In the News Let's Attack the Brits' NHS!

We need more programs like this to educate the American public.

Leon

I agree with you both. We have seen, all too often, the debate on health care overrun by a small, boisterous few. Sadly, their loud opposition has drowned out those of us calling for reform. Programs like this do a great service by informing an otherwise ill-informed American public.

those idiots yelling at the top of their lungs at the town hall meetings are making themselves and the rest of us look terrible. people need to step back and look at the facts and decide for themselves, dont leave it up to msnbc or fox news to do the thinking for them.

Perhaps we weren't watching the same report. The NHS in Great Britain is not all roses. The people are required to pay what many here would consider excessive taxes to get taken care of by their government. And Britain is not alone in requiring their citizens to give up a huge amount of their paycheck. The British government employs 1.4 million people to administer the NHS programs,making the NHS the third largest employer on the planet. Governments are inefficient monsters that consume money, and if you think the US government can deliver on any of the promises they make you are sadly mistaken. Medicare, Medicaid, IHS, the VA system, and Social Security have all ended up costing multiple times more than they were projected to, so what is the solution? Create an even larger national healthcare system? Wake up!
Do you really think we can cover 40 million uninsured people and it won't increase the deficit? What happens in ten years when the talking heads tell us how much more expensive this is than they thought? Do we scrap the program? No, they'll come up with a bigger and better one.

Great Britain has 60 million people. We have over 5 times that many, and according to the last election 53% of our population wants to be taken care of by the government. That shouldn't cost much. I hope we don't lose all our rich people.

We're already paying for the uninsured, just in a very inefficient way, since those uninsured receive care in the most expensive way, through the emergency rooms, and at the worst and most expensive time, when they are already experiencing a health catastrophe that is more expensive to treat. The U.S. spends nearly twice as much of its GDP on health care per capita than the next most expensive country (Canada), at about 16% of GDP compared to 9%, yet we have the 37th best health outcomes, right behind Costa Rica, as I recall.

Why do we spend so much for so little? Part of it could be doctors dealing with literally dozens, even hundreds of insurers to administer their practices, as you can see from how many support staff work in the typical doctor's office relative to the number of physicians. Part of it could be the profit allowed to big insurance companies starting back in the 1980's (prior to that they were not allowed to be for profit businesses). Part of it could be salaries, like the CEO of UHC who made more than $12 million last year, a level of compensation that no government employee, including the President, even approaches. Part of it could be the near monopoly in most areas of the country with one company leading prices and no effective competition to control prices. We know that Medicare's overhead (and that's a single payer system) runs about 3% of expenses, while private insurers have overhead levels ranging between 12% (Kaiser) to 25% of expenses, and that must be part of what we resolve, so we get health care, not bureaucracy, for our health care dollar.

There is no question we need to reform our absurd and cruel way of rationing health care in this country, the question is what form that reform should take. We can argue some areas, but it's time to grow up and face facts so we can craft a solution that will be best for all of us. Misinformation and ignorance of the fact pattern involved only serves to obstruct the process, and is a disservice to us all.

Sounds good from the report, but UK citizens pay up to 23% of their income into their national healthcare system. That is on top of the traditional income taxes that they pay. They pay dearly for having their system, our population is bigger and we would pay dearly if this system was instituted in the US. After it is all said and done, some Americans could end up with tax rates over 60% easy. We can't afford it.

US Congress should look at creating federal clinics to service the needs of the low-income/uninsured. Then make sure that the illegal immigrants will not have access to the plan.

Although the UK has the primary side well covered, we succeed in having the elective surgery side well covered. The report mentioned that.

I believe, the US needs to repair its system, not throw all of it out the door for something new.

Romney care in Massachusetts is in financial trouble and rationing/waiting lists are occurring, what makes us think if we apply Obama care to 303 billion people that it will work.

I am a Canadian. All I can say is thank God for the Government Health Care systems in most advanced countries in the world. You Americans have had the wool pulled over your eyes by the Insurance companies and HMO's. If you are spending roughly 16% of your GDP on health care and Canada is spending under 10% on its health care, do you not think you could design the "Best single pa