Socialist paradise: Britain cancels 50,000 surgeries

I have just had an operation appointment for later this month.

 

I have a few friends in the UK, so I hear their stories regarding wait times for tests like MRIs. They are shocked when I tell them that we can get an MRI immediately, in some cases and in a day or two in non-urgent matters.

With no other perspective, many in the UK think they have it good. Once they see how we do things here, their dissatisfaction for the NHS grows exponentially.

 

It is a capitalist government that is destroying the NHS.
Selling off services to private companies that make a profit by charging for procedures that were carried out cheaper and more efficiently in house. Even car parking is a serious cost to low paid staff. On site nurses' homes have been sold to private companies.

Oligarchy takes the money, generates poverty.

Socialism generated an cost effective system of health care. Private funding does not care.

 

I don't believe this for a New York second.

 

Socialism created low cost healthcare? That is a canard. If it was so low cost and high quality, why privatize it? Fee based health care providers only benefit the government because they will never spend more than the fees they are paid. If that means rationing care, then that is what they will do.

I recently had an in-depth discussion with someone who used Finland as an example of quality socialized medicine. There is one thing he forgot in his defense of Finland's healthcare, he forgot that Finland hardly spends just 1.3% of it's GDP on National Defense.
By comparison the USA spends 3.5%. The difference is calculated in billions of dollars. When can divert taxpayer funding to healthcare without having to worry about National Defense, socialized medicine may work for you. It will not work for countries like the United Kingdom and the United States of America. Both countries spend a significant portion of their gross national product on defense.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

So the US is perfect?

 

I had a MRI soon after arriving in hospital. My wife had an hernia operation on the same day she arrived at the hospital, and the second time she had a hernia on the day after. All at the same hospital in Margate.

 

OH I see this must be opposite day. We post what is the exact opposite of the truth. How fun!

 

Actually, it's just the opposite. It was after the government got involved that healthcare costs went through the roof for the simple reason that, if providers know that the government is going to pay for everything, then they're incentivized to raise costs, not lower them. And if people know the government is going to pay, then they have to incentive to approach healthcare with a consumer's mindset, like they would with other products.

Same with education. When schools know the government isn't going to say no, they they're incentivized to raise prices.

Socialism, on the other hand, ensures that there is no competition and no innovation, both of which are necessary to lower costs.

Several years ago, LASIK surgery cost around $6,000. Now, you can get it for around $300. Because of government interference, right? No! Because LASIK was not, and is not covered under insurance and must be purchased out of pocket. Because consumers were forced to pay out of pocket and were not willing to spend $6,000, providers had to compete and were incentivized to lower costs.

All Socialism does is raise costs and reduce service. That's why so many people come here from Canada and Europe seeking treatment.

Want to get a knee replacement in Britain? Good luck. You could be waiting as long as a year, if you're even approved for one. According to the Frasier Institute, the average wait time in Canada is about 38 weeks.

That's Socialism.

Here, you can have the surgery in a week or less, depending on the availability of the operating room.

That's capitalism.

 

How is US health care paid for?
For accidents?
For medical emergencies?
For chronic conditions?

 

Either through insurance, through the government, or out of pocket.

 

Germany has a free health service, I believe that Spain has as well. France has a partly state funded, partly insurance. In Europe we have a card system where in participating state's citizens can get the health care at the same price as citizens of that country. When my wife left her medication at home, it cost her 23 Euros for the doctor and 9 Euros 60 for her prescription whereas at home there would be no fee.

I have noticed that the French prescription system is extremely inefficient. I had a prescription from a doctor for 30 tablets, and he said I only needed to take 10 of them, and throw the others away, This is because of their insurance system. In any medication there is a sticker to attach to their prescription which goes to the insurance company. In the UK a doctor prescribed me 24 tablets when the box contained 42, the pharmacist gave me 24, but in France I would have to have had 42.

 

Is it really "free"? Or is it just paid for by somebody else?

 

We pay for ours in a national insurance payments taken from our wages while we are at work. I expect other countries do similar.
When I was in a French office claiming back a payment I had made, a Frenchman was claiming his EU card and he was told if he went to Spain treatment would be free, but if he went to Switzerland, he would be advised to get over the border into France if possible as in Switzerland it is very expensive.

 

OK. Because you said it's free.

 

Free at the point of delivery.

 

No, just paid for by somebody else prior to the point of delivery.

 

Just like insurance.

 

You have been told it for so long that you actually believe it now.

Healthcare is not free. You and your neighbors pay for it, and you pay far too much for it because it's inferior and unavailable to you when you most need it.

The government has no money other than yours. You act is if they are doing you a favor by giving a small portion back to you in the form of long queues and inferior technology.