NationStates Jolt Archive

Where exacltly is all the negativity about the NHS comming from. I can see where Tony Blair is comming from when he gets fustrated about this. In general everyone is moaning and whining about the quality of the health service, but then when you ask them about their specific experiance of the NHS, they are almost always positive. This I find most bizare. Staff numbers have gone up, waiting list times have gone down since the tories, quality of technology is rising at a faster rate than did previously. So what exactly is wrong?

People are superficially cynical. They think they are supposed to be angry at the system, so they are.

I WISH that the US had a NHS, it would make things so much easier!

WTF is the NHS?

[/american]

WTF is the NHS?

[/american]

It's the British healthcare system.

I WISH that the US had a NHS, it would make things so much easier!

Aye, that it would.

WTF is the NHS?

[/american]

Well let me just demonstrate how silly and lazy you have been. Why dont you try working it out.

"whining about the quality of the health service"

Health Service - HS

And then you've got me talking about Tony Blair, who is the Prime Minister (first lord of the Treasury) of the United Kingdom of Great Britian and Northern Ireland. So we can assume then that this is a British matter.

If it is within the purvue of the head of government then it must be something that applies on a NATIONAL level.

National Health Service

Of course asking for this level of deduction is a little much to ask of an avarage American internet user, but even so you could have just Googled it

Well let me just demonstrate how silly and lazy you have been. Why dont you try working it out.

[snip]
Though I know what NHS is, I think you could've avoided employing that snide tone and simply defined it. Yes the person could've known you were talking about healthcare but doesn't know the acronym of NHS.

It would be like me using the term OHIP and expecting the read to know what it is.

Though I know what NHS is, I think you could've avoided employing that snide tone and simply defined it. Yes the person could've known you were talking about healthcare but doesn't know the acronym of NHS.

It would be like me using the term OHIP and expecting the read to know what it is.

If you were using the term OHIP and then talked about Operation Holistic and its Internet Priory then we may be able to deduce it. But like I said, he could have googled.

If you were using the term OHIP and then talked about Operation Holistic and its Internet Priory then we may be able to deduce it. But like I said, he could have googled.

I'd say you're wrong because OHIP in this case is "Ontario Health Insurance policy". It's similar to what NHS is. In this case, you could take your advice and "google it". See? Not much different. :)

Aye, that it would.

But the American government certainly couldn't make things easier. It's not their job to increase our quality of life.

I WISH that the US had a NHS, it would make things so much easier!

Woohoo! Pilfer an entire sector of the economy because of someone's political whim, yay! Sounds like fun.

Where exacltly is all the negativity about the NHS comming from. I can see where Tony Blair is comming from when he gets fustrated about this. In general everyone is moaning and whining about the quality of the health service, but then when you ask them about their specific experiance of the NHS, they are almost always positive. This I find most bizare. Staff numbers have gone up, waiting list times have gone down since the tories, quality of technology is rising at a faster rate than did previously. So what exactly is wrong?
The main problem is that the NHS still wastes an awful lot of money - something like 15% of its budget (£75-80bn, I think) is wasted (not counting the salaries of all the sodding managers it employs). It's an incredibly inefficiently run organisation.

The main problem is that the NHS still wastes an awful lot of money - something like 15% of its budget (£75-80bn, I think) is wasted (not counting the salaries of all the sodding managers it employs). It's an incredibly inefficiently run organisation.

And yet the UK government still manages to spend less per capita on healthcare than US, and deliver a free at the point of treatment service open to all.

Well let me just demonstrate how silly and lazy you have been. Why dont you try working it out.

"whining about the quality of the health service"

Health Service - HS

And then you've got me talking about Tony Blair, who is the Prime Minister (first lord of the Treasury) of the United Kingdom of Great Britian and Northern Ireland. So we can assume then that this is a British matter.

If it is within the purvue of the head of government then it must be something that applies on a NATIONAL level.

National Health Service

Of course asking for this level of deduction is a little much to ask of an avarage American internet user, but even so you could have just Googled it


PWNED! :p

Brit-style!

Woohoo! Pilfer an entire sector of the economy because of someone's political whim, yay! Sounds like fun.

health care shouldn't even be part if the economy. health care is part of life, applying econimic forces and values to that is crass to say the least.

