The Downside Of British Health Care

Most British citizens are proud of their health-care system that's been in place for 60 years. But, as Charlie D'Agata reports, some say the system has failed them with tragic consequences.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• CBS
• News
• London
• Charlie
• D'Agata
• Health
• Care

[theessenceable]

If you actually look at this, it's criticising foundation trusts and staff incompetency in an isolated case, and the Brits do not for once say that they wish for the NHS to be eroded. It's all US scaremongering spin. If you had ever lived a day never worrying about access to healthcare for you or your family, then you'd realise what Obama's doing is revolutionary and will improve the live s of millions of americans. Hands off the NHS motherfuckers & wake up to reality.

[TheZachary86]

There's a difference between healthcare system and the healthcare facilities. the system is good. sadly the facility was not run properly. it is a management problem in that facility, not the problem of the system.

[maartenMLMS]

@armeg35 The NHS is underfunded, but the system is still more efficient because no money needs to be paid to share holders. It is also completely in the interest of human well being and not money making.

[maartenMLMS]

That's one hospital. The NHS is fucking brilliant.

[MaximilianHorizon]

@armeg35

"you are forcing people who possibly may not want the service to pay for it"

sorry if we dont wanna people die on the streets only cause they dont have some piece of paper.

[armeg35]

@MaximilianHorizon That doesn't change the fact that the system is in debt, and that you are forcing people who possibly may not want the service to pay for it. Personally I would rather have the option to pay into what ever health insurance I want, vs being forced to pay into a government run, inefficient system.

[MaximilianHorizon]

@armeg35

from 2005 we still have EVERY SINGLE citizen to be able to receive the healthcare that he need.

NO EXCEPTION.

it's still cost half of usa system and still cover 100% of the population.

[armeg35]

@MaximilianHorizon Your national health service has been running in the red since 2005, and hasn't shown any sign of getting better. The problem with the idea that "there are still private healthcare if you wanna pay to give something more or different." is that you are already being forced to pay for the NHS through your taxes. This is involuntarily forcing people to purchase a service.

[MaximilianHorizon]

@armeg35

"they go into debt extremely fast."

false, for each person we spend half and we cover 100% of the population.

and btw there are still private healthcare if you wanna pay to give something more or different.

our LAWS says that they MUST use the best healthsystem avaible,

the politicians can cut social services(like they can cut police or fireman),

but they must always be able to treat anyone(otherwise the judge will sue the state)

[armeg35]

@MaximilianHorizon I never said anything about taxes bro. The original poster isn't me. Unlike you guys though, I like to keep my money. Anyways, the problem about national healthcare systems that I have brought up already is that they go into debt extremely fast. Look at the UK's national system it has a defecit of 7 billion euros. What I'm saying is the reason this system works in Europe is because you guys have (not really, but neither do we) money to give the system when it goes into debt

[MaximilianHorizon]

@armeg35 have you ever been in europe? -.-

really... 50 millions people never seen a doctor in the usa... you are 300 millions people in usa.

we pay more taxes? yes we do, but what the money are there for if not for our heath system?!?!?