The con is to believe the tax-based NHS system is somehow broken and that a new way of paying for healthcare will fix it. There is no cheaper way. Nothing the govt has planned costs less. The public always pay for healthcare. Let me explain…
The German, French, Swedish, Japanese, Norwegian, etc,…systems are social based health systems. That is, they are based on the primary position that healthcare is a human right. In all these countries (and many more) everyone has access to ALL treatments.
Whether homeless or a billionaire, you will get the same treatment for your cancer, heart attack, pregnancy, mental health. Some countries have a “private” premium but this does not grant access to better treatments. The chemotherapy is the same; the angio is the same.
In these countries - in the vast majority of developed countries - you are guaranteed access to healthcare throughout your life regardless of what happens to you. If you lose your job or suffer a horrible accident or need a transplant, you will always have access to the treatment
The US stands out here. In the US what access to treatment you get depends on how much you can pay and even more shockingly how sick you are. If you are too sick to work and can’t afford the insurance then you can’t get the treatment you need.
Currently we have a tax based system or national insurance. Everyone pays the same (means tested) regardless of health status or chance of suffering disease. And if you can’t work (let’s say because you are too sick too work) then it doesn’t matter - you get the same treatment.
Assuming you want a social health system, there are only two real substantial differences between the NHS and the others (mostly called social insurance systems): 1. They pay more (between 15-30% more). 2. Employer contributions. Like pension contributions but to health system.
Note: the US system has both employer contribution and they pay even more - about 200% more than we do. But the health outcomes are worse. Poorer cancer survival, poorer chance of surviving a heart attack, sepsis, etc…
So it’s a con. If you want high-income healthcare (regardless what happens to you during your lifetime) it requires a high income. We have to pay for it. We need to pay for the fancy scanners and modern treatments. And we need to pay for enough high quality staff to deliver it!
It is a choice. Either pay for it or accept a middle income healthcare system. And what we are experiencing just now is a middle income health system. And as it stands there are no plans to change what we are currently experiencing. This is it. This is how healthcare will be.
The govt are not offering a cheaper or better health system. It isn’t even offering a better and cheaper health system to the wealthy. Businesses will pay more and the total quality of healthcare will fall even for the rich - like the States.
So don’t believe the right-wing narrative or govt spin. They are not offering a better or cheaper system. All they are doing is introducing more profit. That’s it. Some wealthy folk follow them under the illusion they won’t have to subsidise the poor folk - ignorant to the fact…
…they will also pay more for worse healthcare outcomes. No amount of reform will fix the current problems while the resources and working conditions remain the same. We need resources. And the biggest resource in the service is the staff. @RishiSunak start there!
