8 ms·

The NHS is one of the most efficient health systems in the world.

by kpmah 5y ago

StreamBright 5y ago
And? What is your point? The Dutch is also one of the best. Singapore too. You can bring examples pro contra for both types. I think the regulation that makes a healthcare good or bad, not that it is private or public. Many public healthcares are in Eastern Europe are bad. Some private healthcares are also bad. I still think that a combination of private and public offering is probably the best with regulation being the QA. My previous comment was to point out that public healthcares can be bad, if it was not clear. Many of my friends do not want to have any nuanced discussion just, public good, private bad. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Singapore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Singapore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_the_Netherlands https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_the_Netherlands
- pelorat 5y ago
  > The Dutch is also one of the best. Sure, once you get passed the useless home doctor (huisarts).
  - StreamBright 5y ago
    Well yes, but that is not a real problem.
- midasuni 5y ago
  Holland spends 20% more on health per capita than the Uk
  - StreamBright 5y ago
    20% more of what?
    - midasuni 5y ago
      Money
Nimitz14 5y ago
The NHS is probably the worst health care system in the developed world.
- simonbarker87 5y ago
  Hahahahahaha! It really really isn’t, it’s a national treasure and it’s amazing how well it runs given how numerous governments have underfunded it. Every study on international healthcare shows the NHS is near the top in every category and once you factor in the cost per person it’s the top in the world. If you have a life threatening issue you will be seen and treated as well on the NHS as anywhere in the US, EXCEPT it won’t matter if you’re rich or poor, you’ll get the same treatment and it will work out at a literal fraction of the cost to the tax payer - insurance based and tax payer based are basically the same (cost is distributed over everyone contributing) except the government don’t arbitrarily say pay xxx thousand and the stress of “how to pay for this” is removed meaning people can focus on recovery and not on making ends meet.
  - 238475235243 5y ago
    In Soviet Russia, grain farming is national treasure. Iz best in World! Once you factor in per-person free labor, is most top in the world! Everyone is treated same in Soviet collective farm, won't matter if you're rich or poor! Anyway. Some of us have been through the NHS a few times. I remember is was kind of ok under the Blair funding, not so great before or after.
  - Nimitz14 5y ago
    > If you have a life threatening issue you will be seen and treated as well on the NHS as anywhere in the US That's just wrong. Try actually talking with a UK doctor about their experience instead of blindly following Labour dogma. They don't have the equipment to provide the level of care an American or Swiss hospital can.
    - simonbarker87 5y ago
      I have 5 friends who are doctors as I lived with medics at uni and it’s not “just wrong”. It’s not labour dogma it’s a fact that the NHS is excellent and there are numerous international studies that prove that. The pinnacle of medical care in the US is better but only if you can afford it through your insurance or being rich, in the uk it is available for all
developer93 5y ago
Although it's been underfunded for decades now. But even the private healthcare in UK is waaay more affordable than in US. The free healthcare creates a price anchor (because if you can't afford it you can have the less shiny but free version, and still not die)

The NHS is one of the most efficient health systems in the world.

by kpmah 5y ago

The NHS is one of the most efficient health systems in the world.

And? What is your point? The Dutch is also one of the best. Singapore too. You can bring examples pro contra for both types. I think the regulation that makes a healthcare good or bad, not that it is private or public. Many public healthcares are in Eastern Europe are bad. Some private healthcares are also bad. I still think that a combination of private and public offering is probably the best with regulation being the QA. My previous comment was to point out that public healthcares can be bad, if it was not clear. Many of my friends do not want to have any nuanced discussion just, public good, private bad. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Singapore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Singapore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_the_Netherlands https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_the_Netherlands

pelorat 5y ago
> The Dutch is also one of the best. Sure, once you get passed the useless home doctor (huisarts).
- StreamBright 5y ago
  Well yes, but that is not a real problem.
midasuni 5y ago
Holland spends 20% more on health per capita than the Uk
- StreamBright 5y ago
  20% more of what?
  - midasuni 5y ago
    Money

Nimitz14 5y ago

The NHS is probably the worst health care system in the developed world.

simonbarker87 5y ago
Hahahahahaha! It really really isn’t, it’s a national treasure and it’s amazing how well it runs given how numerous governments have underfunded it. Every study on international healthcare shows the NHS is near the top in every category and once you factor in the cost per person it’s the top in the world. If you have a life threatening issue you will be seen and treated as well on the NHS as anywhere in the US, EXCEPT it won’t matter if you’re rich or poor, you’ll get the same treatment and it will work out at a literal fraction of the cost to the tax payer - insurance based and tax payer based are basically the same (cost is distributed over everyone contributing) except the government don’t arbitrarily say pay xxx thousand and the stress of “how to pay for this” is removed meaning people can focus on recovery and not on making ends meet.
- 238475235243 5y ago
  In Soviet Russia, grain farming is national treasure. Iz best in World! Once you factor in per-person free labor, is most top in the world! Everyone is treated same in Soviet collective farm, won't matter if you're rich or poor! Anyway. Some of us have been through the NHS a few times. I remember is was kind of ok under the Blair funding, not so great before or after.
- Nimitz14 5y ago
  > If you have a life threatening issue you will be seen and treated as well on the NHS as anywhere in the US That's just wrong. Try actually talking with a UK doctor about their experience instead of blindly following Labour dogma. They don't have the equipment to provide the level of care an American or Swiss hospital can.
  - simonbarker87 5y ago
    I have 5 friends who are doctors as I lived with medics at uni and it’s not “just wrong”. It’s not labour dogma it’s a fact that the NHS is excellent and there are numerous international studies that prove that. The pinnacle of medical care in the US is better but only if you can afford it through your insurance or being rich, in the uk it is available for all

developer93 5y ago

Although it's been underfunded for decades now. But even the private healthcare in UK is waaay more affordable than in US. The free healthcare creates a price anchor (because if you can't afford it you can have the less shiny but free version, and still not die)