The Tories are in sight of their goal aren’t they?

But Maizie, maybe you've hit the nail on the head! Creating extra money for the NHS doesn't end up as profit for private health companies and insurers - that's the point!

You’ve missed one of the barn door options for saving the NHS billions growstuff. Continuing healthcare. I’m not at all saying it should be dispensed with, but some individual care packages in the community cost well over a million pounds per year, to keep one person at home. Is it as drastic and far reaching to stop that and place them in care, as opposed to stopping drug treatments which keep people alive? If there has to be a ceiling, maybe that’s where it should start.

Why does it matter how much a procedure is costing? The money spent on it isn't disappearing down a big black hole, it's going to businesses and individuals and circulating round the economy to help to keep it going.
What would be much more concerning would be if the resources to implement these procedures and packages were in short supply or non existent.

I find it extraordinary that people don't seem to care about money being sucked out of the economy by the rich, who don't use it in the domestic economy, who use it in the financial markets to suck out even more money, or who leave it doing absolutely nothing in tax havens, yet they get very upset at the thought that money is being spent in a useful and productive fashion... then it has to be rationed or withheld...

growstuff

But Maizie, maybe you've hit the nail on the head! Creating extra money for the NHS doesn't end up as profit for private health companies and insurers - that's the point!

Yep, that was my point .

Another question is:

If the state isn't funding healthcare, but expecting people to pay for it themselves via insurance and going private, where are people going to get that money from? Won't it just make everyone a bit poorer and so affect all the other parts of the economy which depend on consumer spending?'

MaizieD

^You’ve missed one of the barn door options for saving the NHS billions growstuff. Continuing healthcare. I’m not at all saying it should be dispensed with, but some individual care packages in the community cost well over a million pounds per year, to keep one person at home. Is it as drastic and far reaching to stop that and place them in care, as opposed to stopping drug treatments which keep people alive? If there has to be a ceiling, maybe that’s where it should start.^

Why does it matter how much a procedure is costing? The money spent on it isn't disappearing down a big black hole, it's going to businesses and individuals and circulating round the economy to help to keep it going.
What would be much more concerning would be if the resources to implement these procedures and packages were in short supply or non existent.

I find it extraordinary that people don't seem to care about money being sucked out of the economy by the rich, who don't use it in the domestic economy, who use it in the financial markets to suck out even more money, or who leave it doing absolutely nothing in tax havens, yet they get very upset at the thought that money is being spent in a useful and productive fashion... then it has to be rationed or withheld...

It matters because of competing demands from other important issues, like education for example MaizieD. Healthcare is a bottomless pit, quite literally. As one need is resolved, another becomes evident. We could end up with a consultant specialising in thickened toenails for example. There has to be some limit on what is available, it’s just where the line is that has to be defined.

MaizieD

growstuff

But Maizie, maybe you've hit the nail on the head! Creating extra money for the NHS doesn't end up as profit for private health companies and insurers - that's the point!

Yep, that was my point .

Another question is:

If the state isn't funding healthcare, but expecting people to pay for it themselves via insurance and going private, where are people going to get that money from? Won't it just make everyone a bit poorer and so affect all the other parts of the economy which depend on consumer spending?'

But only some people can afford private healthcare and top-up insurance schemes. Presumably they're happy to pay for themselves, but not (as they see it) other people who can't afford to pay. That's part of the Tory ideology - they worked hard for their money (ahem - nobody else works hard, of course, and don't mention inheritances) and they should be free to spend it as they wish (not on other people). And if they can make money out of providing health services - why not?

volver

Glorianny

volver

Sorry, off topic.

Unfortunately most engineering degrees don't do this (partly because we no longer have the manufacturing base to accommodate them).

Engineering has very little to do with manufacturing.

But it was the manufacturers who funded the engineering expertise. Manchester and Newcastle used to have huge companies which manufactured things- some consumer goods, some basically engineering components for say the national grid- transformers etc. (I'm no engineering expert). Those companies used to train engineers and give them shop floor experience. They have stopped doing that. They do offer a few apprenticeships but nothing like the numbers they once trained The result is a lot of engineering graduates who know all the theory but have no industrial experience. Mind the same companies are now largely in the hands of huge American and International conglomerates which is another problem.

