Off-topic -- universal health care

[sweetnpied]

For those of us in the states, man is this the hot topic right now. Our Congress just approved it and Obama's signing it. The critics keep saying that in countries which have nat'l health care you have to be put on a long waiting list to get even life-saving operations. Then you see Michael Moore's movie, "Sicko," and he claims socialized medicine countries have no problem getting the best health care, medical tests, etc. I'm just wondering, how do those of you who live in England, Canada, etc., really feel about your country's health care system?

[MJ.]

I am really happy with the healthcare in England when I compare it to the alternatives.
Because I pay my National Insurance from my pay packet I never notice it leaving - it's always gone out. In return, I know I can get a doctors appointment quickly and will be cared for in hospital should anything happen. If I need a life saving operation and it's not immediately forthcoming, I still have the option of going Private and paying for it.
I know I have to pay for prescriptions when I get them, but to have the consultancy technically free? Brilliant.
There'll always be issues - the NHS is underfunded by the government (there's just not enough money to go around the whole of everything in the UK) but as I say - compared to the alternatives, I'm content with my lot.

[glove-n-pie]

I'm really happy with the NHS in the UK for me it works really well! I can get to see my GP the same day as I need to providing I phone early enough in the morning and if I'm not well and in need of a doctor i'm usually awake early in the morning anyhow. I get my prescriptions free as I have a life threatening thyroid condition so if I don't get my medication I could die, if I had to pay I think the worry of what would happen if I could not afford it would worry me senseless.

I don't like the idea of having to pay for all illness and operations. It's nice to have the choice to go private if I needed operation doing quickly and I was on a waiting list, to have it as the only option and to have to save quite a lot or pay for insurance (and how far would you be covered) in case you had a bad year and was in hospital a lot is a scary one.

[Sidi]

I think the NHS sucks big time in the UK. To get an appointment you have to either phone early in the morning and wait for ages for the call to be answered or get there early and queue up in the hope that you can be seen.
I remember the days when you could phone up any time during the day and book an appointment that was convenient to you, you know, arrange for time off work etc.
Trouble with the NHS is that everyone in the UK can get access to it even if you haven't paid anything into it, thats why its underfunded. Not enough payers and too many users. Its a socialist system that takes from the rich and gives to the poor but the trouble with socialism is that sooner or later you will run out of other peoples money to spend.

[SimonW]

I think the NHS sucks big time in the UK. To get an appointment you have to either phone early in the morning and wait for ages for the call to be answered or get there early and queue up in the hope that you can be seen.
I remember the days when you could phone up any time during the day and book an appointment that was convenient to you, you know, arrange for time off work etc.
Trouble with the NHS is that everyone in the UK can get access to it even if you haven't paid anything into it, thats why its underfunded. Not enough payers and too many users. Its a socialist system that takes from the rich and gives to the poor but the trouble with socialism is that sooner or later you will run out of other peoples money to spend.

Got to agree with Asdamax on this one.

More often than not the individual medical treatment given by the NHS is excellent, and free. The problem is that it is underfunded....the concept of free care when it was introduced in 1948 was probably good then, but the high costs of modern treatments and the demographics of an ageing population were never foreseen. Also, by and large, something given for free is often not appreciated.....people prefer to spend on the latest plasma tv or new car rather then pay anything towards their healthcare.

Our so-called "National Insurance" contributions are now just become part of normal taxation, not an "insurance premium". The costs of insurance if you choose to opt for private healthcare are very expensive and cover is usually restricted, especially for pre-existing conditions. There are no refund from the state if you use private facilities or treatments.

[BillShipton]

The NHS has saved my life a couple of times (literally) and I think it works well considering the incredible strain it has to go under.

Free operations (even major ones), free hospital care and free doctors' appointments (I know, they are paid for by National Insurance but free at the time of use) are essential in any caring society. Health should not depend on wealth. The option to 'go private' for those not prepared to wait the (now) relatively short time for operations, appointments etc exists. Personally I don't use private medicine as I see that as queue jumping and believe people should be seen according to need not how much they pay.

