A government powerful enough to guarantee universal health care

[Bono]

is powerful enough to deny you health care. The latest examples of the glories of "national" (re: socialist) health care come from Britain where more than four in ten maternity units have turned away woman in labor because they have no room.

The wonderful folks running Britain's health system have also stopped paying for drugs to treat a rare lung disease, imposing a death sentence on patients suffering from this illness and denied heart surgery to a 61 year-old grandmother because she is too old.

Good thing British health care is controlled by selfless bureaucrats and not greedy capitalists!

[Silent Hunter]

The Daily Mail is a lot of rubbish. I would recommend you get your links from better sources.

[dead0man]

Are you disputing the facts?  Because they come from a lot of other sources than just that one.  cite  I understand it's convenient to ignore things you don't want to hear if it comes from a source you think contains a bias, but all journalism is biased, if you think otherwise you're fooling yourself.

But I don't want to hijack this thread to be about that, lets get back to pointing out the more obvious faults of socialized medicine.

[Silent Hunter]

Are you disputing the facts?  Because they come from a lot of other sources than just that one.  cite  I understand it's convenient to ignore things you don't want to hear if it comes from a source you think contains a bias, but all journalism is biased, if you think otherwise you're fooling yourself.

But I don't want to hijack this thread to be about that, lets get back to pointing out the more obvious faults of socialized medicine.

The Daily Mail ignores the caveats- like the women were able to find other wards. Note the study was commissioned by the Conservatives.

In fact, Bono, has reported the articles inaccurately:
1. Of that study, 42% closed at least once. This was probably three or four times for most of them- out of 365 days in a year.
2. NICE's drug thing- a proposal.
3. The PCT in the case of the 61 year old woman eventually agreed to pay.

Let's draw on my own experiences. Thanks to the NHS, I was able to get orthodontic treatment I would otherwise have had to pay for. I'm sure you wouldn't want "fangs", which I used to have.

I can see a doctor for free, within a reasonable period of time. I can get medicine for a low cost. I have had an improved hospital in my borough. One of them may have closed, but the new one has more beds than the former two.

Yes, there are problems, but I will take "socialised medicine" over "market medicine" every day. Aneurin Bevan has my eternal gratitude and he is now going into my signature.

Edited to remove a bit of the anger. Sorry.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I'm sure that I, or anyone else, could dig up plenty of sob stories and exaggerated tales of woe from any healthcare system. This is the problem with policy debates on the internets (and before you say anything I don't like it when various liberal American posters play that trick either).

Are you disputing the facts?  Because they come from a lot of other sources than just that one.  cite

By the look of it most of the facts (or "facts") came from a Conservative Party press release. Would you take a story that started life as a Democratic Party press release as gospel?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Just because all journalism is biased does not mean that all journalism is equally biased. The Daily Hate Mail is a dreadful rag with a longstanding habit of making people panicky about their health (it mostly caters to middle-to-lower-middle class women) and questioning the reliability of a health (or politics) related story in it is entirely legitimate (the same goes for the other tabloids as well).

[dead0man]

It's your system, I guess you guys would know what's best for you and yours.  I hope it works out for you guys in the long run, but I fear it won't.

[Јas]

It's your system, I guess you guys would know what's best for you and yours.  I hope it works out for you guys in the long run, but I fear it won't.

For the record, what exactly is 'the long run' in this context? (The NHS not having been set up yesterday and all...)

[dead0man]

The death of the last Baby Boomer.

[Person Man]

Yes, this looks like a straw man article. Though I could probably go as far as to say that catastrophic health management in both systems is pretty flawed. If you are dying in a corporate health care system, you can probably get treatment, but only if you can pay and when your guys do decided to cover it, they can rescind the coverage if the set up cost too much, so you can be forced into bankruptcy and poverty. In the state health care system, everyone will have access to catastrophic healthcare, but way have to wait too long. On the whole, I would say the state health care system would work better because a person who cannot afford to live through a life-threatening disease (perhaps 60-70% of the population) will be given a chance to do so and someone who can afford to get private insurance can probably afford to get help from an exotic hospital-spa in the 3rd world where you can get prompt and specialized service in a 4-star (if not 5-star) environment. So, a state/welfare-based system gives everyone a chance to live and promotes global trade. That being said, a corporate health care system only benefits someone who can pay 20,000 up-front for service lest they can't afford insurance or the insurance reneges on its coverage. If it wasn't for my great credit, my wife would be living in poverty because she had to have a cyst taken from her left ovary in the year we met (thank goodness we can still have kids) and it was supposed to cost $5000, but ended up around $20,000. Because of the unanticipated costs, the insurance company reneged and now she has to declare medical bankruptcy, which pretty much dooms you to poverty for 7 years. In a welfare health system, we would of had to wait about a year (instead of 3 months) but wouldn't be in this problem. However, I can see the problem with being able to pay upfront and have to wait an extra couple of months instead, but then you can travel to Dubai for treatment.

[opebo]

It is hard to see how limited health care is not preferrable to no health care at all... as is the case for poors in america.

[Silent Hunter]

The death of the last Baby Boomer.

The NHS was set up in 1948. When did the Baby Boom start in the UK?

[Michael Z]

It's your system, I guess you guys would know what's best for you and yours.  I hope it works out for you guys in the long run, but I fear it won't.

Why don't you pat us on the head and give us a cookie while you're at it?

[Gustaf]

Hear, hear (directed at Al)

[dead0man]

The death of the last Baby Boomer.

The NHS was set up in 1948. When did the Baby Boom start in the UK?

'round the same time I'd guess huh?  When do people need medical care most in their lives?

[afleitch]

At this rate I'll need to start quoting Churchill and Thatcher to some of you on the good they saw in the NHS.

[Silent Hunter]

At this rate I'll need to start quoting Churchill and Thatcher to some of you on the good they saw in the NHS.

Neither of whom abolished it when they were in power.

[afleitch]

At this rate I'll need to start quoting Churchill and Thatcher to some of you on the good they saw in the NHS.

Neither of whom abolished it when they were in power.

The latter of whom doubled it's funding.

[hack] Not that doubling means anything in relative terms as we all know, nor does it mean there will be a better service except 'when Labour do it'..of course [/hack]