Scrote
Well-known member
It should be public because it's a universal service. The private sector can't provide that.This is the sensible answer., unfortunately too many just use the NHS as a political football and think it should all be public or we’ll end up like the US
Just as one, non-clinical, example - how many MRSA infections could have been avoided over the years if cleaning had been done in-house as opposed to being given to the lowest bidder?
There was a study done years ago that showed that NHS Surgeons made the best cleaners because they knew what needed doing. By outsourcing the work, the surgeons didn't have the input they'd had previously and standards slipped. Yes, someone somewhere made a profit but at what expense?
You fundamentally misunderstand the concepts involved. It's non-profit because there isn't anything that generates value. You have to pay for everything which requires government funding. There is no capitalist function within the NHS. You provide a service and there isn't anything to give back (at a basic level). Yes, there will be some niche areas where a small amount of profit can be generated but invariably this will be offset against some other social loss (e.g. selling patient data to US health companies).It doesn't need to be non-profit to actually work on budget (the right budget) and with the right amount of manpower. The main problem it seems to have recently had is that the client underbudgeted it, let manpower go, and didn't replace them. There are literally thousands of companies which have had takeovers or been split up in order to succeed.
The key problem is who the client is, if it's run/ funded by Tories, then Tories are going to Tory, but Labour may be able to manage it ok, better than actually managing it and doing it. The problem is of course if and when the Tories get back into power, they'll wreck it that way, like how they wrecked it in private hands for the last 13 years.
The problem with gas and water was that who we sold it to was basically the new client, there wasn't much other control over them, other than through regulation and as always, adding on regulation adds on cost, which then of course gets passed on to us lot.
I wouldn't want the funding to be taken away, as with that we lose control, so we need to continue with the tax-based way, so it's 100% free for everyone.
Agree on the capitalism thing, but you can also do better by improving efficiency. You can treat people better or treat more people by managing better. Put the risk of managing it better on the contractors, for the same target price.
The value of a heart operation is that if you can do 10, instead of 9, then another person lives.
I'm 100% against not charging for use of the NHS, where people are using the right service. But to be honest, if people were using the wrong service then I think a small means-tested charge could be applied. There's a lot of time wasted in A&E and Doctors, by people who don't need to be there, from what my friends in A&E say, as well as a receptionist I know well in my doctors. Whether this could be made better through education, or even additional services or both, who knows.
I think some aspects could be run privately and run well, maybe more the niche aspects, or aspects where there could be a lot of competition so we can get good value.
How does doing 10 operations instead of 9 generate value that can be turned into profit? You can't start using a different definition of value when your main argument is that we should use 'value' to provide 'profit' for private enterprise.
Why can't you manage better in the public sector? How would you get better management when some part of any funding would alway be taken out of the system for shareholders?
How do patients know what their needs are without access to medical practitioners? People can't "use the wrong service". The NHS doesn't work like that.
And, for the umpteenth time, taxes don't pay for the NHS (or any other government initiative). That's not how government spending works.