Public satisfaction with NHS at lowest ever level
Discussion
Vanden Saab said:
MrsVS and 3 of her recently retired colleagues...hi NHS we have just retired after 30+ years as a nurses we would like to work 2 days a week for you.
NHS... no thanks we do not want you. .
But yeah grrr tories we are 50,000 nurses short. It is all the government's fault
What's stopping them becoming Bank nurses, either direct with the NHS or via an Agency ?NHS... no thanks we do not want you. .
But yeah grrr tories we are 50,000 nurses short. It is all the government's fault
BikeBikeBIke said:
Funnily enough I do and I've found private care to be suprisingly cheap.
My neighbour got a hip done for 12 grand.
I had a bit of a scare and got an appointment with a consultant for £255.
Abolsute bargain in both cases compared to what the NHS were offering. (Which was nothing.)
Does it matter? We all agree the NHS is providing deliberately bad care in order to privatize it. So let's miss out the bad care step and adopt an approach that we prefer. Preferably the French system which combines the best of both because it can be topped up.
You are sorting of proving my point which isn't exactly surprising My neighbour got a hip done for 12 grand.
I had a bit of a scare and got an appointment with a consultant for £255.
Abolsute bargain in both cases compared to what the NHS were offering. (Which was nothing.)
Does it matter? We all agree the NHS is providing deliberately bad care in order to privatize it. So let's miss out the bad care step and adopt an approach that we prefer. Preferably the French system which combines the best of both because it can be topped up.
Edited by BikeBikeBIke on Wednesday 27th March 09:52
Do you know the NHS tariff cost for that hip operation? And maybe the cost of the out-patient appointment for comparison? See if you think it is a bargain
It is not deliberately providing bad care in order to privatise it. What an absolute load of rubbish. We just have incompetent MPs in charge.
pavarotti1980 said:
It is not deliberately providing bad care in order to privatise it. What an absolute load of rubbish. We just have incompetent MPs in charge.
That's been said more than once in this thread and nobody disputed it. (You're the first to disagree and you didn't disagree when it was first said.)But let's assume it's incompetence. Why have someone incompetent running health care?
If you had three garages:
1) Run incomptently.
2) Run deliberately to destroy it.
3) Run as a business to do the best it can.
Which one would you go to?
Why is healthcare less important than garages?
Edited by BikeBikeBIke on Wednesday 27th March 10:06
andy43 said:
We can get a GP appointment within days. If it’s urgent usually same day. I can be on hold for a few minutes and sometimes it can be engaged but I’ll always get to speak to someone. This is not what I hear from people in other areas though, it sounds like some surgeries just can’t cope.
Wife recently had an op. It was delayed once but then carried out and all the follow up appointments and care have been great. Previous hysterectomy care was also faultless.
I used A&E for the first time in my life after falling from a great height (2 feet) and dislocating a finger.
Entered A&E at 6pm on a Thursday, assessed, x rayed, manipulated, x rayed twice more, strapped up and kicked out all in less than 2.5 hours. It would have been quicker but my second X-ray hit the shift changeover which seemed to involve 30 minutes of talking and nothing happening.
Hospital has the builders in building new buildings.
It all seems to be hanging together ok to me. Could be better obviously but when you need it it does seem to work.
It doesn’t though does it. The cancer waiting times, the A&E waiting times, the astronomical waiting times combined with the increase in the number of people dying whilst waiting all suggest that it isn’t working. I am delighted you have had a good experience with the NHS but using that to suggest that it “does seem to work” is seriously flawed logic.Wife recently had an op. It was delayed once but then carried out and all the follow up appointments and care have been great. Previous hysterectomy care was also faultless.
I used A&E for the first time in my life after falling from a great height (2 feet) and dislocating a finger.
Entered A&E at 6pm on a Thursday, assessed, x rayed, manipulated, x rayed twice more, strapped up and kicked out all in less than 2.5 hours. It would have been quicker but my second X-ray hit the shift changeover which seemed to involve 30 minutes of talking and nothing happening.
Hospital has the builders in building new buildings.
It all seems to be hanging together ok to me. Could be better obviously but when you need it it does seem to work.
BikeBikeBIke said:
That's been said more than once in this thread amd almost nobody disputes it. (You're the first to disagree and you didn't disagree when it was first said.)
But let's assume it's incompetence. Why have someone incompetent running health care?
If you had three garages:
1) Run incomptently.
2) Run deliberately to destroy it.
3) Run as a business to do the best it can.
Which one would you go to?
Why is healthcare less important than garages?
Why has someone incompetent run healthcare? Because stupid people voted for Conservative at the last few elections and that put people like Cameron, Osborne, Lansley, Hunt, Johnson et al in charge of things. It really isn't that difficult. They got into power in 2010 and immediately messed around with the NHS, created the HSC Act 2012 which was not required, introduced CCGs at huge expense to replace PCTs who did the same job. Split out commissioning unnecessarily bla bla bla. And you want to use some lame analogy about garagesBut let's assume it's incompetence. Why have someone incompetent running health care?
