NHS USA
- Started
- Last post
- 28 Responses
- 23kon
This has been all over the news this morning
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_po…I cant help but think that the people who are funding the anti-nhs campaign in the states are probably the insurance companies who stand to lose out on billions upon billions of dollars if the US adopted a free health service to it's people.
So it'll be corporation money that influences the governments decision rather than what is best for the people. (again!)
- flashbender0
is the NHS really the best answer though?
Think about cancer treatment waiting lists before answering that question.
- the US has waiting lists too....xcarlx
- I have skin cancer, and I right now, I have no options, I would be happy to be on a wait listfrediscrazy
- moth0
I've thought about the cancer waiting lists and I still think the NHS is the answer. The alternative is queue jumping by way of bidding your way to the top. Treatment for those who can afford it while everyone else is left to die.
The NHS was the best thing to evolve from war. It was a great social leveler. It cut everyone down to size regardless of class or position. It might not be perfect, and it might not have enough money, but it's better than watching people die with no hope whatsoever just because they have less to begin with.
- ribit0
There is a middle ground.. It doesnt have to be either NHS-style (free at point of delivery), or as unregulated as the US. For example when I worked in Germany you paid fairly high fees for treatment, but there was a high-cover state-sponsored health insurance that you were enrolled in when employed, but could opt-out and use a private insurer instead. So, privately run, but with government oversight, and at least everyone working has to have insurance. (I'm sure there was some sort of cover for students, unemployed as well). Same in Australia, there's a Medicare scheme, but you pay (something) for treatment and medicines, and can also buy top-up insurance.
- As from my side i see Australian model solution for future.TomBac
- moth0
Trouble is with private health care in this country ribit, is that uses the SAME resources and is part of the problem that causes queues. You should think twice about using it at all. I wouldn't.
However, I expect complaints about cancer queues would vanish under a insurance based health system because it's probably the wealthy middle classes who feel hard done by. People don't like it when their wealth can't buy them out of a sticky situation.
- roundabout0
I would like to know why are idiot politician are so influenced be America.
- 23kon0
There's still private healthcare though Moth.
Rich or poor, everyone can get the same standard of FREE healthcare paid for by taxes.
And if you've got money to throw around then you can opt for private treatment and pay through the nose for it.
Surely the BEST model?
Why do health insurance companies even need to be involved in this process. All it means is YOUR money is lining some fatcats insurance company managers pocket.
With an NHS type model, money is paid via taxes so it means YOUR money goes into paying for YOUR healthcare - keeping the money in the healthcare system, rather than the money bleeding out of the healthcare loop.
- 23kon0
"is the NHS really the best answer though?
Think about cancer treatment waiting lists before answering that question. "It's a BAD idea to have a health service run by banks/insurers etc, this means its all about money and not about peoples wellbeing.
There was a story on the news from the US the other week. Some guy who had cancer had been told by his doctor that it was going to be too expensive to treat his cancer so instead offered him the cheaper alternative - assisted suicide! :O
cancer waiting lists are a bad thing, at least there IS a free list to get on though - and its not the case if you cant afford treatment you wont get it.
- moth0
Private healthcare is the same thing 23kon. That's what I'm talking about. It uses the same doctors, the same surgeons, the same equipment.
It should be banned imo... It undermines the whole system.
- raf0
This is probably the only industry where advancements in technology and mass production don't bring prices down. This indicates a lack in competition, quite common where a state body enters the market and spoils it by overpaying. They're spending other people's money and there is plenty of room for brib.. err.. lobbying.
This is my biggest concern about socialized healthcare, that it will devour any amount of money you throw at it and it will suck in the end. It will be milked by pharma companies instead of making them rip each other's throat lowering the prices to get the client.
German model where you have to pay your bit and can opt out to get insured privately seems reasonable though. I have a doctor in the family in Germany, will have a chat with him to find some details..
- My example there: I was in Opel BKK (BetriebsKrankenKass... changed to Signal Versicherung)ribit
- raf0
A friend does a lot of online work for pharma companies, the stories he hears.. They corrupt med school students as soon as on their second year. A fact I didn't know, in many countries they get copies of prescriptions from pharmacies, so that they can attribute sales to doctors and pay their commission accordingly.
Do you ever get prescribed generic meds?
- forbes0
here in the UK, we have a free service for health care, which is good enough, but very poorly run. but we also have a private health care system in place where if you want better health service you can pay for it.
the private health care in the UK is *the* best. 5-star treatment etc and much better than what you would have in the us so im told. Any one person can expect to pay far less for private health care in the UK than they would for paying for health insurance in the US.
so what we have in place is the nhs for people who cant afford private health care (or even health insurance in the US) who can turn up and get treated for free, and we have private health care for those who would rather pay.
an american friend of mine has spent some time living here in the UK and said that she had to pay 500 dollars a month for health insurance! WTF!.
i cant believe some of the scare-mongering those stupid republicans are saying! sarah palin saying her mother would die if she was on nhs or stephen hawkin would be deemed not suitable for treatment etc. that is an outright insult on not only the UK, but an insult to each and every single american's intelligence.
the health system in the US is a very profitable business for insurance companies so there are dozens of lobbyists working for them to get Obama's plan revoked..
they dont care about the health of americans. just the dollah
- TomBac0
We all are people, so if democracy rules and that same democracy choose the leader of government via elections. And one who wins is chosen from the people then that one need to work for the people.
And the government should act the same way.
Free healthcare for everyone.The future of mankind depends on this sort of services otherwise we would found our self's in very dark comics world.
- byname0
Hawkins is alive because British gov ripoff every one and behave like f*****g Robin Hood. Is not for free, is from my (and your) money!
This monopoly control allows pharmaceutical corporations to keep drug prices, very effectively robbing taxpayers.
We all are sponsors for Hawkins, banks, genocide in Iraq, CCTV and all this shit. Another National Socialistic Republic, after Germany and Soviets time for England.
Welcome to Brave new world.
- 23kon0
Oh man, some american wifey been on the TV talking about Hawkins too.
She said something like "If he was british he wouldn't be getting all this treatment"
erm, he IS british.
She mustv'e thought because of the accent of his voice that he was american.
lol. think that says it all about the anti-nhs arguement and the people who are trying to make a case against an nhs structure.
- 23kon0
I didnt mean it was FREE "FREE" , it comes out of our pockets via tax alongside other taxes.
Surely though the donation is pittence compared to what major treatments or surgery would cost.If you want to go down the route of getting value for money then surely people that live a healthy life should be taxed less and overweight people, drinkers and smokers would fall into higher tax brackets.
Is that fairer?- that way the healthy dont pay for the unhealthy's NHS bills23kon
- Thank you. Idk why people keep saying free healthcare.kgvs72
- Not really pittence (sic), over your lifetime what you pay will be an average of the true costribit
- but at least it gets everyone at an averaged rate, no surprises. (just like insurance).ribit
- ahli0
- Beeachboy0
The Daily Mash put it perfectly...
"Americans without Health Insurance attack plan to give them health insuarance"
"FAT, stupid Americans with no health insurance have attacked plans to stop them dying so easily"
- doesnotexist0
national honor society?
- dMullins0
I coulda sworn there was a politics thread somewhere................
- Yeah, but this looks like a thread of brits making fun of americansTheBlueOne
- There should definitly be a seperate thread for that, great ideaBeeachboy
- I concurTheBlueOne