A recent study by a US-based organisation rated the healthcare provision of New Zealand, Australia, France, Germany, Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Canada, Britain and the US.
The NHS was rated as the best, and the US came last.
All such ranking exercises have an element of subjectivity, and the NHS certainly has its flaws, but try asking British people how they feel about the NHS, rather than relying on the distortions peddled by the US media.
Here up north I can usually get an emergency appointment with my GP the next day or, if I'm very lucky, maybe even the same day, but normal appointments usually take one or two weeks,
Oh, and A&E (the British equivalent to the ER) in many hospitals is totally overrun due to the GP shortage, often with waiting times exceeding 6 hours. And that's nothing new, this has been going on for years.
I'm from out of town and my opinion is irrelevant but why should the UK subsidize other countries? Why take money from UK taxpayers and donate it to non-producers?Subsidize is possibly the wrong word - I did say support but the essential reason is that we exist in a closed system thus what goes around tends to come around. Keeping people economically active improves their standard of living and ultimately benefits us in return.
QuoteWhy be forced to accept uncontrolled immigration? Especially from groups who want to retain 7th century ideas and have no intention of assimilating? France is swamped by this issue.Broadly speaking immigration is good for an economy because it brings young, fit, frequently well qualified workers who actually want to work and improve their lot. Movement of people/labour has been historically important in Europe for the last 3000 years and, lets face it pretty much everyone living in the USA is an immigrant as Homo Sapiens is an "old world" species.
It does backfire, of course, but the evidence is that immigrants to the UK currently contribute to the economy more than they take back. Also I think IDS has been on about the forecast of 150-250, 000 net influx out to 2030 or so. That's perhaps about the same number of workers that we need to bring into the UK over the same time period so I'm not sure it's entirely a bad thing.
Yes, we need to build houses and schools but it is not the EU's fault that we have not been doing that fast enough but successive governments who have encouraged everyone to go to 5th rate educational institutions to earn a 7th rate piss pot degree rather than running decent training schemes to equip us with the workforce that we need.
QuoteThe voters of the UK are the people whose opinions count. Do they think the UK gains more from membership than they lose? The opinions of members of government are bought and paid for. It's up to the voters to decide.
It is, I just don't think that watching a bunch of self-serving politicians calling each other names is going to qualify them to make the decision.
QuoteIn a way, BREXIT is a disrupter in the same way Trump is a disrupter. Things won't be the same if Trump gets elected and it will be up to history to decide if that's a good thing or a bad thing. Same for BREXIT. Taking the disrupter path guarantees a change!
I can agree with that statement. It might even be if we manage it properly (see previous comments on British management) we will ultimately come out on top but the short term pain could well be intense and I am not sure I believe that things will be as rosy long term as the Leave campaign claim.
The UK is 4% of GDP, the EU closer to 40 - who do you think the US and China will want to negotiate favourable terms with?
The UK is 4% of GDP, the EU closer to 40 - who do you think the US and China will want to negotiate favourable terms with?
The UK will have to agree to TTIP, and that wil be far far worse for me (and many others) personally that any amount of EU problems.
Throw these brits out.
They hardly have a relevant industry left.
Have a leeching financial section that will sink after the brexit.
Somehow they are delusional in thinking that they are still an important world 'power'.
Outside the EU then TTIP looks less likely and certainly will be more open to scrutiny than the secret EU negotiations.
The UK is 4% of GDP, the EU closer to 40 - who do you think the US and China will want to negotiate favourable terms with?
The UK will have to agree to TTIP, and that wil be far far worse for me (and many others) personally that any amount of EU problems.
The UK is 4% of GDP, the EU closer to 40 - who do you think the US and China will want to negotiate favourable terms with?
The UK will have to agree to TTIP, and that wil be far far worse for me (and many others) personally that any amount of EU problems.
Anything that has to be negotiated in secret can't be good. For anybody... Hopefully it crashes and burns.
... the lights go out (and they will go out) in a few years ...
Wow!
