British National Healthcare System holds top spot in worldwide healthcare survey

Governments inevitably serve first the political class that evolves to run them. This is not subtle or hard to figure out.

“[T]he running existential contradictions of D.C., a place where “authenticity and fantasy are close companions”, as the Washington Post’s Henry Allen once wrote. It misses that the city, far from being hopelessly divided, is in fact hopelessly interconnected. It misses the degree to which New Media has democratized the political conversation while accentuating Washington's insular, myopic, and self loving tendencies. It misses, most of all, a full examination of how Washington may not serve the country well but has, in fact, worked splendidly for Washington itself– A city of beautifully busy people constantly writing the story of their own lives.” Mark Leibovich, This Town, Penguin Books, 2013, p. 10.

 

'lack of privacy'?

depends on what is meant by that. if it's about sharing a hospital room .. I can only scoff at how spoilt such women must be, to expect a private room. why would it even occur to them to hope for one, is my question. public health is about necessity, not luxury.

and nurses in ante-natal (maternity) wards are always very busy. they have to prioritise emergencies and first time mothers. if an experienced mother has to wait an hour before someone responds to her call, and it's not an emergency, too bad. she's receiving first rate health care for free .. she has no grounds to complain.

 

Yes, until the bill comes due; and it is always going to be higher than leftists want to pay. But by then it will be too late for them and for all of their victims.

 

ONLY as long as the U.S. military guarantees their absolute freedom via our massive and massively expensive military might. Take that out of the equation then all those countries successfully running socialistic nations would either have to seriously gear up militarily or risk losing everything to someone interested in invading. That's historically accurate. Pretty much only the North Sea oil nations can make their socialistic economies operate as is but even they would be hard pressed to do so while also being the sole military might guarantors of their own sovereignty.

 

That's kind of like saying "nationalised health will only work as long as it keeps working".

 

It is precisely saying that with the caveat that there are special reasons why it works and the primary reason is that some other nation is ultimately footing the bill for them . . . the U.S.A.

 

You "scoff at how spoilt such women must be"?

Is covering up the failure of NHS worth such an empty misogynistic attack on the women who have been neglected by national healthcare.

“Few of us will ever feel so vulnerable or so reliant on the support and experience of others as we do when we are in labour.
So it is truly scandalous that so many pregnant women are being denied the care and expertise they should expect from our maternity services, with the inevitable, tragic results.
A leaked report at the weekend revealed that claims for medical negligence related to NHS childbirth stand at a staggering £4.5?billion, of which £3.3?billion relates to children who developed cerebral palsy as a result of oxygen starvation at birth.
What makes this even more damning is that a report by researchers at Salford University found that 70 per cent of the incidents they studied, in which babies were starved of oxygen at birth, were linked to staff shortages.”

NHS: The fatal lottery of childbirth in Britain, Friday 28 September 2007.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/3351362/NHS-The-fatal-lottery-of-childbirth-in-Britain.html

 

Surely you know nothing about political systems of belief.

You're reading far too much of the Daily Telegraph, the emptiest English newspaper on earth ...

 

HEALTHCARE IN THE US IS A MASSIVE RIPP-OFF

You are fixated on "the bill". Had some bad healthcare-costs recently?

You refuse to accept the facts of the matter. Namely this one:
*The US has the most costly healthcare system of any developed nation on earth, namely because it is privatized.
*It is a profit-generator for BigInsurance and has been since the dawn of health-care insurance.
*The average poor American family is getting screwed as soon as Trump takes down ObamaCare and throws America back in time.

The handwriting on the wall, right in front of your nose:


Why is the OECD-average almost two-thirds less costly. Because healthcare prices are mandated by national governments, who are the end-payers.

What should America do? Two actions that would stop the Massive Rip-off:
*Provide a National Healthcare Service
*Subsidize the costs of all studies necessary to practice medicine and work in the Healthcare Profession ...

 

Blah, blah, blah - you are repeating the same boringly wrong message because you refuse to face the facts. (Which is a LARGE club of backward Replicants on this forum.)

Who programmed you? Donald Dork ... ?

 

A DAMN FOOL

The above is naive in the extreme.

