• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Britain Plans to Decentralize Health Care

Rightwingnutjob

Active member
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
420
Reaction score
118
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Interesting, huh?

in one of its most surprising moves so far, it has done the opposite, proposing what would be the most radical reorganization of the National Health Service, as the system is called, since its inception in 1948.

Practical details of the plan are still sketchy. But its aim is clear: to shift control of England’s $160 billion annual health budget from a centralized bureaucracy to doctors at the local level. Under the plan, $100 billion to $125 billion a year would be meted out to general practitioners, who would use the money to buy services from hospitals and other health care providers.

The New York Times > Log In
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Interesting article, Right Wing. I sure don't understand what it is they're doing though. Seems confusing. What it does tell me is that the slap-dash proposal that Congress passed is only the beginning of what may well be a whore's nightmare.
 
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
11,923
Reaction score
6,160
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
They're trying to reform NHS without portraying that to the public. Essentially they want to dismantle NHS yet make that very tough pill more digestible for the British public.
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Interesting, but nothing to do with the US or what we're doing as their system is very different. Seems they are working on improving as we should be.
 

Barbbtx

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,467
Reaction score
1,993
Location
W'Ford TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Interesting, but nothing to do with the US or what we're doing as their system is very different. Seems they are working on improving as we should be.
Maybe it means they are trying to climb out of the rat hole that we are climbing into.
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Maybe it means they are trying to climb out of the rat hole that we are climbing into.
Oh, I doubt that. Change in ideology ture. But we're not doing what they are doing. Very different here.
 

Laila

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
10,100
Reaction score
2,990
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
They're trying to reform NHS without portraying that to the public. Essentially they want to dismantle NHS yet make that very tough pill more digestible for the British public.
Won't fool the British public.

Keep digging that hole Conservatives 'cause they're gonna be screwed next election
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
35,128
Reaction score
12,044
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Ultimately, messing with the NHS cost Thatcher her power. Doubt Cameron will make the same mistake again. Sure optimize it, but privatize or dismantle... would be political suicide.
 

Your Star

Rage More!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
27,246
Reaction score
19,931
Location
Georgia
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
Yeah, no way the British people allow this.
 

Renae

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
48,389
Reaction score
18,084
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Yeah, no way the British people allow this.
They prefer mediocore over priced healthcare to real change that would improve their lives. Cause if Gov't didn't run it.. they might be *GASP* responsible for their own lives again.

Can't have that.
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
35,128
Reaction score
12,044
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
They prefer mediocore

Life expectancy UK is 79.4 and in the US 78.2. So it is better than the US.. wups.

Under 5 mortality is 6 per 1000 in the UK and 7.8 in the US... another wups.

Number of doctors in the UK is more per 100.000 citizens than in the US.

The UK has also more beds than the US per capita...

in most health statistics the UK beats the US.

over priced healthcare
Overpriced? The US uses almost 8000 dollars per capita, where as the UK uses 3500 per capita.. who is exactly has the over priced healthcare?

to real change that would improve their lives. Cause if Gov't didn't run it.. they might be *GASP* responsible for their own lives again.

Can't have that.
and what exactly are you babbling about here? What "real change".. going from a superior system to an inferior? And we are just as responsible for our own lives as Americans are, so take your arrogance and ...
 

Renae

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
48,389
Reaction score
18,084
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Life expectancy UK is 79.4 and in the US 78.2. So it is better than the US.. wups.

Under 5 mortality is 6 per 1000 in the UK and 7.8 in the US... another wups.

Number of doctors in the UK is more per 100.000 citizens than in the US.

The UK has also more beds than the US per capita...

in most health statistics the UK beats the US.



Overpriced? The US uses almost 8000 dollars per capita, where as the UK uses 3500 per capita.. who is exactly has the over priced healthcare?



and what exactly are you babbling about here? What "real change".. going from a superior system to an inferior? And we are just as responsible for our own lives as Americans are, so take your arrogance and ...
Wow, you got some great talking points, too bad they don't mean squat.
 

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Dungeon Master
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
30,809
Reaction score
34,031
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Wow, you got some great talking points, too bad they don't mean squat.
Clearly for you the line has been blurred between talking points and facts. Which is what Pete showed you. Truly sad you don't know the difference.

