Socialism ISN'T communism.. In the UK - FREE national health service costs 7% gdp compared to 17% going to PRIVATE medical firms in the U.S.? Can you spot the anomaly in that equation.? private medical = fairness?
Uk Politics lies about "loving" the NHS & instead chip away at it - they'd rather corporate chums on the boards of private medical stepped in. But most of UK LOVE the NHS and it employs a LOT of people.
People in poverty die and suffer in the U.S. What's so great about that?
Why can't that no government of any stripe appeal to the BBC as well as NHS, it's just sad to see the beeb fail at comedy and entainment on Saturday's.
On the 17th of May there is going to a march to save the nhs, Meet at University College Hospital, Assemble main entrance in Gower Street in London at 5:30pm, this is going to be huge. Search for Kill Lansley’s Bill- MARCH TO SAVE THE NHSon facebook and invite your friends and family.
"...and no government of any stripe has dared take it away from us since". - David Cameron and Lansley have dared. We'll see what that means when the British people stand up to them.
I broke my collar bone and was left in agony filling in forms at A&E with them demanding a credit card, my insurance company refused to pay the $27,000 required for the simple operation and flew me back to Scotland for treatment. The Doctors and treatment in Edinburgh couldnt have been better or quicker.
There are people here who are bankrupted because they suffer injuries in a car crash. You don't know how luck you are pal.
Yep well that's a problem with administration not health care.
You broke your arm in the US and the British Tax payer paid for it, think about that, all your insurance company paid for was the fligh, good deal for them.
The problem in the US is not quality but everyone is scared of being sued, that is the issue to resolve.
If legal awards were more sensible then insurance costs would be lower, administration would be easier and everything would work much better.
@weetoonmaninla Don't you feel any remorse about that? You were working abroad not paying any tax or national insurance or Vat on the things you bought, but then you sally in and get yourself treated for free....
Whoa you brits need to watch out that no American influence comes in to turn your health care system into system a profit based system like here in the states. Keep an eye on the poison that can attack your country's positive values. Be weary of any talk of adopting an "American" type health system.
@lickmyfart not even old Maggie Thatcher who was the most conservative post war pm this countries had would dream of attacking the nhs. The simple fact is its not perfect but most of the people have benefited from its services at some point in their life at a fraction of the price private healthcare would cost an individual. No party here would get elected with the promise to abolish it. I personally believe its the best thing about our country.
@workingclassbum "I personally believe its the best thing about our country."
Have you ever lived anywhere else, I'm Scottish, I've lived all over Europe, I can testify that the NHS is crap.
Maybe you like it because you are used to it, but it is really awful compared to other countries.
Just ask yourself why do they have to send patients abroad for treatment, if it was so great other countries would be sending people to the UK for treatment.
@Iain1962 You're an idiot. The problem is not the NHS itself or the people who founded it. The problem is to do with the fact that successive goverments have underfunded the NHS over a large time period (as well as continually meddled in the way it's run). Hence why people so often go to the continent because countries like France, Germany, Netherlands etc. are far more willing to spend and give their health services the resources they need.
That's utter nonsense I happen to live in the Netherlands and the Health care here is worse than in the UK, I used to live in France, there it is really brilliant, but very expensive for the taxpayer, as a result businesses are crushed, so very nice if you are sick and really bad for you if you are healthy.
If the NHS was so good other countries would be sending people to the UK for treatment instead of the opposite.
@Iain1962 of course we're not no 1 but we're better than most, any improvements are ours to make. On 1st April 2011 the SNP government made prescriptions 100% free to everyone! I <3 the NHS, but I'm not in love with it, if you know what I mean.
@Iain1962 "Attlee and Bevan wrecked the country." No. Just no.
What are you on about? Our doctors are still world class. Being run by the state doesn't automatically mean that healthcare declines. What we have now is better than before.
OK, so maybe the buildings are a little old, and the hospital food's shit. Who cares? The treatment is up to date, and the equipment is modern. What else really matters?
@BasilFawlty4444 Of course Attlee an Bevan wrecked the Country where is the steel industry the coal industry the shipbuilding industry? Even British Rail had to be reprivatised, the only thing left is the creaking old NHS. As you say the buildings are old and the food is shit. Nothing is free do you think the doctors and nurses work for free? Do you know how much it really costs? You pay for it in your NI and also with tax.
@Iain1962 You want to know where the coal, steel and shipbuilding went? One word: Thatcher. Then her minion Major went and finished the job by privatising the railways.
And this government is going to carry on the job and privatise the NHS, the fucking criminals. I just pray that the LibDems get some guts and vote against it. Cameron knows what he's doing, and he has Clegg as his little pet.
It's a matter of principle: the NHS belongs to all of us; it should never belong to a private company.
@BasilFawlty4444 Well I disagree with you there Thatcher saved what was left and put it back to work after the unionists had pillaged it. What do you have to compare the NHS with? Why do they send patients abroad for treatment?
I hope they do privatise it, it would certainly improve things. Everything works better when it privately owned rather than seen as some sort of charitable foundation.
@Iain1962 Are you joking me? She led a crusade against the miners - Thatcher fired the first shot! She started to close down the mines. Scargill's response, I'll concede uncalled for/extreme, was against what Thatcher started. Even Marr, who is about as Tory as you can get, says that it was "unfinished buisness" between the miners and the Tories; the miners had brought down Heath.
Thatcher is THE direct reason there is so much unemploment in Wales and the North.
@BasilFawlty4444 Nonsense again, if Atllee and Bevan hadn't nationalised them in the first place there would never have been a problem. You can only fix the problems you are presented with at the time even if it was stupidity 40 years before that caused them. If the problems hadn't been tackled the situation would be much worse today.
@Iain1962 I have no problem with nationalisation. At the time, these industries were the bedrock of the British economy and vital for running the country. It was the mismanagement of the industries that was the problem. Tory AND Labour mismanagement. If it had been run like a buisness, the GOVERNMENT could have made a profit!
The NHS just isn't like that. You hear all these lies about bureacracy, but when you speak to people who work for the NHS and know the statistics, it becomes clear.
@BasilFawlty4444 Well you hit the nail on the head there, because it's nationalised one lot do one thing and the other lot do another, that's no way to run a business, undoing the vision of the previous administrators, that's why they shouldn't be involved, create the environment, tax the profits and let the professionals get on with it !
@BasilFawlty4444 You've never had it so good eh? That was the slogan for a while because of course when a business doesn't need to make a profit and invest in the future it can just spend away...and then eventually because of others innovation everyone ends up out of a job. This is the fallacy of "social policy" it ends up destroying the people it is supposed to help.
@Iain1962 The NHS should never be "owned." You just don't get it, do you? YOU AND I AND EVERYONE IN THIS COUNTRY owns the NHS...
I don't give a shit about making a profit from healthcare - to a Briton at least, it's a fundamental human right, and it was from the moment Bevan opened it. Maybe we should privatise the police of the armed forces because they protect us? The Fire Brigade? The schools? Let THEM make a profit, huh?
@BasilFawlty4444 I get it very well I have lived all over Europe and seen many healthcare systems my mum still lives in the UK, fucking shite, she has to wait a year to see somebody and told if she goes private, no more NHS consultation for you, I live in Holland it's 5 times better here and not nationalised, I used to live in France it's 50 times better there and not nationalised.
@Iain1962 What are you basing this on? How is it better, please expand?
Now, I don't know exactly what your mother is going through; I don't even know if you're telling the truth, but it's not as if privatisation is going to bring down waiting times. And it's simply not true that if you go private you're cut off from the NHS. My sister went private to have an operation on her gums.
I have an American friend who used to be against the NHS. A few months of living here and NOT ANY MORE!
Well the US system is bad too because of too much litigation and conivance between all the facets insurance drug companies and etc, but that has also been facilited by govt collusion. Of course if you are on the receiving end of some nice treatment for this or that from the NHS and you don't see a bill it seems wonderful and you do pay by increased taxes and NI, it all has to be paid for somehow, andt what could be there instead if there really was a free market.
@BasilFawlty4444 However we do send patients from the UK to the US for treatment you know those campaigns you see to raise money, because they do have private hospitals which are excellent. I don't see many (any) cases of US patients being sent to the UK because of the excellence of the NHS.
@Iain1962 Well, I've never heard of sending patients to the USA, but it's probably for really serious or wacky cases; in cases like this, people are often sent to the experts in central Europe or in the US. it's not just confined to the UK, other countries do it too.
But I have heard of a man who had to pay $27,000 for treatment in the US, and hopped on a plane over here to get it for free (it's ok, he was a British citizen).
@BasilFawlty4444 Yeah I heard that story, he broke his arm in the US or something and his insurance company worked out is was cheaper to fly him to the UK so they could have the British taxpayer pay for it.
Yes private schools are better. If more schools were private then people could send their children where they wanted instead of having to go by postcode...Maybe their children want to focus on drama or music or maths so they could pick the school, Government indeed should look after the armed forces for defence, and Fire-brigade used to be volunteer largely before it was institutionalised and did fine before, the chief in Scotland complains H&S regulations stop them saving lives !
@Iain1962 you really are a hardcore right-winger, aren't you?
One thing is for certain: the schools should never go private. Schools, not governments, set down their entry criteria. Most schools measure from Postcodes, that's all. People can still pick their schools; I remember doing it. Postcodes are no more related to nationalisation than faith preferences for faith schools.
The council will only intervene if you aren't allocated a space.
