Pilger film about the NHS.

[SWP's back]

Demographics I imagine will play a part. Declining fertility rates and people living longer means more demand on the Health Service and spending has not matched that demand. Secondary, rather than primary care is likely to be the biggest drain with shifting demographics.

Then there is pay and conditions, training, staffing all impacting on the service provided.

Past spending as a share of GDP may have been sufficient for the demand at the time, but like other services - education, defence, policing - there has been underinvestment over the last decade or so. Which, given we kept electing Govts obsessed with austerity is hardly a surprise.

But you can see the “real” spend has quadrupled over the last 33 years from the graph so hopefully understand my questioning of the mantra repeated on here about the NHS not being funded.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

But you can see the “real” spend has quadrupled over the last 33 years from the graph so hopefully understand my questioning of the mantra repeated on here about the NHS not being funded.

Selective argument.

Do you have shares in private healthcare companies?

 

[SWP's back]

Selective argument.

Do you have shares in private healthcare companies?

How’s it selective?

As for the second part, go fuck yourself. A completely worthless remark/question that did absolutely nothing to further any point you may have. It’s called playing the man, rather than the ball and you like to believe you’re better than that as a rule. Be better.

It’s Friday night here and I really can’t be arsed having an argument with you so I’m sticking you on ignore for the weekend.

 

[GeorgeR]

Here’s an article which shows a graph of real term increases and those increases after being adjusted for population and demographic changes - which doesn’t paint as rosy a picture of the funding

The past, present and future of government spending on the NHS

With the Chancellor making further updates to government spending plans and the health service facing crisis on several fronts, there is uncertainty over what the future will hold for health care finances amid such instability. How much is this government really spending on the NHS per person...

www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

How’s it selective?

As for the second part, go fuck yourself. A completely worthless remark/question that did absolutely nothing to further any point you may have. It’s called playing the man, rather than the ball and you like to believe you’re better than that as a rule. Be better.

It’s Friday night here and I really can’t be arsed having an argument with you so I’m sticking you on ignore for the weekend.

Because of this.

Would the NHS be in a better position had investment kept pace with comparable countries?

How the NHS might look had it been funded the same as comparative countries.

www.nhsconfed.org

 

[DenisLawBackHeel74]

Demographics I imagine will play a part. Declining fertility rates and people living longer means more demand on the Health Service and spending has not matched that demand. Secondary, rather than primary care is likely to be the biggest drain with shifting demographics.

Then there is pay and conditions, training, staffing all impacting on the service provided.

Past spending as a share of GDP may have been sufficient for the demand at the time, but like other services - education, defence, policing - there has been underinvestment over the last decade or so. Which, given we kept electing Govts obsessed with austerity is hardly a surprise.

That last bit is the key for me. I worry about healthcare for the most vulnerable in our society without the means to pay for it going forward.

I think the Reality is the rest of us will need to pay a few hundred quid a month more to bring NHS spending in line with where it needs to be…

 

[BobKowalski]

But you can see the “real” spend has quadrupled over the last 33 years from the graph so hopefully understand my questioning of the mantra repeated on here about the NHS not being funded.

Yes. And it isn’t enough to meet the current demand.

 

[Kirkstall Blue]

Tony Blair how could we elect him on a Labour ticket and every Labour PM since without the general public being made aware of what was happening to the NHS
Thatcher brought in the privatisation policy but Labour didn’t have to go along with it.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

But you can see the “real” spend has quadrupled over the last 33 years from the graph so hopefully understand my questioning of the mantra repeated on here about the NHS not being funded.

But that's kind of a meaningless statistic if it's not taken along with inflation and population. It's also why any claims of record funding or funding increases should be taken with a grain of salt in any government budget. Budgets should increase every year, because the money is worth less every year. The question is how quickly it's increasing.

The percentage of GDP graph that you posted is probably more relevant, although even that could be misleading. If you tank the economy, then the amount you're spending on the NHS as a percentage of GDP could go up even if you haven't changed a thing. If GDP goes down and so does NHS funding, then the graph would look level. So it would need a bit more digging to understand that one, I suspect, because Brexit hasn't been kind to the GDP.