FlyTheNest

howsillyofme1 wrote: I could have some sympathy for an upgrade to a 'private room but it does sound a bit shit to be honest and how do we provide all this accommodation without increasing cost?

SpinningHugo wrote:

howsillyofme1 wrote: I could have some sympathy for an upgrade to a 'private room but it does sound a bit shit to be honest and how do we provide all this accommodation without increasing cost?

You can't. Which is why more liberal systems are inevitably more expensive than wholly collective ones. That being the point I've kept making. if you want these additions you'll have to pay, and then the overall cost will go up. There being no free lunches.

Willow904 wrote:Perhaps it's time for the left to talk about reform of the NHS if the alternative is to allow the Tories to slowly disintegrate it into a two tier system as has already happened in optometry and dentistry.

Take the initiative and start exploring possible changes based on models that work elsewhere that are more closely aligned to our own system. And they do exist. This idea the UK is the only country that publicly funds its healthcare system, that insurance based systems are the only viable option for our future, is rubbish. What about Canada? And we're not the only country with government administered healthcare, either. What about Scandinavia? It's this misleading idea that we're somehow out on a limb doing something completely different to everyone else, who all have an identical and better system, that reveals the ulterior motives of such discourse. No two universal healthcare systems are the same and no system is perfect. I think the real downfall of the NHS is not that it is imperfect, all systems are imperfect, but that we have stopped trying to make it the best it can be, while other countries haven't.

SpinningHugo wrote:

Willow904 wrote:Perhaps it's time for the left to talk about reform of the NHS if the alternative is to allow the Tories to slowly disintegrate it into a two tier system as has already happened in optometry and dentistry.

Take the initiative and start exploring possible changes based on models that work elsewhere that are more closely aligned to our own system. And they do exist. This idea the UK is the only country that publicly funds its healthcare system, that insurance based systems are the only viable option for our future, is rubbish. What about Canada? And we're not the only country with government administered healthcare, either. What about Scandinavia? It's this misleading idea that we're somehow out on a limb doing something completely different to everyone else, who all have an identical and better system, that reveals the ulterior motives of such discourse. No two universal healthcare systems are the same and no system is perfect. I think the real downfall of the NHS is not that it is imperfect, all systems are imperfect, but that we have stopped trying to make it the best it can be, while other countries haven't.

I don't think Labour will be in power, so I wonder if there isn't scope for collective provision through co-ops and unions?

Australia has a relatively strong health system by international standards, but it needs a makeover. To generate fresh ideas, The Conversation is profiling five international health systems that have important lessons – good and bad – to pull Australia out of its health reform black hole.

howsillyofme1 wrote: If people want the NHS to stay true to its principles then they shouldn't vote Tory.......if they do then they take the consequences

Only 45% of Labour voters think Corbyn would be best PM: poll

Research by Opinium also suggests the Conservatives are the most trusted party on all major issues except the NHS (Guardian)

PorFavor wrote:

Only 45% of Labour voters think Corbyn would be best PM: poll

Research by Opinium also suggests the Conservatives are the most trusted party on all major issues except the NHS (Guardian)

So nuclear war's off, then?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... st-pm-poll

gilsey wrote:

howsillyofme1 wrote: If people want the NHS to stay true to its principles then they shouldn't vote Tory.......if they do then they take the consequences

We all take the consequences. FPTP.

I've said before, the NHS is lost unless we get PR, even if the tories don't succeed in completely unravelling it this time they'll just start again down the line.

I get particularly infuriated by articles and btl comments saying this, that or the other system is better than the NHS when clearly the only alternative model on offer to us is the US one, which is pretty much a disaster.

gilsey wrote:

howsillyofme1 wrote: If people want the NHS to stay true to its principles then they shouldn't vote Tory.......if they do then they take the consequences

We all take the consequences. FPTP.

I've said before, the NHS is lost unless we get PR, even if the tories don't succeed in completely unravelling it this time they'll just start again down the line.

I get particularly infuriated by articles and btl comments saying this, that or the other system is better than the NHS when clearly the only alternative model on offer to us is the US one, which is pretty much a disaster.

howsillyofme1 wrote:I fail to see why we have to 'copy' anyone else's system

There is no perfect model and we have to take into account the massive change programme needed to move to something organisationally different from the NHS..

Hugo wants to make it easier for the rich to have perks whilst the rest of us seem to suggest building on the current strengths and work out how to improve for everyone not just provide some baubles for the few

It would be a start for us to look to increase spending as proportion of GDP to the Germans

SpinningHugo wrote:

howsillyofme1 wrote:I fail to see why we have to 'copy' anyone else's system

There is no perfect model and we have to take into account the massive change programme needed to move to something organisationally different from the NHS..

Hugo wants to make it easier for the rich to have perks whilst the rest of us seem to suggest building on the current strengths and work out how to improve for everyone not just provide some baubles for the few

It would be a start for us to look to increase spending as proportion of GDP to the Germans

As I've tried to explain, comparing the cost of the UK system with that of more liberal systems like Germany is a false comparison. If you give people the choice to pay more some will, and the overall spend goes up. You want to deny the choice whihc leads to the higher expenditure.

The problems with the NHS is not just confined to poor outcomes. You get poor service too with very long delays to see GPs or have routine surgery, of a length that you don't see elsewhere in Europe.

Blair, in his pomp, saved the NHS in its current form in 2000. No politician of the left with that much clout, and to be fair favourable economic circumstance, is coming back. Labour will lose in 2020 and 2025.

So, we need either to argue for structures outside of government (unions, co-ops) or to look to other systems which we could viably move towards that are not so susceptible to underfunding at government whim (ie look at everyone else in the EU).

refitman wrote:Hugo, when you talk about "liberal" healthcare, do you actually mean free-market?

refitman wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:

howsillyofme1 wrote:I fail to see why we have to 'copy' anyone else's system

There is no perfect model and we have to take into account the massive change programme needed to move to something organisationally different from the NHS..

