America on the NHS

[Johnny Bognor]

Yes, that's right the NHS is funded by central government. The government then devolves money to local Primary Care Trusts who spend their budgets as they see fit. Primary Care Trusts are broadly based on counties.

 

I hope this explains to you how the NHS is funded and operated.

 

 

You have eloquently explained how the NHS is operated, but who funds the government?

[bridge too far]

No, the NHS is funded by the taxpayer....period.

 

The NHS is funded from the central exchequer. The central exchequer gets its money from income tax, corporation tax, VAT, sale of government assets, council tax income.

 

The exchequer then allocates money to the NHS, local government, schools, the armed forces ............

 

However, you carry on being pedantic. It's no more than I expected

 

Ah I see you saw the error of your ways and edited your post

[bridge too far]

You have eloquently explained how the NHS is operated, but who funds the government?

 

The tooth fairy or so I was told.

[Johnny Bognor]

The NHS is funded from the central exchequer. The central exchequer gets its money from income tax, corporation tax, VAT, sale of government assets, council tax income.

 

The exchequer then allocates money to the NHS, local government, schools, the armed forces ............

 

Why is it the lefties don't want to recognise taxpayers' contributions?

 

They accept that money comes from taxation vehicles (whether that be income tax, VAT, etc), but don't like to mention that it is real people that have to pay it. That's right, they have to go out, work hard and hand over most of their money in taxes.

 

Go on BTF, just say it once, the tax payer pays for everything. It won't make you less of a socialist for doing so.

 

Ah I see you saw the error of your ways and edited your post

 

OK, you got me there

[bridge too far]

Why is it the lefties don't want to recognise taxpayers' contributions?

 

You mean,why didn't I say that government money comes from income tax?

Oh! But I did. I think most of us pay vehicle tax, and VAT too - so where exactly have I tried to say that taxpayers don't fund central government?

It's a basic tenet of socialism (not that we have a socialist government ATM) and indeed civilised society that we all pay taxes towards the common good. Even your much adored USA requires its residents to pay taxes FFS.

 

They accept that money comes from taxation vehicles (whether that be income tax, VAT, etc), but don't like to mention that it is real people that have to pay it. You mean it's not the tooth fairy :shock: That's right, they have to go out, work hard and hand over most of their money in taxes. Not MOST - just some and depending on circumstances.

 

Go on BTF, just say it once, the tax payer pays for everything. It won't make you less of a socialist for doing so.

 

 

 

OK, you got me there

 

You are quite dim sometimes, aren't you?

[Johnny Bognor]

That's right, they have to go out, work hard and hand over most of their money in taxes.

 

You are quite dim sometimes, aren't you?

 

OK, for many it is most, for the rest it is a significant proportion (circa 45%) so it is nealy most.

 

It is actually quite staggering.......

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/5268998/Average-worker-pays-7.27-an-hour-in-tax.html

[solentstars]

morons make up a decent percentage of those who use the NHS

 

True. It's when they breed that annoys me but that's a different debate.....

oh dear :smt015 two silly comments i think.

i

[revolution saint]

Johnny, just what is it you're driving at? Do you want me or anyone else to say that the NHS is funded by the taxpayer. OK well it is (or probably the majority of funds raised are). Most people already know that, it's not an earth shattering revelation but if it will make you happy then there it is.

[revolution saint]

oh dear :smt015 two silly comments i think.

i

 

It was a joke - I'm not that into eugenics.

[solentstars]

Why is it the lefties don't want to recognise taxpayers' contributions?

 

They accept that money comes from taxation vehicles (whether that be income tax, VAT, etc), but don't like to mention that it is real people that have to pay it. That's right, they have to go out, work hard and hand over most of their money in taxes.

 

Go on BTF, just say it once, the tax payer pays for everything. It won't make you less of a socialist for doing so.

 

 

 

OK, you got me there

 

what lefties and socialists are you on about:confused:oh must be people like david cameron .

[solentstars]

It was a joke - I'm not that into eugenics.

glad to hear that i was worried the direction this thread was going.

[Thedelldays]

yanks pay for the health care...we pay for our health care...not much difference really...

[bridge too far]

OK, for many it is most, for the rest it is a significant proportion (circa 45%) so it is nealy most.

