3 ms·

That's where my taxes will go. And I have to pay almost a grand a month for private healthcare because of incompetent NHS. Maybe I should move to Wales to get s

That's where my taxes will go. And I have to pay almost a grand a month for private healthcare because of incompetent NHS. Maybe I should move to Wales to get some of my money back.

growse 5y ago
> That's where my taxes will go. The welfare state already receives the largest fraction of your taxes. Personally, I'm in favour of things that make the welfare state more cost-effective. > And I have to pay almost a grand a month for private healthcare because of incompetent NHS. Maybe I should move to Wales to get some of my money back. You don't have to, you choose to.
- jokethrowaway 5y ago
  NHS has been pretty terrible in my experience and thank God I have Bupa now. You don't have to, but if you have something you need serious treatment for you'd better go private. They didn't do any tests when presenting symptoms of a stomach ulcer after queueing for 3 hours (I had to do a private test to find out). Statistically I was unlikely t have it because of my age. The first pregnancy went ok (albeit nowhere close to the level of instrumentation you see in the states), for the second one they delayed epidural until it was too late to administer and my wife gave birth on a sofa without pain relief. My son had teeth problems since birth and they wanted to remove 4 front teeth saying an abscess was inevitable. Luckily we have dentists abroad who advised otherwise and it turned out removing teeth was not needed (and it would have been years of pain, spacers and ruined roots). All in all, considering all the money I paid over the years to the government, it was a pretty shoddy deal.
  - growse 5y ago
    I have extensive experience with the NHS (unfortunately) and have pretty much always been very well looked after. The only exception was probably maternity post-delivery, but that's not anything to do with the fact that it was the NHS. But that's irrelevant. You can prove pretty much anything with personal anecdotes - what matters is the big picture. If you're against the NHS, you should probably put some thought into answering the question of "How do we stop poor people dying from preventable conditions?" (assuming that this is a desired end goal). Also, Bupa aren't going to take you to the hospital at 3am when you have severe kidney stones, or unconscious after having been hit by a drunk driver.
- hogFeast 5y ago
  No, the welfare state doesn't receive "the largest fraction" of your taxes. Thinking this is a bit of a meme in the UK. The largest category of spending is actually the state pension (which is partly funded by direct revenue), this isn't welfare. The actual amounts that go towards helping people who actually need help in the UK is relatively small. Unemployment benefits vanishingly small. Even when unemployment was high, the total spending barely surpassed a few billion (in real terms, they haven't increased since the 70s or something ludicrous). Disability is a large category, although some of this in-work people, but a big issue over the past ten years has been implementation of UC...this cost £12bn (the implementation of UC i.e. the amount handed out to contractors was 25%+ of what was actually given to claimant...Duncan-Smith had a neuralgia about "scroungers"). Tax credits are a large category but these are semi-universal and made to people in work. How they can be distinguished from a subsidy to companies is unclear. So the actual net effect isn't that clear. The UK has a relatively small welfare state (this is apparent if you actually talk to anyone on benefits...in the pandemic some people realised for the first time that welfare state wasn't actually that generous...and then we got a massive in-work subsidy program, I am guessing that if you had been on UC subject to regular inquiries by the DWP to get a grand total of £80/week or whatever, the state lavishing subsidies on