Sorry, really off topic now.

DH was an engineer. He lectured engineers at University. I managed teams of engineers from all around the world.

Engineers don't work on the shop floor. The engineers I know build bridges, design space craft, write the software that makes Gransnet work, and keep the wind turbines going. For instance.

My MIL used to be quite put out that her engineer son couldn't make her broken kettle work. She didn't know what engineering was either. Engineers don't need "shop floor experience" in manufacturing companies and they don't need manufacturing companies to "fund their experience".

Sorry volver I have personal connections (don't post personal stuff so not going to explain) with someone who trained under what was known as "sandwich course" system as an electrical engineer at a large manufacturing company in Manchester. Went on as a consulting engineer to supervise and control many installations in many countries, working for an originally British, now American company. His constant complaint was about graduates coming out from universities thinking they understood the subject but with only theoretical knowledge. And actually (although he primarily dealt with much bigger things) he could fix electrical items like kettles because he understood that the maths and theories are fine but sometimes if you don't understand the basics you can't discover what is going wrong.
He worked a lot in France and considered both the training and respect given to engineers there vastly superior to England where it could mean just someone who fixed your kettle. He was recognised there as an Ingénieur diplômé. Now he would be a C. Eng. something which graduates only get when they have sufficient practical experience.
The churning out of engineers by British universities many of whom would never work in the field they studied worried him

I think you are confusing major engineering work with technology and design, both of which can be done theoretically unlike practical engineering work on major infrastructure.

Insurance is managed by loss adjusters too not by medical experts who will have studied and followed medical ethics and frameworks that fit that. It is actually a very cruel way of treating and viewing human life.

I think you are confusing major engineering work with technology and design, both of which can be done theoretically unlike practical engineering work on major infrastructure.

Lol. No I'm not. But never mind. One of the institutions DH lectured in was an école supérieur in France. He's a C. Eng. too. How do people who design and build bridges, for instance, get experience on the shop floor of manufacturing companies? Reinforcing the idea that engineering has something to do with manufacturing is not on in this day and age, in my opinion.

Casdon Where would you draw the line? Goodness knows how much the NHS has spent on my cancer treatment or the follow up treatment over the next few years, my heart attack or diabetes treatment for over 30 years. I had bacterial meningitis as a child and was in hospital for weeks. Both my children were born by Caesarian, which costs more than natural childbirth.

I'm not much use to anybody economically, so it doesn't make economic sense to keep me alive.

I pay for private healthcare. What do you suggest I go without in order to pay for other people who can't afford to pay? Maybe my household insurance so I am no longer protected from fire or flood? Or maybe my car insurance so that if my car is a write off I can no longer get to work or take my DGCs to school? Or maybe my sacks of dog food so my pet starves?

Joseanne

I pay for private healthcare. What do you suggest I go without in order to pay for other people who can't afford to pay? Maybe my household insurance so I am no longer protected from fire or flood? Or maybe my car insurance so that if my car is a write off I can no longer get to work or take my DGCs to school? Or maybe my sacks of dog food so my pet starves?

That attitude doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

Joseanne

I pay for private healthcare. What do you suggest I go without in order to pay for other people who can't afford to pay? Maybe my household insurance so I am no longer protected from fire or flood? Or maybe my car insurance so that if my car is a write off I can no longer get to work or take my DGCs to school? Or maybe my sacks of dog food so my pet starves?

You could pay the amount you pay for private healthcare into the public system?

So you haven't answered my questions, just got personal?

I'm sure many of us on these threads have private healthcare insurance through our jobs or spouses jobs too and haven;t felt the need to think we deserve healthcare whilst others less fortunate do not. It doesn't take much imagination at all to be open minded and compassionate.

Just offering an alternative. Don't give up any of those things, just pay the money you already pay for healthcare into a fund that helps everybody.

I thought it was obvious

Of course it means higher taxes, which are anathema to some.

True, Volver, goid point, but then wouldn't all the test and investigations I've had cost the public sector ££ thousands? Far far more than my small amount?

Yes, they would.

And if everyone, especially those who think that private healthcare is a human right (or something), thought we should all support each other, we'd have a better society.