@BasilFawlty4444 Not a right winger, I believe in freedom and personal responsability, who is the government? Us! So why is it that a chap with a form and a clipboard knows what's best for me.
@Iain1962 Even with completely private schools, there are a limited number of spaces in each school; you can't just go to whatever school you like. They have the 11+ exam for promising students. If you pass this, then you're released to apply for any school in the country.
And in case you hadn't noticed, schools really are allowed to do their own thing, that's why they have OFSTED.
Trust me, I remember applying for secondary school as clear as day.
@BasilFawlty4444 Well I actually went to a private school one of the best in Scotland actually but they had a lot of students who also went for free because of donations to a fund from Former pupils and back when I went it wasn't expensive compared to today and your postcode religion or colour was irrelevant.
@Iain1962 No, they have an equivalent of the 11+ now, I don't know what it's called, but it does exist.
Colour has nothing to do with how schools choose people, but faith schools certainly have a criteria. And yes, I do know that Private Schools have a fund for promising students; I know someone that got into Merchant Taylors on it.
But it's just silly and implausible to suggest that the ENTIRE school system should be nationalised. It wouldn't work; there's millions of kids to find schools for.
@BasilFawlty4444 Well in any market if there are millions of customers, there will be plenty of suppliers, some will be good and some bad, just think about mobile phones, do you think if the govt had decided to run the mobile phone industry when it started up in earnest about 15 years ago, prices would have fallen nd now your mobile phone is about as powerfull as a computer, no I don't think so we would still have big clunky slow expensive phones.
@BasilFawlty4444 No I'm not suggesting there shouldn't be a sort of NHS or state school or firebrigade or anything, but what has happened is that it has become overbearingly oppressive, these state run institutions should be a safety net to pick up the slack, not the norm. Like unemployment benefit, help people get back on their feet but don't give them the opportunity to lie about and be taken care of forever at the taxpayers expense.
@Iain1962 I have to agree with you there. Although I think that the state itself should become more efficient, I have to say that the dole system is absolutely shite.
My father is a hardworking man, an architect, and when the recession came, his practice went bankrupt. He got I think only two weeks of unemployment benefit, and then he was on his own. He can't find a permanent job in architecture, and he's resorted to working from home, although he's had quite a bit of work recently (thank God).
@BasilFawlty4444 Well you can't have an efficient state system if they are trying to run businesses, this is the whole point, you have to a vision and long term plan as well as a get through the next three months plan, I am sorry for your dad, if the world was run differently he could have found another or started his own business preety fast, alas they want us working ofr big companies.
@Iain1962 It's just so unfair that extremists like Anjem Choudary get £25,000 a year on benefits, but hardworking normal people get screwed over. It's just not what the benefits system was set up for in the first place.
@BasilFawlty4444 Yes exactly and things like single mother benefit, fatastic idea but put it out there , and over time sa certain type of girl is going to say well if I'm a single mother I get all this dosh... so then you have kids who are neglected because the mother only had him for the benefits so you need social workers and the cycle progresses to all sorts of other problems. I hate all this nanny stuff.
@Iain1962 yeah, but how many people actually do that? You see it in the newspapers, but I just can't imagine anyone stooping to that level - actually getting pregnant in order to get benefits.
And in the same way, we can't really go back to the Victorian era, having mothers and children living on the streets. Even if they do it intentionally, it still wouldn't be right to kick them out on the streets.
@BasilFawlty4444 Of course they do, it's rife, benefit fraud is massive, there are even websites telling you what the best scams are, google it.
I believe the best way to help people is stop all this bureacracy, cut the taxes, leave more money in the hands of the people and then jobs will follow, it is much more satisfying working for a living than getting a dole cheque, and a dole cheque has no future posibilites, promotion a new job because a customer likes your style etc...
@Iain1962 I agree with you there, as well. My father says that he feels utterly ashamed being unemployed.
But at the end of the day, I do think that keeping the NHS under the control of the state is the best thing to do, and I seriously hope that the LibDems don't sell what's left of their souls to the Tories, and vote down the Lansley's bill.
@Iain1962 And again, Health and Safety has nothing to do with the state. People in private buisnesses take it to extremes as well.
I don't know the ins and outs of Health and Safety, so I don't really have an opinion on whether or not it should stay, but I do know that privatising the Fire Brigade won't make any difference on that front.
@BasilFawlty4444 Health and safety has everything to do with the state they impose the rules on people who want to save lives, force companies to take ridiculous safety precautions, for fucks sake the kids on Blue Peter can''t do an experiment without wearing safety goggles and gloves !
@Iain1962 You say "impose" but really it's no different from any other laws. I'm all up for a review of Health and Safety law, but I don't think that we should get rid of it all together. There have to be SOME rules about what you can and can't get your employees to do.
@BasilFawlty4444 Why? There should be laws that you can't force somebody to do something against their will but fiiremen being told they can't go and try to save people's lives because it's too dangerous? What next? Soldiers not allowed to fight because they might twist an ankle?
@Iain1962 NO, as I said, I'm fully in favour of reviewing Health and Safety, especially in regard to the instance that you mentioned. I think that's just stupid; soldiers are soldiers because they want to fight, and it involves risking your life. In the same way, firemen become firemen because they want to save lives, and risking your life is part of that as well.
But as I said, I don't think it would be right to completely get rid of H&S.
@lickmyfart its already starting. Some NHS services are being sold off to private companies. Its still free, but its provided by the private sector (though funded by government). The Conservatives are helping their friends in big business and the American health giants to take over much of the NHS.
True, the Conservatives is basically a way in which big business can take over the world. We've voted in people whose primary goal as government is to break up the state and sell it off to big companies and pocket a large sum of money along the way.
NHS are nothing but a bunch of low life terrorists who murder people just so they can have a laugh and a chat,fuck the nhs they all should be shote on site
@cpnstav There are many great British journalists with a view as to who is running the country. The internet makes their works widely available. There's no need to throw the Daily Mail card M into the mix.
There are many things Marr omits from his analysis; the media in general are like that. History and news is filtered by the perceptions and ideologies of those writing it. Like you said he is part of an elite holding those same elite values.
Theres a lot to criticise regarding the NHS. If only we could actually effect changes from these criticisms. When I think of the alternatives to socialised health care or even simply allowing privatisation of certain provisions within the service (which has been going on) Id much rather it be under public ownership as flawed as that may be. Public ownership ran under democratic lines as part of a functioning democracy I think would be far more efficient and effective.
@4333davidb I'd be interested to know how the model you'd like to see varies from the original model. It sounds more like the original model than the current one. (Both have had their problems.) I also wonder what do you mean by 'democratic lines'. These things do need management, cost money, etc.--so what is it you'd like to see? Not that I'm taking any stance against anyone here. I'm a socialist.
the nhs has turned out to be a 60 year mistake. it once was good - when you had matrons on wards but there are too many people who have come to england that have acute ailments from their poor countrys that now cost the nhs relentlessly.
thus, people like me - white, london born, straight male has to wait 2 weeks to merely see a doctor for 2 minutes.
Good deterrant, all i need is a repeat subscription but now won't bother
they put obstruction in the way so people don't bother
the nhs has turned out to be a 60 year mistake. it once was good - when you had matrons on wards but there are too many people who have come to england that have acute ailments from their poor countrys that now cost the nhs relentlessly.
thus, people like me - white, london born, straight male has to wait 2 weeks to merely see a doctor for 2 minutes.
Good deterrant, i can't afford to take the time off work - this is what the governmentdoes - puts obstruction in the way so people don't bother
It should also be recognised that people originally from the UK also abuse it.
Unfortunately Daily Mail (and other newspapers of such quality journalism) readers seem to think that immigration has crippled the NHS, whereas if it wasnt for mass immigration in the 1950s and 1960s the NHS would not of been able to run.
You also might want to recognise that the increasing medicines and technology that keep more and more people alive has driven up costs.
@sgu02nsc oringinal people from the UK 'abusing' it are ok imo, afterall they've paid for it
it is widely known people come to england (on a 'holiday') with the sole intention of getting hospital treatment for an ailment they already have and mysteriously get sick whilst here and are treated. I reiterate that there are people from abroad that have come to live here that bring all kinds of deformaty and disease that costs the nhs way too much
Just so you know: stating fact doesnt make it a fact. Youre taking the simple argument that people coming over here has done nothing but cause problems. There are many people from the UK who have not paid for the NHS (you know, the type that havent worked a day in their lives) and there are people who have come over here and paid tax from day one. Who deserves it more out of those two groups?
@sgu02nsc the people native to this country for whom the nhs was originally setup with the understanding that deductions would pay for a fair and free service
the people that havenn.t worked are likely to have issues that means they can't
@sgu02nsc Actually that's an incorrect statement, everyone pays taxes - even if they don't pay income tax. Council tax, fuel duty, alcohol and cigarette duties and of course VAT. If you've spent just £1 in this country, you have paid some form of taxation. Of course we don't all contribute the same amount in taxation, but there's no way to fix that we all pay the exact same amount......so we cannot justify saying that those who pay more should get more. Best to keep a universal and fair system.
