Well, from a personal point of view, rather than a Labour one - I'm not a Labour party member of even a consistent Labour voter - I would fund it better. As I said earlier, under Blair/Brown it was funded properly and worked well. Of course there are structural problems that need fixing, especially the crossover with social care, but money is the fundamental issue.
Until all parties can drop their bullshit manifestos, false promises and even political pride then the NHS will always majorly under perform. Its should be set in stone, whoever governs, a minimum amount in relation to the economic needs of the day. Nursing should be a vocation rewarded on par with someone who gets paid to watch porn in parliment.
Problem is though Bob, in reality the current way of funding the NHS is just not sustainable irrespective if it's a Tory or Labour Government. The NHS is just a black hole so some radical reform is needed of there needs to be a huge hike in taxes and that still won't be enough......... I don't know what the answer is but I would have thought that some form of payment system as I posted earlier might ease some of the financial problems within the system....... the problem is that there will be a huge amount of objections and the whole thing will just get bogged down and go nowhere.......
Non Domicile status has existed since 1799 so plenty of time for Governments of all persuasions to do something about it, but they've all chosen to ignore it....... Agree that it's outdated and should be reviewed but you'll find that it's not just a UK problem but is practised widely, for instance Portugal encourages overseas investors to move there and not pay any tax for 10 years........ It's finding the right balance that's the problem......
We always have money to spaff away, whether it be on an illegal war, a test and trace system, or millions for a shipping company with no boats, corporate tax avoidance, a bloody yacht ffs.
Yeah, the Non-Dom reference was a bit flippant, but it should be scrapped anyway. Tax the super-rich. I saw a stat the other day saying that that if you had earned $200,000 a day every day since Columbus landed in America in 1492, you still wouldn't have the $44 billion that Elon Musk just paid to buy Twitter. How much do these billionaires need?
**** me standards of living are supposed to improve over time, what’s being discussed on here and elsewhere, seems like we are heading back 75 years, if not longer. There will be some very happy Tory donors with talk of nhs privatisation, did we not learn anything with the ppe contracts? It’s another lovely caring way to tax the poor.
surely all it needs is more money NHS is bumping along near the bottom of world healthcare league table as report warns we risk becoming the sick man of the world UK's healthcare is ranked as the second worst in a cohort of 19 similar countries France, Spain, Germany and Japan all outranked the UK on healthcare quality Only the US was worse, because it spends far more on health per capita Metrics include life expectancy, cancer survival rates, strokes and heart attacks NHS waiting lists now standing at a record 6.2million, with pressure increasing By HEALTH CORRESPONDENT FOR THE DAILY MAIL PUBLISHED: 09:00 AEST, 27 April 2022 | UPDATED: 17:13 AEST, 27 April 2022 The UK is the sick man of the world, with its healthcare system ranking second worst out of 19 similar countries, a report has warned. With NHS waiting lists now standing at a record 6.2million, the report found Britain is ‘bumping along the bottom’ of the league table for a range of major health outcomes – with only the United States faring worse overall. The Civitas think-tank analysed data from 2019 on 16 measures including life expectancy and survival rates for cancer, strokes and heart attacks. The UK came bottom more often than any of the other countries, which include France, Spain, Germany and Japan. please log in to view this image +1 View gallery The UK's healthcare is ranked as one of the worst in its cohort, with its healthcare system ranking second worst out of 19 similar countries, a report has warned. The UK came bottom more often than any of the other countries, which include France, Spain, Germany and Japan But the US was ranked lower because it spends far more on health per capita, had the worst life expectancy and did not feature in all tables due to a lack of data. Researchers say 6,500 lives a year could be saved in the UK if its performance on preventable diseases matched the average rate in other nations. The only area the UK performs well in is helping diabetics avoid limb amputation, according to the first International Health Care Outcomes Index, which drew on data from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. The UK was ranked 17th out of 19 countries for life expectancy, worst for stroke and heart attack survival, and 16th out of 18 for five types of cancer. For example, stomach cancer five-year survival rates were 17th out of 19 at 20.7 per cent. Study author Tim Knox said: ‘If what matters most to patients is the outcome of the treatment they will receive, then these findings should be of concern to all... Our uncritical worship of the NHS means that it is difficult to ask questions of our health service and how it ranks against those of other nations.’