And yet the UK government still manages to spend less per capita on healthcare than US, and deliver a free at the point of treatment service open to all.

well we all know the american government doesn't know how to spend money effectively. that's old news.

health care shouldn't even be part if the economy. health care is part of life, applying econimic forces and values to that is crass to say the least.

Healthcare is a human right. It is one of the things that keeps people above the absolute poverty line. Food, fuel, shelter, light, water and medical aid are basic needs that the state should meet to some degree or other.

PWNED! :p

Brit-style!

That would be "Owned"

But thank you, its nice to see intelegent put-downs and deductions aplauded for a change

Healthcare is a human right. It is one of the things that keeps people above the absolute poverty line. Food, fuel, shelter, light, water and medical aid are basic needs that the state should meet to some degree or other.

that is essentially what he said, if rather abstractly.

And yet the UK government still manages to spend less per capita on healthcare than US, and deliver a free at the point of treatment service open to all.
It isn't a rose garden -- the NHS has tremendous waiting lists.

Where exacltly is all the negativity about the NHS comming from. I can see where Tony Blair is comming from when he gets fustrated about this. In general everyone is moaning and whining about the quality of the health service, but then when you ask them about their specific experiance of the NHS, they are almost always positive. This I find most bizare. Staff numbers have gone up, waiting list times have gone down since the tories, quality of technology is rising at a faster rate than did previously. So what exactly is wrong?

Everyone should have to live in the US for a while.

Seriously, in the UK we don't realise how good we got it. We complain because we get put on a waiting list for something that isn't immediately terminal.

Big deal. We still GET the treatment, it's usually good, and we don't end up bankrupted by the whole process.

Take it from someone who has lived both sides of the pond, and who has watched in-laws die of things that they wouldn't have died of in the UK - because they would have got treated earlier, because they wouldn't have had to get a second-mortgage for the treatment.

It isn't a rose garden -- the NHS has tremendous waiting lists.

For non leathal conditions. I think the people who need a hip will survive without it for long enough so that someone dying of lukimia can live.

It isn't a rose garden -- the NHS has tremendous waiting lists.

That really depends. If you need immediate treatment, you get immediate treatment. If you need treatment soon, you get treatment soon.

On the other hand, if your big problem is something not important, not life-threatening, you might have to wait a while so that people with REAL problems get treated first.

I don't see a problem.

Woohoo! Pilfer an entire sector of the economy because of someone's political whim, yay! Sounds like fun.

Something were lives mean nothing and profits mean everything, I really don't think healthcare should be the business of corporations.

Something were lives mean nothing and profits mean everything, I really don't think healthcare should be the business of corporations.
So how about the government provides it alongside corporations and allows those who want to opt out of government-sponsored treatment? Or is this too much to ask?



I don't see a problem.
Meh, I suppose I'm just biased towards Iceland's way of doing it. Granted, it's a smaller nation - but it does it more efficiently. As does France.

Meh, I suppose I'm just biased towards Iceland's way of doing it. Granted, it's a smaller nation - but it does it more efficiently. As does France.

No one pretends the UK's health service is perfect. But it's a LOT better than a LOT of the world gets. And we pay a lot less for it, too.

So how about the government provides it alongside corporations and allows those who want to opt out of government-sponsored treatment? Or is this too much to ask?


That's fine.

Am I the only one who thought this was about the National Honor Society?

Everyone should have to live in the US for a while.

Seriously, in the UK we don't realise how good we got it. We complain because we get put on a waiting list for something that isn't immediately terminal.

Big deal. We still GET the treatment, it's usually good, and we don't end up bankrupted by the whole process.

Take it from someone who has lived both sides of the pond, and who has watched in-laws die of things that they wouldn't have died of in the UK - because they would have got treated earlier, because they wouldn't have had to get a second-mortgage for the treatment.
Yes, I knoe someone who was studying to be a doctor, but was so disgusted by the way we do it that she quit and started studying medical ethics.

Am I the only one who thought this was about the National Honor Society?

could be ;). i've never heard of that NHS for a start.

Yes, I knoe someone who was studying to be a doctor, but was so disgusted by the way we do it that she quit and started studying medical ethics.

A field I'm thinking of maybe heading into, if I can.