The problem is that any health service is extremely expensive to run because equipment needed to keep it at the forefront costs more and more. Your population needs to be prepared to expect this and support it - some more right-wing people might see it as a money pit, especially as it is helping the poorer in society more than the well-off. Personally I think this is exactly what we should be doing. Socialism did have some good ideas and helping the most needy is one of them.

When the NHS was introduced in the UK it was opposed by doctors, conservatives and many more. Now it is accepted as a good idea (albeit not perfect). Once your country gets used to paying their insurance contributions in the same way they pay taxes they should feel that they have done a good thing. Of course, you will always have a few who object to paying to help poorer people, immigrants etc but in a fair society, we should be prepared to do exactly that.

[Richard]

I agree fully with almost all of what Bill says. I am by no means a 'socialist' but, despite all of its faults the NHS is the best value for money ever conceived by any government (it was conceived by a Liberal Party politician by the way, not a Labour Party one).

Since childhood I have been shortsighted (and needed glasses to see the blackboard in class - that's how the condition was noticed). The condition continued until about ten years ago when I developed cataracts in both eyes. I was then offered replacement lenses (inside the eye!) under local anaesthetic. Result, after two short outpatient ops, I could see clearly without specs for the first time in over 50 years. I don't grudge any of the money I have paid in Nat Ins or tax over my working life as I have had the knowledge that there is a safety net should I ever need it. If I don't need it again, then so much the better!

[Mike Nomic]

For 2007, per capita health spending was: -

OECD Average $2986 Life expectancy 79.2 yrs
UK $2992 79.1
Canada $3895 80.9
USA $7290 78.1

See here for the full details.

Yes, socially funded systems have their problems as others have outlined; the UK NHS would do better if funds were directed towards frontline services (there are more administrators than beds in the UK NHS) rather than people falsely filling in government statistical target returns.

In the US, if you've got insurance they'll treat you - including unnecessary treatments, investigations, operations and medication - 'cos, hey, somebody else is picking up the check. Huge spending does not translate into better health, as the figures above show. New wonder drugs, equipment and life-saving or life-improving transplant surgery are expensive and will become more so; leading to a larger, more elderly population, occupying more space, and leaving less area in which to grow food for the larger population - is there a problem here?

As for the right-wingers objecting to funding the poorer elements of society and immigrants - well, Werner von Braun wasn't a home-grown millionaire, and where would the US space programme have been without his early input. Don't knock the poor, or the hard-working immigrant - you never know what they may turn out to be.

Mike.

[sparx104]

From my point of view the mental health side is pretty useless. It's woefully underfunded and doesn't really provide anything (although that may just be my problems).

Otherwise, the NHS works buts that about it - it's not particularly good but I'd rather have it than not. And it's infinitely better than having to pay for everything yourself.

We have the same problems getting an appointment around here, but that's the GP's - not the NHS. They were allowed to choose their own working conditions and chose very good ones for themselves - who didn't see that coming?

Also: we hear about all the opposition from the law-makers but what's the US's general population think? Are they for it or against? I don't think I've heard much about that.

[Mike Nomic]

Also: we hear about all the opposition from the law-makers but what's the US's general population think? Are they for it or against? I don't think I've heard much about that.

Putting party political dogma to one side, I suspect that those who will reap greater benefits will be in favour, and those that will suffer greater cost will be against it.

Now there's a novelty!!

Mike.

[mr angry]

I think the NHS was and is the greatest achievement of the post war Labour government. Health care is a duty which the government should provide, it is a basic fundamental human right. I totally agree with Bill on the subject, Richard was incidentally correct in that it was concieved by a Liberal, William Beveridge, as part of the report "social and allied services"

PS I would say I am a fan of the NHS as I am a socialist!!

Health is far too important to be left to the greedy, profit obsessed private sector, as are utilities, public transport, and, in my opinion banking. Renationalise the lot - vote Angry!!

[muckypup]

I was going to mention the life expectancy and cost per head of population figures that Mike mentioned, I think that is key. It seems to me that the medical companies all take a massive cut over there and that every test under the sun is done if you have good medical insurance even if it isn't required just to make a few bucks more.