@AeneasInvictus I totally agree. I only used the argument I did to counteract the small minded opinion of ‘everyone comes over here to live off our benefit system’ as a general xenophobic/racist justification. My retaliation to that opinion is if that is their justification then why do they prefer ‘native’ people who don’t work to immigrants that do?
if they "helped the NHS to run" and thus got treatment then i wonder why they complain saying the streets were not paved with gold and moan at the english as if we forced them to come here to do the supposed crap jobs the british would (supposedly) not do?
you need to get your idea correct lol
driven up costs ? a prescription is over £7 are you mental ? we pay for it. Those that can't pay wait for the non appearing hospital treatment have had to sell their houses 45,000 this year alone
@sgu02nsc don't know but how often are you actually going to need angioplasty ? maybe once ? maybe twice ? maybe never - but you still pay in for it and have no option.
repeat prescriptions still cost £7 a pop, everytime
Healthcare in the U.S. consumes so much money even the business community began to see it needed rethinking hence the proposals we see now under Obama (these hardly revolutionary changes would not even be on the table if it were not for the business interests behind them). I hope changes in the U.S. will help those working families who are regularly broke and disenfranchised by the system. The suffering this must cause is unthinkable to me. So I thank Nye Bevan and the movement for the NHS.
The NHS is a remarkable achievement and has endured attacks since its seeds as an idea and a movement amongst the working class. It has been built within a capitalist framework and so obviously suffers setbacks and from bureaucracy. It could be ran far more effectively along democratic lines if we in the UK had a functioning democracy. Most people in the UK would rather build hospitals and schools with our tax money but our imperialist masters prefer weapons and to subsidise the super wealthy.
Why does Marr choose not to talk about the real revolution in health care . the mass production of antibiotics brought about in 1940 -41 . This was largely a British achievement . Yet how many people reading this could name a single person responsible for this ? why is this ?Why is it seen as a political achievement? Answer: because of people like Marr - the metropolitan elite.
@tincoffin Well, not to worry, I've seen at least one whole BBC documentary on that topic (and quite an entertaining one at that). I'm not sure you can really criticise a programme like this for what it excludes as much as for what it includes. For one thing, who knows what got edited out?
@RussMoxham Could you tell me the name of that documentary? I do not see why the BBC has to be so relentlessly middle of the road .Why can it never allow a slightly contrarian viewpoint ? The BBC represents the views of the political class that is all .
If the government had nationalised the car industry around 1925 when cars were beginning to be mass-produced we would thank the government for our Trabant . In 1940 medicine from spectacles to drugs began to be mass-produced ....
Andrew Marr has not thought since he left university like the rest of the metropolitan elite.
Why do some UK residents think that the NHS is 'Free'? Just because you don't get to see the bill? Just because you don't have to hand over cash? The NHS is the most expensive and wasteful health service in the world. Check out the amount doled out by the poor uk tax payer per patient per year for the crap service. And still some Brits thinks it's 'Free'. I repeat, 'It's the most expensive health system in the wolrd!' - and it's crap! I just watched my dad die in NHS squalor.
The problem with the NHS is that it exists. It is an abberation, a relic of Soviet socialism that has no place in a modern, democratic country. We should have the right to choose our own healthcare. Socialists claim to deplore monopoly in the private sector, yet turn a blind eye to public sector monopoly. It proves a fundamental axiom socialism; it is a hypocritical disgrace.
We DO have the right to choose healthcare. You can use the NHS or you can pay to go private. Without the NHS you'd only have the choice to go private or not receive any care at all. We have MORE choice than most Americans.
Under the US system you would have to pay MORE taxes to pay for the few programs they do have and also the greater numbers of people turning up at the ER with severe conditions. Conditions which would be nipped in the bud when they're cheaper, on the NHS.
No you don't. You just pay your insurance and you then receive some of the best medical care in the world, with no NICE death panels who ascribe monetary value to a patient's life.
If people don't have 80% of their income stolen by the government through income taxation, and then have what they consume taxed also, they can afford it. But the government takes our money in the stupid belief that it can spend our money better than we can.
Yes, I am British. I live in Doncaster. NICE decides the value of patients' lives. It recently rejected a drug because it was too expensive.
I'd rather be a right winger as opposed to a statist, fascist bastard.
@Mickmars90 Because we live in a democracy the government is "we" if "we" the people decide to vote for and keep voting for a party that supports the NHS, which of course all major parties do then "we" give permission for our governments to tax us to support that which "we" vote for ,this is not theft.Not sure were you get the 80% tax bit from.Normally from a societies point of view Governments do spend better than the individual,in the sense of maintaining a society that is worth living in.
Mickmars90 It is if that's how "we" choose to use or indeed not use democracy .Your alternative would be? I would support the idea of "we" having some kind of proportional representation system and both of us being in favour of democracy can we agree that in a modern democratic system we should certainly get rid of the house of lords and indeed the unelected monarchy Or does your love of democracy only hold only if an ultra right wing party is in power.
A system of direct democracy based on local elected senates. We don't need a massive centralised system of government. The internet allows direct democracy. We should have a libertarian constitution which allows freedom of thought and action within the confines of the Rule ofL Law.
I have no love of representative democracy. I am a monarchist because it is privately owned government rather than publically owned. I'd get rid of parliament altogether, and keep the building as a museum
@Mickmars90 Sorry I do not mean to be rude but you are a strange man.Direct democracy based on local elected senates so no Britain,England ,Scotland or Wales just a collection of little independent but totality uneconomic ,defenceless statelets Monarchy is privately owned government?Translates as dictatorship .I can only assume I am talking to Prince Charles that would account for the strangeness. Please feel free to reply but my bit ends here.
The monarch would be the head of state. Monarchy is apolitical. Presidents do not enjoy universal support, whereas monarchies can because they represent a whole smorgasbord of views. Nations would still exist of course... but we don't need a centralised parliament anymore because the internet allows direct democracy. We can vote online, we could draft our own bills for debate through wikipedia. Instead of twisting what I have said, learn to fucking read.
@Mickmars90 Sorry,but you write the most utter bollocks .Not only are you a retard but you are foul mouth twat with it. Everything you have written is just so much crap.Nice knowing you.
So this is what you do when you are crushed in a debate? You insult your master and commander? How typical of those too stupid to understand a rational and reasoned argument. You may have thought it nice knowing me, but it wasn't nice knowing you. You sir, are a skidmark on the underpants of Britain, one that copious amounts of bleach cannot remove.
No, just sardonic and perspicacious. I possess a great deal of alacrity, but sometimes I descend into prolixity, but I've never lost a debate. I don't remember an opponent being as easy to defeat as you however. You didn't even answer my points, you tried to shoot the messenger instead of the message, and you're a crap shot.
I think the word is pompous... I am also pedantic in the extreme, but with some justification. I can project an atmosphere of hauteur, but false modest is inimcal to my personality.
But I'm not a pregnant goldfish. You really need to brush up on your general knowledge. One is amazed at your lack of intelligence. Are you a heavy drinker or do you have a naturally occuring low number of brain cells? Are you parents proud of producing and then raising such a stupid child? It reminds me of the Horace quote; ''The mountains will be in labour, and will give birth to a ridiculous mouse.'' You started off promisingly, but you are incredibly banal and naive
Why should Ieave my country when I can argue for what I believe in? The Eastern European dissidents didn't leave, they stood up for an idea whose time had come, and they fought and died for it.
My last comment may have come across as too strong. I'm not saying you should leave, that would be ridiculous as that is nit my place. But you clearly take umbridge to a system you can't do an aweful lot about otherwise apart from moving somewhere you don't need to pay tax for it. But as you have stated you have your beliefs and I have mine, which is great; one of the many benefits people in the Soviet Union didn't have.
@PiccoloNo92 No I could not ! I could not live in a developed country without paying for most of my health care through taxes. In US nearly 50% is paid through taxes even before Obamacare. Healthcare can never operate like a commercial market Why ? Essentially because people will not pay for illnesses they do not have.
The NHS is rightly something that many of us in the UK are proud of. When we look into the data a little more there are cracks appearing, huge investments in a system that is struggling with a population that is not living a health lifestyle is not sustainable. How can we safeguard this amazing resource? My opinion is that we ought to begin to be proactive. Let's tell the NHS about our experiences! Use my channel to leave your feedback, good or bad and I'll get the message to the NHS.
The NHS works, that's why we have a higher survival rate for children and lower death rates than the US. Check gapminder for accurate stats on healthcare
Immigrants are being encouraged to come to the country because they are more likely to follow orders of the state like....take your swine flu vaccine and dont ask whats in it, or if you can spread the virus to others!
Canada had Tommy Douglas. We had Nye Bevan. It's a shame America doesn't have anyone with the courage to stand up for universal public healthcare, and accept nothing short of it.
How does that make us Nazis? Because we have a health system that helps everyone who needs it, not just those blessed few who can? Because the evils of capitalism are so enshrined into your values that you'll even put a price on human life? You'd just rather let people die because you don't want to pay a little extra in taxes? America is apparently a democracy, I'm not convinced.
Aneurin 'Nye' Bevan my fellow countrymen R.I.P. A true hero of 20th century British Politics.
Why do you believe capitalism is evil? Do you have a mobile phone? Then you're a lackey of those evil capitalistic pigs who observe the rules of the market by operating on supply and demand. You demand a product, and the market supplies it for you. You use the internet. A big business provides the internet for you. You pay and they supply. If you're going to criticse capitalism then don't be a fucking hypocrite it about it.
America isn't a democracy. It's a constitutional republic
I'm not a hypocrite because I don't deny that I'm buying into the system even if I do believe it evil. True I could choose not to buy a mobile but it doesn't make a blind bit of difference because if I'm not there to fufil the demand someone else will and as the system is so entrenched if supply and demand were to stop the economy would break down and that would do no one any good.
That's a non-sequitur. Supply and demand is there in any form of economy, even a controlled one, its just controlled by the state. But you are profitting from the 'exploitation' of labour by purchasing the products they produce. That is hypocritical, no matter how you dress it up.
Nazi idea BOLLOCKS! , look learn and listen you ignorant guy. You work pay a few % (alot less than U.S. Insurance) then even 10 years later you are ill, and you get treated free hows that Nazi dumbo, that's equality and fairness.
The US should have a publicly funded healthcare system, if you go ill in America and don't have cover your dead doctors will refuse to treat a person and throw them out of the hospital. 10 million Americans don't have cover its disgusting.
if you get shoot in the US and don't have cover you bleed to death outside the hospital, and I'm not joking.
i think its actually more like 30 million without healthcare, in 1909 the UK made sure its working population had healthcare, i dont know if america can be considered developed in this sense
Private medicine puts profit before care. Did you know that whenever a US Medical Insurance company has to pay out, they consider it a 'loss'?
I would much prefer to trust my democratic government than a money hungry company to pay for my healthcare.
Where is the ethics? where is the so called civilised people?... oh yeah, they are all in the UK, where the average life span is still longer than the US. We must be doing something right i guess...
people in Britian DIE wiaitng for critical surgery are you aware that your socialist system created rationign? and shrtages of doctors..do a little history in the 1960s and 70s 10 000 s of doctors left britian
for canada and australain to escape your horrible socialist mess less doctors to care for you..there are disaadvatages for a for profit system but many of your best doctors came here to the USA and now practice..they no longer serve you but us.
People in the USA DIE waiting for surgery. Are you aware that your private system creates profit from pain? Shortages of doctors, do a little history, in the 60s and 70s many people left the UK for many jobs.
Canada and Australia did'nt escape our socialist mess they have free Health care. Idiot.
There are disadvantages to free healthcare and many doctors go to the USA. They no longer serve us because they want to make more money for their family treating those who CAN pay.
I'm poor i'm disabled if you are poor here you can apply for medicaid many do if you are old or diaabled you may apply for social security and medicare many do i am familair with both systems they work quite well and the poor more ofthen than not get the same exact care the wealthy do now where our system fails and it does is the wroking poor those who work but do not make enough to afford coverage or recenty un employed this admitedly is a problem we need reform HOWEVER
Medicare is a social insurance program administered by the United States government, providing health insurance coverage to people who are aged 65 and over, or who meet other special criteria. Medicare operates as a single-payer health care system.[1] The Social Security Act of 1965 was passed by Congress in late-spring of 1965 and signed into law on July 30, 1965, by President Lyndon B. Johnson as amendments to Social Security legislation
Medicaid is the United States health program for eligible individuals and families with low incomes and resources. It is a means-tested program that is jointly funded by the states and federal government, and is managed by the states.[1] Among the groups of people served by Medicaid are certain eligible U.S. citizens and resident aliens, including low-income adults and their children, and people with certain disabilities. Poverty alone does not necessarily qualify an individual for Medicaid.
It is estimated that approximately 60 percent of poor Americans are not covered by Medicaid.there in lies the problem see? if we could gradually expand medicare and medicaid programs to cover all poor people and the uninsured we could go a long way to making care universal, now that is expensive but i think it would be much preferable to a total governement take over of what is basically a very high quality system
The Canadian system has been 69-75% publicly funded,though most services are delivered by private providers, including physicians (although they may derive their revenue primarily from government billings). Although some doctors work on a purely fee-for-service basis (usually family physicians), some family physicians and most specialists are paid through a combination of fee-for-service and fixed contracts with hospitals or health service management organizations.
The NHS provides the majority of healthcare in England, including primary care, in-patient care, long-term healthcare, ophthalmology and dentistry. The National Health Service Act 1946 came into effect on 5 July 1948. Private health care has continued parallel to the NHS, paid for largely by private insurance: it is used by about 8% of the population, generally as an add-on to NHS services.
Recently the private sector has been increasingly used to increase NHS capacity. According to the BMA a large proportion of the public oppose this move
Canada the insurance is govenrment funded and payments go through the
single payer system HOWEVER most care providers remain private as do most doctors,your system is completely government run and your popualtion resists even farming out service to private companies as Canada has ALWAYS DONE, actually despite its drawbacks the Cnadians system is good, many americans thins its socialized but not really thats just right wing propoganda
i actually think there are many advantages to the Canadian
system when i lived there in the 70s everyone loved it
it does have certain serious drawbacks in rationing and waiting periods but it does a marvelous job for routine care and prevention.
your system is totally state run totally socialist and total rubbish Blair had some very good ideas for preserving universal coverage but improvong quality by privatizing some service providers but keeping it basically free of charge other than taxes, but you lefties torpedoed a good idea
Canada spent 10.0%. In 2006, 70% of health care spending in Canada was financed by government, versus 46% in the United States. Total government spending per capita in the U.S. on health care was 23% higher than Canadian government spending, and U.S. government expenditure on health care was just under 83% of total Canadian spending (public and private
Life expectancy is longer in Canada, and its infant mortality rate is lower than that of the U.S., but there is debate about the underlying causes of these differences.
One commonly cited comparison, the World Health Organization's ratings of "overall health service performance", published in 2000, which used a "composite measure of achievement in the level of health, the distribution of health, the level of responsiveness and fairness of financial contribution", ranked Canada 30th and the U.S. 37th among 191 member nations.
This study rated the US "responsiveness", or quality of service for individuals receiving treatment, as 1st, compared with 7th for Canada. The average life expectancy for Canada was 80.34 years compared with U.S. at 78.6 years
This has been flagged as spam show
GOOGLE 'Andrew Lansley Bankrolled by Private Healthcare'
janebusby 2 weeks ago
That is one "incredible" video. =p
urtismcdona13c 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Socialism ISN'T communism.. In the UK - FREE national health service costs 7% gdp compared to 17% going to PRIVATE medical firms in the U.S.? Can you spot the anomaly in that equation.? private medical = fairness?
Uk Politics lies about "loving" the NHS & instead chip away at it - they'd rather corporate chums on the boards of private medical stepped in. But most of UK LOVE the NHS and it employs a LOT of people.
People in poverty die and suffer in the U.S. What's so great about that?
telemetry9 1 month ago
This video went viral on Malta
rolandhensle24 2 months ago
Why can't that no government of any stripe appeal to the BBC as well as NHS, it's just sad to see the beeb fail at comedy and entainment on Saturday's.
TheMischievousbull 6 months ago
On the 17th of May there is going to a march to save the nhs, Meet at University College Hospital, Assemble main entrance in Gower Street in London at 5:30pm, this is going to be huge. Search for Kill Lansley’s Bill- MARCH TO SAVE THE NHSon facebook and invite your friends and family.
spfanluke 10 months ago 6
If the TORIES & LIB DEMS push through this act of mass privatisation proposed in the white paper, I will never ever vote for either of them again.
No f*cking joke.
janebusby 10 months ago
"...and no government of any stripe has dared take it away from us since". - David Cameron and Lansley have dared. We'll see what that means when the British people stand up to them.
JayEey 11 months ago 8
@iain1962
sorry mate, Im Scottish too and live in the US
I broke my collar bone and was left in agony filling in forms at A&E with them demanding a credit card, my insurance company refused to pay the $27,000 required for the simple operation and flew me back to Scotland for treatment. The Doctors and treatment in Edinburgh couldnt have been better or quicker.
There are people here who are bankrupted because they suffer injuries in a car crash. You don't know how luck you are pal.
weetoonmaninla 1 year ago 2
@weetoonmaninla
Yep well that's a problem with administration not health care.
You broke your arm in the US and the British Tax payer paid for it, think about that, all your insurance company paid for was the fligh, good deal for them.
The problem in the US is not quality but everyone is scared of being sued, that is the issue to resolve.
If legal awards were more sensible then insurance costs would be lower, administration would be easier and everything would work much better.
Iain1962 1 year ago
@weetoonmaninla Don't you feel any remorse about that? You were working abroad not paying any tax or national insurance or Vat on the things you bought, but then you sally in and get yourself treated for free....
Iain1962 1 year ago
As much I hate Labour, have to give them some credit on this one
gopconservative78 1 year ago 3
Comment removed
sabaafzal11 1 year ago
Whoa you brits need to watch out that no American influence comes in to turn your health care system into system a profit based system like here in the states. Keep an eye on the poison that can attack your country's positive values. Be weary of any talk of adopting an "American" type health system.
lickmyfart 1 year ago
@lickmyfart not even old Maggie Thatcher who was the most conservative post war pm this countries had would dream of attacking the nhs. The simple fact is its not perfect but most of the people have benefited from its services at some point in their life at a fraction of the price private healthcare would cost an individual. No party here would get elected with the promise to abolish it. I personally believe its the best thing about our country.
workingclassbum 1 year ago 2
@workingclassbum "I personally believe its the best thing about our country."
Have you ever lived anywhere else, I'm Scottish, I've lived all over Europe, I can testify that the NHS is crap.
Maybe you like it because you are used to it, but it is really awful compared to other countries.
Just ask yourself why do they have to send patients abroad for treatment, if it was so great other countries would be sending people to the UK for treatment.
Attlee and Bevan wrecked the country.
Iain1962 1 year ago
@Iain1962 You're an idiot. The problem is not the NHS itself or the people who founded it. The problem is to do with the fact that successive goverments have underfunded the NHS over a large time period (as well as continually meddled in the way it's run). Hence why people so often go to the continent because countries like France, Germany, Netherlands etc. are far more willing to spend and give their health services the resources they need.
