDP paid by government plus another 10% paid by Users or mostly their insurance.   And as you know there are still large numbers of people unable to use it.  If the 10% was was given via the tax man then the US could offer heath to all. And Government spending would be so much higher that the US would be called a socialist country.

The UK system costs 9% total and other European countries spend 1, or ,2% more.  And until last year everyone had access.

I have never heard anyone claim the US system is efficient before. 

I can only speak as I find...Mrs C has more recent experience of NHS and agrees with me..broadly....which is really as I speak on the subject..... I have a Binlaw waiting for a hip replacement..delayed yet again....Covid of course a factor but my experiences in the last ten years have been dealt with quickly and administratively efficiently......

Again not championing anything just as I have experienced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sciatika   

I am not sure I know enough to compare with other countries. My personal experience of the NHS is not great and nowadays I tend to treat myself and private dental and other care. I only do the latter sparingly because it is not cheap. Given my experience, I am inclined to believe people I know who work in the NHS when they say that it is poorly managed and grossly inefficient. More or less than other countries, I do not know. However, there seems to be no incentive in the NHS to achieve efficiencies.

What I can say is that it is not simply about how much is paid. Since 2010 real terms spending on the NHS has increased from about 117bn to 133bn. This is from the HoC library and is indisputable. However, this does not represent actual expenditure on healthcare. For instance, during the last Labour administration, the government racked up debts in healthcare expenditure through PFI. This means that about 2% of the current NHS budget is spent on repayment of PFI. This will continue to increase until about 2030 when it will be about 2.5bn p.a. and continue until 2050. In effect, the Blair administration achieved an increase in expenditure on the NHS by borrowing from private companies. It is one example and I am sure there are others, equally insidious, under other administrations.

Another thing that should be said is that the NHS is an ALB (arms-length body). It is also a cult in the UK. Being an ALB means that government has no control over the operations including spending decisions of the NHS. It makes policy and provides money and regulates and monitors performance. Being a cult means that, for many, anything that works is down to the NHS and anything that does not is the fault of government. For many others, it is the reverse. Sensible conversations about it are almost impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ham   
19 minutes ago, Sciatika said:

I am not sure I know enough to compare with other countries. My personal experience of the NHS is not great and nowadays I tend to treat myself and private dental and other care. I only do the latter sparingly because it is not cheap. Given my experience, I am inclined to believe people I know who work in the NHS when they say that it is poorly managed and grossly inefficient. More or less than other countries, I do not know. However, there seems to be no incentive in the NHS to achieve efficiencies.

What I can say is that it is not simply about how much is paid. Since 2010 real terms spending on the NHS has increased from about 117bn to 133bn. (1) This is from the HoC library and is indisputable. However, this does not represent actual expenditure on healthcare. For instance, during the last Labour administration, the government racked up debts in healthcare expenditure through PFI. This means that about 2% of the current NHS budget is spent on repayment of PFI. This will continue to increase until about 2030 when it will be about 2.5bn p.a. and continue until 2050. In effect, the Blair administration achieved an increase in expenditure on the NHS by borrowing from private companies. It is one example and I am sure there are others, equally insidious, under other administrations.

Another thing that should be said is that the NHS is an ALB (arms-length body). It is also a cult in the UK. Being an ALB means that government has no control over the operations including spending decisions of the NHS. It makes policy and provides money and regulates and monitors performance. Being a cult means that, for many, anything that works is down to the NHS and anything that does not is the fault of government. For many others, it is the reverse. (2) Sensible conversations about it are almost impossible.

1) Indisputable figures will always be disputed on here.

2) This is sadly the case on all of the hottest political and social topics these days. 

Great post, by the way.

Edited by Ham
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chara   
3 hours ago, Ham said:

1) Indisputable figures will always be disputed on here.

2) This is sadly the case on all of the hottest political and social topics these days. 

Great post, by the way.

Great post indeed.....a very complex subject and not one helped by the Media...too many agendas..same here....a well run Gov.organisation would be great here but any talk of such leads to "Socialism".....all depends on the agenda of the hacks....a "good" thing or a "slippery slope"......sigh....well run of course being the key!