someone making £200/day was...odd). The NHS has pretty poor outcomes for a developed country. It is provided at low-cost (interestingly, about half the size of the public health system in the US) but the results are very poor (politically, doctor's unions have had very strong lobbying, so when spending increases it has typically gone into the back pocket of doctors with output unchanged). Private healthcare is better. Btw, if you are seeing a trend here: the UK's problem is that there is a massive political demand for subsidies, regardless of whether you are in need or not, but 40% of adults pay no income tax. There is a massive disconnect.
  - growse 5y ago
    > No, the welfare state doesn't receive "the largest fraction" of your taxes. Thinking this is a bit of a meme in the UK. The largest category of spending is actually the state pension (which is partly funded by direct revenue), this isn't welfare. The actual amounts that go towards helping people who actually need help in the UK is relatively small. Hmm. On my tax breakdown from HMRC, "Welfare" comes top at ~22%, whereas "State Pensions" comes third at ~12% (Health is second at ~20%). Are you saying HMRC is wrong, or am I misinterpreting this? It does say this is just for income tax and NI, but I'm not aware of income/NI being specifically ringfenced and spent in a different way to, say, VAT. > The NHS has pretty poor outcomes for a developed country. It is provided at low-cost (interestingly, about half the size of the public health system in the US) but the results are very poor (politically, doctor's unions have had very strong lobbying, so when spending increases it has typically gone into the back pocket of doctors with output unchanged). Private healthcare is better. I'm not sure there's a consesus on this. The most charitable interpretation I can gather from skimming the research (e.g. https://www.bmj.com/content/367/bmj.l6326 https://www.bmj.com/content/367/bmj.l6326) is that "It's complex. The NHS does some things badly, and it does some things well, and it generally spends less than its peers". If we accept that, then the next question is naturally "what do we want to change" and "how do we do that". Maybe if the NHS spends less than its peers, we need to fund it more to get better outcomes (I wouldn't be against this)? I also don't disagree necessarily that "Private healthcare is better" for some things, but as I said elsewhere, they're not the ones who have to deal with emergency trauma cases, so it's not a like-for-like comparison.
- intricatedetail 5y ago
  No, I have to. The treatment is not available on NHS and I would be dead without it.
  - growse 5y ago
    I sympathise. Do you think the reason the treatment isn't available on the NHS is incompetence?
    - intricatedetail 5y ago
      Yes, combined with corruption. The treatment is not available because if more people had access to it, that would eat big pharma profits which some people on advisory panels are shareholders or otherwise have conflict of interest. I am talking about medical cannabis for chronic pain. You can only get it on private prescription.
robotmay 5y ago
The NHS isn't incompetent, at least here in Wales. It has however been hobbled by years of cuts and lack of investment by successive conservative governments in England. Here the government continue to invest in it and everyone I know receives great care. In that regard, yes maybe you should move to Wales, it's pretty nice here, and the NHS was a Welsh invention in the first place. In reference to taxes, the English, frankly, owe the Welsh reparation. Hundreds of years of oppression and exploitation of the people and landscape of Wales, and they are repaid by killing entire industries and throwing a nation into poverty. Villages removed to flood valleys for English drinking water. Children beaten when they spoke Welsh. UBI might help repair some of the lasting damage that has been inflicted upon them. Or it might not. But they deserve the right to try.