Hugo wants to make it easier for the rich to have perks whilst the rest of us seem to suggest building on the current strengths and work out how to improve for everyone not just provide some baubles for the few

It would be a start for us to look to increase spending as proportion of GDP to the Germans

As I've tried to explain, comparing the cost of the UK system with that of more liberal systems like Germany is a false comparison. If you give people the choice to pay more some will, and the overall spend goes up. You want to deny the choice whihc leads to the higher expenditure.

The problems with the NHS is not just confined to poor outcomes. You get poor service too with very long delays to see GPs or have routine surgery, of a length that you don't see elsewhere in Europe.

Blair, in his pomp, saved the NHS in its current form in 2000. No politician of the left with that much clout, and to be fair favourable economic circumstance, is coming back. Labour will lose in 2020 and 2025.

So, we need either to argue for structures outside of government (unions, co-ops) or to look to other systems which we could viably move towards that are not so susceptible to underfunding at government whim (ie look at everyone else in the EU).

I seem to remember the NHS working pretty well towards the end of Labour being in power. Waiting times were down, outcomes were up. Staff were happy and so were the patients.

Were you looking at a different NHS to the rest of us?

refitman wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:

howsillyofme1 wrote:I fail to see why we have to 'copy' anyone else's system

There is no perfect model and we have to take into account the massive change programme needed to move to something organisationally different from the NHS..

Hugo wants to make it easier for the rich to have perks whilst the rest of us seem to suggest building on the current strengths and work out how to improve for everyone not just provide some baubles for the few

It would be a start for us to look to increase spending as proportion of GDP to the Germans

As I've tried to explain, comparing the cost of the UK system with that of more liberal systems like Germany is a false comparison. If you give people the choice to pay more some will, and the overall spend goes up. You want to deny the choice whihc leads to the higher expenditure.

The problems with the NHS is not just confined to poor outcomes. You get poor service too with very long delays to see GPs or have routine surgery, of a length that you don't see elsewhere in Europe.

Blair, in his pomp, saved the NHS in its current form in 2000. No politician of the left with that much clout, and to be fair favourable economic circumstance, is coming back. Labour will lose in 2020 and 2025.

So, we need either to argue for structures outside of government (unions, co-ops) or to look to other systems which we could viably move towards that are not so susceptible to underfunding at government whim (ie look at everyone else in the EU).

I seem to remember the NHS working pretty well towards the end of Labour being in power. Waiting times were down, outcomes were up. Staff were happy and so were the patients.

Were you looking at a different NHS to the rest of us?

SpinningHugo wrote:

refitman wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:
Depends what you mean of course. Better in terms of outcomes than comparable states? No. Better in terms of waiting times? No.

Better than now? Undoubtedly yes.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Non-Tory government - possibly a coalition - in 2025. Calling it now.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Q1 - don't know, but still think there is a very good chance it won't be Corbyn (and if it isn't him, it won't be McDonnell either)

Q2 - who knows? I agree a Tory win is likely even if JC is no longer there, but the recent leaking of private polling showing them losing seats to the LibDems was revealing. Quite a lot of current Tory support is soft and augmented by a feeling (partly media created, of course) that "there is no alternative" rather than positive enthusiasm.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I know that you don't want it to. You have told us enough times already, after all

AnatolyKasparov wrote:ComRes have tended to give the worst Labour figures for a while now. They are also a rubbish pollster, those facts are not necessarily related - but they could be

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Not denying that McDonnellomics has problems, but I think this is pretty risible from Blanchflower tbh.

He was quite rightly taken to task over it on Twitter earlier.

SpinningHugo wrote:

RogerOThornhill wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote: 1. One thing I feel quite strongly about is that those in the medical profession are exactly the wrong people to be listening to. They are trained in medical care. not the economic modelling of delivering services. The people to listen to on the delivery of heathcare are (micro-)economists.

2. The NHS does have strengths, but there are also good reasons why the UK is the only country that adopts this model.

3. The NHS is cheap, but illiberal. It is cheap because it is illiberal. Because it is illiberal there are costs it puts on to people (like me) in terms of time (ie queues) that I'd prefer to pay more to avoid, but can't without opting out of collective provision (which I don't wish to do).

4. Personally, I'd prefer the German model. One of the reasons for that is I think we now have Tory government as a more or less permanent feature of the UK (at least for the next thirteen years) and they will simply never properly fund a wholly state delivered system.

None of that addresses my central point against that writer.

He is not even a specialist in health economics - the title of his PhD was Constructing a new measure of poverty for the UK

If you're going to propose a different system then it would help if you could argue the case for it using a model and not just keep banging on about how everything is terrible...change the funding model and it'll all be fine.

I notice in that article he doesn't even say what he would propose - utterly pointless.

I think the point that he makes no concrete proposal (ie support a move to say the Singaporean model while explaining it) is fair.

Complaining about who he is isn't really.

seeingclearly wrote:quote="SpinningHugo"]
1. One thing I feel quite strongly about is that those in the medical profession are exactly the wrong people to be listening to. They are trained in medical care. not the economic modelling of delivering services. The people to listen to on the delivery of heathcare are (micro-)economists.

2. The NHS does have strengths, but there are also good reasons why the UK is the only country that adopts this model.

3. The NHS is cheap, but illiberal. It is cheap because it is illiberal. Because it is illib

Can I just challenge the idea that the UK is the only country that has adopted the NHS model. .

North Korea has attempted to launch a missile on its east coast which is believed to have failed, South Korea's military says.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 85016.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Jeremy Corbyn’s policy blitz supported by majority of British public, poll says