3 ms·

Wealthy Canadians get medical care in the US for a reason. Here's some stats on NHS 1. 3x higher death rate after major surgeries compared to US 2. 48% of Br

Wealthy Canadians get medical care in the US for a reason. Here's some stats on NHS 1. 3x higher death rate after major surgeries compared to US 2. 48% of Brits haven't seen a dentist in over 2 years 3. Average surgery wait time of 18 weeks, 100 days for major surgeries. 4. 1 in 28 die due to subpar care Universal health care = universally terrible Source: http://www.dailywire.com/news/14470/7-things-you-need-know-about-britains-failing-aaron-bandler# http://www.dailywire.com/news/14470/7-things-you-need-know-a...

nicky0 9y ago
Nice to see a good unbiased source referenced there.
- cmahler7 9y ago
  every stat in the article is backed by a study.
  - nicky0 9y ago
    The selection of stats presented is still a form of bias.
  - 45h34jh53k4j 9y ago
    So what you are saying is that only the wealthy deserve good quality healthcare? Good plan.
    - cmahler7 9y ago
      No I'm simply putting out facts that universal health care isn't a perfect system. Nice strawman though
      - nicky0 9y ago
        Maybe not perfect, but the system was pretty good today when I went to see my doctor for free.
gmac 9y ago
I'll bite: across the population as a whole, the UK has much better health outcomes than the US despite spending a lot less money on healthcare. Of course, we should be spending more money, and then I expect we'd equal or even beat the US at the top too, because too much healthcare is also a bad thing, and with private healthcare that's what rich people get.
corney91 9y ago
Most of these are due to lack of funding, just look at the examples given in the article -- "lack of beds and nurses" sums up a lot of them. This makes sense when you see that the UK spends 9.78% GDP on healthcare when the US spends 16.91% (http://www.nhsconfed.org/resources/key-statistics-on-the-nhs http://www.nhsconfed.org/resources/key-statistics-on-the-nhs) and you can also see we actually get great value for money when the Commonwealth Fund has rated the NHS above most other healthcare systems: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/20... The NHS wasn't in this state in 2010 before Andrew Lansley got his hands on it. Maybe the problem lies with those who are managing it (somehow currently the imbecile fall-guy Jeremy Hunt...) On top of that, stats like your first one are easily skewed because people in the US don't even get necessary surgeries because they can't afford it, so of course the NHS is going to have a higher rate of death afterwards!
- Fifer82 9y ago
  You mean the ex culture secretary? With no experience of healthcare, finance, or anything else that the job entails? Crazy. The only thing more ridiculous is having a Chancellor with no real world business or financial experience who is known to dodge tax... oh... and now Editors a Newspaper.

nicky0 9y ago

Nice to see a good unbiased source referenced there.

cmahler7 9y ago
every stat in the article is backed by a study.
- nicky0 9y ago
  The selection of stats presented is still a form of bias.
- 45h34jh53k4j 9y ago
  So what you are saying is that only the wealthy deserve good quality healthcare? Good plan.
  - cmahler7 9y ago
    No I'm simply putting out facts that universal health care isn't a perfect system. Nice strawman though
    - nicky0 9y ago
      Maybe not perfect, but the system was pretty good today when I went to see my doctor for free.

gmac 9y ago

I'll bite: across the population as a whole, the UK has much better health outcomes than the US despite spending a lot less money on healthcare. Of course, we should be spending more money, and then I expect we'd equal or even beat the US at the top too, because too much healthcare is also a bad thing, and with private healthcare that's what rich people get.

corney91 9y ago

Most of these are due to lack of funding, just look at the examples given in the article -- "lack of beds and nurses" sums up a lot of them. This makes sense when you see that the UK spends 9.78% GDP on healthcare when the US spends 16.91% (http://www.nhsconfed.org/resources/key-statistics-on-the-nhs http://www.nhsconfed.org/resources/key-statistics-on-the-nhs) and you can also see we actually get great value for money when the Commonwealth Fund has rated the NHS above most other healthcare systems: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/20... The NHS wasn't in this state in 2010 before Andrew Lansley got his hands on it. Maybe the problem lies with those who are managing it (somehow currently the imbecile fall-guy Jeremy Hunt...) On top of that, stats like your first one are easily skewed because people in the US don't even get necessary surgeries because they can't afford it, so of course the NHS is going to have a higher rate of death afterwards!

Fifer82 9y ago
You mean the ex culture secretary? With no experience of healthcare, finance, or anything else that the job entails? Crazy. The only thing more ridiculous is having a Chancellor with no real world business or financial experience who is known to dodge tax... oh... and now Editors a Newspaper.