You've been fed this "socialized medicine" propaganda for so long... I truly feel for you buddy.
 

digsbe

Truth will set you free
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
20,224
Reaction score
14,223
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Life expectancy UK is 79.4 and in the US 78.2. So it is better than the US.. wups.
What does this mean? That people in the UK live 1.2 years longer because they have superior healthcare? It could be due to the fact that in America we have an obesity epidemic. Healthcare quality isn't the only thing that factors into life expectancy.
Under 5 mortality is 6 per 1000 in the UK and 7.8 in the US... another wups.
What statistic is this supposed to be for? Any sources?
Number of doctors in the UK is more per 100.000 citizens than in the US.
This is factually incorrect. According to Physicians per 1,000 people (most recent) by country
52United States: 2.3 per 1,000 people
55 United Kingdom: 2.2 per 1,000 people
The US has more doctors per person (even though it is slightly more) than the UK. Your statistic is wrong.
The UK has also more beds than the US per capita...
This is correct. The US only has 320 hospital beds per 100,000 people. The UK has 390. However, Russia has 1072, Belarus has 1124, and Poland has 523. Does that mean these nations have a better healthcare system than the UK? You have to take into account the quality of care in hospitals and population growth rates. I've known many sick people, and no one has ever been turned away from a hospital due to no vacancy.
in most health statistics the UK beats the US.
That is due to culture and personal life style choices. I would like to see proof related directly to healthcare, hospitals, and the quality of care.
Overpriced? The US uses almost 8000 dollars per capita, where as the UK uses 3500 per capita.. who is exactly has the over priced healthcare?
Source please? In the UK healthcare is funded by taxes. Who has the higher taxes?
41 United States: 35 %
24 United Kingdom: 40 %

and what exactly are you babbling about here? What "real change".. going from a superior system to an inferior? And we are just as responsible for our own lives as Americans are, so take your arrogance and ...
In America we are headed for an inferior system filled with bureaucracy and even more wasteful spending. My dermatologist is from the UK, and he has told us how horrible their healthcare system is. One reason he left the UK was to escape it.

Now, I am for an efficient form of socialized healthcare. I believe it's a right and I do believe that in America we are spending too much and wasting too much. However, the British healthcare system has become a bloated bureaucracy that is inefficient.
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
35,128
Reaction score
12,044
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
What does this mean? That people in the UK live 1.2 years longer because they have superior healthcare? It could be due to the fact that in America we have an obesity epidemic. Healthcare quality isn't the only thing that factors into life expectancy.
The British are not far off on the obesity problem. But I see it makes a nice excuse. Like it or not obesity is not a "US problem" by far. The Germans are near the US on some obesity stats and the UK not far behind. But it is hard to find current statistics it seems.. best I have found is at Forbes.. wtf.. from 2007 (so 2005-6 numbers).

What statistic is this supposed to be for? Any sources?
It is one of the many statistics you can see at WHO and OECD. It is how many children die before their 5th birthday. WHO Global Health Observatory has it all.

This is factually incorrect. According to Physicians per 1,000 people (most recent) by country
52United States: 2.3 per 1,000 people
55 United Kingdom: 2.2 per 1,000 people
The US has more doctors per person (even though it is slightly more) than the UK. Your statistic is wrong.
Yes, it was factually incorrect in 2002.... now in 2010 it is actually factually correct.

OECD Health Data 2010 - Frequently Requested Data

Excel ark btw, but it has lots of nice information. It shows 2.61 practising physicians per 1000 population for the UK in 2008 and 2.43 for the US. Now there is no number yet for 2009 for the US, but the UK climbed to 2.71... doubt the US made up that much ground in 1 year.. And this fits the trend in the US, where hospitals are being closed at an almost record pace.

This is correct. The US only has 320 hospital beds per 100,000 people. The UK has 390. However, Russia has 1072, Belarus has 1124, and Poland has 523. Does that mean these nations have a better healthcare system than the UK? You have to take into account the quality of care in hospitals and population growth rates. I've known many sick people, and no one has ever been turned away from a hospital due to no vacancy.
Actually it is now 310 per 100.000 people according to the new statistics, and the UK has 340. As for your second point, no it does not. But I was replying to the "expensive" comment if you look, and places like the UK and pretty much everyone else that the US compares it self normally, get more for their money by far. And yes, having more beds and good health statistics and more doctors and so on, shows how efficient a healthcare system is vs the amount of money pumped into it.

