Public Services or Going Private

[O'Kelly Isley III]

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

I'm loving the idea that you want others to believe you would put other people you don't know before your own children.

Putting your own kids first is called parenting.

If you think that's somehow a bad thing then I'll leave you to it.

Delicious.  I'm just looking around this thread and seeing you making an utter tit of yourself - you even got a greenie from Dawson Creek Boy - but thanks for your own-brand parenting advice.  

[BigDoddyKane]

1 hour ago, Bob Mahelp said:

In regards to state/private health provision, it should be pointed out that.....because of the untouchable, holy NHS, and the concept of 'free care' (it isn't)......the UK is the only country in the world, possibly with the exception of the USA, where this discussion takes place. 

Other countries in Europe, where social provision outstrips the UK, and where society generally looks after the weakest....such as Sweden, Denmark, Norway, The Netherlands....have private health care for everyone, which is effectively state provision. 

You have to be insured, and everyone from the richest to the poorest is entitled to the same (high) level of basic care that you are here. 

The NHS was one of the world's great inventions back in the 1940's. It was innovative, and ground breaking. 

Sadly in many ways, it's become a millstone around the neck of the country. 

 

How much is the health insurance in Holland? Everyone has to take it out and pay it but I cant remember how much it actually was. I think it covers 50% and Government picks up the other 50%

Some european countries you pay a nominal fee for any doctors appointments and hospital fees you may incur

Edited November 4, 2021 by BigDoddyKane

[BigDoddyKane]

I googled it for Holland no sure is still correct but 50% paid by everyone over 18, 45% is paid by employer and 5% by Government.

Its 200 euros in total a month and 100 euros what the individual pays and the other 100 euros paid by Employer/Government

Edited November 4, 2021 by BigDoddyKane

[Dawson Park Boy]

16 minutes ago, BigDoddyKane said:

I googled it for Holland no sure is still correct but 50% paid by everyone over 18, 45% is paid by employer and 5% by Government.

Its 200 euros in total a month and 100 euros what the individual pays and the other 100 euros paid by Employer/Government

We need to get on to something like that ASAP.

[BigDoddyKane]

I prefer the NHS model but this idea other EU countries are better isnt always the case imo

It would be nice though with all the big data supposedly available nowdays that some real comparisons between countries health care could be done on how they are exactly funded and how much value they get from the way they are funded in terms of care and waiting lists etc

It may be the average dutch person pays less overall if including taxes that go to healthcare even when having to pay private insurance, that I dont know

 

Edited November 4, 2021 by BigDoddyKane

[Guest Bob Mahelp]

1 hour ago, BigDoddyKane said:

I prefer the NHS model but this idea other EU countries are better isnt always the case imo

It would be nice though with all the big data supposedly available nowdays that some real comparisons between countries health care could be done on how they are exactly funded and how much value they get from the way they are funded in terms of care and waiting lists etc

It may be the average dutch person pays less overall if including taxes that go to healthcare even when having to pay private insurance, that I dont know

 

I totally agree with you on that. 

However, the most often citied reason for keeping the NHS totally un-privatised is the fear that the UK will become like the USA....in fact, somebody already posted that on here. 

Opinion on the NHS tends to be blinded by the myth that it's 'free' (it isn't), and as I said the fact that it's treated as an untouchable God-like organisation ultimately holds the NHS back. 

What the UK should have done decades ago was to look at best practice in other European countries, and see how we could use an analgam of models to improve services here. We could still have a significant element of privatisation, that could close the gap between the haves and have-nots, instead of increasing it.

But we didn't. 

[Dawson Park Boy]

35 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

We already know what the problems would be with any insurance type scheme.

1) Constant premium inflation.

2) An inability to directly compare one supplier with another.

3) Difficulties with getting the companies to pay out when needed.

4) Problems getting insurance for those with pre-existing conditions.

5) Profiteering.

We don't want or need any of this in our health system.

For all it's many faults, the NHS funding model of free at the point of use is the right approach.

 

Your points are valid and the NHS funding model is, in theory, attractive and should cut out lots of needless bureaucracy.

However, we need to compare the NHS system with our European neighbours. Again, I’m not too sure on this, but I was of the impression that their ‘outcomes’ were better than ours and that’s what’s really important.

One of those huge questions which needs to be opened up to debate with, hopefully, an answer at the end unlike the social care problem which has been batted about for years.

[NotThePars]

1 hour ago, Bob Mahelp said:

Opinion on the NHS tends to be blinded by the myth that it's 'free' (it isn't), and as I said the fact that it's treated as an untouchable God-like organisation ultimately holds the NHS back. 

Probably more the successive governments undermining it by stealth than some misty-eyed view from the populace tbh.