In a country that has already a warped means of electing a president, and all candidates require oodles of money just to become known, it is obvious that the more money one has the better able they are to buy campaign commercials on TV.

It might interest you to know that such a pollution of the political debate is illegal in most evolved countries around the world. Also, the maneuverings such as then FBI-head Comey's "intention to investigate Hillary" just one week before the election should be outlawed. Such an announcement is clear manipulation of the electoral process, and Comey should have been brought before a court of law for doing so. He had no business interfering in the electoral process at such a late date.

Were the US to simply establish a process that allows equitable TV-time to all candidates (or employ the Internet to do so), and no commercials (that sell politicians like soap detergent) maybe we'd get some intelligent debate and policy-objectives from our candidates.

Wouldn't that help to get a better idea of what the candidate stands for and their political objectives whilst in office?

Isn't that a lot better than the circus of this last PotUS election, the sixth time in our history that a warped Electoral-College vote permitted a victory fabricated illegitimately out of popular-vote loss.

Anyone who thinks that is "democracy" must be a damn fool ...

PS: And, no, I'm saying this because I'm a sore loser. It's the integrity of the democratic process that's the loser. Shame on America!

 

Oh my ****ing cheese. You are using Che Guevera as a source? What the **** is wrong with you? Seriously, get some help.

 

So you prefer to hear your bad news from The Guardian?

"The notion that we must all be cured alongside each other, just as we must be educated in comprehensive harmony, for the sake of national cohesion, is ludicrous. "...
"Private healthcare should be as valid an aspiration as wanting a car so you don't have to rely on public transport. To encourage more such aspiration, there should be tax relief on private medical insurance. We should incentivise those who want instant referrals to fit in with their work schedule, fancy add-ons like cosmetic surgery, or the latest fertility techniques, to aspire to provide it for themselves." Melissa Kite, "We won't need a PC World NHS if more of us go private", The Guardian UK, 9/29/1

 

Your politicians are whores for the Basel backed banks, stripping an ever increasing portion of the fruits of your labor year after year. The bankers live like Xerxes and you guys get to live in dingy government subsidized flats. You are no different, just further down the road to Soylent Green

 

Not to be funny but, The Guardian's **** IMO.
I mean, NHS ranked #1?
That cannot be right, if things are good here, what's it like in Cuba!? Aye Caramba!

 

Yes, but isn't it good to be green?

 

Yeah after all enslaving you children in debt because of healthcare isn't the way american way to enslave your children. Aircraft carriers and assorted military toys is the 'merkin way.

No worries t'all.

 

Kinda funny is it not, so many Countries needing or dependent on American armed services for protection then bitch about it but I am with you, time to leave those nations now that the EU is all grown up....we just need to send them the final invoice.

 

Well that's what this forum is for - people come to opinions based upon some very silly notions. The Commonwealth study is one of the more exhaustive of National Healthcare systems.

Yes, the UK wins out, mostly because it covers 100% of ALL medical fees. It's coverage is the largest of any NHS on earth. Moreover the costs are controlled - so there's no Insurance Industry gouging out profits on the insured base.

There are other criteria as well ...

 

Blah, blah, blah.

Get your rocks off vomiting into a Debate forum ... ?

 

You want to sink the finest health-care coverage system in the world, just go to private insurance. And start paying through the nose.

You can in the UK. Go for it ... !

 

Che Guevara was in charge of the Healthcare System at its inception in Cuba. Fidel put him in charge.

And, so what? Wakey, wakey to the real world ... it can surprise you.

 

as he runs down the field goalposts firmly in hand.

 

There you go again - dissing The Guardian. How about The Independent?

“A devastating indictment of the standard of nursing care given to older
people on Britain's hospital wards is contained in a government report
published yesterday.

The report by the Standing Nursing and Midwifery Advisory Committee says
elderly patients are allowed to go hungry and thirsty, woken too early or
left immobile and under-occupied too long, and denied basic rights to
privacy and independence. The report was slipped out quietly by the
Department of Health yesterday, as ministers announced a new drive to end
ageism in the NHS. It was not handed out at the ministerial press conference
but made available only on the department's website.”

THE INDEPENDENT, Routine abuse of elderly in NHS care, By Jeremy Laurance, Health Editor, 28 March 2001.