4 thoughts on “The NHS ‘founding myth’: It never happened in the way we think it happened”

  1. Posted 04/12/2015 at 16:34 | Permalink

    There is, of course, nothing necessarily wrong about elites leading the way in social changes — indeed I dare say that is how changes often come about. But what I really value is not change but competition. That’s where the NHS falls down. It’s a state monopoly (or, as I prefer to say, ‘monoparechy’ — single supplier’, rather than ‘single seller’). We taxpayers all have to pay (a lot) for the NHS, and most of us would rather not have to pay twice if we choose to go private. That’s why some form of voucher scheme always seems very attractive. It retains the NHS for those who want it, but allows the rest of us an alternative option. Why won’t the politicians allow us to go down that path?

  2. Posted 06/12/2015 at 17:00 | Permalink

    Maybe the NHS is now, along with other state run health systems a product of it’s own ‘success’ insofar that it is an easy target for the big drug manufacturers.

    Who could imagine the drug companies raking in the huge price of some drugs if the target was the punters themselves.

    Of course we will never know but it would seem that the cost of drugs would come under greater scrutiny by Joe Public if he were able to lower his insurance premium cost by electing to become self insured in some instances.

    Maybe we would have a quite different health system and a more affordable system and, maybe a generally more user friendly system.

    After all how much would another six months of life be worth in realcost terms rather than in NICEcost terms and, more importantly, would we each be willing to pay for it

  3. Posted 21/12/2015 at 14:26 | Permalink

    Given the fact that the NHS is the third largest employer in the World and the two largest serve nations more than ten times our own population, I would endeavour to suggest that the NHS doesn’t provide value for money; this along with facts such as the requirement of the NHS to undertake some activities which are not core to its raison d’etre; the constant dissolution of objective argument being drowned out in choruses of subjective banter; the constant politicising of the entity to grab votes by all parties and the reliance of the nations’ increasing dependency upon the NHS as a mainstay of the “Illfare State” means there will never be sensible debate or discussion upon its future or indeed, as to whether we feel we can afford it any longer.

  4. Posted 02/01/2016 at 13:29 | Permalink

    One problem I see is that the concept of private healthcare, or similarly, private schooling, is conflated totally with expensive, posh, for the rich, in the minds of the public. When a state version of a service exists, people forget that the idea of poor people, even not-poor-but-not-rich people, buying a private service is even slightly plausible. Ask them whether the poor use private supermarkets and they’ll be baffled – the question doesn’t make sense. When there isn’t a state version, the private service isn’t thought of as private, it’s just… normal. When there is a state version, the private alternative is called private, and private means shutting people out, means for the rich only.

    Status quo bias is a powerful thing. Everywhere in the world, people can only imagine things working how they currently do in their own society, and think it would be absurd for them to work any differently.

Comments are closed.