Jeremy Clarkson proposes government abolish NHS to save money

[HoppingKangaroo]

What a tit. He would be alright as he can afford private healthcare, what does he expect the majority of us to do with no Nhs? Does he just say whatever comes into his head for attention.

Seriously! Privileged moron who obviously doesn’t have DC with chronic health conditions.

My 12 year old DS was recently disgnosed with Type 1 diabetes. I had lots of fears in life before but they pale into comparison with the thought of a medical system like the US where Type 1 diabetics have to ration their insulin or can’t afford it as it’s so expensive and end up dying at a young age because if it.

Again, @VladmirsPoutine , the NHS failed me under Labour. It's not just a Tory thing. The model isn't working properly and I'm not sure it ever has. Yes Clarkson just wants sensational nonsense but there's a conversation to be had.

Along come all the tory donors with efficient medical agencies just ready to 'support' the NHS and wuHoo!! a fully working, fully privatised NHS and lots of happy very rich tories

Not just Tories. Remember it was New Labour who introduced private sector outsourcing to the NHS.

And Starmer made a speech this summer in which he dropped the policy pledge to end it. Shadow health secretary has been saying the same.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-nhs-pledge-privatisation-b2123849.html

I mean, he's not wrong. It would save money if we got rid of the NHS.

This.

Jeremy Clarkson is a smart bloke, like him or loathe him. Sometimes he runs his mouth for the sake of a quick joke, but sometimes he actually has something valid to say.

Surely abolishing Jeremy Clarkson would be easier?

What exactly do you mean by this? Should some people not be able to have healthcare because of an inability to pay for it?

Apart from the fact that if we abolished the NHS and all hospitals were private that they would actually provide sufficient emergency and critical care.

So many people seem to forget that there are options between the NHS and the US system. The US is a third world country for all intense and purpose. Not to mention that their central government DGAF about basics for most of their citizens; maternity leave is barely a concept there for goodness sake.

I’m very left wing, and I work for the NHS, and I have children who have needed it, but even I can see it isn’t working as it stands. There’s quantifiable data to show it isn’t working, and enough anecdotal data of its failings on mumsnet alone to justify abolishing it and replacing it with something better.

I think that's really unfair. I pay a lot of tax, a fair bit of which goes to the NHS. Are you really saying because I earn a lot, I should pay again for the treatment I've already paid for?

No, the NHS shouldn't be abolished because otherwise it would create a two-tier society, yet again with poor people getting the short straw. I'm happy to pay more in tax and if I had my way, I would want it in writing every month where my tax was going. I'm really fed up of not knowing what's happening to my money.

I'd rather pay a bit more and be able to see a doctor when I need one thanks. Give me the French or German system any day.

The nhs is a shit show ! Excellent at saving lives but anything beyond that they are shocking!

I've fought with camhs , elderly services , social services , eating disorder services to name a few and the end result was I went private because it's like banging your head against a brick wall !! 🙄🙄🙄

Tit’s absolutely right. There are plenty of equally appropriate alternatives.

He’s a stupid cunt. I used to find him vaguely amusing but he should really shut the fuck up about anything serious

That's as may be, but none of them is remotely on offer. You've been softened up for what's happening: a swift sleep-walk into the US system. Wake up.

My thoughts exactly.

How will it save money? I often see people state on here that we can’t afford the NHS. What does that even mean? The NHS is far from beyond criticism, but it is comparatively cheap. Any other system would immediately add a whole new layer of expensive financial bureaucracy.

Countries that do it better, (France and Germany are often touted) have historically payed far more in taxes towards healthcare, and as far as I’m aware still do. Better funding almost inevitably leads to better services.

The only way we can save money on what the NHS costs is to stop providing healthcare to the millions of people who can’t afford to pay for it. Back to the good old days!

Erm people know they will be far worse off if healthcare is run to earn a profit, right?