As you say Ham......sadly the case.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/09/2021 at 10:42 AM, Sciatika said:

I am not sure I know enough to compare with other countries. My personal experience of the NHS is not great and nowadays I tend to treat myself and private dental and other care. I only do the latter sparingly because it is not cheap. Given my experience, I am inclined to believe people I know who work in the NHS when they say that it is poorly managed and grossly inefficient. More or less than other countries, I do not know. However, there seems to be no incentive in the NHS to achieve efficiencies.

What I can say is that it is not simply about how much is paid. Since 2010 real terms spending on the NHS has increased from about 117bn to 133bn. This is from the HoC library and is indisputable. However, this does not represent actual expenditure on healthcare. For instance, during the last Labour administration, the government racked up debts in healthcare expenditure through PFI. This means that about 2% of the current NHS budget is spent on repayment of PFI. This will continue to increase until about 2030 when it will be about 2.5bn p.a. and continue until 2050. In effect, the Blair administration achieved an increase in expenditure on the NHS by borrowing from private companies. It is one example and I am sure there are others, equally insidious, under other administrations.

Another thing that should be said is that the NHS is an ALB (arms-length body). It is also a cult in the UK. Being an ALB means that government has no control over the operations including spending decisions of the NHS. It makes policy and provides money and regulates and monitors performance. Being a cult means that, for many, anything that works is down to the NHS and anything that does not is the fault of government. For many others, it is the reverse. Sensible conversations about it are almost impossible.

Brilliant post. Remember the clapping thing during the pandy? If you didn’t clap you were framed as a Nazi.

For me it’s simple. Make people pay to see the doctor. That’ll cut a swathe through waste by imo by eliminating a lot of time wasters and malingerers. Protect the most vulnerable of course but switch to an insurance based system where maybe the government can help according to how much you can pay. The NHS was formed with a “cradle to grave” socialist ideal when there were far fewer people in the UK. This model, while great on paper, like so many socialist plans imo is unsustainable especially as we now have nearly 68,000,000 people in the UK. The waste is appalling (one of my best mates works for the NHS and says you wouldn’t believe the inefficiency) yet these days if you go against leftist groupthink and dare to criticise the NHS you’re cancelled.

To keep this on topic: Come on Chelsea! 🙌🏿🤪

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chara   
9 hours ago, Michael Tucker said:

Now that would be nice. 

You are quite right MT......But one of the great things about CFCnet is "The Intelligent Forum" ......of course at times things slip a bit !......and often a side road appears on a specific topic....... usually the "extra" topic is interesting, and at times absolutely hilarious, and has great thoughtful input before slipping away.

I appreciate very much the Mods' indulgence when such incidents emerge and for me as long as something is of obvious interest and presented sensibly it has a place and more importantly a natural "life cycle".

On subject.... more and more...or perhaps it's just me having too much time on my hands...the "Media" is framing all football trends whether they exist or not....no need for me to elaborate as I could ask practically anyone on here ...and outside...what the (media) trending thoughts are on any football related subject..... we all may have different opinions of a certain player/tactic/subject at Chelsea and they are voiced and discussed to the nth degree but they are diverse....the media take on the manure management is standard..as is the absolute demise of Arse until last week and now they are on the crest etc etc....very few dissenting voices.

Slight rant over.....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sciatika   

I'd apologise but then that would just be another off-topic post. So instead, I will draw your attention to TT's brilliant response suggesting that James might have been called up to the England Water Polo team. My worry as usual is how they get the horses to wear snorkel and flippers.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Sciatika said:

I'd apologise but then that would just be another off-topic post. So instead, I will draw your attention to TT's brilliant response suggesting that James might have been called up to the England Water Polo team. My worry as usual is how they get the horses to wear snorkel and flippers.

:)  I think they play on Elephants as they do in India.
Snorkels then are not necessary, but the flippers get stuck in the mud.
Playing waterpolo... along with elephantsWaterpolo Development World

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now