Some good news for you:
” For the 30 years up to 2011, the number of people dying in the UK was falling but that has changed as the people born during the boom in births following World War Two have grown old. Over the next decade, the number of deaths a year is expected to increase by 12%. “
Copied from:-
Assisted dying debate: The UK’s real problem with palliative care
The UK was once ranked the best country for end-of-life care - but, say experts, that has all changedwww.bbc.co.uk
Really annoying to me for two reasons, one being how much time, effort and money was sent in the early 2010s on developing community end of life care to facilitate people whose preference was to die at home. The second is that, having been unaware of the current situation described that, despite having being involved in all that work at the time, I personally didn’t have a huge desire to die at home. My preference is not to die at all, although my belief is that immortality as a stand alone concept is probably not all that great a prospect. Immortality and everlasting health would be the minimum requirement. As that personal preference isn’t going to happen, it is extremely upsetting to see how poor hospital end of life care is being reported to be.
And this is a big part of the reason the NHS is fucked. The routine and profitable services are taken on by private healthcare companies who reap the rewards. The rest if left with the NHS to deal with but with increasingly less resources as the money is being spent elsewhere and the staff are poached by private providers.
I had a fun day at the hospital on Saturday and the person I saw was very scathing that I was only now seeing someone actually employed by the NHS despite first having gone to my GP in 2010. Bounced around from place to place with symptoms being patched up rather than anyone looking at the overall cause. Was told this happens all the time because nobody is looking outside the narrow band of whatever particular service they are being paid to provide.
This seems bonkers to me. Is the worry that they’ll all fuck off as soon as they’ve trained? Cant we golden handcuff them or something. We cut off supply of critical labour all over the shop it seems.
Why would you further complicate the tax system like that rather than just pay them more and create more roles so that the working conditions are improved?Well yeah because working conditions in the NHS are that bad, qualified people go abroad to earn more and better conditions in, ironically, privatised healthcare systems. This is why we’re in a position that we import many of our healthcare professionals from abroad.
I’d like to see the tax burden reduced on NHS staff so abolition of basic tax on frontline staff and the taxes on pensions. It could also be a good idea to allow NHS staff to opt-out of their 10% contributions.
Why would you further complicate the tax system like that rather than just pay them more and create more roles so that the working conditions are improved?
More taxes? Yippee! That won’t exacerbate the situation with record amounts of millionaires leaving the country or an increasing tax burden on companies.
The criticism that we’re a healthcare system with a country attached becomes truer by the day. The NHS budget is forecasted to be around £192bn and at what point do we say ‘this is a bit much now?’
Well, 14 years of Tory neglect have achieved that. Like you they would prefer it if people were charged for being ill and we had for-profit middlemen in the system, so it suited them to let it rot.Well yeah because working conditions in the NHS are that bad, qualified people go abroad to earn more and better conditions in, ironically, privatised healthcare systems. This is why we’re in a position that we import many of our healthcare professionals from abroad.
I’d like to see the tax burden reduced on NHS staff so abolition of basic tax on frontline staff and the taxes on pensions. It could also be a good idea to allow NHS staff to opt-out of their 10% contributions.
The budget will continue to go up as the population ages, accept it.
Gutted that the wife and I don’t live in the US to be charged £30k+ for having a baby.I don’t think the electorate will accept it blindly. If the NHS is gobbling all this money and it’s months/years to get the procedures/checks people need, they probably would prefer it if we moved to an insurance based system.
In my experience, the people most likely to be anti-privatisation are people who have never suffered the pain of NHS waiting lists.
I don’t think the electorate will accept it blindly. If the NHS is gobbling all this money and it’s months/years to get the procedures/checks people need, they probably would prefer it if we moved to an insurance based system.
In my experience, the people most likely to be anti-privatisation are people who have never suffered the pain of NHS waiting lists.
Well, 14 years of Tory neglect have achieved that. Like you they would prefer it if people were charged for being ill and we had for-profit middlemen in the system, so it suited them to let it rot.