Chazzoli 1 year ago
@Chazzoli Well thanks for calling me an idiot.
That's utter nonsense I happen to live in the Netherlands and the Health care here is worse than in the UK, I used to live in France, there it is really brilliant, but very expensive for the taxpayer, as a result businesses are crushed, so very nice if you are sick and really bad for you if you are healthy.
If the NHS was so good other countries would be sending people to the UK for treatment instead of the opposite.
Iain1962 1 year ago
@Iain1962 of course we're not no 1 but we're better than most, any improvements are ours to make. On 1st April 2011 the SNP government made prescriptions 100% free to everyone! I <3 the NHS, but I'm not in love with it, if you know what I mean.
lizziedavidson1987 9 months ago
@Iain1962 "Attlee and Bevan wrecked the country." No. Just no.
What are you on about? Our doctors are still world class. Being run by the state doesn't automatically mean that healthcare declines. What we have now is better than before.
OK, so maybe the buildings are a little old, and the hospital food's shit. Who cares? The treatment is up to date, and the equipment is modern. What else really matters?
Nobody should ever have to pay for healthare!
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 Of course Attlee an Bevan wrecked the Country where is the steel industry the coal industry the shipbuilding industry? Even British Rail had to be reprivatised, the only thing left is the creaking old NHS. As you say the buildings are old and the food is shit. Nothing is free do you think the doctors and nurses work for free? Do you know how much it really costs? You pay for it in your NI and also with tax.
Iain1962 9 months ago
@Iain1962 You want to know where the coal, steel and shipbuilding went? One word: Thatcher. Then her minion Major went and finished the job by privatising the railways.
And this government is going to carry on the job and privatise the NHS, the fucking criminals. I just pray that the LibDems get some guts and vote against it. Cameron knows what he's doing, and he has Clegg as his little pet.
It's a matter of principle: the NHS belongs to all of us; it should never belong to a private company.
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 Well I disagree with you there Thatcher saved what was left and put it back to work after the unionists had pillaged it. What do you have to compare the NHS with? Why do they send patients abroad for treatment?
I hope they do privatise it, it would certainly improve things. Everything works better when it privately owned rather than seen as some sort of charitable foundation.
Iain1962 9 months ago
@Iain1962 Are you joking me? She led a crusade against the miners - Thatcher fired the first shot! She started to close down the mines. Scargill's response, I'll concede uncalled for/extreme, was against what Thatcher started. Even Marr, who is about as Tory as you can get, says that it was "unfinished buisness" between the miners and the Tories; the miners had brought down Heath.
Thatcher is THE direct reason there is so much unemploment in Wales and the North.
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 Nonsense again, if Atllee and Bevan hadn't nationalised them in the first place there would never have been a problem. You can only fix the problems you are presented with at the time even if it was stupidity 40 years before that caused them. If the problems hadn't been tackled the situation would be much worse today.
Iain1962 9 months ago
@Iain1962 I have no problem with nationalisation. At the time, these industries were the bedrock of the British economy and vital for running the country. It was the mismanagement of the industries that was the problem. Tory AND Labour mismanagement. If it had been run like a buisness, the GOVERNMENT could have made a profit!
The NHS just isn't like that. You hear all these lies about bureacracy, but when you speak to people who work for the NHS and know the statistics, it becomes clear.
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 Well you hit the nail on the head there, because it's nationalised one lot do one thing and the other lot do another, that's no way to run a business, undoing the vision of the previous administrators, that's why they shouldn't be involved, create the environment, tax the profits and let the professionals get on with it !
Iain1962 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 You've never had it so good eh? That was the slogan for a while because of course when a business doesn't need to make a profit and invest in the future it can just spend away...and then eventually because of others innovation everyone ends up out of a job. This is the fallacy of "social policy" it ends up destroying the people it is supposed to help.
Iain1962 9 months ago
@Iain1962 The NHS should never be "owned." You just don't get it, do you? YOU AND I AND EVERYONE IN THIS COUNTRY owns the NHS...
I don't give a shit about making a profit from healthcare - to a Briton at least, it's a fundamental human right, and it was from the moment Bevan opened it. Maybe we should privatise the police of the armed forces because they protect us? The Fire Brigade? The schools? Let THEM make a profit, huh?
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 I get it very well I have lived all over Europe and seen many healthcare systems my mum still lives in the UK, fucking shite, she has to wait a year to see somebody and told if she goes private, no more NHS consultation for you, I live in Holland it's 5 times better here and not nationalised, I used to live in France it's 50 times better there and not nationalised.
Iain1962 9 months ago
@Iain1962 What are you basing this on? How is it better, please expand?
Now, I don't know exactly what your mother is going through; I don't even know if you're telling the truth, but it's not as if privatisation is going to bring down waiting times. And it's simply not true that if you go private you're cut off from the NHS. My sister went private to have an operation on her gums.
I have an American friend who used to be against the NHS. A few months of living here and NOT ANY MORE!
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
Well the US system is bad too because of too much litigation and conivance between all the facets insurance drug companies and etc, but that has also been facilited by govt collusion. Of course if you are on the receiving end of some nice treatment for this or that from the NHS and you don't see a bill it seems wonderful and you do pay by increased taxes and NI, it all has to be paid for somehow, andt what could be there instead if there really was a free market.
Iain1962 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 However we do send patients from the UK to the US for treatment you know those campaigns you see to raise money, because they do have private hospitals which are excellent. I don't see many (any) cases of US patients being sent to the UK because of the excellence of the NHS.
Iain1962 9 months ago
@Iain1962 Well, I've never heard of sending patients to the USA, but it's probably for really serious or wacky cases; in cases like this, people are often sent to the experts in central Europe or in the US. it's not just confined to the UK, other countries do it too.
But I have heard of a man who had to pay $27,000 for treatment in the US, and hopped on a plane over here to get it for free (it's ok, he was a British citizen).
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 Yeah I heard that story, he broke his arm in the US or something and his insurance company worked out is was cheaper to fly him to the UK so they could have the British taxpayer pay for it.
Iain1962 9 months ago
Yes private schools are better. If more schools were private then people could send their children where they wanted instead of having to go by postcode...Maybe their children want to focus on drama or music or maths so they could pick the school, Government indeed should look after the armed forces for defence, and Fire-brigade used to be volunteer largely before it was institutionalised and did fine before, the chief in Scotland complains H&S regulations stop them saving lives !
Iain1962 9 months ago
@Iain1962 you really are a hardcore right-winger, aren't you?
One thing is for certain: the schools should never go private. Schools, not governments, set down their entry criteria. Most schools measure from Postcodes, that's all. People can still pick their schools; I remember doing it. Postcodes are no more related to nationalisation than faith preferences for faith schools.
The council will only intervene if you aren't allocated a space.
Nothing to do with central government.
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 Not a right winger, I believe in freedom and personal responsability, who is the government? Us! So why is it that a chap with a form and a clipboard knows what's best for me.
BBC website
news/10134139
Guardian website
education/2008/may/23/schooladmissions.schools1
Iain1962 9 months ago
@Iain1962 Even with completely private schools, there are a limited number of spaces in each school; you can't just go to whatever school you like. They have the 11+ exam for promising students. If you pass this, then you're released to apply for any school in the country.
And in case you hadn't noticed, schools really are allowed to do their own thing, that's why they have OFSTED.
Trust me, I remember applying for secondary school as clear as day.
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 Well I actually went to a private school one of the best in Scotland actually but they had a lot of students who also went for free because of donations to a fund from Former pupils and back when I went it wasn't expensive compared to today and your postcode religion or colour was irrelevant.
And the eleven plus disappeared in the 70's.
Iain1962 9 months ago
@Iain1962 No, they have an equivalent of the 11+ now, I don't know what it's called, but it does exist.
Colour has nothing to do with how schools choose people, but faith schools certainly have a criteria. And yes, I do know that Private Schools have a fund for promising students; I know someone that got into Merchant Taylors on it.
But it's just silly and implausible to suggest that the ENTIRE school system should be nationalised. It wouldn't work; there's millions of kids to find schools for.
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 Well in any market if there are millions of customers, there will be plenty of suppliers, some will be good and some bad, just think about mobile phones, do you think if the govt had decided to run the mobile phone industry when it started up in earnest about 15 years ago, prices would have fallen nd now your mobile phone is about as powerfull as a computer, no I don't think so we would still have big clunky slow expensive phones.
Iain1962 9 months ago
@Iain1962 come off it, mate, I can understand the NHS, but the schools is just implausible. It would never work.
Even the US has state schools, and their political system consists of two parties; right wing and even further right wing.
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 No I'm not suggesting there shouldn't be a sort of NHS or state school or firebrigade or anything, but what has happened is that it has become overbearingly oppressive, these state run institutions should be a safety net to pick up the slack, not the norm. Like unemployment benefit, help people get back on their feet but don't give them the opportunity to lie about and be taken care of forever at the taxpayers expense.
Iain1962 9 months ago
@Iain1962 I have to agree with you there. Although I think that the state itself should become more efficient, I have to say that the dole system is absolutely shite.
My father is a hardworking man, an architect, and when the recession came, his practice went bankrupt. He got I think only two weeks of unemployment benefit, and then he was on his own. He can't find a permanent job in architecture, and he's resorted to working from home, although he's had quite a bit of work recently (thank God).