If you had three garages:
1) Run incomptently.
2) Run deliberately to destroy it.
3) Run as a business to do the best it can.
Which one would you go to?
Why is healthcare less important than garages?
Have you worked out if that private hip op and OP appointment were good value or not yet
pavarotti1980 said:
Why has someone incompetent run healthcare? Because stupid people voted for Conservative at the last few elections and that put people like Cameron, Osborne, Lansley, Hunt, Johnson et al in charge of things. It really isn't that difficult. They got into power in 2010 and immediately messed around with the NHS, created the HSC Act 2012 which was not required, introduced CCGs at huge expense to replace PCTs who did the same job. Split out commissioning unnecessarily bla bla bla. And you want to use some lame analogy about garages
I'll tell you what how about we get rid of the NHS and when there are no more stupid people and we live in a one party state where only Labour can be elected we bring it back? (But even then there will still be people who want to spend more or less. People don't all want identical healthcare provision and they'll say Labour are incompetent for providing the wrong care.)pavarotti1980 said:
Have you worked out if that private hip op and OP appointment were good value or not yet
Best value ever. Both life changing improvements.Edited by BikeBikeBIke on Wednesday 27th March 10:31
Edited by BikeBikeBIke on Wednesday 27th March 10:33
BikeBikeBIke said:
I'll tell you what how about we get rid of the NHS. And then theyre are no more stupid people and we live in a one party state where only Labour can be elected we bring it back? (But even then there will still be people who want to spend more or less. People don't all want identical healthcare provision and they'll say Labour are incompetent for providing the wrong care.)
On reflection, best if we go with a base level and top up system. Keeps almost everyone happy.
Thank you for proving my point you have started at a baseline of knowing nothing and not got any better. On reflection, best if we go with a base level and top up system. Keeps almost everyone happy.
BikeBikeBIke said:
Best value ever. Both life changing improvements.
We will keep it basic cost as that is easier to compare than biased perceptive costs. Would it come as a shock to you that the NHS cost of a non-trauma hip operation with a low clinical complexity score (which is what private providers like to have for a quick turn-around) is between £5,443-£6,281. That is op, drugs, physio and bed for up to 5 days
Single professional initial consultant led out-patient appointment (cardiology specialty as an example) is £191 and subsequent appointments are £100
Edited by pavarotti1980 on Wednesday 27th March 10:59
BikeBikeBike said:
On reflection, best if we go with a base level and top up system. Keeps almost everyone happy.
Even if it costs more? Because the French state/taxpayer spends more - both in raw numbers and as %GDP than we do on the NHS plus the extra of individual top-ups. If you spend way more you get better outcomes! Who'd of thought it?
Time and again comparative studies have shown that, overall, the NHS provides outcomes comparative with the budget it is given - with the proportion of GDP and the demographic demands placed on it it performs exactly as you'd expect.
As for your 'three garages' analogy; what about the secret fourth option of a garage that isn't run as a business but as a public service? Or is that just not on the table anymore? Are we really in such myopic times that the options are 'sabotage from without', 'incompetence' and 'run it as business'?
2xChevrons said:
Even if it costs more? Because the French state/taxpayer spends more - both in raw numbers and as %GDP than we do on the NHS plus the extra of individual top-ups.
If you spend way more you get better outcomes! Who'd of thought it?
Yes, and under the French system you have the option to spend more - to top up. If all your neighbours want to spend less you can say "Fine I'll top it up.". You aren't relying on convincing 35 million other people to want the same as you.If you spend way more you get better outcomes! Who'd of thought it?
2xChevrons said:
As for your 'three garages' analogy; what about the secret fourth option of a garage that isn't run as a business but as a public service? Or is that just not on the table anymore? Are we really in such myopic times that the options are 'sabotage from without', 'incompetence' and 'run it as business'?
It's not new. It's been that way for as long as I can remember.BikeBikeBIke said:
2xChevrons said:
Even if it costs more? Because the French state/taxpayer spends more - both in raw numbers and as %GDP than we do on the NHS plus the extra of individual top-ups.
If you spend way more you get better outcomes! Who'd of thought it?
Yes, and under the French system you have the option to spend more - to top up. If all your neighbours want to spend less you can say "Fine I'll top it up.". You aren't relying on convincing 35 million other people to want the same as you.If you spend way more you get better outcomes! Who'd of thought it?
But if spending more just leads to better outcomes why not just do that? Why don't we just raise NHS spending to the European %GDP average (as it was when satisfaction and outcomes peaked in the late 2000s) and run with that?
JagLover said:
Electro1980 said:
All irrelevant. You accept that the only important metric of funding, per capita, has been cut. All of the rest is irrelevant to the conversation about why services have got worse. The rest, about tax take, total spending, percentage of GDP etc irrelevant to the discussion about why the NHS is worse.
No it is very relevant as the government cannot spend money it doesn't have unless you operate in a world of infinite money.If we want to talk about if the government had the money to spend more, that’s an entirely different question.
Having had my mother needing the NHS for the last 12 months I can confirm it is absolutely appalling. No coordination, no management, in some cases even care and empathy are severely lacking at all areas.