 

It is actually quite staggering.......

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/5268998/Average-worker-pays-7.27-an-hour-in-tax.html

 

From that link:

 

"The figures, calculated by The Daily Telegraph, are taken from documents published by the Treasury at the time of the Budget last month. They only capture taxes that fall on individuals such as council tax, alcohol duty and income tax. They exclude company taxes."

 

So all taxes then - some of which are 'choice' taxes anyway. Not just income tax.

 

I don't mind paying that amount of tax at all. At least I know that people like my mum, my children and my grandchildren (oh and me) will have their health looked after regardless of their circumstances.

 

If some of the large companies paid the corporation taxes that they were supposed to, instead of paying expensive accountants to 'avoid' it, we'd probably see that percentage fall anyway.

 

Glad to see Mr Cameron supporting the NHS too.

 

Oh and 'nearly most' means at least more than 50%. HTH

[bridge too far]

yanks pay for the health care...we pay for our health care...not much difference really...

 

DD there IS a difference.

 

'Yanks' pay for health care (or rather their employers do, if they have one). But they have to pay MORE for health care if they have or develop a condition (through no fault of their own often). If they're unemployed they can't afford private medical insurance so have to go hang if they become ill.

 

We pay for health care according to our ability to pay. If we're children or pensioners we don't have to (unless we're a wealthy pensioner and pay tax - but we still get 'free' prescriptions and eye tests) and no matter how serious our illnesses we get treatment regardless.

 

That's the difference - thank goodness.

[bridge too far]

Johnny Bognor - do you do paid work?

[Johnny Bognor]

From that link:

 

"The figures, calculated by The Daily Telegraph, are taken from documents published by the Treasury at the time of the Budget last month. They only capture taxes that fall on individuals such as council tax, alcohol duty and income tax. They exclude company taxes."

 

So all taxes then - some of which are 'choice' taxes anyway. Not just income tax.

 

I don't mind paying that amount of tax at all. At least I know that people like my mum, my children and my grandchildren (oh and me) will have their health looked after regardless of their circumstances.

 

If some of the large companies paid the corporation taxes that they were supposed to, instead of paying expensive accountants to 'avoid' it, we'd probably see that percentage fall anyway.

 

Glad to see Mr Cameron supporting the NHS too.

 

Oh and 'nearly most' means at least more than 50%. HTH

 

I don't mind paying tax and I don't mind having a safety net for people. Our only differences are the extent to which this goes, in terms of how much people are taxed and how much is spent. There is massive Government waste and the system could be improved which would either provide better services or save the tax payer money. I suppose what I want is better value from the state.

 

Johnny Bognor - do you do paid work?

 

Not sure this is relevant, but as I admit to paying tax, I suppose I must do.

[bridge too far]

I don't mind paying tax and I don't mind having a safety net for people. Our only differences are the extent to which this goes, in terms of how much people are taxed and how much is spent. There is massive Government waste and the system could be improved which would either provide better services or save the tax payer money. I suppose what I want is better value from the state.

 

 

 

Not sure this is relevant, but as I admit to paying tax, I suppose I must do.

 

Oh right - I just wondered when you did it, that was all.

[Johnny Bognor]

Oh right - I just wondered when you did it, that was all.

 

Very Good BTF

 

As I have only had 5 days off this year and can work up to 18 hours a day, then forgive me if I take things a little easier in a traditionally quiet month. As a net exporter, with most of my clients being based in Germany and France, they all clear off for the month of August, which leaves me with some time for a little light relief.

 

It is reassuring to know that both of these countries have come out of recession and so when my clients return, I will do my best to bring as much of that much needed money into our sick and weak economy, thus repairing the damage done by Clown and Co and whilst doing my best to financially support your beloved public sector.

[Special K]

DD there IS a difference.

 

'Yanks' pay for health care (or rather their employers do, if they have one). But they have to pay MORE for health care if they have or develop a condition (through no fault of their own often). If they're unemployed they can't afford private medical insurance so have to go hang if they become ill.

 

We pay for health care according to our ability to pay. If we're children or pensioners we don't have to (unless we're a wealthy pensioner and pay tax - but we still get 'free' prescriptions and eye tests) and no matter how serious our illnesses we get treatment regardless.