JaneJudge

I'm sure many of us on these threads have private healthcare insurance through our jobs or spouses jobs too and haven;t felt the need to think we deserve healthcare whilst others less fortunate do not. It doesn't take much imagination at all to be open minded and compassionate.

Correct.
We'd far rather be the ones paying in than receiving. The word "deserving" or "entitled," doesn't enter into it.

volver

^I think you are confusing major engineering work with technology and design, both of which can be done theoretically unlike practical engineering work on major infrastructure.^

Lol. No I'm not. But never mind. One of the institutions DH lectured in was an école supérieur in France. He's a C. Eng. too. How do people who design and build bridges, for instance, get experience on the shop floor of manufacturing companies? Reinforcing the idea that engineering has something to do with manufacturing is not on in this day and age, in my opinion.

There are now many graduates who have no practical experience. The best University courses and some Apprenticeships offer both practical and theoretical training like the French do. Unfortunately a lot of English University engineering courses have no such requirement. The decline of British manufacturing and British engineering expertise trace parallel courses and understanding what was lost is perhaps necessary to plan for a better future.

But the assertion that engineering has no connection at all with manufacturing is in any case totally wrong

The manufacturing sector makes a substantial economic contribution, accounting for
43.5% of the turnover generated by engineering enterprises in the UK.
• 27.0% of the 2.67 million registered enterprises in the UK in 2018 fell within the
engineering footprint.
• Of the 721,940 engineering enterprises in the UK in 2018, the largest proportions were
in information and communication (29.4%), construction (27.3%) and manufacturing
(18.6%)
www.engineeringuk.com/media/156198/key-facts-figures-2019-final-20190627.pdf

Which is why medical degrees require a proportion of the time to be spent in hospitals doing clinical practice.
Unfortunately most engineering degrees don't do this (partly because we no longer have the manufacturing base to accommodate them)

This is a quote from your original post on this topic. It draws a link between engineering degrees not having a practical element and the UK not having a manufacturing base any more. That is an incorrect assumption. The majority of engineers I have met and know personally didn't need manufacturing base because that is irrelevant to their subject and occupation.

Also, in this discussion we're skipping between English Universities and British manufacturing. Not all British engineers come from English Universities.

ps - I'm sorry to have taken this off topic. I won't post any more about engineers.

growstuff

Casdon Where would you draw the line? Goodness knows how much the NHS has spent on my cancer treatment or the follow up treatment over the next few years, my heart attack or diabetes treatment for over 30 years. I had bacterial meningitis as a child and was in hospital for weeks. Both my children were born by Caesarian, which costs more than natural childbirth.

I'm not much use to anybody economically, so it doesn't make economic sense to keep me alive.

I don’t know where I’d draw the line, it needs much weightier minds than mine to debate and decide. I don’t believe that life saving or life prolonging treatment should be withheld from anybody, but I do think all the quality of life issues should be fully discussed with them and their families, and I don’t think that’s always the case. I think there will have to be a line drawn regarding clinical care at home because the costs can be extortionate - so for example, one complex care case could be the same cost as 50 people being supported at home with carers. What I’m quite sure of is that the potential costs will be bottomless, so lines have to be drawn - and it’s easier to do that with lower level procedures and treatments. IVF is a good example of where the wrestling between couples’ desire to have a child and the cost of giving them chances to do so are ‘managed’ now, and how complex that is.

volver

ps - I'm sorry to have taken this off topic. I won't post any more about engineers.

your specialist subject

Casdon, medical professionals already make those decisions. Before people receive treatment it goes to panel and professionals surrounding that person make decisions ethically based on the patients best interests and potential outcome. There are lots of examples of how with holding care will cause more expensive long term problems.

JaneJudge

Casdon, medical professionals already make those decisions. Before people receive treatment it goes to panel and professionals surrounding that person make decisions ethically based on the patients best interests and potential outcome. There are lots of examples of how with holding care will cause more expensive long term problems.

I know JaneJudge. I was peripherally involved with the Independent Patient Funding Request for drugs and therapeutics process for a while in my job. There’s a separate panel approval process for Continuing Healthcare applications, but fundamentally it is uncapped, if somebody meets the criteria the funding is granted - it’s one of the biggest cost pressures on Health.