Time to increase taxes?
- Thread starter Casdawer
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 7,774
- Location
- Under the Hill
The real experts don't work for the government, it doesn't pay well enough
The real experts don't work for the government, it doesn't pay well enough
That's probably quite true, you're never going to get rich working for HM Government - well not unless you are an MP.
if you go work for a public company you will see the huge waste compared to private companies and the annoying thing is the solutions are rather simple. its just no one wants to implement them, partly as you need increase funding in he short term. The other big reason is although everyone is annoyed by the situation they also don't want to lose their cushy job.
Did you read the whole article? Only 1 out of the 5 measures did the UK perform badly. Health outcomes includes general health of the population and early deaths, that's more indicative of drinking, smoking & fast food in the UK, nothing to do with quality of care.
of course it has stuff to do with qaulity of care.
there's plenty of ways to alter stats to get the results you want, this is a prime example.
uk simply does not do well with actual outcomes of care, one of the most important outcomes, as pretty much every study concludes.
I'd be interested to read these studies if it's not the case the UK is a decent healthcare system. Anecdotal evidence but I've had nothing but good words for the care my father has received, top notch. NHS trust's all vary though
http://www.thelancet.com/action/showFullTextImages?pii=S0140-6736(17)30818-8
while such bogus reports which rate vaccines and patient opinion so highly then the majour flaws in NHS will not be adresed.
OK, UK - 85. Luxembourg which is the start of the top 10 is 89, 4 point difference, 4 points in the other direction and you only have to go down 3 places. This doesn't convince me that the NHS is in dire straights and a complete wreck like some people would have you believe.
so you ignore the many diseases in the UK with high death rates compared to others. Whats worse is some of these are easy to detect and treat, ie they are preventable and yet we still have a high death rate.
I'm not ignoring, of course the NHS can improve, I just don't buy into this modern myth that the NHS is destroyed
who said anything about destroyed.
once you adjust the stats to remove things liek vaccine and access which we should be very good at with our model of healthcare, it makes outcome very poor compared to many similar countries. This is not good enough, seeing as its one of the biggest things you expect from health care is a good outcome,
Not a precieved outcome from patient opinion. I mean you can offer homoeopathy and improve the opinion rating at a deterement to outcome, oh wait NHS does that.
the op does not state that, however the nhs is poor for the high ranking western country we are, no ifs or buts the outcome rankings tell us this. It si in no way as good as you stated and is why i pulled you up on it and puled your source up for the fudging of stats.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 May 2007
- Posts
- 3,221
Now your just being negative , the public sector simply needs to be made more efficient
And no I am not paying any more tax
I think that sums up most posts
In reality having worked with and for a while in the public sector it is a tough challenge to make it more efficient rather than simply just cost cutting with your head buried in the sand.
I've been on projects where some "public servant" has changed his mind weeks in costing £1m+ basically on a whim. Not his money and he knows that it'll go over budget anyway but did sit there thinking that's my taxes right there.
So no. They have plenty of money but because no one is held responsible they are fairly loose with looking after it. Give them an incentive to save it via a bonus and they might become interested. Otherwise it's a case of spend the lot otherwise we will get less next year
So no. They have plenty of money but because no one is held responsible they are fairly loose with looking after it. Give them an incentive to save it via a bonus and they might become interested. Otherwise it's a case of spend the lot otherwise we will get less next year
I'm on board with all the efficiency arguments.
I'm not 100% against privatisation. But the reason it is such a threat is to do with how inefficient the public sector is. Private company sectors can do they same job and make a profit and still do it for cheaper than the public sector?
However to make the public sector more efficient you will have to spend the money on wages getting the best and brightest involved.
I'm not 100% against privatisation. But the reason it is such a threat is to do with how inefficient the public sector is. Private company sectors can do they same job and make a profit and still do it for cheaper than the public sector?
However to make the public sector more efficient you will have to spend the money on wages getting the best and brightest involved.
The OP stated collapsing. Hence when I'd seen that article recently, I posted it. I believe you are making it out to be far worse than it actually is.
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 2,332
My wife receives residential care due to a myriad of disabilities that have afflicted her in the last few years. She was once a fit and athletic woman but now is registered as legally blind (she likens her vision to looking through tracing paper) and has issues with her central nervous system.
The care workers that come and help her work for a private company that are sub-contracted by the NHS. I have a big problem with this. Effectively they receive a budget from the NHS and then the company takes it's cut of the "profits" off the top before they even send a care worker out. They make their "profits" by paying the care workers a pittance, care workers are only paid for the time they are in a person's home giving them care. The time that they spend commuting from one person to the next is unpaid.
These companies should not exist. There is no efficiency or competitiveness, the quality of service is poor as wages are so low it does not attract the right people into the job.
Raising taxes would have zero effect on this as the companies would just take bigger cuts whilst continuing with the same level of service.
The profit motive exists for companies that take risks. Take a risk bringing a new product to market and reap the rewards. It does not exist for 3rd parties to siphon a profit from the top of a public sector service that is paid for by the tax payers.