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 Well you can't have an efficient state system if they are trying to run businesses, this is the whole point, you have to a vision and long term plan as well as a get through the next three months plan, I am sorry for your dad, if the world was run differently he could have found another or started his own business preety fast, alas they want us working ofr big companies.
Iain1962 9 months ago
@Iain1962 It's just so unfair that extremists like Anjem Choudary get £25,000 a year on benefits, but hardworking normal people get screwed over. It's just not what the benefits system was set up for in the first place.
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 Yes exactly and things like single mother benefit, fatastic idea but put it out there , and over time sa certain type of girl is going to say well if I'm a single mother I get all this dosh... so then you have kids who are neglected because the mother only had him for the benefits so you need social workers and the cycle progresses to all sorts of other problems. I hate all this nanny stuff.
Iain1962 9 months ago
@Iain1962 yeah, but how many people actually do that? You see it in the newspapers, but I just can't imagine anyone stooping to that level - actually getting pregnant in order to get benefits.
And in the same way, we can't really go back to the Victorian era, having mothers and children living on the streets. Even if they do it intentionally, it still wouldn't be right to kick them out on the streets.
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 Of course they do, it's rife, benefit fraud is massive, there are even websites telling you what the best scams are, google it.
I believe the best way to help people is stop all this bureacracy, cut the taxes, leave more money in the hands of the people and then jobs will follow, it is much more satisfying working for a living than getting a dole cheque, and a dole cheque has no future posibilites, promotion a new job because a customer likes your style etc...
Iain1962 9 months ago
@Iain1962 I agree with you there, as well. My father says that he feels utterly ashamed being unemployed.
But at the end of the day, I do think that keeping the NHS under the control of the state is the best thing to do, and I seriously hope that the LibDems don't sell what's left of their souls to the Tories, and vote down the Lansley's bill.
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago 2
@Iain1962 And again, Health and Safety has nothing to do with the state. People in private buisnesses take it to extremes as well.
I don't know the ins and outs of Health and Safety, so I don't really have an opinion on whether or not it should stay, but I do know that privatising the Fire Brigade won't make any difference on that front.
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 Health and safety has everything to do with the state they impose the rules on people who want to save lives, force companies to take ridiculous safety precautions, for fucks sake the kids on Blue Peter can''t do an experiment without wearing safety goggles and gloves !
Iain1962 9 months ago
@Iain1962 You say "impose" but really it's no different from any other laws. I'm all up for a review of Health and Safety law, but I don't think that we should get rid of it all together. There have to be SOME rules about what you can and can't get your employees to do.
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 Why? There should be laws that you can't force somebody to do something against their will but fiiremen being told they can't go and try to save people's lives because it's too dangerous? What next? Soldiers not allowed to fight because they might twist an ankle?
Iain1962 9 months ago
@Iain1962 NO, as I said, I'm fully in favour of reviewing Health and Safety, especially in regard to the instance that you mentioned. I think that's just stupid; soldiers are soldiers because they want to fight, and it involves risking your life. In the same way, firemen become firemen because they want to save lives, and risking your life is part of that as well.
But as I said, I don't think it would be right to completely get rid of H&S.
BasilFawlty4444 9 months ago
@lickmyfart its already starting. Some NHS services are being sold off to private companies. Its still free, but its provided by the private sector (though funded by government). The Conservatives are helping their friends in big business and the American health giants to take over much of the NHS.
JayEey 1 year ago
@JayEey
True, the Conservatives is basically a way in which big business can take over the world. We've voted in people whose primary goal as government is to break up the state and sell it off to big companies and pocket a large sum of money along the way.
alex471996 1 year ago
NHS are nothing but a bunch of low life terrorists who murder people just so they can have a laugh and a chat,fuck the nhs they all should be shote on site
cj4680 1 year ago
Cool! Short and very interesting!
TheViagrasenzaricett 1 year ago
JUST ""WHO"" is running this country then ?? Certainly not us Brits Muslim staff escape NHS hygiene rule
Muslim doctors and nurses are to be allowed to opt out of strict hygiene rules introduced by the NHS to restrict the spread of hospital superbugs
cpnstav 1 year ago
@cpnstav There are many great British journalists with a view as to who is running the country. The internet makes their works widely available. There's no need to throw the Daily Mail card M into the mix.
AndyLuke 1 year ago
There were riots under Thatcher
Is it ever right to Riot ??
Well if they try take the NHS off the people or under fund it until it cant cope I think yes.
Watch out Cameron's about and he's lying through his teeth.
greatwhitepoet 1 year ago
the NHS must go!!
well at least give me the choice not to have to belong to sutch a rubish health system!!
1820ecape 1 year ago
@1820ecape YOU PIG
rday18 1 year ago
@1820ecape We already have that choice. Private healthcare exists in the U.K which (or so I've heard) is paid for by the NHS.
swordhunter12 1 year ago
this is what thatcher would call socialism people
iky00001 1 year ago
@tincoffin
There are many things Marr omits from his analysis; the media in general are like that. History and news is filtered by the perceptions and ideologies of those writing it. Like you said he is part of an elite holding those same elite values.
4333davidb 2 years ago
Theres a lot to criticise regarding the NHS. If only we could actually effect changes from these criticisms. When I think of the alternatives to socialised health care or even simply allowing privatisation of certain provisions within the service (which has been going on) Id much rather it be under public ownership as flawed as that may be. Public ownership ran under democratic lines as part of a functioning democracy I think would be far more efficient and effective.
4333davidb 2 years ago
@4333davidb I'd be interested to know how the model you'd like to see varies from the original model. It sounds more like the original model than the current one. (Both have had their problems.) I also wonder what do you mean by 'democratic lines'. These things do need management, cost money, etc.--so what is it you'd like to see? Not that I'm taking any stance against anyone here. I'm a socialist.
RussMoxham 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
the nhs has turned out to be a 60 year mistake. it once was good - when you had matrons on wards but there are too many people who have come to england that have acute ailments from their poor countrys that now cost the nhs relentlessly.
thus, people like me - white, london born, straight male has to wait 2 weeks to merely see a doctor for 2 minutes.
Good deterrant, all i need is a repeat subscription but now won't bother
they put obstruction in the way so people don't bother
sweetypie000 2 years ago
the nhs has turned out to be a 60 year mistake. it once was good - when you had matrons on wards but there are too many people who have come to england that have acute ailments from their poor countrys that now cost the nhs relentlessly.
thus, people like me - white, london born, straight male has to wait 2 weeks to merely see a doctor for 2 minutes.
Good deterrant, i can't afford to take the time off work - this is what the governmentdoes - puts obstruction in the way so people don't bother
sweetypie000 2 years ago
It should also be recognised that people originally from the UK also abuse it.
Unfortunately Daily Mail (and other newspapers of such quality journalism) readers seem to think that immigration has crippled the NHS, whereas if it wasnt for mass immigration in the 1950s and 1960s the NHS would not of been able to run.
You also might want to recognise that the increasing medicines and technology that keep more and more people alive has driven up costs.
sgu02nsc 2 years ago
@sgu02nsc oringinal people from the UK 'abusing' it are ok imo, afterall they've paid for it
it is widely known people come to england (on a 'holiday') with the sole intention of getting hospital treatment for an ailment they already have and mysteriously get sick whilst here and are treated. I reiterate that there are people from abroad that have come to live here that bring all kinds of deformaty and disease that costs the nhs way too much
no argument about it, this is a widely known fact
sweetypie000 2 years ago
Just so you know: stating fact doesnt make it a fact. Youre taking the simple argument that people coming over here has done nothing but cause problems. There are many people from the UK who have not paid for the NHS (you know, the type that havent worked a day in their lives) and there are people who have come over here and paid tax from day one. Who deserves it more out of those two groups?
sgu02nsc 2 years ago
@sgu02nsc the people native to this country for whom the nhs was originally setup with the understanding that deductions would pay for a fair and free service
the people that havenn.t worked are likely to have issues that means they can't
sweetypie000 2 years ago
@sgu02nsc Actually that's an incorrect statement, everyone pays taxes - even if they don't pay income tax. Council tax, fuel duty, alcohol and cigarette duties and of course VAT. If you've spent just £1 in this country, you have paid some form of taxation. Of course we don't all contribute the same amount in taxation, but there's no way to fix that we all pay the exact same amount......so we cannot justify saying that those who pay more should get more. Best to keep a universal and fair system.
AeneasInvictus 1 year ago
@AeneasInvictus I totally agree. I only used the argument I did to counteract the small minded opinion of ‘everyone comes over here to live off our benefit system’ as a general xenophobic/racist justification. My retaliation to that opinion is if that is their justification then why do they prefer ‘native’ people who don’t work to immigrants that do?
sgu02nsc 1 year ago
@sgu02nsc Ah yes, I guess this teaches me to read an entire discussion before launching into writing a reply!!
AeneasInvictus 1 year ago
if they "helped the NHS to run" and thus got treatment then i wonder why they complain saying the streets were not paved with gold and moan at the english as if we forced them to come here to do the supposed crap jobs the british would (supposedly) not do?
you need to get your idea correct lol
driven up costs ? a prescription is over £7 are you mental ? we pay for it. Those that can't pay wait for the non appearing hospital treatment have had to sell their houses 45,000 this year alone
sweetypie000 2 years ago
A prescription costs £7, how much does the drug cost? How much does current treatment, such as angioplasty, cost?
sgu02nsc 2 years ago
@sgu02nsc don't know but how often are you actually going to need angioplasty ? maybe once ? maybe twice ? maybe never - but you still pay in for it and have no option.
repeat prescriptions still cost £7 a pop, everytime
sweetypie000 2 years ago
Healthcare in the U.S. consumes so much money even the business community began to see it needed rethinking hence the proposals we see now under Obama (these hardly revolutionary changes would not even be on the table if it were not for the business interests behind them). I hope changes in the U.S. will help those working families who are regularly broke and disenfranchised by the system. The suffering this must cause is unthinkable to me. So I thank Nye Bevan and the movement for the NHS.
