ARmy Rumour SErvice

Originally Posted by sunnoficarus

The much maligngned by the NHS ore nationslised systems were not only able to keep the population at large well cared for and significantly healthier than it is now, they were also able to treat hundreds f thousands of civ and mil war wounded. Do you seriously think our currrent NHS could treat the injured from one major WWII bombing raid without collapsing into chaos? Just a bad motorway pile up causes the bloody system to creak and go into panic mode.

I couldn't comment I've never had any involvement in planning for such things.

Originally Posted by jarrod248

I couldn't comment I've never had any involvement in planning for such things.

As has been said by a thousand better informed commentators by me, the main purpose of the NHS now is to self perpetuate itself, not improve patient care. Think about it, what would its 1.3 million staff do if demand fell through better and more efficient services?

bollocks in a word healthcare is expensive and with people living a lot longer your going to need rather a lot of staff to look after them.
NHS provides universal coverage at a cost per head a lot less than the US system that fails to cover everyone and often leads to personal bankruptcys.
Most of the Ideas to "improve" the NHS seem to think Charging and privitisation will make things better.

One word RAILTRACK the Britsh Goverment does not have a good record of pulling off big ideas.

Originally Posted by jumpinjarhead

In the US (at least until we have crossed the Rubicon of going over 50% of people here legally and otherwise receiving some sort of direct monetary benefit from government) we have regarded fire and police services as legitimate functions of the LOCAL government "police power." "Health care" in general has never been regarded that way. Thus the so-called Obamacare is suspect in many respects including a violation of federalism and creating a "right" that has no historical or legal basis. Of course, as I have contended from the outset of this crass partisan ploy masked by the appealing label "health care," this has much more to do with progressivist expansion of extra-Constitutional federal power for partisan reasons rather than any real concern with health.

"We have regarded fire and police services as legitimate."

De facto social services free to all at the point of delivery.

Originally Posted by jumpinjarhead

...I also recognize the differences in culture whereby Americans (at least heretofore) do not want the federal government being involved in their daily lives Any more than absolutely necessary.

It certainly is a major of cultural difference, health systems tend to reflect local traditions, in the US it's really more a matter of vested interests powerfully defending their place at the trough than ideology. Sometimes state intervention is a practical necessity not a matter of ideologically preference, the transnational US railroads, highways and internet were not magicked into existence by free markets but by heavy state assistance, and in healthcare like defense there does not seem to be viable alternative.

The Pentagon's role in the US defense industry and generous distribution of Tax payer pork is accepted without a qualm by most, though it would have The Founders rotating in their graves. Chaotic US healthcare as it sits is beggaring The Republic more surely than going abroad to slay dragons despite our best efforts to squander trillions there.

Coming back to culture Brits perpetually grumble about the mediocre NHS. Septic seniors cling to their socialized Medicare program like its a lifebelt and are understandably fearful of change. But I can't imagine the French or Swiss meekly accepting the necessity of being fleeced to the point of bankruptcy by health providers because their government is too compromised to rein them in, the result would be civil unrest.

Originally Posted by sunnoficarus

The much maligngned by the NHS ore nationslised systems were not only able to keep the population at large well cared for and significantly healthier than it is now, they were also able to treat hundreds f thousands of civ and mil war wounded. Do you seriously think our currrent NHS could treat the injured from one major WWII bombing raid without collapsing into chaos? Just a bad motorway pile up causes the bloody system to creak and go into panic mode.

Bit of a simplification there - don't you think? In WWII there were only limited antibiotics and other drugs, no modern imaging, no heart surgery, severe brain or spinal injuries would have been mostly fatal, the list goes on and on. The medical sciences have advanced.

When the big killers were infectious diseases then longer term diseases such as Cancer or heart disease would have been less of an issue (and pretty much untreatable) - and remember lifespans were shorter. Also people were physically more active and fast food was limited to fish and chips....

Originally Posted by Yokel

Bit of a simplification there - don't you think? In WWII there were only limited antibiotics and other drugs, no modern imaging, no heart surgery, severe brain or spinal injuries would have been mostly fatal, the list goes on and on. The medical sciences have advanced.

When the big killers were infectious diseases then longer term diseases such as Cancer or heart disease would have been less of an issue (and pretty much untreatable) - and remember lifespans were shorter. Also people were physically more active and fast food was limited to fish and chips....

The biggest per capita users of the NHS are the very professional welfare class the NHS has helped create.
Why are employed people healthier than unemployed, and all significantly healthier than the professionally non employed, a class of untermensch now some 9 million strong that's only really come into existance since 1945.

Self licking lollipop?

Originally Posted by DeltaDog

Like car insurance?

But you don't have to drive. The government doesn't force you to buy a car. And even if it did car insurance is about the risk you present to other people as a driver, whereas health insurance is the health risk you present to yourself. The two are quite different.

Originally Posted by sunnoficarus

And it should also be remembered, the starry eyed individuals who invented the NHS actually thought spending on healthcare would actually GO DOWN in the UK as the nation got healthier!! Yes, after the initial splurge to get everyonrpe fit and healthy, it was thought the NHS would become a cheap primarily emergency treatment service with a constantly falling budget as we all lived happily ever after in a state sponsored people's paradise free from want and worry.

And your point is?