It is so true, though... the US 'health economy' is about money... quality of life, the welfare of the citizens... totally secondary behind worship of God Money.

could be ;). i've never heard of that NHS for a start.
Academic society for smartypants high schoolers. I was a member way back in the day. ;)

Am I the only one who thought this was about the National Honor Society?

Perhaps it would have been wise for you to have read the first post, and also post 7

No one pretends the UK's health service is perfect. But it's a LOT better than a LOT of the world gets. And we pay a lot less for it, too.
I wonder if a voucher system wouldn't help reduce some of its load... obviously, it needs further structural reforms, but broadening the choices one can make could help.

A field I'm thinking of maybe heading into, if I can.

It is so true, though... the US 'health economy' is about money... quality of life, the welfare of the citizens... totally secondary behind worship of God Money.

Which is why the government has to do research into stem cells. If a disease can be treated by 1 $1000 shot, but it would cost $100,000 for a long and painful treatment prossess, they'd pick the long and painful treatment prossess over the Stem Cells.

could be ;). i've never heard of that NHS for a start.

I'll just repost the first post and post 7 for those who havent seen it.

Where exacltly is all the negativity about the NHS comming from. I can see where Tony Blair is comming from when he gets fustrated about this. In general everyone is moaning and whining about the quality of the health service, but then when you ask them about their specific experiance of the NHS, they are almost always positive. This I find most bizare. Staff numbers have gone up, waiting list times have gone down since the tories, quality of technology is rising at a faster rate than did previously. So what exactly is wrong?


WTF is the NHS?

[/american]

Well let me just demonstrate how silly and lazy you have been. Why dont you try working it out.

"whining about the quality of the health service"

Health Service - HS

And then you've got me talking about Tony Blair, who is the Prime Minister (first lord of the Treasury) of the United Kingdom of Great Britian and Northern Ireland. So we can assume then that this is a British matter.

If it is within the purvue of the head of government then it must be something that applies on a NATIONAL level.

National Health Service

Of course asking for this level of deduction is a little much to ask of an avarage American internet user, but even so you could have just Googled it

Perhaps it would have been wise for you to have read the first post, and also post 7Perhaps you could realize that some of us don't give a shit and are having a bit of harmless fun. Lighten the fuck up.

Perhaps you could realize that some of us don't give a shit and are having a bit of harmless fun. Lighten the fuck up.
Lol is it just me or are a lot of the new members totally humourless? :confused:

Lol is it just me or are a lot of the new members totally humourless? :confused:

There are always a couple. We set them straight and they wind up working out in the long run.

Or we chase them away. Either way... ;)

Lol is it just me or are a lot of the new members totally humourless? :confused:
Hah! It's funny because they don't have any humor!

Which is why the government has to do research into stem cells. If a disease can be treated by 1 $1000 shot, but it would cost $100,000 for a long and painful treatment prossess, they'd pick the long and painful treatment prossess over the Stem Cells.

Exactly - it's all about the dollar. I'm not sure how much of a difference stem-cells will actualyl make, of course - since the PRICE of medical treatment in the US is decided by what they can eke out of the market... not how much it should cost, or how much it is 'worth'.

Perhaps you could realize that some of us don't give a shit and are having a bit of harmless fun. Lighten the fuck up.

Just a suggestion. It would seem to be you who needs to relax, given the severity of your response. The internet is void of expression tones. How am I to tell if your being serious or not.

Exactly - it's all about the dollar. I'm not sure how much of a difference stem-cells will actualyl make, of course - since the PRICE of medical treatment in the US is decided by what they can eke out of the market... not how much it should cost, or how much it is 'worth'.

Exactly, money is not good.
*hides behind militant capitalist-proof wall*

Just a suggestion. It would seem to be you who needs to relax, given the severity of your response. The internet is void of expression tones. How am I to tell if your being serious or not.

Come on, man. My first post in this thread was around number 30. Did you really think I hadn't caught on by then that you were talking about the National Health Service? It's not like I'm a n00b here.

Come on, man. My first post in this thread was around number 30. Did you really think I hadn't caught on by then that you were talking about the National Health Service? It's not like I'm a n00b here.

