3 ms·
The health/economic experts in the article cite the British system for its quality, efficiency, competitiveness, and access. If that's true, it's sounds like it
by caseysoftware 9y ago
The health/economic experts in the article cite the British system for its quality, efficiency, competitiveness, and access. If that's true, it's sounds like it's funded "enough" for the current responsibilities.
If it was underfunded - especially for decades - then some of those things would be big problems, right?
- jaggederest 9y agoI think it's more of a credit to the British system that, even underfunded relative to ideal the NHS produces still excellent outcomes. I imagine that, if it were funded with another 1-2% of GDP it would truly excel more like the French system.