That's about it. NHS care (state owned) or BUPA care, if you don't want state owned. I'm on the NHS. .... Suggestion? Why not have a more American model while maintaining a NHS/State Health Care? Why? It's an issue in the UK of budgets for the NHS/National Health Service; because everyone's who's not with BUPA is on it by default, and I don't know of anyone who's with BUPA personally. Why not have charity sponsored health care and OTHER providers? So like charity and private in CONJUNCTION with and to alleviate demand on a stressed out NHS health care. Let's say you decided to make a non profit, there should be incentives to start one such as the existing not paying tax but also... What else can be done to get this to work? Making the NHS do a little less, but having that non profit fund the rest and then some so, if you can't afford any private health care and are ill, the NHS & Charity that can be there for you with even more treatments and surgeries and medicines not previously available on a stretched out NHS perhaps?
I take it that BUPA is some sort of private healthcare company in the UK? I'm not familiar with it. Does it provide healthcare services for the rich who don't want to wait in line or services not covered by the NHS? Also, I'm unclear on how you imagine an American private model to work in conjunction with the NHS. How exactly would that work?
It isn’t an either/or choice. Private healthcare and insurance options in the UK like BUPAs offerings don’t and are not intended to replace NHS care. There a key areas they don’t cover, most notably accident and emergency, and they rely on the NHS infrastructure actually contracting work or facilities from the NHS or farming off patients if there are complications or long-term side effects. If you’re proposing a change, the question should be why make that change. You’d need to explain exactly which aspects of the American system would you propose us taking, how that would fit in to or alter our existing healthcare structures and what benefits you believe they’d bring. I’d also query why you’re looking to the US system, which has just as many (albeit very different) issues as ours and not some of the systems elsewhere in the world, notably across Europe, which seem to be more stable and are already closer to what we have already. We do. The problem is that charity based services tend to have limited incomes and thus are able to provide limited services and private companies tend to focus on clinically easier and more profitable services. The NHS is left to deal with all the difficult and low-cost/high-effort ones.
They've expanded in to a number of related fields and some aspects of contracted services between the NHS and private providers (in both directions) can get complicated, but yes, that's essentially it.
I can't even answer @Lil Mike's question on why I feel a US model is better than the NHS. Not without at least understanding Blue Cross Blue Shield more. (Because at the time I thought Blue Cross Blue Shield was a community health care thing). But now thinking it's not, I wonder; What happens to an American without health care who winds up in ER? Who pays the bill then? Or does the patient simply incur a debt?
There's no private/public distinction in UK health care. The NHS is being forced to privatise services. It is also forced to actually use resources to provide private care (e.g. there's a two tier system for cancer care). This reflects years of attacking the NHS by right wing cretins.
I know that if you put 50p into a 'Cretin Jar' every time you used the word cretin or cretinous or anything else with 'cretin' within it and gave that money to the NHS; that would save the NHS. Sorry, could not resist. However, if you want to still moan about which wing of this Turkey to blame, remember PFI contracts introduced to the NHS by Blair and his Centre Leftism and if Corbyn had won, was promised to be reviewed/not abolished; But reviewed by Jeremy Corbyn making it possible that more PFI contracts might be needed.
The NHS is in crisis. The internal market and PFI were integral starting points for the ideological attack. That certainly led to key negative traits, such as contracting out and how that intensified problems such as MRSA. But its under the current regime that you're seeing intensification of privatisation. Quality isn't being maintained, as profit opportunity dictates. And that is the fault of people like you. People like you ensured that we reached a postion where Virgin sues the NHS and generates an outcome where quality of care falls.
They gave us the NHS, and the public will fight them if they tried taking it away. No matter how much it costs.
You're not making sense again. Labour gave us the NHS. The Tories are taking it away. Services are being stripped. It is not an exaggeration to say that just one more Tory regime will eliminate the NHS.
Governments either party are stuck with the NHS because no one can take it away. Paying for it's a problem after Tony Blair. Took an idea and ran with it. Corbyn doesn't even pledge to abolish PFIs.
The NHS is successful. It twins equity with efficiency. Its a perfect example of the provision of real public good. Its current problems reflect Tory ideological attack. Essentially, if you're voting Tory you are the enemy of rationality. By voting Tory you are destroying equitable efficiency.
Maybe there's better ideologies? Like promoting healthy living and affordable healthcare? Rather than the NHS. I would love to reward any non profits helping people where they're sick. And... Instead of a National Insurance, why not just give a tax cut if you donate more?
https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/labour-manifesto-2017.pdf You can expect the reduction in GDP share to be reversed. The Tories are deliberately twinning underfunding of the NHS with privatisation. Both ideological assaults would be ended.
People in America think of Primary Health Care... That means; Healthy living and independence probably because they distrust medicine or can't afford Health Care... Until somebody answers to me what happens to someone without health care in America in ER or if they need to give birth or whatever; then I can't tell you it's better than the NHS ideology.
As we progress with technical innovations, it only increases the sense of the NHS's equitable-efficiency
America... They just know. The NHS We don't have this logic in Britain. We are Nanny State. Everything's comprehensive. It's all about people here are free to drink, eat grease and smoke knowing it's not their problem.
I don't know though what would happen to these people with out health insurance if they end up in ER?
