Sunak and his quiet trip to USA

Dickens

PS... Norway spends more per person on healthcare than any other country in the world.

Not according to the OECD. It comes third, after the US and Switzerland.

People are slightly missing my point. What I am trying to point out is that all these lauded health services spend more per head (how ever it is financed) than does the UK.

Yes we gets much more bang for our bucks in the U.K.

Why lose it? where is the sense?

We live in France. We pay just over 200 euros per month for our health care top up. If we need blood tests we turn up at our local health centre in the morning. The results arrive by email the next day. Most towns have xray facilities where you can also get a mammogram.

There are plenty of physios and osteos should you need one and you can make an appointment on line.

I've recently seen a chest consultant at a teaching hospital and he has diagnosed a new treatment for my asthma which involves regular injections. I picked up the first month's supply and the cost is over 1300 euros per month. Luckily he has designated me as having a long term illness so our health insurance doesn't have to pay for it.

So, the system costs us money but it is generally very efficient.

The Tories have never liked the NHS. Apparently Thatcher wanted to get rid of it but was talked out of it by her advisers on the grounds that the public wouldn't stand for it.

People have saying how good the American system is. If you can afford it. A friend in America fell down some concrete stairs and was severely injured. His treatment is costing thousands. Luckily his wife works for one of the large insurance providers and he is covered by her policy. He would not be able to afford to pay for his health costs himself.

When we were in New York a few years ago, staying in Harlem, we were surprised at the number of invalids that we saw and concluded that their conditions had worsened because they couldn't afford to pay for treatment.

Does it not occur to people that we could enjoy deluxe services if the government were prepared to invest the money to pay for them?

Yes. But Tory ideology is 'small State'. A big bar to such an investment. And their resounding victory at the election implies that this is what people agree with - even those who would benefit personally from such an investment.

Margaret Thatcher paved the way, and it's been followed since.

Looking (again) at Norway - a very healthy Capitalist democracy - the government invested their oil wealth and now have a huge (£trillions) sovereign wealth fund, which outweighs its public debt - it doesn't need to borrow money. These reserves have been set aside to benefit the future economy - and its citizens... to invest in new technologies (for when the oil 'runs out'); and a portion has been set aside to fund social, health and welfare programmes.

We could have done the same - but the Thatcher government chose not to... and I'm not going to give a litany of where the money went, because everyone on here probably knows. It got spent. We did not invest. And under a Tory government, we will not invest in public services.

Under our FPTP system, we got the government the people wanted. Unless we change that, we will forever be voting for Tweedledum or Tweedledee... for eternity.

MaizieD

Dickens

PS... Norway spends more per person on healthcare than any other country in the world.

Not according to the OECD. It comes third, after the US and Switzerland.

People are slightly missing my point. What I am trying to point out is that all these lauded health services spend more per head (how ever it is financed) than does the UK.

... I will look that up - there are a number of sources for the information, but I forgot to look at the OECD!

Here you are, Dickens

data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm

Yes. But Tory ideology is 'small State'. A big bar to such an investment. And their resounding victory at the election implies that this is what people agree with - even those who would benefit personally from such an investment.

Do you think so? That people who voted tory in the 2019 GE agree with reducing investment in the NHS?

I thought it was to 'get Brexit done', with no other considerations..

(and it wasn't a majority of voters...)

MaizieD

Here you are, Dickens

data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm

... thanks for the link - I've actually got their homepage stored on my 'favourites' bar, but didn't look at it.

Yes, I do think so - I do think that getting Brexit "done" was not necessarily the only consideration - although for a swathe of people it obviously was. And I don't believe everyone is enamoured of our NHS. I've heard a considerable number of individuals say that it needs 're-structuring' (or words to that effect) and, on closer examination, they've said that it should be privatised to "run efficiently" or to be "managed properly". These conversations date back prior to Brexit... to the early days of Cameron's "no top-down reorganisation" when the subject became a hot potato again.

And then there were the "anyone-but-Corbyn" voters... so although anyone who wanted to Quit would've probably voted for Johnson, I really think it was a mixed bag.