 

That's the difference - thank goodness.

 

Americans do get federal funded health care through medicare and medicaid, but it doesn't cover (by any means) all. So some on low incomes will qualify and all child health is covered by the state; they are not wholly left without treatment as you suggest.

[bridge too far]

Very Good BTF

 

........

 

It is reassuring to know that both of these countries have come out of recession and so when my clients return, I will do my best to bring as much of that much needed money into our sick and weak economy, thus repairing the damage done by Clown and Co and whilst doing my best to financially support your beloved public sector.

 

These two countries that are

a) in the eurozone (the sooner we are, the better)

b) not so dependent on the financial sector as are we (and the US)

c) have a far lower general level of leverage than in the Uk (and the US) because their people don't buy property as happens here.

[bridge too far]

Americans do get federal funded health care through medicare and medicaid, but it doesn't cover (by any means) all. So some on low incomes will qualify and all child health is covered by the state; they are not wholly left without treatment as you suggest.

 

Apparently not:

 

[edit] Coverage

 

Enrollment rules in private and governmental programs result in millions of Americans going without health care coverage, including children. The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that 45.7 million Americans (about 15.3% of the total population) had no health insurance coverage at some point during 2007.[36] Most uninsured Americans are working-class persons whose employers do not provide health insurance, and who earn too much money to qualify for one of the local or state insurance programs for the poor, but do not earn enough to cover the cost of enrollment in a health insurance plan designed for individuals. Some states (like California) do offer limited insurance coverage for working-class children, but not for adults; other states do not offer such coverage at all, and so, both parent and child are caught in the notorious coverage "gap."

 

It's worth reading the whole link. I was amazed to see that the most sophisticated country in the world has a lower life expectancy than the UK.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_United_States#The_uninsured

[Saintandy666]

NHS via taxes: Always covered regardless of treatment.

 

US via insurance(if you have it, 44 million americans don't): covered for basics, but if more treatment is needed, often that means you have to cough up alot more(despite already in alot of cases paying more per year per head on insurance than we do per year per head for the NHS).

[bridge too far]

This makes for interesting reading:

 

http://www.aflcio.org/issues/healthcare/whatswrong/

 

As does the fact that the US system has considerable administrative overheads, far greater than in nationalised systems. And, apparently, medical debt is the biggest cause of bankruptcy in the US.

[Johnny Bognor]

It's worth reading the whole link. I was amazed to see that the most sophisticated country in the world has a lower life expectancy than the UK.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_United_States#The_uninsured

 

It is also surprising that the NHS has the 2nd worst infant mortality rates (after the US) of the 24 richest countries.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/rise-in-uks-child-mortality-rate-is-linked-to-inequality-442806.html

[revolution saint]

Very Good BTF

 

As I have only had 5 days off this year and can work up to 18 hours a day, then forgive me if I take things a little easier in a traditionally quiet month. As a net exporter, with most of my clients being based in Germany and France, they all clear off for the month of August, which leaves me with some time for a little light relief.

 

It is reassuring to know that both of these countries have come out of recession and so when my clients return, I will do my best to bring as much of that much needed money into our sick and weak economy, thus repairing the damage done by Clown and Co and whilst doing my best to financially support your beloved public sector.

 

When I worked for the NHS I couldn't access this site.

 

I have to admit I didn't realise that people were employed as exporters of nets though - that must be a niche market or do you cast it far and wide?

[Saintandy666]

http://www.foxnews.com/search-results/m/25666562/you-were-warned.htm

 

Just watched Dan Hannan's interview on Fox news, he just really ****es me off with the bull**** he's coming out with in this lead on by the most bias interviewer ever but that's what it's like in the U.S. I love how in the corner it has it's logo 'Fox News: Fair and Balanced' - oh the irony.

 

I also love how now alot of people who have moaned about the NHS are really coming together in support of it now. It's a bit like a family member, you are allowed to moan about it but if someone else does you get really defensive. I think it goes to show how many people really value the NHS, just they are usually drowned out by the moaners in the Daily Mail.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

The NHS is one of the greatest institutions on the planet, and one that makes me feel proud to be English/British. The rednecks/middle class yanks, as per usual, don't seem to have a clue what they are one about.