[scottsdad]

In the late 90s, my dad injured his shoulder at work. He was off work for a long time with it. He couldn't move it at all without getting sharp, stabbing pains. He needed a fairly straightforward operation to sort it. 

The NHS had a waiting time of over a year. He spoke to the police to see if they would pay to go private (the cost was about £3k if I remember correctly). They said no. In the end he paid it himself - a year in pain just wasn't worth it.  

[101]

Paying for your kids go to a private school means you have to dress them up in the most horrific gear and should be banned on human rights grounds alone.

[jakedee]

Paying for your kids go to a private school means you have to dress them up in the most horrific gear and should be banned on human rights grounds alone.

There's a reason for it. It buys privilege, simple as.

https://www.statista.com/chart/18492/uk-top-jobs-dominated-by-privately-educated/

[101]

24 minutes ago, jakedee said:

There's a reason for it. It buys privilege, simple as.

https://www.statista.com/chart/18492/uk-top-jobs-dominated-by-privately-educated/

Is going to school in shorts and long socks worth it? It's a no from me.

[BigDoddyKane]

How do other comparable countries fund and deal with care homes?

do they have same issues ? 
 

[Billy Jean King]

How do other comparable countries fund and deal with care homes?
do they have same issues ? 
 

A lot of families in Europe especially Southern Europe tend to look after their elderly relatives at home themselves. I can't remember seeing many care homes in the likes of Italy, Spain or Greece.

[tamthebam]

I did go to a private school. I don't know about networking though as the only useful contact I might be able to exploit is someone who works in a brewery...Having worked with people who went to council schools I'm not sure I was any more educated than them as a result of my private education. Most folk at work assume I went to state school as I'm a scruffy bam.

I don't have any kids but I'd probably send them to my old school if I had the money as it wasn't bad for extra things like music that you might not get at a state school. My rich schoolmate sent his two to private school although a different one from ours oddly enough.

I have heard that the RC state schools give you a good education and I believe you don't necessarily have to be RC to attend. "Right kids, if anyone asks we eat fish on a Friday, support Celtic and think Daniel O'Donnell is the greatest singer ever"

[Aufc]

I went to a private school. I stood out a bit because I wasn’t from a posh area and my family are not overly posh, although we obviously were able to afford it for me and my two siblings.

Looking back now, I enjoyed it but I don’t feel I made the most of it. The reason people pay for it is not because of the education. It is same education as state schools, just without the fucking idiots disrupting the class. You are paying for the facilities. At my school, in my lifetime, we got £1m new computer block with fancy equipment, a huge new stand with top of the range gym and canteen, an all weather pitch (before they became more common) plus others.

I never really made the most of these facilities. I didn’t really hang sbout with my school mates outside of school as I only really wanted to hang out with my mates from back home. I never really played rugby, despite being pretty decent as I just wanted to play football back home. I also didn’t the exam results I should have got albeit it has worked out in the end

I can understand why people resent them. I was pretty lucky. I am hoping to send my two to private school because the high school in the town I live is currently shite. This may change in a few years when they are the right age. I cant see it though.

[Aufc]

Paying for your kids go to a private school means you have to dress them up in the most horrific gear and should be banned on human rights grounds alone.

I just had to wear a blazer with a tie. I think this is fairly common in a lot of state schools now. Some of the outfits you see kids wearing to school are fucking horrendous

[101]

4 minutes ago, Aufc said:

I just had to wear a blazer with a tie. I think this is fairly common in a lot of state schools now. Some of the outfits you see kids wearing to school are fucking horrendous

There is some school in Edinburgh that dress their male students up like a rich stereotype doll. 

They also annoy commuters by being loud. I'm with the Victorians that kids should be seen and not heard and with red knee high socks you can't miss them.

[Aufc]

There is some school in Edinburgh that dress their male students up like a rich stereotype doll. 
They also annoy commuters by being loud. I'm with the Victorians that kids should be seen and not heard and with red knee high socks you can't miss them.

Yeah I can imagine regarding the uniforms.

Groups of kids in being loud shock. I’d rather that than them being violent or abusive

[Fullerene]

23 hours ago, oaksoft said:

It's not about grades.

Private schooling is about networking contacts.

And if that is followed through into the likes of Oxford and Cambridge then the payoff can be very substantial.

The big difference with the rich compared to the rest of us is that they tend to be much better at building and actively using their personal networks.

For many employers a CV that shows straight Bs from Eton looks better than one with straight As from some comprehensive school they have never heard of.

Similarly Oxford and Cambridge.

It is also more likely your connections will help.  For example your school friend's Dad getting you started with a well paid job.

I don't think the rich are better at networking.  Simply that is more fruitful financially.  If you are poor and your friends are poor you can hardly use them to get rich.