Given the NHS is creaking and the cost to the tax payer will keep increasing given the ageing population, I struggle to understand why they don’t encourage people to have private health care by not making it a taxable benefit.

It would be a vote loser

First rule of politics don’t mention the NHS…
It’s a tax cut to the rich so unpopular and the headline of Health Services only for the rich spring to mind. So many good ideas are clouded by ideology and crap opinions

Premiums are massive. Ageing population and increasing cost of healthcare is making private healthcare insurance v difficult to provide – cost of claims is higher than premium income can cover without massively high premiums, which most people can’t afford. Look at how much we’re cutting back on supermarket bills, and ask yourself who’s going to try and find £100/month for Bupa!

A massive % of the market is company-paid premiums and companies are all trying to keep costs as low as possible so not willing to pay for it as a benefit either.

Better to make NHS a means-tested contributory system IMO

Better to make NHS a means-tested contributory system IMO

Somebody is off to the slaughter house…..

I live in a basic means tested, contributory, top up semi privatised HC system

It’s a bit of a mess, the government offers me $36.30 for a GP visit (about 18 quid) however it’s tough to find a GP that charges that low most are up near $50 or more so I pay the gap, unless I find a private who does.
That’s the simple starting point, the upside is with private cover or not I get a better choice of my own health care and direction (if I have the cash to spend).
Instead of a tax break if I don’t take Private Medical I have to pay a higher rate come tax time (means tested) – following so far the premiums are currently higher than the tax and as I use very little if anything I’ll pay that instead.

Give me the NHS any day

I was out this eve with a few colleagues for food and drink and chat…
We all agreed; at the current consumption vs financing, the NHS is (for want of a better word)…FUBARd.

Save for insurance, or stay healthy….
A sad realisation TBH.

DrP

Scrap the tax avoidance schemes we have reinvest into other areas, bring in Robin Hood Tax and make a tiny increase per person to help out.

Or let’s have a sensible debate about what a future health service will look like. Whenever this topic comes up the debate is boiled down to an NHS vs US style system. There are many other ways to configure an NHS system that uses private involvement and still provides a service free at the point of use to all, which ultimately is what is important. Trying to make the NHS run efficiently is impossible so we either accept a lower quality system, smaller scope system or do something different. Money alone won’t save the NHS. If it was just about money there wouldn’t be a crisis.

OP basically thats the system they have in France, private insurance top up. Where its better than the uk is that if you go privately the state still contributes something.

We don’t pay nearly enough tax in the uk to have the health service we want. The nhs is world class for critical care, aside from that its middling to poor depending who you compare it too. Dentistry is close to dire fwiw

Actually this is about money. Global spending is sky-rocketing because we’re getting very good at keeping sick people alive longer. The patient’s I treat daily tend to have an average of 4-5 illnesses which implies they have very high medication and medical needs but also that they have very high care needs.

Funding of the NHS by itself is only part of the problem as were it purely to look after those with purely medical need then it might actually be ok. The problem is, so many patient’s can’t leave hospital to receive appropriate care as it simply isn’t available. If we get people out of hospital quickly into appropriate rehab or care beds or home with increased care you might reduce the workload of the NHS so much as to reduce most of the funding gaps. The problem is care is very expensive. So instead the nurses do it until beds are available. And we provide GP care in hospital because the patient is not unwell but something has happened to make their previous living arrangements untenable. The system as a whole is what matters.

Paying for these things is very difficult. We have a very negative view of taxation in this country as it’s seen as a way to exploit the common man. Government’s are not willing to have this discussion as people are so convicted that paying higher tax is automatically bad that they will almost guaranteed to lose the next election.

Those who feel the NHS is inefficient should actually visit a hospital. The NHS is hugely efficient relative to other economies because it needs to be (unless you read the Daily Fail which will always tell you otherwise to prevent their owners and buddies paying more tax). The rest of care services are tragically disastrous.

I never implied the NHS was inefficient, I was just saying that the cost of running it is only going to increase. Just listening to radio 4 and labour are giving their spin on how they would balance the books.

It always seems to come down to robbing Peter to pay Paul. If the books don’t balance then surely income tax needs to go up across the board. Everyone then naturally pays their fair share to the system.

Like has been said though, it will never happen with either party as it will be deemed as political suicide.

Spot on Speedstar.

Those who feel the NHS is inefficient should actually visit a hospital. The NHS is hugely efficient relative to other economies because it needs to be (unless you read the Daily Fail which will always tell you otherwise to prevent their owners and buddies paying more tax). The rest of care services are tragically disastrous.

I’m sure hospitals are efficient, but there are other parts of the NHS which are laughably bad.
My 8 year old Daughter has a few medical issues which means she sees our GP, a Paediatrician at our local hospital and a consultant at Kings in London.
I’ve lost count of the amount of letters we receive regarding her treatment/making + cancelling appointments/etc.
Has the NHS never heard of email?
Why are they spending millions on stamps when they could just email people?

My Dad is in exactly the same position – ring binder full of letters when email would be so much quicker/easier/cheaper.

I can get appointments sent by txt and email, I email referrals to GPs.

Drac – Moderator

I can get appointments sent by txt and email, I email referrals to GPs.

Well you obviously don’t work from either Bromley healthcare or Kings!

I’m currently working on a massive project on getting people out of the repeat hospital admissions. The savings to be made and the hopefull health improvements are huge but it’s a massive shift in culture and infrastructure. A lot of the calls of inefficient stuff can come from perhaps people doing stuff under the pressure of not having the resources to change. One of the main things in find when I’m working in health care.

Has the NHS never heard of email?
Why are they spending millions on stamps when they could just email people?

It might cost more for stamps and stationery, than to send emails, but I bet it’s more cost effective when
a) a significant number of people still don’t have access to email, and
b) I imagine that a letter is less likely to be unopened/overlooked/forgotten about than an email, therefore fewer wasted appointment slots.

Don’t forget we don’t pay much for the NHS – average cost is one of the lowest in the developed world (around £3K per person) – it is also one of the lowest as part of our GDP – about 6% as opposed to 8% in the eu

I would very happily forgo 2p of tax to fund it properly

Also bring social care into the nhs rather than make it a local council issue would make a diff

It’s the only answer – perhaps raise the age before death a bit though!…

Pretty sure the NHS has heard of email they are also aware that a significant portion of their patients have not or do not have access to it our cannot use it reliably .

OP basically thats the system they have in France, private insurance top up. Where its better than the uk is that if you go privately the state still contributes something.

And is rather dearer.

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS

Don’t forget we don’t pay much for the NHS

This. If we want a nationalised health care service that’s fit for purpose, we need to pay more for it.

>we need to pay more for it.

Déjà vu anyone?

Between 97 and 2010 we doubled spending on the NHS, it gobbled up all the money, and apart from shorter waiting times we got very little for it. In the end even Labour admitted that throwing money at a problem isn’t always a good solution.

Solutions to the NHS,

Stop saving people
Stop giving people expensive life prolonging drugs
Cull the population

More people living longer will eat cash, there are ways to make the money go further but health will be the biggest growth in spending to come.

Between 97 and 2010 we doubled spending on the NHS, it gobbled up all the money, and apart from shorter waiting times we got very little for it.

I think we got a great deal for it. It’s easy to forget just how run-down the service had become under the previous Tory government. As you say, “déjà vu”.