That is due to culture and personal life style choices. I would like to see proof related directly to healthcare, hospitals, and the quality of care.
Ahh the "obesity" excuse again. Listen, obesity and life style choices are not that dramatically different between the US and UK or Germany or many other countries. The only ones where you remotely can claim this, are countries around the Mediterranean because of their use of olive oil. The Brits and Germans are fat, they eat fatty unhealthy foods and drink too much.

Source please? In the UK healthcare is funded by taxes. Who has the higher taxes?
41 United States: 35 %
24 United Kingdom: 40 %
Source? It is commen fact lol. Again I refer you to the OECD Excel ark. First page.. 2008 numbers, the US spent 7538 dollars per capita, the UK 3129 per capita. Considering US healthcare costs are out of control, then the present 2010 number will be around 8000 if not over... does the healthcare costs not rise about 15% to 30% a year now days?

As for your argument that the UK pays more taxes .. yes that is true. However unlike the US, everyone is covered and there is no self payment and coverage does not run out if your plan maximum runs out.. If we were to add the same level of coverage to the US, then your over all "burden" would skyrocket way past the 40% in tax rate the UK pays, because of the extremely high healthcare costs.

Okay say we take two people. No deductibles and all that crap as it scews the facts. One in the UK and one in the US. Both earn say 100.000 dollars and after taxes that would leave 65000 for the American and 60000 for the Brit. Now since the Brit already has paid for his healthcare and that of his family through taxes he does not have any additional costs on this.. however the American still has to go out and find a healthcare plan.. and to match the coverage of the British one.. what would that cost the American... more than 5000 dollars or less.. a year for a family? Well according to this...

Average family health insurance policy: $13,375, up 5% - USATODAY.com

it would cost him 13375, and not even give the same coverage as the British model. And yes if we are talking about a single person, then the US system would be slightly cheaper but less coverage.. oh bugger!

So again, I would claim paying over taxes is cheaper than a single payer system.

In America we are headed for an inferior system filled with bureaucracy and even more wasteful spending.
That may be, but it is not because of Government, since Government has caved in to big business and let them make the rules. Hence the healthcare market is basically localized monopolies with zero controls on prices.

My dermatologist is from the UK, and he has told us how horrible their healthcare system is. One reason he left the UK was to escape it.
Oh dont get me wrong, by European standards the UK NHS is at the bottom of the pile so to say, but it is still miles ahead of the US at least on the statistical background.

As for you dermatologist.. guess he was pissed he could not squeeze his victims.. I mean customers, for all the money they had. You see in Europe, people dont usually become doctors because they want to be rich.. but because .. yes I know it is shocking.. they actually want to help people.

Now, I am for an efficient form of socialized healthcare. I believe it's a right and I do believe that in America we are spending too much and wasting too much. However, the British healthcare system has become a bloated bureaucracy that is inefficient.
And again, you base this one what? RNC Talking points.. what Fox tells you?
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Normally I just ignore you but this is just too full of crap to let fly. First of all I've seen the WHO report myself. Considering they are pro-UHC biased and just threw out blanket numbers with no analysis it's not surprising people outside of the health or insurance industry who want handouts for all use their numbers blindly.
So now to bring the hammer down on your inaccuracies.

Life expectancy UK is 79.4 and in the US 78.2. So it is better than the US.. wups.
Not factoring in that less people in the UK own vehicles or have less disposable income due to tax and regulate,among(which can lead to premature deaths among the reckless and unfortunate) other lifestyle factors and the numbers still only skew up by what amounts to a little over a year. Nice oops yourself.

Under 5 mortality is 6 per 1000 in the UK and 7.8 in the US... another wups.
Which is an irrelavent statistic considering the US is not a homogenous population with different laws and ways of living. Another Pete wups.

Number of doctors in the UK is more per 100.000 citizens than in the US.
The U.S. has a doctor shortage due to legally limited doctor enrollment by federal law in which the AMA lobbied for in the early part of the 1900's, guess your little WHO propoganda piece didn't give you that piece of info did it?
The UK has also more beds than the US per capita...
And more sanitation problems coupled with longer wait times, worse satisfaction scores, and a much higher critical care mortality rate. To quote you wups.
in most health statistics the UK beats the US.
Not even close.



Overpriced? The US uses almost 8000 dollars per capita, where as the UK uses 3500 per capita.. who is exactly has the over priced healthcare?
I'd rather pay more for better than less for crap.



and what exactly are you babbling about here? What "real change".. going from a superior system to an inferior? And we are just as responsible for our own lives as Americans are, so take your arrogance and ...
LOL, you can't even come close to claiming that. The UK has more unemployment historically and Europe is the handout capital of the free world. What was that word you used again? Oh yeah........wups.
 
Last edited:

Vic Mango

Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
64
Reaction score
8
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Healthcare is one area in which the health of our loved ones should over-ride profits.
 

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Dungeon Master
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
30,809
Reaction score
34,031
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Easy to say when it's someone else's money.
If you pay insurance, and someone else gets sick who's in your insurance company, and you don't... does that not mean you pay for it too?
 

Rightwingnutjob

Active member
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
420
Reaction score
118
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Healthcare is one area in which the health of our loved ones should over-ride profits.
I'm sure it's not the only area you have that belief.

The members of society who make an EFFORT to be healthy and to work should have healthcare for themselves and their children. I genuinely believe some people NEED help. I also believe that the vast majority don't. Health care is a privelege, NOT a right.
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
35,128
Reaction score
12,044
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Normally I just ignore you but this is just too full of crap to let fly. First of all I've seen the WHO report myself. Considering they are pro-UHC biased and just threw out blanket numbers with no analysis it's not surprising people outside of the health or insurance industry who want handouts for all use their numbers blindly.
So now to bring the hammer down on your inaccuracies.
Okay..

Not factoring in that less people in the UK own vehicles or have less disposable income due to tax and regulate,among(which can lead to premature deaths among the reckless and unfortunate) other lifestyle factors and the numbers still only skew up by what amounts to a little over a year. Nice oops yourself.
LOL talk about being inaccurate and muddying the waters. What exactly does owning less cars have to do with health? And less disposable income.. what... on earth does that have to do with it.. and I am not even sure that is correct. Prove it.

So basically... wups what on earth does this have to do with anything!?

Which is an irrelavent statistic considering the US is not a homogenous population with different laws and ways of living. Another Pete wups.
Eh? Seriously where do you get this crap. What on earth does this have to do with the statistic? Are you blaming the blacks or something? It is hardly an irrelevant statistic. It shows how many children die in a country before they are 5. Now this can be accidents or it can be disease. Are you claiming that US parents are so bad at parenting that they kill their children more than other nations?

The U.S. has a doctor shortage due to legally limited doctor enrollment by federal law in which the AMA lobbied for in the early part of the 1900's, guess your little WHO propoganda piece didn't give you that piece of info did it?
Actually that is common place in ALL countries.. so that is evened out! Most countries have limits on enrolment into medical schools, including the UK.

And more sanitation problems coupled with longer wait times, worse satisfaction scores, and a much higher critical care mortality rate. To quote you wups.
yes you guys do have a few stats you are better at. So that is what.. 4 out of how many hundred? Got any more.. Yes I know about the cancer statistics.

And sanitation problems are often because that the cleaning has been outsourced to private companies. Our standards are as good as American standards when it comes to sanitation, but because of the gutting of the NHS, hospitals have been forced to privatize the cleaning of hospitals, and that has meant that the cleaning has suffered. It happened in Denmark as well.

As for "satisfaction scores", it is not exactly a statistic that is comparable. People might not be satisfied enough with the NHS, but if you ask them if it should be privatised and broken up then you would find that a huge majority would say no. Hell France and Spain have some of the best healthcare systems in the world, and the population are never satisfied with them and yet they would never ever get rid of them.

As for waiting lists.. you do know they exist in your oh so perfect system right? Plus it is easy to cut waiting lists if you dont cover more than 60% of your population and the rest just die at home or in emergency rooms when it is too late...

Not even close.
OH.. I know the US beats most on cancer statistics, but what else? And even here, it is only statistics on those that are treated.. there are no statistics on those not treated because they cant afford going to the doctor... they dont show up in the official cancer statistics.

I'd rather pay more for better than less for crap.
I agree, but in the US case you are paying much much more for worse than most European countries on average..... then again if you are willing to pay for liver transplants for 70+ year odl alcoholic multi millionaire instead using the liver on someone who can contribute to society, then by all means go ahead.

LOL, you can't even come close to claiming that. The UK has more unemployment historically and Europe is the handout capital of the free world. What was that word you used again? Oh yeah........wups.
On the UK unemployment .. prove it.. and let me remind you the official US unemployment figures are not reliable as people can fall out of the statistics after a certain time.. not to mention it is a freaking poll... only real unemployment statistics even get close.

As for the "handout capital of the free world".. 30+ years ago sure, now.. not so much. Your sense of reality about Europe seems stuck in the 1960s and 1970s. Europe as a whole, has over the last 30 years changed very much on almost every level.
 

Vic Mango

Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
64
Reaction score
8
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I'm sure it's not the only area you have that belief.

The members of society who make an EFFORT to be healthy and to work should have healthcare for themselves and their children. I genuinely believe some people NEED help. I also believe that the vast majority don't. Health care is a privelege, NOT a right.
Healthcare should be a RIGHT, and we can all contribute either with money or some kind of community service, like cleaning hospital beds. The greatest asset of this country is our people, and we should not treat them like garbage because they dont make a lot of money.
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,264
Reaction score
4,744
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Normally I just ignore you but this is just too full of crap to let fly. First of all I've seen the WHO report myself. Considering they are pro-UHC biased and just threw out blanket numbers with no analysis it's not surprising people outside of the health or insurance industry who want handouts for all use their numbers blindly.
So now to bring the hammer down on your inaccuracies.
Violent deaths (i.e. shootings, etc) are also higher in the US then many other places (such as Japan, UK) in the world. Vicitims of violent deaths tend to be younger, so, like car accidednts, they have a greater impact on life expectancy than other types of deaths.

You also forgot the fact that the US counts a live birth much differently then the rest of the world. The US counts a live birth if the infant shows any sign of life. Other countries will only count a live birth if the baby has certain weight, height, circumfrance measurements. Teen pregnancies and fertiliity treatments are also much higher in the US then most other countries. All things that can affect numbers.
 
Last edited:

VanceMack

MSG Benavides TAB
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
73,591
Reaction score
30,979
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
"The plan would result in thousands of layoffs among health care workers, and across the board cuts in everything from hip and cataract surgery to pediatric and maternity services, according to Britain's Sunday Telegraph. The NHS already doles out certain health services, and is likely to increase rationing on common procedures like knee replacements and orthodontic treatment."

Hype, rhetoric and ideology aside...the reality is that government run healthcare is a nightmare. Britain is trying to save money by getting out of the beauracratic and administrative side and allow regional managers to spend the money as the region sees fit. We do the same thing in this country already with Medicare/Medicaid...we contract services to private businesses. This is a nightmare. You will see a significant portion of that 160 billion go into the pocket of the administrators that are awarded the bid. You will see reductions in services. You will see doing more with less, doctors with greater caseloads, and a reduction in care. I suspect this aint gonna be pretty...
 

VanceMack

MSG Benavides TAB
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
73,591
Reaction score
30,979
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Okay..


As for the "handout capital of the free world".. 30+ years ago sure, now.. not so much. Your sense of reality about Europe seems stuck in the 1960s and 1970s. Europe as a whole, has over the last 30 years changed very much on almost every level.
In order for ANY of the WHO stats to be valid they have to do a straigh up apples to apples comparison. They dont because every country reports things differently. In some countries live births and infant mortality arent even counted until the baby is two months old. In some countries children born premature or with handicaps are never counted in their infant mortality statistics. Its interesting that people that USE statistics so much dont adhere to basic standards of validity and reliability in their research.
 
Top Bottom