I think it is too big, too overstretched for treatments, blurred lines on responsibilities between NHS and local authorities. Just about everything about it is poor.
Like most other things in this country, there are too many services, too many people demanding them and a chronically badly managed system to provide it. More money thrown at it as per usual is money down the drain.
We have over the last 30 years or so seen various governments try and fail miserably to put it right and everyone has failed. Surely someone needs to say time to stop and rebuild from the ground up something that is affordable and something manageable that will work.
I think it is too big, too overstretched for treatments, blurred lines on responsibilities between NHS and local authorities. Just about everything about it is poor.
Like most other things in this country, there are too many services, too many people demanding them and a chronically badly managed system to provide it. More money thrown at it as per usual is money down the drain.
We have over the last 30 years or so seen various governments try and fail miserably to put it right and everyone has failed. Surely someone needs to say time to stop and rebuild from the ground up something that is affordable and something manageable that will work.
isaldiri said:
Well, it's hardly very substantial real term cuts either is it? -0.07% per annum in the coalition government and -0.03% spend per capita isn't exactly showing the government hasn't been supporting the NHS because nearly everything else associated with government spending (well apart from foreign aid I suppose) did get cut because it was well... unaffordable after 2008.
It wasn’t unaffordable. It was a choice that was made, and a choice that has since been shown to be based on economic illiteracy and bad data.Those cuts might be small, but they are cuts year on year, each one adding to the decline.
Edited by Electro1980 on Wednesday 27th March 11:10
BikeBikeBIke said:
Electro1980 said:
BikeBikeBIke said:
If so let's privatize it ASAP so we get the health care we want without the Government deliberately sabotaging it.
Every other country manages fine without an NHS. We should stop it and adopt something like the French system ASAP. ~£3k a year funded by the taxpayer and people bump it up, if that base level isn't good enough for them. It's insane that we all a) Think our system is failing to deliver over at least 40 years. b) Think it's better than all the others. c) Stick with it!
Would you go to a garage the deliberately sabotaged your car?
France spends far more than the UK per capita. The tax payer funded part is more than the UK.Every other country manages fine without an NHS. We should stop it and adopt something like the French system ASAP. ~£3k a year funded by the taxpayer and people bump it up, if that base level isn't good enough for them. It's insane that we all a) Think our system is failing to deliver over at least 40 years. b) Think it's better than all the others. c) Stick with it!
Would you go to a garage the deliberately sabotaged your car?
pavarotti1980 said:
We will keep it basic cost as that is easier to compare than biased perceptive costs.
Would it come as a shock to you that the NHS cost of a non-trauma hip operation with a low clinical complexity score (which is what private providers like to have for a quick turn-around) is between £5,443-£6,281. That is op, drugs, physio and bed for up to 5 days
Single professional initial consultant led out-patient appointment (cardiology specialty as an example) is £191 and subsequent appointments are £100
I can just imagine the GP: "Good news Mr Bike. Despite being managed by incompetent MPs, the appointment you can't have would cost £60 less than the one you can have!".Would it come as a shock to you that the NHS cost of a non-trauma hip operation with a low clinical complexity score (which is what private providers like to have for a quick turn-around) is between £5,443-£6,281. That is op, drugs, physio and bed for up to 5 days
Single professional initial consultant led out-patient appointment (cardiology specialty as an example) is £191 and subsequent appointments are £100
Electro1980 said:
Maybe you can top it up in France, but they still spend more per capita from the state in the first place, which makes your whole argument nonsense.
How so?The whole point of being able to top up is to mitigate underspending by the taxpayer.
Edited by BikeBikeBIke on Wednesday 27th March 11:24
BikeBikeBIke said:
I can just imagine the GP: "Good news Mr Bike. Despite being managed by incompetent MPs, the appointment you can't have would cost £60 less than the one you can have!".
Ah the classic "ah but what about". This is what you said
BikeBikeBIke said:
Funnily enough I do and I've found private care to be suprisingly cheap.
And yet the NHS is cheaper but it should be scrapped 
Electro1980 said:
BikeBikeBIke said:
Electro1980 said:
BikeBikeBIke said:
If so let's privatize it ASAP so we get the health care we want without the Government deliberately sabotaging it.
Every other country manages fine without an NHS. We should stop it and adopt something like the French system ASAP. ~£3k a year funded by the taxpayer and people bump it up, if that base level isn't good enough for them. It's insane that we all a) Think our system is failing to deliver over at least 40 years. b) Think it's better than all the others. c) Stick with it!
Would you go to a garage the deliberately sabotaged your car?
France spends far more than the UK per capita. The tax payer funded part is more than the UK.Every other country manages fine without an NHS. We should stop it and adopt something like the French system ASAP. ~£3k a year funded by the taxpayer and people bump it up, if that base level isn't good enough for them. It's insane that we all a) Think our system is failing to deliver over at least 40 years. b) Think it's better than all the others. c) Stick with it!
Would you go to a garage the deliberately sabotaged your car?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff