Health Service Blues
 

You can imagine how delighted I am about this ....:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7029809.stm


*growls a bunch of very, very bad words*

Argh. So the NHS is going to use services from private companies. Which by definition are run to make a profit. And yet this is somehow more cost effective that providing them themselves. Ho hum.

We have found that privatization generally saves at least 25% of costs while providing increased benefits. It rescued the budgets of several large cities in the 90s including Philadelphia.

Unfortunately, our system doesn't quite work that way. There have been numerous attempts to meld the private sector with the NHS (like the computerised records system and the PFI hospitals not to mention some areas where third parties are brought in for some services) and they always cost the NHS more.

Do they not bother with writing solid contracts and putting out open bids?

At least you still have health care, Dana. Here in the US, something like 30% of the population has no health insurance at all. Sure, they can resort to a hospital ER, but an ER visit is far more expensive than a regular doctor's visit. The people who can't afford insurance can't afford to pay that high ER bill either, so costs get passed along in the form of higher bills for those who have insurance. The insurance companies pass the cost along to the consumer and tah-dah! What results is actually a highly expensive, very ineffective form of national health insurance. But don't tell anybody. We wouldn't want to have a system that might actually be cost effective and even save lives. Not here in the good old US of A. Nope. :eyebrow:

...to Medicaid. You forgot Medicaid.

Medicaid covers the cost of prescriptions for certain eligible low income disabled and/or elderly. It may also confer other benefits, as well. MediCARE is probably what get hits with the higher hospital costs, just to pick bones.;)

People with Medicare/Medicaid usually have their own health care providers and don't need to resort to the ER unless they've been hit by a truck.

As a tax payer/health insurance consumer which would you rather pay?

A) $70 for a doctor's visit
B) $300 for a trip to the ER
C) $? if we just stop providing any health care what-so-ever to those whose incomes/employment don't allow them to buy private insurance.

I put a "?" for part C, because you have to factor in such intangible costs as lost productivity from a wage earner, sick children going to school and possibly infecting others, babies with failure to thrive, etc., etc. Plus you have to consider the psychological/sociological impact of US cities and streets becoming even worse than they are now with blind and sick and other disabled people begging for coins.

I experienced "C" when I traveled in South America, and I emphatically reject it as an option for the US. Therefore, I choose "A." But its a free country, and most of my fellow citizens seem to be choosing "B" because they are unaware or indifferent or in a deep coma of some sort. :headshake

It seems you have chosen to lecture us about health care without knowing what Medicaid is.

This is off topic- but did you really just use Wikipedia as a source?!? In all seriousness at that? I understand using it to make fun of someone.......or jokingly...but....

Ok. Everyone. I have an announcement...that's it!
We are functioning out of a parallel universe...the merge must have happened so slowly and painfully, that no one noticed! It is my professional alternate universal reoccuring opinion that the merge completed sometime last month (next month for the laymen) Be advised.


Or
We have a "Michael Scott" on our hands.
:)

It seems you have chosen to lecture us about reality, truth, and the nature of the Internet without stopping yourself from being a flaming asshole.

I was actually trying to lighten things up after someone else was being a flaming asshole.

In fact....if you haven't noticed...no one is here anymore because of the "Survivor" mentality obliterating the members of this board. What you are doing right now is a great example of it.

And:
Just depends on how you read it UT. I thought it was pretty comical. And your claims about my response being the truth, a lecture, reality, or a history of the internet?.....wow. Just wow.


I thought using the fact that people use wikipedia as a source- as undeniable proof of a parallel universe shift was hilarious actually......just a tough crowd.

It would appear you have chosen to lecture me about the nature of The Cellar and online community.

Jesus...knock it the fuck off.

Siss, no problems with you at all, but there are plenty of people still here. A few have left for very specific issues (Shawnee hurt herself by her reactions to things and chose to leave, Uisgae left because we have a strident Atheist etc etc) but a wholesale desertion isn't true. The fact there is a Missing Cellarites thread is testament to the fact we are a close-knit board.

And what UT said referred solely to what you posted. Not, "Let's attack Cicero, yay, easy target" If you posted in humour you only have to say that. I've certainly posted what I thought were jokes, only to have them fall pancake flat.

Tough crowd? Yes & no. You're drawn back because it's a tough crowd - you get a laugh or approval you know you hit a zinger. Don't take one poster's opinion (even if he hosts the board) as everyone's opinion - this board moves slowly, and that is part of its charm.

/There endest the lesson.