Go back
Govt run healthcare

Govt run healthcare

Debates


And liberals want this?


https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/08/patients-suffering-direct-result-nhs-wait-time-failures

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/social-care-vacancies-audit-office-11988585


Originally posted by @mott-the-hoople
And liberals want this?


https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/08/patients-suffering-direct-result-nhs-wait-time-failures

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/social-care-vacancies-audit-office-11988585
The NHS isn't perfect. Never will be.

But it is one of the best (if not THE best) healthcare systems in the world.

The NHS runs on far less money per capita than
the US system. AND delivers far better outcomes.

I'm sure I've posted proof of this here as have
others so I will not justify those claims again.
But go search and try and disprove me.


To be completely fair... the US system has a lot of market inhibitors that very drastically impact the industry.

It would not be accurate to describe the US health care market as free market, and it would not be accurate to describe it as socialistic. It truly is a very, very deeply mixed system and it has been, to some degree, designed to fail.

I have heard it said that Obamacare (or the Affordable Care Act) was utterly problem riddled from the moment of rollout and was not sustainable. One of the reasons for this, though, was because everyone suspected that Clinton would have become the President and therefore they could just socialize the system further and march towards a final destination.

So, what can you say about "the free market" system? I'm not sure. We haven't properly tried it for decades now.


But let me also say this... the healthcare systems in older times were never truly free market either as the bulk of people literally just depended on charity, and the bulk of doctors and healers were on retainer from Nobles who would let them serve regular people as an act of charity.

The Church very much was insturmental in the development and provision of healthcare to the masses.

Traditionally, a lot of people did not conceive of this as a market.

Should we do so now?

Not sure.

But one thing is for sure: whenever the government is involved in runnign something that becomes potentially exceedingly complicated there are a lot of issues concerning austerity within service provision. We have to have realistic expectations.

2 edits

3 edits

1 edit

-Removed-
On the one hand you say economics don't come into it on the other hand you employ economics even if it's one of the worst suckers only need apply propaganda misnomers going haha the a f f o r d a b l e c a r e.

If you thought healthcare was expensive, wait until it's free.

1 edit


Originally posted by @mott-the-hoople
And liberals want this?


That's not what they want, they want you to believe in their dream feeling fantasies and if you resist they'll enlist the services of state thugs to make you conform. They don't care about waiting lists and health outcomes, all they care about is forcing their ideals on unwilling fellow citizens, being in control, and getting others to help them prop up some kind of inflated view that they know what's best for everyone.

2 edits

-Removed-
divegeester "i r r e s p e c t i v e o f t h e c o s t"

🙄

You're so blinded by the propaganda you don't even realise it's pooting out of your mouth

1 edit

1 edit


-Removed-
Ohh plenty of people are throwing around the 'free' word, it doesn't occur around here so much now because they've had their knuckles rapped too many times.

Here's the factor, all those that believe in the affordable healthcare act band together voluntarily and form your own organisation. See how simple that is, everyone's happy.

Funny how cost is of so little concern when you're dipping your hand in other peoples pockets.



-Removed-
Noted, nice going, thumbs up.