Gutted that the wife and I don’t live in the US to be charged £30k+ for having a baby.
Getting it to underperform to justify eventually scrapping it has been part of the right wing playbook from 2010.These NHS has pretty much always underperformed in health outcomes compared to similar countries.
The UK is not the only universal healthcare system and many others use universal insurance based systems which produce better health outcomes.
A sensible approach for the government would be to get as many people off the NHS and in the private sector so it can prioritise the most needy people.
See above, I don’t necessarily mind that provided it remains free to use.Resorting to the US system as the example is why the country cannot have a sensible topic on the NHS. The US system is the polar opposite and has equally bad health outcomes.
Hypothetically, if a universal insurance-based system lead to better health outcomes, higher pay and better working conditions. Why would you be against that as a staunch trade unionist?
Who is an insurance based system going to be cheaper for? How is it going to be cheaper?
Private healthcare is driven by the need to make a profit. That should not be the objective of any healthcare system.I never said anything about being cheaper. My argument was simply that the government should make private healthcare more accessible by introducing tax breaks.
My employer pays for private healthcare insurance, it is a sound idea if we encourage businesses to offer this to their workers. The more people going to independent providers, the less demand on the NHS and that’s inherently a good thing. It’s not undermining the NHS and probably allows it to focus their resources elsewhere. For example, increasing trainee positions or being able to bring privatised services back in house.
Getting it to underperform to justify eventually scrapping it has been part of the right wing playbook from 2010.
Provided the principle of free at the point of use is maintained though I don’t necessarily mind about the government running hospitals or directly employing staff. The issue I have is what we have seen in education with the privately run/publicly funded model. It introduces more waste and less consistency in the service.
See above, I don’t necessarily mind that provided it remains free to use.
Private healthcare is driven by the need to make a profit. That should not be the objective of any healthcare system.
Then the question is in fact one of politicians making the argument that quality services aren’t cheap. As said above, look at what has happened to state education since we switched to academisation. I am not convinced allowing for-profit healthcare providers and insurers into the system is the right thing for the country.Which, by the way, is more or less the norm in Europe and Australia. They also have a significantly larger private sector.
You reference 2010, the reason for New Labour NHS reforms were basically down to sustainability. For example, PFI is overall a failure, but was down to offset the larger upfront costs of building hospitals.
The issue we have is that everything is government funded, it’s reached a point where it’s just stretched far too thinly and the public probably isn’t willing pay the costs needed to bridge the funding gap.
Treating patients like customers buying a new car has always struck me as an odd way to view medical treatment.Well, that’s a naive notion. Profit motives drive innovation and leads to advancements in medicines, equipment, technologies that support healthcare systems.
Applying the logic to hospitals, they will tend to have the best; ‘customer service’, equipment and staff. The lack of choice we have in the NHS to choose healthcare providers is eye opening.
The primary objective of a healthcare system is delivering the best healthcare outcomes which the NHS has consistently punched below its weight there. The problems do not start in 2010.
Then the question is in fact one of politicians making the argument that quality services aren’t cheap. As said above, look at what has happened to state education since we switched to academisation. I am not convinced allowing for-profit healthcare providers and insurers into the system is the right thing for the country.
It’s all well and good your employer paying your insurance, but this a) gives them leverage over your access to healthcare and b) leaves you in a sticky spot if you were to be laid off. It is in fact just transferring the burden of cost from the state onto someone else.
Well yeah because working conditions in the NHS are that bad, qualified people go abroad to earn more and better conditions in, ironically, privatised healthcare systems. This is why we’re in a position that we import many of our healthcare professionals from abroad.
I’d like to see the tax burden reduced on NHS staff so abolition of basic tax on frontline staff and the taxes on pensions. It could also be a good idea to allow NHS staff to opt-out of their 10% contributions.
We could just pay the more. The net is the same and it makes the job feel more prestigious. Has the downside of angering up the blood of Daily Mail readers of course.