 

"I don't want my country to be like Russia" I heard one American moron say on the news...****!

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

http://www.foxnews.com/search-results/m/25666562/you-were-warned.htm

 

Just watched Dan Hannan's interview on Fox news, he just really ****es me off with the bull**** he's coming out with in this lead on by the most bias interviewer ever but that's what it's like in the U.S. I love how in the corner it has it's logo 'Fox News: Fair and Balanced' - oh the irony.

 

I also love how now alot of people who have moaned about the NHS are really coming together in support of it now. It's a bit like a family member, you are allowed to moan about it but if someone else does you get really defensive. I think it goes to show how many people really value the NHS, just they are usually drowned out by the moaners in the Daily Mail.

 

AND, Dan Hannan represents us (I think?) in the European Parliament!!

[Saintandy666]

AND, Dan Hannan represents us (I think?) in the European Parliament!!

 

Yep, if you live in the south which most people on this forum do I guess he represents US. The thing is he is a good speaker, so he can make bull**** sound plausible.

 

Makes me appreciate the BBC watching that as well... it was so god damn bias!

 

I just can't take other countries criticizing us like this, but when one of our own does it in their country... it's like treason.

 

I think John Prescott's video on this is quite good.

- represents the NHS better anyway.

[EastleighSoulBoy]

While we are on the subject of how much more wonderful the US is than the UK in looking after it's citizens (ahhemm!) this link came into my inbox.

 

It really does support all those red necks in proclaiming that the yewessofa is truly the land of the free.

 

 

Only in America.

[Ponty]

The NHS might be rubbish but at least it's free!

[EastleighSoulBoy]

The NHS might be rubbish but at least it's free!

 

Are Admongspeep allowed to Troll? :smt081

[Verbal]

Well, the spend per head on the NHS is approx £1834 per annum which is roughly $3000, so for a family of three the NHS spends an equivalent of $9000 per annum. Bearing in mind that this burden is funded by the tax payer, who represent approximately half of the population, I would have thought a tax payer would be paying (directly or indirectly) quite a bit more than $9000 per annum for their free at the point of delivery healthcare. So the "cost" of our free at the point of delivery healthcare is probably not too dissimilar to the "cost" of the expensive American healthcare.

 

No, that's way off, I'm afraid.

 

The cost of health insurance is high enough in the US, and prohibitive for about 40 million plus Americans. But you can't just watch uninsured people

die of gunshot wounds, heart attacks, strokes, etc, etc.

 

So the US has a kind of ghost NHS. Part of it is known as Medicare, which is entirely US taxpayer-funded. The other major part is the County Hospital system that you'll find across the US. These are also taxpayer-funded, and are designed solely to treat the uninsured.

 

But even if you're insured, be very sure not to have a chronic or degenerative disease. The insurance companies will weedle out of paying for your treatment, and even the hugely expensive safety nets funded by US taxpayers won't help you.

[LVSaint]

No, that's way off, I'm afraid.

 

But even if you're insured, be very sure not to have a chronic or degenerative disease. The insurance companies will weedle out of paying for your treatment, and even the hugely expensive safety nets funded by US taxpayers won't help you.

 

It's not just chrnic or degenerative diseased patients that are shafted if you have to change healthcare insurance. Even less serious conditions that you had been covered for before, you will have a very hard time getting new insurance to cover you. This basic fact seems to have alluded those on here making excuses for the US way.

 

The other fact is that whilst it can be argued that costs to those paying for insurance and those being taxed could equate to the same is not really true.

 

Once undergoing US treatment, many plans require a whopping great deductible to be met (in our case $2500 per year, not too bad) before the insurance kicks in. This is after the monthly premiums we pay. Then you can still be liable for 10 or 20% of costs after that. Bear in mind that hospitals, doctors, anesthesiologists, etc, tend to charge from $10Ks to $100Ks for a fairly routine operation with a week's stay. Added to this, as mentioned above, the insurance people will, at any opportunity, attempt to wriggle out of anything they can to lessen their payout to the docs.

It's totally ****.

[Verbal]

It's not just chrnic or degenerative diseased patients that are shafted if you have to change healthcare insurance. Even less serious conditions that you had been covered for before, you will have a very hard time getting new insurance to cover you. This basic fact seems to have alluded those on here making excuses for the US way.

 

The other fact is that whilst it can be argued that costs to those paying for insurance and those being taxed could equate to the same is not really true.

 

Once undergoing US treatment, many plans require a whopping great deductible to be met (in our case $2500 per year, not too bad) before the insurance kicks in. This is after the monthly premiums we pay. Then you can still be liable for 10 or 20% of costs after that. Bear in mind that hospitals, doctors, anesthesiologists, etc, tend to charge from $10Ks to $100Ks for a fairly routine operation with a week's stay. Added to this, as mentioned above, the insurance people will, at any opportunity, attempt to wriggle out of anything they can to lessen their payout to the docs.

It's totally ****.

 

Agreed, LV, and I hope you escaped your brush with the medical industry with your mortgage intact.

 

To arrive at a true comparison between the cost to us of the rival health systems, you have to ADD the US cost of medical insurance together with the substantial federal and state taxes that pay for their ghost NHS.

 

It'll be blindingly obvious then which is the better value for money. The idea that we pay anywhere near an equivalent amount is frankly laughable.

[Saintandy666]

http://spennypost.blogspot.com/2009/08/more-nhs-bashing-filth-from-faux-news.html

 

This report from Fox news is frankly ridiculous, racist and most of all total ********! It's scaremongering by saying universal healthcare would mean and influx of muslim terrorists... WTF!!!!

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

http://spennypost.blogspot.com/2009/08/more-nhs-bashing-filth-from-faux-news.html

 

This report from Fox news is frankly ridiculous, racist and most of all total ********! It's scaremongering by saying universal healthcare would mean and influx of muslim terrorists... WTF!!!!

 

Fox love a bit of blatent racsim, they are scum.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Why is it the lefties don't want to recognise taxpayers' contributions?

 

They accept that money comes from taxation vehicles (whether that be income tax, VAT, etc), but don't like to mention that it is real people that have to pay it. That's right, they have to go out, work hard and hand over most of their money in taxes.

 

Go on BTF, just say it once, the tax payer pays for everything. It won't make you less of a socialist for doing so.

 

 

 

OK, you got me there

 

I work hard and pay taxes but I don't begrudge the NHS! I will defend it to the day I die. I have a chronic illness and if we had some disgusting system like the USA, myself, and many others like me, would not be able to get treatment.

[Verbal]

Here’s another way to look at the relative merits of the two health systems.

 

Compare how much the US and the UK spend on health as a proportion of GDP.

 

Then test this against the ultimate measure of their effectiveness: life expectancy.

 

According to the OECD, The US spends around 15.2% of GDP on health.

 

The UK spends 8.2% of GDP on health.

 

For all that massive difference in spending, life expectancy in the US is 78 years.

 

In the UK, it’s 79.1.

 

Which is better? Hmm, I wonder.

 

So what accounts for this massive waste in the US? Well, you only have to look at the financiers of the vicious campaign against the Obama health reforms for the answer to that.

 

‘Health’ is a very dirty business in the US.

[Thedelldays]

do you go into hospital and get C-Dif in the USA or MRSA...?

[bridge too far]

do you go into hospital and get C-Dif in the USA or MRSA...?

 

Apparently so:

 

"The CDC claims that 1.7 million people contract infections in U.S. hospitals each year. In fact, the truth is several times that number. The proof is in the data. One of the fastest growing infections is methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), a superbug that doesn’t respond to most antibiotics. In 1993, there were fewer than 2,000 MRSA infections in U.S. hospitals. By 2005, the figure had shot up to 368,000 according to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). By June, 2007, 2.4 percent of all patients had MRSA infections, according to the largest study of its kind, which was published in the American Journal of Infection Control. That would mean 880,000 victims a year."

 

from: http://www.hospitalinfection.org/essentialfacts.shtml

 

However, I can't find any data to compare all HAI rates in the US and England.

[Verbal]

Apparently so:

 

"The CDC claims that 1.7 million people contract infections in U.S. hospitals each year. In fact, the truth is several times that number. The proof is in the data. One of the fastest growing infections is methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), a superbug that doesn’t respond to most antibiotics. In 1993, there were fewer than 2,000 MRSA infections in U.S. hospitals. By 2005, the figure had shot up to 368,000 according to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). By June, 2007, 2.4 percent of all patients had MRSA infections, according to the largest study of its kind, which was published in the American Journal of Infection Control. That would mean 880,000 victims a year."

