Jump to content

Donald Trump

Earl Aelfheah

By Earl Aelfheah
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

LondonMix

LondonMix

Posted
Posted
How is the ranking decided (what major factors hold the most weight)? I find it interesting that France is number 1. I have a lot of French colleagues and they think the NHS is terrible. All of them over the years (an this adds up to about a dozen people) have gone back to Paris to give birth. I always suspected this was just part of the French's general jingoism but perhaps there was some truth to it.
Blah Blah

Blah Blah

Posted
Posted

It's not exactly free though. We all pay into it. When making European comparisons, we are not always comparing like for like. Many European countries have aspects to their health services that run like private models. In France for example, you will pay for a GP appointment and then claim the money back if you are eligible to do so. The only areas that we manage like that are prescriptions and dentistry.


The NHS though still remains excellent value for what we spend.


And what dismays me about the pressure for privatisation is that government look to America, when really they should be looking to Europe, where there are plenty of good examples of where changes could be made that don't in reality privatise huge areas of healthcare.

Loz

Loz

Posted
Posted

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> And what dismays me about the pressure for privatisation is that government look to America,

> when really they should be looking to Europe, where there are plenty of good examples of where

> changes could be made that don't in reality privatise huge areas of healthcare.


What makes you think they are looking to America? Or are you equating 'privatised' with the US and then projecting? Germany and Austria are two systems that have a significant private contribution and work very well.

LondonMix

LondonMix

Posted
Posted

The Swiss system is also a private model in which everyone has compulsory insurance. It is still individual policies that can be supplemented.


Of the fully publicly funded systems, I'm not sure which ones are the best-- ie who gets the most quality of life / extended life for dollar spend. Some analysis by York University to complement NICE cost benefit analysis showed that every circa 20k of expenditure equals one QUALY currently in the NHS.


I'm not sure how other health systems compare.

LondonMix

LondonMix

Posted
Posted

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euro_health_consumer_index


This is an interesting list. Like all lists it can't be perfect but at least it breaks down the components on which the country's are being scored. The UK ranks 14 out of 37 European countries. It mostly loses points for waiting times and to a lesser extent for health outcomes.


Waiting times for non life threatening illnesses in the UK can be quite astonishing. My husband needed knee treatment and the NHS sent him a letter several months after being on the waiting list that stated if they didn't hear from him within two weeks they'd remove him from the waiting list. We were luck we got it in time as we'd been on holiday when it initially arrived. Its one of the ways the NHS tries to reduce its lists. Eventually, we just used my private insurance and paid the deductible.

Blah Blah

Blah Blah

Posted
Posted

Government ministers have consulted with American healthcare providers Loz. They published a report via one of their think tanks. I will try and find it.


What I would say is that there is not enough investment in preventative care. Some areas have improved on that front, like cancer, but other areas like mental health and obesity are extremely under resourced. If we want to reduce NHS cost, we could start with the diet of the nation. The long term savings to the NHS would be significant on that front alone.

LondonMix

LondonMix

Posted
Posted
How can the NHS influence people's diets with more funding. I'm not sure there are a lot of people who are obese because they don't know what is healthy and what is not. Taxing really unhealthy food and subsidizing healthy choices might be the only thing that makes a serious impact on the choices people make.
Loz

Loz

Posted
Posted

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Government ministers have consulted with American healthcare providers Loz. They published a report

> via one of their think tanks. I will try and find it.


I'm sure they have, but that doesn't mean we are heading towards a US-style system. The NHS Supply Chain has been run by the German logistics company DHL and NHS Shared Business Services, handling a wide range of back office functions (SBS), is 50% owned by French IT company Sopra Steria. Virgin (UK owner) has show a lot of interest in health provision.

  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...
LondonMix

LondonMix

Posted
Posted

Very scary times.


Also, I can't believe that despite winning the popular vote, the assigned delegates (those you get from winning a state) and the total delegates (including Super Delegates), Sander won't concede much less congratulate her as is standard practice.


There is something very ugly about it and I strongly suspect would never happen to a male candidate.

LondonMix

LondonMix

Posted
Posted

Louisa, he has lost the race by every metric. Not conceding is petty, disrespectful, pointless and increases the chance of a Trump victory.



Louisa Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Good on Bernie Sanders for not conceding yet. He

> is the authentic Democratic candidate this

> electoral season. A principled man.

>

> Louisa.

civilservant

civilservant

Posted
Posted

I was interested to hear that liberally inclined voters in the US view the Clintons much in the same way that liberally inclined voters in the UK view the Blairs - suggesting that voting for Hillary is analogous to voting for Cherie!


really difficult for anyone who would otherwise welcome a woman running for President

Louisa

Louisa

Posted
Posted

LM in any normal circumstances I would say conceding defeat would be the appropriate thing to do, but considering how unpopular Hilary is both inside the Democrat Party and out in the wider US electorate, it is the right thing to do. It's alarming that some working class Democrats are so anti-establishment that they would be prepared to vote Trump rather than Hilary. She's a polarising figure, as much, if not more so than Trump.


Louisa.

civilservant

civilservant

Posted
Posted

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I was under the impression that Bill Clinton is

> remembered much more fondly over there than Tony

> Blair is over here...


my impression too - but that's not saying a lot, they seem to have a better tolerance for sleaze over there

I see that a poll of fave un-dead ex presidents over there had Bill neck and neck with Bush Senior

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...