4333davidb 2 years ago 3
The NHS is a remarkable achievement and has endured attacks since its seeds as an idea and a movement amongst the working class. It has been built within a capitalist framework and so obviously suffers setbacks and from bureaucracy. It could be ran far more effectively along democratic lines if we in the UK had a functioning democracy. Most people in the UK would rather build hospitals and schools with our tax money but our imperialist masters prefer weapons and to subsidise the super wealthy.
4333davidb 2 years ago
@4333davidb
Why does Marr choose not to talk about the real revolution in health care . the mass production of antibiotics brought about in 1940 -41 . This was largely a British achievement . Yet how many people reading this could name a single person responsible for this ? why is this ?Why is it seen as a political achievement? Answer: because of people like Marr - the metropolitan elite.
tincoffin 2 years ago
@tincoffin Well, not to worry, I've seen at least one whole BBC documentary on that topic (and quite an entertaining one at that). I'm not sure you can really criticise a programme like this for what it excludes as much as for what it includes. For one thing, who knows what got edited out?
RussMoxham 1 year ago
@RussMoxham Could you tell me the name of that documentary? I do not see why the BBC has to be so relentlessly middle of the road .Why can it never allow a slightly contrarian viewpoint ? The BBC represents the views of the political class that is all .
tincoffin 1 year ago
If the government had nationalised the car industry around 1925 when cars were beginning to be mass-produced we would thank the government for our Trabant . In 1940 medicine from spectacles to drugs began to be mass-produced ....
Andrew Marr has not thought since he left university like the rest of the metropolitan elite.
tincoffin 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why do some UK residents think that the NHS is 'Free'? Just because you don't get to see the bill? Just because you don't have to hand over cash? The NHS is the most expensive and wasteful health service in the world. Check out the amount doled out by the poor uk tax payer per patient per year for the crap service. And still some Brits thinks it's 'Free'. I repeat, 'It's the most expensive health system in the wolrd!' - and it's crap! I just watched my dad die in NHS squalor.
123Scears123 2 years ago
The problem with the NHS is that it exists. It is an abberation, a relic of Soviet socialism that has no place in a modern, democratic country. We should have the right to choose our own healthcare. Socialists claim to deplore monopoly in the private sector, yet turn a blind eye to public sector monopoly. It proves a fundamental axiom socialism; it is a hypocritical disgrace.
Mickmars90 2 years ago
What are you talking about?
We DO have the right to choose healthcare. You can use the NHS or you can pay to go private. Without the NHS you'd only have the choice to go private or not receive any care at all. We have MORE choice than most Americans.
JayEey 2 years ago
I can't opt out of National Insurance contributions or general taxation. That is called coercion
Mickmars90 2 years ago 2
Under the US system you would have to pay MORE taxes to pay for the few programs they do have and also the greater numbers of people turning up at the ER with severe conditions. Conditions which would be nipped in the bud when they're cheaper, on the NHS.
JayEey 2 years ago
No you don't. You just pay your insurance and you then receive some of the best medical care in the world, with no NICE death panels who ascribe monetary value to a patient's life.
Mickmars90 2 years ago
And what if you can't afford insurance? Or what if they refuse to cover you? Or they dispute your claim?
Then what do you do? Die?
NICE death panels? Ah so you're not british at all then. You nearly had me hoodwinked. You're just another uninformed far-right american fruitcake.
JayEey 2 years ago
If people don't have 80% of their income stolen by the government through income taxation, and then have what they consume taxed also, they can afford it. But the government takes our money in the stupid belief that it can spend our money better than we can.
Yes, I am British. I live in Doncaster. NICE decides the value of patients' lives. It recently rejected a drug because it was too expensive.
I'd rather be a right winger as opposed to a statist, fascist bastard.
Mickmars90 2 years ago
@Mickmars90 Because we live in a democracy the government is "we" if "we" the people decide to vote for and keep voting for a party that supports the NHS, which of course all major parties do then "we" give permission for our governments to tax us to support that which "we" vote for ,this is not theft.Not sure were you get the 80% tax bit from.Normally from a societies point of view Governments do spend better than the individual,in the sense of maintaining a society that is worth living in.
davijeph 2 years ago
You think it is a democracy when Labour has a filibuster proof majority when it secured 35% of the vote on a 61% turnout? Is that democracy toyou?
Mickmars90 2 years ago
Mickmars90 It is if that's how "we" choose to use or indeed not use democracy .Your alternative would be? I would support the idea of "we" having some kind of proportional representation system and both of us being in favour of democracy can we agree that in a modern democratic system we should certainly get rid of the house of lords and indeed the unelected monarchy Or does your love of democracy only hold only if an ultra right wing party is in power.
davijeph 2 years ago
A system of direct democracy based on local elected senates. We don't need a massive centralised system of government. The internet allows direct democracy. We should have a libertarian constitution which allows freedom of thought and action within the confines of the Rule ofL Law.
I have no love of representative democracy. I am a monarchist because it is privately owned government rather than publically owned. I'd get rid of parliament altogether, and keep the building as a museum
Mickmars90 2 years ago
@Mickmars90 Sorry I do not mean to be rude but you are a strange man.Direct democracy based on local elected senates so no Britain,England ,Scotland or Wales just a collection of little independent but totality uneconomic ,defenceless statelets Monarchy is privately owned government?Translates as dictatorship .I can only assume I am talking to Prince Charles that would account for the strangeness. Please feel free to reply but my bit ends here.
davijeph 2 years ago
The monarch would be the head of state. Monarchy is apolitical. Presidents do not enjoy universal support, whereas monarchies can because they represent a whole smorgasbord of views. Nations would still exist of course... but we don't need a centralised parliament anymore because the internet allows direct democracy. We can vote online, we could draft our own bills for debate through wikipedia. Instead of twisting what I have said, learn to fucking read.
Mickmars90 2 years ago
@Mickmars90 Sorry,but you write the most utter bollocks .Not only are you a retard but you are foul mouth twat with it. Everything you have written is just so much crap.Nice knowing you.
davijeph 2 years ago
So this is what you do when you are crushed in a debate? You insult your master and commander? How typical of those too stupid to understand a rational and reasoned argument. You may have thought it nice knowing me, but it wasn't nice knowing you. You sir, are a skidmark on the underpants of Britain, one that copious amounts of bleach cannot remove.
Mickmars90 2 years ago
@Mickmars90 Now ya just being cruel.
davijeph 2 years ago
No, just sardonic and perspicacious. I possess a great deal of alacrity, but sometimes I descend into prolixity, but I've never lost a debate. I don't remember an opponent being as easy to defeat as you however. You didn't even answer my points, you tried to shoot the messenger instead of the message, and you're a crap shot.
Mickmars90 2 years ago
@Mickmars90 Now you're just being supercilious.
davijeph 2 years ago
I think the word is pompous... I am also pedantic in the extreme, but with some justification. I can project an atmosphere of hauteur, but false modest is inimcal to my personality.
Mickmars90 2 years ago
@Mickmars90 No the word is supercilious,followed by 'twat".
davijeph 2 years ago
But I'm not a pregnant goldfish. You really need to brush up on your general knowledge. One is amazed at your lack of intelligence. Are you a heavy drinker or do you have a naturally occuring low number of brain cells? Are you parents proud of producing and then raising such a stupid child? It reminds me of the Horace quote; ''The mountains will be in labour, and will give birth to a ridiculous mouse.'' You started off promisingly, but you are incredibly banal and naive
Mickmars90 2 years ago
@Mickmars90 No the word is definitely supercilious +twat
davijeph 2 years ago
You could always live in another country where they do not offer National Insurance.
PiccoloNo92 2 years ago
Why should Ieave my country when I can argue for what I believe in? The Eastern European dissidents didn't leave, they stood up for an idea whose time had come, and they fought and died for it.
Mickmars90 2 years ago
My last comment may have come across as too strong. I'm not saying you should leave, that would be ridiculous as that is nit my place. But you clearly take umbridge to a system you can't do an aweful lot about otherwise apart from moving somewhere you don't need to pay tax for it. But as you have stated you have your beliefs and I have mine, which is great; one of the many benefits people in the Soviet Union didn't have.
PiccoloNo92 2 years ago
@PiccoloNo92 No I could not ! I could not live in a developed country without paying for most of my health care through taxes. In US nearly 50% is paid through taxes even before Obamacare. Healthcare can never operate like a commercial market Why ? Essentially because people will not pay for illnesses they do not have.
tincoffin 2 years ago
Comment removed
123Scears123 2 years ago
Britain has both private and state healthcare so everyone gets whats best for them.
warriorprince1010 2 years ago
The NHS is rightly something that many of us in the UK are proud of. When we look into the data a little more there are cracks appearing, huge investments in a system that is struggling with a population that is not living a health lifestyle is not sustainable. How can we safeguard this amazing resource? My opinion is that we ought to begin to be proactive. Let's tell the NHS about our experiences! Use my channel to leave your feedback, good or bad and I'll get the message to the NHS.