 

from: http://www.hospitalinfection.org/essentialfacts.shtml

 

However, I can't find any data to compare all HAI rates in the US and England.

 

Thanks, BTF, I was looking for that, because I'd heard plenty of horror stories of MRSA infection. But I was too busy attending a death panel.

[Saint George]

The amazing thing about this thread, is out of all the peeps singing the praises of the NHS ....Not ONE of you have a clue how much its costing you...or how much of the total burden it is that you're carrying.....Its just there....just like Nanny's comfy blanket...scary stuff

 

As for trying to compare like for like with the US system, thats just ludicrous....Peeps, listen up!...there's no comparison between the treatment and service that's available to peeps in the US and the desperately under funded, sub standard, rationed and post code alocated NHS...Of course US health care will be more expensive......Where do peeps go when they want, or need the best treatment available in the world?...Yup they come here, in their thousands.....The NHS however only seem to be able to attract cheapskates and spongers from backwater countries, looking for free treatment, paid for by the good ol'e, and ever diminishing British tax payer.

 

The revulsion you're seeing across the pond for the thought of US adopting a NHS style system stems from 2 things .....1/Not many peeps will accept their quality of health care being reduced to such a level............. and 2/'No one', other than the most ardent of Obomabots will accept 'that' much Government control in their lives. No way!.....Just ain't going to happen!

 

Yes, the US health care system needs a major overhaul....Most Americans can see and accept that.....It's just a case of finding the right solution.....The NHS ain't it...We already have a 'Charity system' here that's already nearly on a par to a good chunk of the NHS

 

But judging by these pages, all is rosy in the NHS blanket, so at least y'all are happy with your lot....So thats ok then

[Baj]

Saint George, I have a heart condition, should that heart condition worsen, in the NHS I would be covered for further treatment. Should I move the US, it is my understanding (and here's where perhaps you can correct me) that I would not be covered as it IS pre-existing and I would have to pay out of my own pocket?

[bridge too far]

Saint George, I have a heart condition, should that heart condition worsen, in the NHS I would be covered for further treatment. Should I move the US, it is my understanding (and here's where perhaps you can correct me) that I would not be covered as it IS pre-existing and I would have to pay out of my own pocket?

 

 

And also, Baj, prescription medicines are a lot more expensive in the US. I don't believe insurance pays for these. I think that's why there's a 'tourist trade' to Canada because these medicines are cheaper there.

 

In England (because it's different in Scotland and Wales) over 80% of prescriptions are written for people who do not have to pay prescription charges - children, pregnant women and nursing mothers, the elderly and many people with chronic conditions. Do people with heart conditions get free prescriptions? I know diabetes sufferers do.

[Saint George]

Saint George, I have a heart condition, should that heart condition worsen, in the NHS I would be covered for further treatment. Should I move the US, it is my understanding (and here's where perhaps you can correct me) that I would not be covered as it IS pre-existing and I would have to pay out of my own pocket?

 

Not necessarily...."The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act" prevents Insurance companies, providing 'group' schemes from excluding pre-existing conditions for more than a year.....Most, will honor them after only 9 months.....and some States have legislation for even less.....So you shouldn't have too much of a problem with 'Employer provided' health insurance....

 

Individual coverage is a different matter tho.....You can still get coverage from most insurers, but they'll charge an excess for your pre existing condition or place additional limitations on treatment

 

This is definitely an area in US health care that needs more reform

[EastleighSoulBoy]

The amazing thing about this thread, is out of all the peeps singing the praises of the NHS ....Not ONE of you have a clue how much its costing you...or how much of the total burden it is that you're carrying.....Its just there....just like Nanny's comfy blanket...scary stuff

 

As for trying to compare like for like with the US system, thats just ludicrous....Peeps, listen up!...there's no comparison between the treatment and service that's available to peeps in the US and the desperately under funded, sub standard, rationed and post code alocated NHS...Of course US health care will be more expensive......Where do peeps go when they want, or need the best treatment available in the world?...Yup they come here, in their thousands.....The NHS however only seem to be able to attract cheapskates and spongers from backwater countries, looking for free treatment, paid for by the good ol'e, and ever diminishing British tax payer.

