cellar Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 been watching all the noise about this but have lost the plot,is it about making money or improving say getting to see a doctor without spending hours on a phone,Never heard anything about getting help to the elderly without dialling emergency numbers. Visited a walk in centre it was packed so i walked out.This change seems to be about who is going to be in line for private medicine and who is going get the contracts.Where is our Good old NHS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saving grace Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 I wouldnt knock the NHS. When Ive needed it (really needed it) its always been there. However we could do alot lot better. Not sure how mere commoner's would go about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Complete-Heat Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 i think the initial process was about encouraging more competition as a way of driving costs down and sold as a way of improving services. Increasing the number of private contractors who will provide a cheaper and more efficient (laugh) service. Also using more PFI's (private finance initiatives) when rebuilding and upgrading. This sounds iffy to me as private = shares and profit and i would imagine initial share will be bought cheap and sold high. bankers and city boys/girls making loads o money from what should be a non profit organisation, free to all... look what happened when the ward domestics were got rid of in favour of private cleaning companies and catering was privatised to the dreadful food that is served to patients. My mum was a ward domestic and kept her ward spotless!! She also gave out food to patients and helped the nurses (who weren't too busy filling in outcome forms and processing "consumers") to feed all the patients. I have read where it is improving care. in one hospital there was a huge wait for routine ultrasounds and the hospital brought in a private ultrasound company which is seeing patients quicker and cheaper. Not too keen on GP's getting all this financial power. They should be left to practicing medicine and not buying and selling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rachels1980 Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 That's if there is still a NHS in a few years time... we're already losing our jobs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cellar Posted June 16, 2011 Author Share Posted June 16, 2011 if we went back to basics and started at the begining ,learnt from our mistakes and then rebuilt we would then back politicians in their quest. but you cant help but wonder if the goverments past and present live in another world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 The Health Service where I am at the moment is pretty good. It's not 'free at the point of delivery' - Everybody gets a bill, but as everybody is insured (either through the state scheme with deductions from the wage-earner's paypacket or [in a few cases] by private insurance.) Everybody gets a bill which they present to their insurers, who pay the hospital/doctor/other provider. Health care providers charge a rate (which is set by the government) for each procedure, service or drug. They (those who are treating patients with state insurance) all charge the same rate. There is competition - but it's not done by undercutting the prices, it's done by being efficient. If you were a health care provider and you wished to set up a practice staffed by 2 doctors, 2 nurses, one receptionist and 1500 administrators - feel free to do so! You don't get a pot of money to enable you to pay everybody - you have to pay all those staff out of the fees (charged at a set rate) earned by the doctors and nurses - the people who provide the health care. The more patients you treat, the more money you get. You aren't paid per patient, you are paid per treatment at a rate which varies with the treatment provided - so there's no advantage to be gained by treating a large number of people with simply-resolved problems, as opposed to treating a smaller number of patients with a wide range of problems - some of which may require extensive and time-consuming treatment. It's not a 'numbers game'. As I understand it, in the NHS, hospitals and medical practices receive a pot of money to run the administration and to provide treatment for patients. If a hospital or a practice decides it needs additional administrators, it hires them. - They are paid out of the pot. If there isn't enough money left to treat all the patients, some of them will have to go elsewhere or do without. Provided the hospital/doctor treats the requisite number of patients, it/(s)he has 'hit the target'. There doesn't seem to be much incentive to be efficient, but there is plenty of incentive to 'work the system'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Total Chaos Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 If we came out of the wars and put the millions/billions to good use eg into the NHS or education it would improve.But no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 The defence budget is less than the interest on the money which the government has over-spent. The defence budget - unlike the interest payment - provides jobs for many thousands of people. If the government stopped over-spending, think how much that would make available for education and the NHS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Total Chaos Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 The defence budget is less than the interest on the money which the government has over-spent. The defence budget - unlike the interest payment - provides jobs for many thousands of people. If the government stopped over-spending, think how much that would make available for education and the NHS? That makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Haze Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 I'm new to this forum and haven't seen the whole thread but saw the NHS thing and thought I'd respond. I took steroids and now have Testosterone issues and they won't help me so I'm having to go private for treatment. I'm travelling to London on Monday and forking out almost three hundred and fifty quid just to see a specialist. I'm a 30 year old male. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.