No, but it seems many people have an ignorence of this. And there is prescendent. Anway, did you have an opinion on the issue...

No, but it seems many people have an ignorence of this. And there is prescendent. Anway, did you have an opinion on the issue...Not really. I'm jealous. I wish we had a single payer system here in the US.

Not really. I'm jealous. I wish we had a single payer system here in the US.

It seems to me that on this issue, those Amecian conservatives who would say that it is dangerous, overly costly and inefficent to have an national health service of this nature in America should have a look at what Magret Thatcher did with regards to the internal market.

Did you really think I hadn't caught on by then that you were talking about the National Health Service? It's not like I'm a n00b here.

* checks Nazz's join date *

That, young-fellow-me-lad, is a matter of opinion.

It seems to me that on this issue, those Amecian conservatives who would say that it is dangerous, overly costly and inefficent to have an national health service of this nature in America should have a look at what Magret Thatcher did with regards to the internal market.

Them American conservatives have surely already realised that they have at present a dangerous, overly costly and inefficient non-national health service, no?

My solution: hang all the lawyers and put the money into actual healthcare instead.

* checks Nazz's join date *

That, young-fellow-me-lad, is a matter of opinion.

Oh, you knew me way back when under another name, back in the days of the old server, in the before time, in the long long ago.

Oh, you knew me way back when under another name, back in the days of the old server, in the before time, in the long long ago.

Oh, you mean long long ago when the US had a chimp for a president and was mired in a pointless war? Good to have you back again, Michael Jackson666.

Them American conservatives have surely already realised that they have at present a dangerous, overly costly and inefficient non-national health service, no?


Hence the internal market. I'm not aware if the US has something similar already but what it basicly did was turn the NHS into a market place, broken into two sections, the GP's as purchases and hospitals etc as providers. The GP's would be given a sum of money by the government and would pay for various services from the hospitals with it. This encouraged the hospitals to be efficent and work harder to get the money from the doctors. I'm sure somewhere on the net a more detailed analysis is available

Oh, you mean long long ago when the US had a chimp for a president and was mired in a pointless war? Good to have you back again, Michael Jackson666.
That's just mean. Check your tgs.

That's just mean. Check your tgs.

Oh come now, it was so unacceptable it was clearly meant as harmless jest.

Anyhoo: is hanging the lawyers the solution to the US healthcare problem?

Anyhoo: is hanging the lawyers the solution to the US healthcare problem?

and even if not, can we try it anyway?

Like most people, I have had good experiences of the NHS, and like most people, I have moaned about it just based on hearsay and rumours of other peoples bad experiences.

Maybe we brits just like complaining too much. And its hard what with a free health service and a government thats actually doing a good job. Yes in the media the governent is crap, but it really pisses me off that so many people say they will never vote labour again, not because of anything that happened to them of course, but because of something they read in the paper that didnt affect them at all.

Then the Tories get back in, and all of a sudden the shit that was just in the papers before is actually happening to you, and all your friends. and you can complain all the live long day.

Anyway the point is that the NHS is doing okay as far as I can tell, it just needs to be more efficient. and start employing some of the thousands of nurses they felt the need to train.

Them American conservatives have surely already realised that they have at present a dangerous, overly costly and inefficient non-national health service, no?

So long as they are making ridiculous profits, no.

My solution: hang all the lawyers and put the money into actual healthcare instead.

How about we remove the copious amounts of corporate welfare/government pork barrel spending, allow small businesses to enter the market while remaining competitive (instead of being forced out of business or gobbled up by larger Corporations), and start importing Pharmaceuticals from Canada. That might prove to be a better start to a more comprehensive healthcare reform plan.

Plus, trying to simeltaneously execute every lawyer in the country would result in millions of frivolous lawsuits lasting years with no foreseeable outcomes. And any angry mobs that attempted to lynch them would undoubtebly fall under the drowsing and utterly confusing spell of their legal 'mumbo-jumbo.'

Oh come now, it was so unacceptable it was clearly meant as harmless jest.

Anyhoo: is hanging the lawyers the solution to the US healthcare problem?

I know, but I'm increasingly outing myself lately. Before too long I'll probably put it in my sig, though I imagine few people around here remember me.

As to the lawyers, they're not really the problem. Insurance companies, on the other hand...