|
|
Post by zanygame on Apr 29, 2023 7:01:15 GMT
Stop dodging, the UK spends £2989 per patient. France spends £3737 per patient. Do you deny this I'm not denying anything - simply asking what method of international comparison do you want to use now that you suddenly don't want to use per-capita spending? Well if you were honest you would answer my question. As you have admitted the 2008 financial crash meant that Labour reduced spending on the NHS whereas France did not - does the method of funding explain this difference? The circumstances between the two countries in 2008 are to numerous to calculate which might have influenced the decision. Why is NHS spending per patient only 91% of that in France NOW as in NOW.
And why are you expecting the same service for 91% of the money?
I know you will never answer this, because you can't do so without your house of cards falling down. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Apr 29, 2023 7:05:58 GMT
Why is NHS spending per patient only 91% of that in France NOW as in NOW. Well as you have already said, the 2008 crash meant that government spending was reduced. Once that spending is gone its hardly likely to catch back up again. So would it not be better to remove the funding of health services from the day to day whims of politicians. And before you start again on your tedious 'it's all the fault of the Tories' nonsense, Labour went into the 2010 GE promising massive cuts in government spending as well. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Apr 29, 2023 8:15:47 GMT
Why is NHS spending per patient only 91% of that in France NOW as in NOW. Oh really why is that then. The French system is mainly at the whims of politicians. But that is not the point. Your argument is that our NHS is a monolith that does not require more money and just needs to be privatised and less wasteful Which is why I ask. Why are you expecting the same service for 91% of the money?
You see its about the money. Starve the NHS, see it fail, privatise it, put the costs back up to much higher and take the profits. I hope the good folk on here can see this, it saddens me that your dodging is effective. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Apr 29, 2023 8:30:07 GMT
I'm not denying anything - simply asking what method of international comparison do you want to use now that you suddenly don't want to use per-capita spending? Well if you were honest you would answer my question. As you have admitted the 2008 financial crash meant that Labour reduced spending on the NHS whereas France did not - does the method of funding explain this difference? The circumstances between the two countries in 2008 are to numerous to calculate which might have influenced the decision. Why is NHS spending per patient only 91% of that in France NOW as in NOW.
And why are you expecting the same service for 91% of the money?
I know you will never answer this, because you can't do so without your house of cards falling down. Try scaling down the waste instead of piling up the inefficiency. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Apr 29, 2023 10:44:22 GMT
Oh really why is that then. I'm not aware of any political party anywhere in the globe who goes around deciding current budgets based on what the department did or didnt get several years ago. I'm not expecting the same service for 91% of the money - by the same token I'm not expecting the same service from a system that is inherently inferior. If other countries can get a better service by spending the same amount of GDP just by changing the system, then I fail to see why we should suffer. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Apr 29, 2023 16:04:23 GMT
The circumstances between the two countries in 2008 are to numerous to calculate which might have influenced the decision. Why is NHS spending per patient only 91% of that in France NOW as in NOW.
And why are you expecting the same service for 91% of the money?
I know you will never answer this, because you can't do so without your house of cards falling down. Try scaling down the waste instead of piling up the inefficiency. Then don't compare it to a health system that costs 10% more. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Apr 29, 2023 16:07:04 GMT
Oh really why is that then. I'm not aware of any political party anywhere in the globe who goes around deciding current budgets based on what the department did or didnt get several years ago. I'm not expecting the same service for 91% of the money - by the same token I'm not expecting the same service from a system that is inherently inferior. If other countries can get a better service by spending the same amount of GDP just by changing the system, then I fail to see why we should suffer. Can other countries get a better service for the same money? The one you compared the NHS to costs nearly 10% more per patient. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Apr 29, 2023 16:39:59 GMT
I'm not aware of any political party anywhere in the globe who goes around deciding current budgets based on what the department did or didnt get several years ago. I'm not expecting the same service for 91% of the money - by the same token I'm not expecting the same service from a system that is inherently inferior. If other countries can get a better service by spending the same amount of GDP just by changing the system, then I fail to see why we should suffer. Can other countries get a better service for the same money? The one you compared the NHS to costs nearly 10% more per patient. We spend a larger proportion of GDP than Australia, Austria, Belgium or Holland - certainly for that sort of outlay we should expect better results. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Apr 29, 2023 16:43:02 GMT
Can other countries get a better service for the same money? The one you compared the NHS to costs nearly 10% more per patient. We spend a larger proportion of GDP than Australia, Austria, Belgium or Holland - certainly for that sort of outlay we should expect better results. Which you could well get bar the political ping pong in Westminster. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Apr 29, 2023 16:44:18 GMT
We spend a larger proportion of GDP than Australia, Austria, Belgium or Holland - certainly for that sort of outlay we should expect better results. Which you could well get bar the political ping pong in Westminster. Which is why its a crap system.. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Apr 29, 2023 16:45:12 GMT
Which you could well get bar the political ping pong in Westminster. Which is why its a crap system.. And why privatisation wouldn’t improve it either. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Apr 29, 2023 17:20:04 GMT
Which is why its a crap system.. And why privatisation wouldn’t improve it either. It removes politicians from the equation. If you were creating a health system today, you would not create the NHS. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Apr 29, 2023 17:21:15 GMT
Try scaling down the waste instead of piling up the inefficiency. Then don't compare it to a health system that costs 10% more. See if you can work out what you are saying. I doubt it makes sense to anyone else. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Apr 29, 2023 17:31:50 GMT
Can other countries get a better service for the same money? The one you compared the NHS to costs nearly 10% more per patient. We spend a larger proportion of GDP than Australia, Austria, Belgium or Holland - certainly for that sort of outlay we should expect better results. France is suddenly out of the discussion. Australia spends an average of £6380.00 per patient. Nearly double the NHS I can't be bothered to check the rest you just keep making it up and lying. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Apr 29, 2023 17:32:31 GMT
And why privatisation wouldn’t improve it either. It removes politicians from the equation. If you were creating a health system today, you would not create the NHS. What would you have the equivalent of the water industry and the energy companies? |
|