MysteryPatient 2 years ago
How are we better than the Communist North Koreans or Chinese when we have this totalitarian socialist monstrosity.
soyinka101 2 years ago
The NHS works, that's why we have a higher survival rate for children and lower death rates than the US. Check gapminder for accurate stats on healthcare
sharkblubber 2 years ago 3
The NHS is brilliant...without it I wouldnt be alive today!
pardeepsinghk 2 years ago 3
The NHS is an imigrant Magnet.
xRxixcxhxtxexrx 2 years ago
Immigrants are being encouraged to come to the country because they are more likely to follow orders of the state like....take your swine flu vaccine and dont ask whats in it, or if you can spread the virus to others!
HumanSayNo 2 years ago
Canada had Tommy Douglas. We had Nye Bevan. It's a shame America doesn't have anyone with the courage to stand up for universal public healthcare, and accept nothing short of it.
DarthCipient 2 years ago
that's because we aren't Nazis
gopconservative78 2 years ago
gopconservative78- No, my friend. It's because you've got shit for brains.
DarthCipient 2 years ago
How does that make us Nazis? Because we have a health system that helps everyone who needs it, not just those blessed few who can? Because the evils of capitalism are so enshrined into your values that you'll even put a price on human life? You'd just rather let people die because you don't want to pay a little extra in taxes? America is apparently a democracy, I'm not convinced.
Aneurin 'Nye' Bevan my fellow countrymen R.I.P. A true hero of 20th century British Politics.
PiccoloNo92 2 years ago
Why do you believe capitalism is evil? Do you have a mobile phone? Then you're a lackey of those evil capitalistic pigs who observe the rules of the market by operating on supply and demand. You demand a product, and the market supplies it for you. You use the internet. A big business provides the internet for you. You pay and they supply. If you're going to criticse capitalism then don't be a fucking hypocrite it about it.
America isn't a democracy. It's a constitutional republic
Mickmars90 2 years ago
I'm not a hypocrite because I don't deny that I'm buying into the system even if I do believe it evil. True I could choose not to buy a mobile but it doesn't make a blind bit of difference because if I'm not there to fufil the demand someone else will and as the system is so entrenched if supply and demand were to stop the economy would break down and that would do no one any good.
PiccoloNo92 2 years ago
That's a non-sequitur. Supply and demand is there in any form of economy, even a controlled one, its just controlled by the state. But you are profitting from the 'exploitation' of labour by purchasing the products they produce. That is hypocritical, no matter how you dress it up.
Mickmars90 2 years ago
Nazi idea BOLLOCKS! , look learn and listen you ignorant guy. You work pay a few % (alot less than U.S. Insurance) then even 10 years later you are ill, and you get treated free hows that Nazi dumbo, that's equality and fairness.
wind4watts 2 years ago 2
who where the first people to introduce fluoride to their drinking water were?
I'll make it easy for you. The Russians and the Nazi's used it in their prisoner of war camps during WWII to keep the prisoners docile.
Where did the Nazi scientists end up after their short spells in jail?
I'll let you research that one yourself, just incase you call my answer bollocks!
HumanSayNo 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the NHS....a Nazi idea
gopconservative78 2 years ago
You are a fuckin Nazi.......!!!!!!!!!!
SoziLiberAL 2 years ago
People who say anything against the NHS are evil, they should not be allowed to voice their opinion. Socialism forever in the UK.
krazykeys88 2 years ago
The US should have a publicly funded healthcare system, if you go ill in America and don't have cover your dead doctors will refuse to treat a person and throw them out of the hospital. 10 million Americans don't have cover its disgusting.
if you get shoot in the US and don't have cover you bleed to death outside the hospital, and I'm not joking.
jellyboy123 2 years ago 25
i think its actually more like 30 million without healthcare, in 1909 the UK made sure its working population had healthcare, i dont know if america can be considered developed in this sense
catchthewave91 2 years ago 7
Comment removed
wind4watts 2 years ago
proud to belong to this society with our NHS
cray32 2 years ago 35
the NHS....a NAZI idea
gopconservative78 2 years ago
this is absolutely true who dares attack this man?
HumanSayNo 2 years ago
@gopconservative78 Retarded inbred cunt,
tom1984uk 1 year ago
NHS is not perfect, but it is Fair.
Private medicine puts profit before care. Did you know that whenever a US Medical Insurance company has to pay out, they consider it a 'loss'?
I would much prefer to trust my democratic government than a money hungry company to pay for my healthcare.
Where is the ethics? where is the so called civilised people?... oh yeah, they are all in the UK, where the average life span is still longer than the US. We must be doing something right i guess...
:-)
dauntless111 2 years ago
people in Britian DIE wiaitng for critical surgery are you aware that your socialist system created rationign? and shrtages of doctors..do a little history in the 1960s and 70s 10 000 s of doctors left britian
for canada and australain to escape your horrible socialist mess less doctors to care for you..there are disaadvatages for a for profit system but many of your best doctors came here to the USA and now practice..they no longer serve you but us.
so how about that?
TheWilliamcale 2 years ago
People in the USA DIE waiting for surgery. Are you aware that your private system creates profit from pain? Shortages of doctors, do a little history, in the 60s and 70s many people left the UK for many jobs.
Canada and Australia did'nt escape our socialist mess they have free Health care. Idiot.
There are disadvantages to free healthcare and many doctors go to the USA. They no longer serve us because they want to make more money for their family treating those who CAN pay.
So how about that?
dauntless111 2 years ago
TheWilliamcale 2 years ago
Medicare is a social insurance program administered by the United States government, providing health insurance coverage to people who are aged 65 and over, or who meet other special criteria. Medicare operates as a single-payer health care system.[1] The Social Security Act of 1965 was passed by Congress in late-spring of 1965 and signed into law on July 30, 1965, by President Lyndon B. Johnson as amendments to Social Security legislation
it not like people are left with nothing
TheWilliamcale 2 years ago
Medicaid is the United States health program for eligible individuals and families with low incomes and resources. It is a means-tested program that is jointly funded by the states and federal government, and is managed by the states.[1] Among the groups of people served by Medicaid are certain eligible U.S. citizens and resident aliens, including low-income adults and their children, and people with certain disabilities. Poverty alone does not necessarily qualify an individual for Medicaid.
TheWilliamcale 2 years ago
It is estimated that approximately 60 percent of poor Americans are not covered by Medicaid.there in lies the problem see? if we could gradually expand medicare and medicaid programs to cover all poor people and the uninsured we could go a long way to making care universal, now that is expensive but i think it would be much preferable to a total governement take over of what is basically a very high quality system
TheWilliamcale 2 years ago
doctors in canada and austarlia make more money and there system is different than yours
TheWilliamcale 2 years ago
Canada's healthcare system is very similar to that of the UK
ycfc 2 years ago
no!
TheWilliamcale 2 years ago
Care to elaborate?
ycfc 2 years ago
The Canadian system has been 69-75% publicly funded,though most services are delivered by private providers, including physicians (although they may derive their revenue primarily from government billings). Although some doctors work on a purely fee-for-service basis (usually family physicians), some family physicians and most specialists are paid through a combination of fee-for-service and fixed contracts with hospitals or health service management organizations.
TheWilliamcale 2 years ago
The NHS provides the majority of healthcare in England, including primary care, in-patient care, long-term healthcare, ophthalmology and dentistry. The National Health Service Act 1946 came into effect on 5 July 1948. Private health care has continued parallel to the NHS, paid for largely by private insurance: it is used by about 8% of the population, generally as an add-on to NHS services.
TheWilliamcale 2 years ago
Recently the private sector has been increasingly used to increase NHS capacity. According to the BMA a large proportion of the public oppose this move
TheWilliamcale 2 years ago
Canada the insurance is govenrment funded and payments go through the
single payer system HOWEVER most care providers remain private as do most doctors,your system is completely government run and your popualtion resists even farming out service to private companies as Canada has ALWAYS DONE, actually despite its drawbacks the Cnadians system is good, many americans thins its socialized but not really thats just right wing propoganda
i actually think there are many advantages to the Canadian
TheWilliamcale 2 years ago
system when i lived there in the 70s everyone loved it
it does have certain serious drawbacks in rationing and waiting periods but it does a marvelous job for routine care and prevention.
your system is totally state run totally socialist and total rubbish Blair had some very good ideas for preserving universal coverage but improvong quality by privatizing some service providers but keeping it basically free of charge other than taxes, but you lefties torpedoed a good idea
TheWilliamcale 2 years ago
Canada spent 10.0%. In 2006, 70% of health care spending in Canada was financed by government, versus 46% in the United States. Total government spending per capita in the U.S. on health care was 23% higher than Canadian government spending, and U.S. government expenditure on health care was just under 83% of total Canadian spending (public and private
TheWilliamcale 2 years ago
Life expectancy is longer in Canada, and its infant mortality rate is lower than that of the U.S., but there is debate about the underlying causes of these differences.
TheWilliamcale 2 years ago
One commonly cited comparison, the World Health Organization's ratings of "overall health service performance", published in 2000, which used a "composite measure of achievement in the level of health, the distribution of health, the level of responsiveness and fairness of financial contribution", ranked Canada 30th and the U.S. 37th among 191 member nations.
TheWilliamcale 2 years ago
This study rated the US "responsiveness", or quality of service for individuals receiving treatment, as 1st, compared with 7th for Canada. The average life expectancy for Canada was 80.34 years compared with U.S. at 78.6 years
TheWilliamcale 2 years ago