Soft agree.
If you want fast care for complex issues, just have cash, that’s about as efficient possible.
In fact that’s how the system is supposed to work.
The NHS has deep inefficiencies, better outcomes, but the speed of healthcare slows drastically when it comes in contact with government.
If you want fast care for complex issues, just have cash, that’s about as efficient possible.
In fact that’s how the system is supposed to work.
The NHS has deep inefficiencies, better outcomes, but the speed of healthcare slows drastically when it comes in contact with government.
Comments
Either people are putting their money into the private pool, or they're putting it into the public pool.
At least the public pool can't go broke.
Are you assuming that there is just not going to be regulation? When and how a private->public referral is allowed and visa versa already exist in Europe.
Care through employment is equal to golden handcuffs. It makes things more complicated, too, which reduces efficiency.
There's no argument for private insurers that can hold up to scrutiny.
They have one job: pay for expenses. There's no reason for a profit motive at all.
Efficiency and speed are secondary assuming that a properly structured system can prioritise correctly.
I’m being sardonic, but I think my point stands.
This takes the burden off the public health system, as dealing with complex, non life threatening conditions is a real drag on the system.
Sure, if someone is wealthy enough to pay cash for major medical needs, they will get faster/priority from doctors. But if there's a single system, it's better funded. Taking profit reduces the pool.