That's where my taxes will go. And I have to pay almost a grand a month for private healthcare because of incompetent NHS. Maybe I should move to Wales to get some of my money back.

growse 5y ago

> That's where my taxes will go. The welfare state already receives the largest fraction of your taxes. Personally, I'm in favour of things that make the welfare state more cost-effective. > And I have to pay almost a grand a month for private healthcare because of incompetent NHS. Maybe I should move to Wales to get some of my money back. You don't have to, you choose to.

jokethrowaway 5y ago
NHS has been pretty terrible in my experience and thank God I have Bupa now. You don't have to, but if you have something you need serious treatment for you'd better go private. They didn't do any tests when presenting symptoms of a stomach ulcer after queueing for 3 hours (I had to do a private test to find out). Statistically I was unlikely t have it because of my age. The first pregnancy went ok (albeit nowhere close to the level of instrumentation you see in the states), for the second one they delayed epidural until it was too late to administer and my wife gave birth on a sofa without pain relief. My son had teeth problems since birth and they wanted to remove 4 front teeth saying an abscess was inevitable. Luckily we have dentists abroad who advised otherwise and it turned out removing teeth was not needed (and it would have been years of pain, spacers and ruined roots). All in all, considering all the money I paid over the years to the government, it was a pretty shoddy deal.
- growse 5y ago
  I have extensive experience with the NHS (unfortunately) and have pretty much always been very well looked after. The only exception was probably maternity post-delivery, but that's not anything to do with the fact that it was the NHS. But that's irrelevant. You can prove pretty much anything with personal anecdotes - what matters is the big picture. If you're against the NHS, you should probably put some thought into answering the question of "How do we stop poor people dying from preventable conditions?" (assuming that this is a desired end goal). Also, Bupa aren't going to take you to the hospital at 3am when you have severe kidney stones, or unconscious after having been hit by a drunk driver.
hogFeast 5y ago
No, the welfare state doesn't receive "the largest fraction" of your taxes. Thinking this is a bit of a meme in the UK. The largest category of spending is actually the state pension (which is partly funded by direct revenue), this isn't welfare. The actual amounts that go towards helping people who actually need help in the UK is relatively small. Unemployment benefits vanishingly small. Even when unemployment was high, the total spending barely surpassed a few billion (in real terms, they haven't increased since the 70s or something ludicrous). Disability is a large category, although some of this in-work people, but a big issue over the past ten years has been implementation of UC...this cost £12bn (the implementation of UC i.e. the amount handed out to contractors was 25%+ of what was actually given to claimant...Duncan-Smith had a neuralgia about "scroungers"). Tax credits are a large category but these are semi-universal and made to people in work. How they can be distinguished from a subsidy to companies is unclear. So the actual net effect isn't that clear. The UK has a relatively small welfare state (this is apparent if you actually talk to anyone on benefits...in the pandemic some people realised for the first time that welfare state wasn't actually that generous...and then we got a massive in-work subsidy program, I am guessing that if you had been on UC subject to regular inquiries by the DWP to get a grand total of £80/week or whatever, the state lavishing subsidies on someone making £200/day was...odd). The NHS has pretty poor outcomes for a developed country. It is provided at low-cost (interestingly, about half the size of the public health system in the US) but the results are very poor (politically, doctor's unions have had very strong lobbying, so when spending increases it has typically gone into the back pocket of doctors with output unchanged). Private healthcare is better. Btw, if you are seeing a trend here: the UK's problem is that there is a massive political demand for subsidies, regardless of whether you are in need or not, but 40% of adults pay no income tax. There is a massive disconnect.
- growse 5y ago
  > No, the welfare state doesn't receive "the largest fraction" of your taxes. Thinking this is a bit of a meme in the UK. The largest category of spending is actually the state pension (which is partly funded by direct revenue), this isn't welfare. The actual amounts that go towards helping people who actually need help in the UK is relatively small. Hmm. On my tax breakdown from HMRC, "Welfare" comes top at ~22%, whereas "State Pensions" comes third at ~12% (Health is second at ~20%). Are you saying HMRC is wrong, or am I misinterpreting this? It does say this is just for income tax and NI, but I'm not aware of income/NI being specifically ringfenced and spent in a different way to, say, VAT. > The NHS has pretty poor outcomes for a developed country. It is provided at low-cost (interestingly, about half the size of the public health system in the US) but the results are very poor (politically, doctor's unions have had very strong lobbying, so when spending increases it has typically gone into the back pocket of doctors with output unchanged). Private healthcare is better. I'm not sure there's a consesus on this. The most charitable interpretation I can gather from skimming the research (e.g. https://www.bmj.com/content/367/bmj.l6326 https://www.bmj.com/content/367/bmj.l6326) is that "It's complex. The NHS does some things badly, and it does some things well, and it generally spends less than its peers". If we accept that, then the next question is naturally "what do we want to change" and "how do we do that". Maybe if the NHS spends less than its peers, we need to fund it more to get better outcomes (I wouldn't be against this)? I also don't disagree necessarily that "Private healthcare is better" for some things, but as I said elsewhere, they're not the ones who have to deal with emergency trauma cases, so it's not a like-for-like comparison.
intricatedetail 5y ago
No, I have to. The treatment is not available on NHS and I would be dead without it.
- growse 5y ago
  I sympathise. Do you think the reason the treatment isn't available on the NHS is incompetence?
  - intricatedetail 5y ago
    Yes, combined with corruption. The treatment is not available because if more people had access to it, that would eat big pharma profits which some people on advisory panels are shareholders or otherwise have conflict of interest. I am talking about medical cannabis for chronic pain. You can only get it on private prescription.

robotmay 5y ago

The NHS isn't incompetent, at least here in Wales. It has however been hobbled by years of cuts and lack of investment by successive conservative governments in England. Here the government continue to invest in it and everyone I know receives great care. In that regard, yes maybe you should move to Wales, it's pretty nice here, and the NHS was a Welsh invention in the first place. In reference to taxes, the English, frankly, owe the Welsh reparation. Hundreds of years of oppression and exploitation of the people and landscape of Wales, and they are repaid by killing entire industries and throwing a nation into poverty. Villages removed to flood valleys for English drinking water. Children beaten when they spoke Welsh. UBI might help repair some of the lasting damage that has been inflicted upon them. Or it might not. But they deserve the right to try.