 

The revulsion you're seeing across the pond for the thought of US adopting a NHS style system stems from 2 things .....1/Not many peeps will accept their quality of health care being reduced to such a level............. and 2/'No one', other than the most ardent of Obomabots will accept 'that' much Government control in their lives. No way!.....Just ain't going to happen!

 

Yes, the US health care system needs a major overhaul....Most Americans can see and accept that.....It's just a case of finding the right solution.....The NHS ain't it...We already have a 'Charity system' here that's already nearly on a par to a good chunk of the NHS

 

But judging by these pages, all is rosy in the NHS blanket, so at least y'all are happy with your lot....So thats ok then

 

Who on earth would want to come back to the crappy UK to either live or for health treatment? The thing is, with a lot of you Yanks, you think your country is the absolute dog's dangly bits when it clearly is far from it.

 

Each country has problems to varying degrees. Why not try to sort your own country out before running ours down?

 

Oh! presumably you'll not want to lower your standards and come back to your mother country for treatment, should you be unlucky enough to fall ill and your insurance company start prevaricating about paying out on your policy? I hope, sincerely, in a case like that you wouldn't compromise your principles?

[Saint George]

And also, Baj, prescription medicines are a lot more expensive in the US. I don't believe insurance pays for these. I think that's why there's a 'tourist trade' to Canada because these medicines are cheaper there.

 

In England (because it's different in Scotland and Wales) over 80% of prescriptions are written for people who do not have to pay prescription charges - children, pregnant women and nursing mothers, the elderly and many people with chronic conditions. Do people with heart conditions get free prescriptions? I know diabetes sufferers do.

 

Boy, It seems Tony and Gordy have done a good job on you! ....Do you really believe this stuff?...or are you just spreading the party propaganda?

 

Of course the insurance companies here cover perscription drugs....Hell, since the good old capitalist institution 'Walmart' got on the scene, most insured and widely used perscription drugs are even available for as little as $4 for a months supply.....Even cheaper than the NHS i believe....Well, for hard working Tax paying peeps anyway.

Less common generics are available at other pharmacies for around $15 and the latest and greatest drugs to market can be obtained for around $30 - $50 a month ...

 

Most of these top end drugs wont even be available on the NHS for several years...to expensive y'see........Last time my wife was in the UK she ran out of her medication and had to revert to a medicine thats near obsolete in the US......Her $30 a month medication was too expensive for the NHS, who wont approve it, until the price has dropped or its available in generic form.

 

Sure...here 'everyone' has to pay something towards there 'own' healthcare ...But that's a whole lot better than 'some' peeps having the burden of paying for 'everyone's healthcare.....even that guy down the road who's never paid tax and chose to smoke all his life and now has costly health problems.

[Saintandy666]

Boy, It seems Tony and Gordy have done a good job on you! ....Do you really believe this stuff?...or are you just spreading the party propaganda?

 

Of course the insurance companies here cover perscription drugs....Hell, since the good old capitalist institution 'Walmart' got on the scene, most insured and widely used perscription drugs are even available for as little as $4 for a months supply.....Even cheaper than the NHS i believe....Well, for hard working Tax paying peeps anyway.

Less common generics are available at other pharmacies for around $15 and the latest and greatest drugs to market can be obtained for around $30 - $50 a month ...

 

Most of these top end drugs wont even be available on the NHS for several years...to expensive y'see........Last time my wife was in the UK she ran out of her medication and had to revert to a medicine thats near obsolete in the US......Her $30 a month medication was too expensive for the NHS, who wont approve it, until the price has dropped or its available in generic form.

 

Sure...here 'everyone' has to pay something towards there 'own' healthcare ...But that's a whole lot better than 'some' peeps having the burden of paying for 'everyone's healthcare.....even that guy down the road who's never paid tax and chose to smoke all his life and now has costly health problems.

 

Watch the film 'sicko'.

[Thedelldays]

Watch the film 'sicko'.

if that is the michael moore film then no thanks..

 

he could make a conspiracy out of the life of mother therasa