Probably still better than the absolute lottery of care homes. The NHS would not allow my dad to come home from hospital as they said it wasn’t safe, no other option than a care home. Except there was no places available so at one point, until someone local died and a place became vacant, there was talk of him going as far away as Manchester.it is extremely upsetting to see how poor hospital end of life care is being reported to be.
My ex worked for the NHS. They sent her to uni for 3 years, covered all the fees and continued to pay her salary. There was zero requirement for her to even work a single day after completing the course.This seems bonkers to me. Is the worry that they’ll all fuck off as soon as they’ve trained? Cant we golden handcuff them or something. We cut off supply of critical labour all over the shop it seems.
We are currently experiencing the NHS through pregnancy and it’s been excellent so far. My concerns on relying on employers to pay for insurance are above.It’s not introducing the private sector into the NHS, let’s be clear on what I’m arguing for here.
My argument is that it’s desirable to have a buoyant private sector to support the NHS indirectly. The vehicles for this is abolishing VAT on private healthcare and giving employers generous tax breaks on private health care insurance. Any tax not recouped is probably offset overtime - in a blue sky thinking.
The NHS backlogs is the biggest driver of inaccessible healthcare. It’s totally normal for people to know of someone on a NHS waiting list. I had a NHS appointment at the end of Jan (2025) and this was my ‘3 month follow up’ from Q3, 2023. It was actually really useful being able to be seen by a consultant privately 3 times in the meantime.
Trust me, as soon as you actually experience private healthcare, you’d 100% do it if you could. Don’t get me wrong, there are absolutely brutal stories from the USA and China where the worst excesses of completely privatised systems come to the fore.
I never said anything about being cheaper. My argument was simply that the government should make private healthcare more accessible by introducing tax breaks.
My employer pays for private healthcare insurance, it is a sound idea if we encourage businesses to offer this to their workers. The more people going to independent providers, the less demand on the NHS and that’s inherently a good thing. It’s not undermining the NHS and probably allows it to focus their resources elsewhere. For example, increasing trainee positions or being able to bring privatised services back in house.
Well, that’s a naive notion. Profit motives drive innovation and leads to advancements in medicines, equipment, technologies that support healthcare systems.
Applying the logic to hospitals, they will tend to have the best; ‘customer service’, equipment and staff. The lack of choice we have in the NHS to choose healthcare providers is eye opening.
The primary objective of a healthcare system is delivering the best healthcare outcomes which the NHS has consistently punched below its weight there. The problems do not start in 2010.
The care in the nhs is usually very good but there’s major issues with it and it’s not just funding
Productivity down significantly since the pandemic, there’s extra staff but waiting lists increasing and insufficient bed capacity (social care)
I still can’t understand why more of the recent cash injection wasnt focussed on social care. That would surely be the quickest win due to the amount of bed blocking that goes on. Clear some of that that and free capacity increases
Also, I’ve said a million times that until we as a nation start to look after ourselves better it won’t matter what is thrown at the nhs. With an ageing unhealthy population that has grown by around 7.5% in past 10 years or so and will continue to grow rapidly in the short term, it doesn’t look good
Ps If anyone thinks this is just a purely funding issue needs to look at Scotland nhs.
Social care is paid for by local authorities not the NHS
Genuine question, how is productivity quantified in the NHS?The care in the nhs is usually very good but there’s major issues with it and it’s not just funding
Productivity down significantly since the pandemic, there’s extra staff but waiting lists increasing and insufficient bed capacity (social care)
I still can’t understand why more of the recent cash injection wasnt focussed on social care. That would surely be the quickest win due to the amount of bed blocking that goes on. Clear some of that that and available capacity increases
Also, I’ve said a million times that until we as a nation start to look after ourselves better it won’t matter what is thrown at the nhs. With an ageing unhealthy population that has grown by around 7.5% in past 10 years or so and will continue to grow rapidly in the short term. Throw in the long term affects of the pandemic (thanks China) and it doesn’t look good
Ps If anyone thinks this is just a purely funding issue needs to look at Scotland nhs.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?