I thought most people were aware that the Tories are not enthralled with the NHS, including Brexiters - but they voted for them just the same.

... and yes, I'm well aware it wasn't a majority of voters - hence my comment about FPTP. But that also seems to be what people want, too. It's been voiced on here - government by consensus doesn't get things "done". And we're obsessed with getting things "done" - however badly - it seems. God only knows how all the other countries manage to get things done (yet they do) - with all those broad range of opinions, carefully looking at things from different angles that might reflect the view of the people they represent - perish the thought, eh!

^ It's been voiced on here - government by consensus doesn't get things "done". And we're obsessed with getting things "done" - however badly - it seems. God only knows how all the other countries manage to get things done (yet they do) - with all those broad range of opinions, carefully looking at things from different angles that might reflect the view of the people they represent - perish the thought, eh!^

Ironic that such views are held in the face of a government that quite spectacularly hasn't got things done...

(We'll leave to one side their fascist proposed legislation for the moment..)

perhaps we should ask them how it’s done
Perhaps tgey have a more joined up system than us.
Some weeks ago I had an ECG at my surgery.
Sent to hospital ( immediately afterwards) for blood test.
While at hospital got phone call from Dr to go and have another ECG.
When I asked the nurse why she couldn’t look at the ECG I’d had at my surgery 2hrs before she said we haven’t got the technology ? It’s the 21st century !!!!

When will people realise that privatisation means a proportion of the profits go to shareholders? Just look at the water companies to see privatisation in action.

I must be very fortunate to be very grateful for the NHS at the moment. I cannot fault to care I have received following a referral by my optician about a likely TIA ( mini stroke). Within two weeks I was seen by a consultant at The Stroke Clinic and the Eye Hospital. I’ve been prescribed various medications to prevent future strokes and had several hospital visits to rule out other reasons for my sight loss. Only this week I was offered an appointment before Christmas to have a 72 hour heart monitor fitted ( which I refused as my sister is visiting from the US so it’s now booked for the beginning of January) and I had an MRI scan of my head to again look at blood clots and eye problems.

My sister who is visiting from the US is in awe of the care from the NHS and is aware of how much this would have cost her in the US with the various excesses she would pay on top of her insurance for the different procedures I have had.

I just hope that we can continue to fund the NHS so that it can provide this excellent care for years to come.

We can continue to fund the NHS - no problem.

It is the political will we need to vote for.

“ Mr Sunak, the NHS isn’t yours to sell. It belongs to the nation. Perhaps you could ask the nation if it wants to privatise it? After all no-one voted for this, it wasn’t on your manifesto was it? If you’re so fond of referendums why not one for the NHS?”

Whitewavemark2

“ Mr Sunak, the NHS isn’t yours to sell. It belongs to the nation. Perhaps you could ask the nation if it wants to privatise it? After all no-one voted for this, it wasn’t on your manifesto was it? If you’re so fond of referendums why not one for the NHS?”

... not a chance. But you're right, it belongs to us. Isn't around 80% funded from our taxes?

But of course, the NHS would never be sold wholesale - there would be riots. So the Tories will continue to salami-slice the privatisation and we will find more and more services and procedures that are not available unless you pay for them.

I hope everyone who is still planning to vote Tory in the next election is well aware of this, especially as in our age group, we are more likely to need the NHS.

I guess there are those who are financially comfortable enough to pay for private health insurance and think it's a good idea. I am, but I don't think it is.

The problem with private health insurance is the risk - and the risk is that you will develop a disease that is complex and costly, and your insurance will not cover the necessary treatments and procedures which your doctor / consultant thinks are necessary. And then you will be in for protracted discussions, phone calls, letter writing, emailing, to get your insurers to cover the cost. Or simply pay up, out of your own pocket.

I give an example. A friend of mine in the US (now deceased) needed a diagnostic scan - his consultant needed it before deciding on further treatment. But my friend's insurance policy would only cover 1 scan within a set time-period, and he'd already had that. So they refused to pay initially, until weeks later, after a letter written by his consultant and much to-ing and fro-ing... is this really the type of battle you want when you are suffering a serious disease?