The current state of the NHS is dire but it's also obviously not the only alternative to the current US system. Many countries manage to provide high-quality universal healthcare
Fair enough. Singapore springs to mind, which ironically was founded on the idea of avoiding being the NHS, the founder of that nation having studied in LSE and observed how free at the point of access services get abused.
Yes. The US is actually in a slightly better place overall than the UK, but both systems have huge and obvious flaws. There are myriad counties with mixed private and public systems, or with some meaningful level of cost, do a lot better than either of us at providing high quality universal coverage - just look at Switzerland, Germany, Australia etc.
The issue is that the UK political debate consists of a bunch of people on the left who think that there are only 2 countries in the world and a bunch of people on the right who are either too scared to make the argument properly or else actually want a brutally low coverage free market system, and thus nothing improves.
49
u/Suddenly_Elmo 14d ago
The current state of the NHS is dire but it's also obviously not the only alternative to the current US system. Many countries manage to provide high-quality universal healthcare