Yes Several "notices of insufficiency" have already been formally issued, but I believe not enacted. (An NoI is a warning to industrial customers that they may have their power cut)
We currently have about 3% excess generating capacity. All it takes is a couple of unscheduled outages.Many large nukes are reaching their end of life and/or having their peak capacity reduced for safety reasons. And we're closing the coal stations. And we are trying to get other countries to finance new gas generating plant.
But of course, the market wisdom is sufficient to solve all problems. Not.
... the lights go out (and they will go out) in a few years ...
Wow!
Yes Several "notices of insufficiency" have already been formally issued, but I believe not enacted. (An NoI is a warning to industrial customers that they may have their power cut)
We currently have about 3% excess generating capacity. All it takes is a couple of unscheduled outages.Many large nukes are reaching their end of life and/or having their peak capacity reduced for safety reasons. And we're closing the coal stations. And we are trying to get other countries to finance new gas generating plant.
But of course, the market wisdom is sufficient to solve all problems. Not.That is true, but staying in the EU will keep the lights on... erm, how exactly? The ECB can't print leccy!
Simple: by mandating a minimum excess generating capacity! One of the things the EU does right is preventing governments from doing stupid things. As Wuerstchenhund wrote: nowadays people tend to vote against their own best interest and I think there is truth in that statement.
Yes, the NHS has many failings, as does the healthcare of any other country, but that doesn't make it incomparably worse than what rstofer acknowledges to be "an abomination".
QuoteDental care in the UK is probably the worst I've ever encountered in any first world country, a lot worse than in Germany and even more so than in the US.Really? So how does the UK manage to share the crown for the healthiest teeth of any country in the world with Germany?
Don't put words in my mouth. I never claimed the NHS was "the envy of the world" I just get upset when Americans assume it to be some kind of third-world hellhole.
And Brits are the only nation given to "inappropriate amounts of national pride", are they?
The UK will have to agree to TTIP, and that wil be far far worse for me (and many others) personally that any amount of EU problems.Indeed if the UK remains in the EU then we will get TTIP and in time the NHS will be opened up to US providers and who knows what happens next.
Outside the EU then TTIP looks less likely and certainly will be more open to scrutiny than the secret EU negotiations.
NHS vs Middle East example...
People vote against their interest all the time. Hitler was elected, Mussolini, too. For a more recent example, just look at the 2015 general elections in the UK, or the fellowship of Trump.
People vote against their interest all the time. Hitler was elected, Mussolini, too. For a more recent example, just look at the 2015 general elections in the UK, or the fellowship of Trump.We've got one!
Throw these brits out. They hardly have a relevant industry left. Have a leeching financial section that will sink after the brexit.
Somehow they are delusional in thinking that they are still an important world 'power'.
NHS vs Middle East example...... which completely ignores the very basic distinction that the UAE has a far higher per-capita income than the UK, and so can afford it.
I'm from out of town and my opinion is irrelevant but why should the UK subsidize other countries? Why take money from UK taxpayers and donate it to non-producers?Subsidize is possibly the wrong word - I did say support but the essential reason is that we exist in a closed system thus what goes around tends to come around. Keeping people economically active improves their standard of living and ultimately benefits us in return.
Yes, we need to build houses and schools but it is not the EU's fault that we have not been doing that fast enough but successive governments who have encouraged everyone to go to 5th rate educational institutions to earn a 7th rate piss pot degree rather than running decent training schemes to equip us with the workforce that we need.
NHS vs Middle East example...... which completely ignores the very basic distinction that the UAE has a far higher per-capita income than the UK, and so can afford it.
I think you ignored me writing the hospital is PROFITABLE. Only the first 3 days of intensive care is subsidized/paid by the Government. All other hospital income is paid for by the users. So it has nothing to do with per capita income.
Yes it is the EU's fault we've not being building schools and houses fast enough to keep up.
When immigration is controlled by the government, the government can reliably react to population growth because it's relatively stable and predictable. If more children are born, then their births will be registered so the government knows to more school places will be required in five years time and more houses need to be built over the next twenty years. Now anyone can just hop over the channel at any point, resulting in unpredictable population growth and chaos.