While the health services in France and Germany are publicly funded, the actual delivery of healthcare is part private, part non for profit and part public. As far as I’m aware that’s the model that provides the best outcomes, and is the one that various governments have tried to introduce to the UK. Yes, they spend slightly more money, but the actual delivery model doesn’t pretend that the state can do everything. But in the UK any attempt to change is derided, mainly by the hard of thinking, as privatisation and the chant of ‘more money’ is heard. Fix the delivery of services, then ramp up funding. My late husband was chronically ill for the best part of 20 years, and the NHS consistently let him down year after year, sometimes badly. To get anything out of it in what the rest of the world would call a reasonable timeframe you need very sharp elbows, a strident voice and, the direct mobile number of a consultant. And even with that things don’t go to plan every time.

@Tryingtokeepgoing
While the health services in France and Germany are publicly funded, the actual delivery of healthcare is part private, part non for profit and part public.

Thats also how the NHS delivers health care too. Huge chunks of it are privatised and done by contracting with private companies. All GP surgeries are private delivery. Many hospitals are private and the NHS pays rent to use them. Maintenance, cleaning, and ambulance/patient transport went private ages ago.

The issue with the NHS is lack of funding. Full stop. It’s not mismanagement. It’s not the “wrong system”.

Whie, that’s partly true, it’s not comparable. Outsourcing infrastructure at high cost (thanks Gordon/Tony) and the low paid cleaning, catering, housekeeping services is not in the slightest way comparable with the French or German models where healthcare delivery it outsourced. And before you spend more money, you have to get the system right. There’s no will to change the system, and no hope for improvement unless there is.

And for comparison, the latest figures show Germany spends 11.7% of GDP on healthcare, the French 11.1% and we spend 10.2%. So there is definitely a gap, but the efficiencies of the French and German models meanwhile they spend just 10% more service, satisfaction and outcomes are significantly more than 10% better.

Although I agree with you generally, it’s important to point out that lots of private companies provide healthcare and the NHS pays them. Care UK, Virgin Care, BMI, Spire, Nuffield, Horder…. Not to mention even companies like Specsavers providing hearing tests.

So, I understand that a successful millionaire thinks that abolishing NHS is a brilliant idea to solve the crisis but you gotta offer a solution. I would rather restructure the NHS than get rid of it. NHS is fit for purpose and it needs looking after. Take the BBC TV licence that is not fit for purpose for a real example. We pay to watch telly while the rest of the world doesn't? So, I would rather use that money to help fund the NHS than fund Gary Linkers crisp addiction.

It's certainly based on ignorance. Everyone pays for the NHS through their taxes, it's not "free healthcare." And if you are in the top half of earners, the tax you pay just for the NHS is probably more than a private healthcare policy would cost.

I guess you could make a case for means testing the NHS to save money but people would expect what they paid in taxes back in rebates to buy their own policies.

However, you would then have to factor that against the lost purchasing power. The NHS is one of the biggest healthcare providers in the world and it has clout in negotiations with the pharmaceutical industry and other vendors that would be lost if healthcare became fragmented.

Clarkson's a self-promoting bellend. He's like Boris, says anything to get attention. I mean he's clearly incapable of reason, 390,000 (Cancer Research) people a year are treated for cancer, I'd wager 70% of them could not afford health insurance, so we just let 259,000 people die from this dreadful condition. Not to mention people who need dialysis, heart surgery, A&E, cataracts, etc, etc, etc. The problem is that because the NHS has had so many reorganisations by the Tories, every time they do it it's costs a fortune, but it's just cover so they can slice off another piece of the NHS funding pie to give to their mates in the private sector. And please dont believe the Tory lie that it's management costs that are killing the NHS, a lie pushed out by Tory and Industry paid-for "Think Tanks" like the Kings Fund. The numbers of managers in the NHS workforce is about 3% of staff, compared to an average of about 9% in the private sector.
Tories like Clarkson and Johnson are at best ignorant parrots of Right-Wing Zombie policies and at worse part of a cynical, systematic, sadistic process of trying to steal UK Tax money for the rich, Tories (with the hope of a lucrative post-MP position in the private sector) and people who run shares and hedges funds who fund the Tories. This is what the small state is all about, taking from the people who actually do the work and funnelling it up for the gain of the rich and so bankers can play Casino Banking with it. Scratch away at any Tory Policy it boils down to one of these (or a combination thereof): Screw the NHS, screw Education, screw The Police and Criminal Justice System and screw local councils, the poor and the most vulnerable in our society.