As most people have said, I'm in no way a socialist but I think the NHS is something we are on the whole proud of. It has its problems and basically unless there was an unlimited pot of money there is no way you can pay for all of the possible treatments so it can seem underfunded in some parts.

In relation to Mike's other point I agree to a point but I think this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8474611.stm article is pretty interesting.

Switching it around what do the people from the States think?

Also: we hear about all the opposition from the law-makers but what's the US's general population think? Are they for it or against? I don't think I've heard much about that.

Putting party political dogma to one side, I suspect that those who will reap greater benefits will be in favour, and those that will suffer greater cost will be against it.

Now there's a novelty!!

Mike.

[Essexgungefan]

The NHS is great, but needs improving, updating and being less wasteful!!!

[MrB]

Don't get me started, I have a bee in my bonnet on this one. I'm english, but spend a lot of time in Arizona. I get very frustrated by the 'Every man for himself' attitude that many americans, particularly republicans and tea partiers have. There is such poverty in america, however there is a tendency to blame the individuals for failing to work hard enough, when ill health, or genetic lack of ability may be to blame.

As someone who has seen both systems, here is how I see it;

The NHS is awesome if you need it. If you are seriously injured, you will be taken for free to the hospital which has the best chance of fixing you up, before getting the most appropriate treatment, and after care to ensure that you are healing correctly. You won't even have your nationality checked, let alone insurance, even if you have private healthcare. You won't have any idea how much it costs.

If you have cancer, or need a transplant, it is equally awesome. Operations are free, and in these instances, timely. Drugs cost either £7 per pack, or about £100 per year if you need a lot. If a drug is approved by NICE as being cost effective, then it will cost you £7, even if it costs the NHS £5,000 / month (for NICE to approve that, it would have to serious extend your life, rather than just improve the quality).

If you need treatment due to pain, it's not so good. It can take hours to get a bad sprain seen in the ER, and months to get your knee operated on. But it's free and you're not going to die. This does cause the majority of complaints though. People in pain don't like to wait.

Mental health care is vastly underfunded, and elderly care isn't great either. But I love the NHS.

Private health care is available for those who want it, and treatments relate to queue jumping for knee type operations, mental health / additions, and elderly care. I have private insurance through work, and used it to jump a queue once, but for a major operation I went with the NHS, and there is no private emergency room.

From a financial perspective, insurance and drug companies are ripping americans off, and that needs to stop. Health spending vs care is shocking as Mike pointed out. Much of this is because the insurance companies are creaming off money that public systems wouldn't lose. The rest is due to overcharging on drugs. My drugs are bought by the government, they know how to get a good deal. If NICE say "no, we're not paying that", then the companies would have to lower the price or no-one will get the drugs. An individual can't negotiate a price with a drug company, but a government will really swing things in your favour.

Finally, US politics is very strange currenly. Everyone seems heavily devoted to one party or the other, and never the two parties will agree. Everything Obama does is evil by definition according to most republicans, and when faux news and glen beck are around, all sorts of strange opinions get formed. Look at how obama was compared to hitler, that was just ludicrous.

Obamas bill will help all americans, it might just take a few years to prove. For now, just be relieved how scared the insurers and drug companies are. They stand to lose a fortune, and it's your money that they are no longer going to get.

[SimonW]

I have no quarrels with the NHS, but I take to task anyone who says private health insurance and treatment is "queue jumping".

I am self-employed and as such receive no state sick pay, holiday pay or pension other then the basic state pension. If I am ill (or even take a holiday or day off), I am unpaid and no-one does my work while I'm not there.

I pay into private health insurance (over £2,000 per year from my own money, with no tax relief), because, should I be ill, I simply cannot afford to loose time and possibly future business. If I need an non-urgent operation, I can then arrange it for a time to minimise loss of work, and, if appropriate, have a private room so that I can have contact with my clients as soon as I can (I do confidential work for my clients), and get back to work as soon as possible.

This, of course, also saves the NHS money....but I get no refund of my National Insurance contributions or any rebate of costs.

Before anyone says I'm a fat-cat who doesn't care for the poor and disadvantaged, let me say that my annual income (in a good year!) equates to approximately the national average wage.