If we want to live for a reasonable time in the UK we can’t go down the US healthcare route
Amazingly, I know of precisely zero people who recommend the US health care system as a replacement for the UK one. And I’m about as privatisation and neoliberal as you can get.
As John Burn-Murdoch himself makes clear, it is shocking to realise that as a result of spending twice as much of their GDP on health care as we in the UK do the US only manage to produce an average result the same as the worst in the whole of England.
Yep, it ain’t that great a system overall. Although we do need to be more than a little careful. Strip out violence figures and the US does much better. Also, you do actually get health care quickly there, something you don’t in the UK. But still.
This though is to be a cretin:
That is not just staggering: it shows how dire Tory thinking on health is. And it shows us that the only way to deliver the healthcare we need is via a state-owned and funded NHS.
There are 192 health care systems among the members of the UN. Possibly more in fact, given that Wales, Scotland and England each have their own variations on a theme under only one UN seat. That one of the 192 ain’t good is not proof that one single other of the 192 is the only possible alternative now, is it?
What about the systems of Germany, France, Holland, Estonia, Sweden and on and on? Which of them might have useful comparative lessons? For none of them have the NHS either……