Ambulance ‘waiting rooms’ cost NHS £11m

From The Times:
[INDENT]THE NHS has wasted more than £11m using ambulances as “waiting rooms” to get around Labour’s target that patients should be treated within four hours of entering casualty.
New figures reveal the time spent by crews waiting outside hospitals for their patients to be admitted last year was the equivalent to funding 31 fully staffed ambulances to do nothing for 24 hours a day.
The statistics released by NHS ambulance trusts show the amount of time ambulances are forced to remain idle is increasing each year. In the first nine months of 2009 the total so-called “dead time” in England reached 284,000 hours — more than the whole of 2007.
The four-hour target was introduced in 2004 in an effort to end the scandal of patients left on trolleys overnight waiting to be seen by doctors.
[/INDENT]Man, that's horrible. A good socialized medicine plan implemented by the government would fix that kind of abuse.

Oh, wait...

So! How come this issue wasn't discussed during the Obamacare debate?

This problem in the UK ties up ambulances and their crews and causes hospital emergency rooms to lie about their ability to handle the demand which is queued outside in the street.

Listen,we get that you dont want an NHS,but why do you have to pull up everything that is wrong with it? Is the US healthcare system perfect,of course its not. People in the UK get really fed up listening to US citizens look down at the NHS,it is a source of great pride in this country.
Fair enough it might not be what you want in the US but that doesnt mean you look at all the negatives of our system. Do you ever look at the positives?

[quote="timcfc, post:3, topic:193838"]
Listen,we get that you dont want an NHS,but why do you have to pull up everything that is wrong with it? Is the US healthcare system perfect,of course its not. People in the UK get really fed up listening to US citizens look down at the NHS,it is a source of great pride in this country.
Fair enough it might not be what you want in the US but that doesnt mean you look at all the negatives of our system. Do you ever look at the positives?

[/quote]

I understand one big reason why folks like it: it is a major jobs provider.

Per their own recruiting website:
[INDENT]The NHS is the largest employer in Europe. It employs approximately 1.3 million staff and provides an enormous range of services to over 57 million people. In 2007, the annual budget was around £90 billion.
[/INDENT]1.3 million people, huh? I guess that's about 3% of the population between 18-65. Wow.

That sure is a lot of folks to be working for a single entity.

Well, I could understand why folks in the UK would get upset about Americans knocking the NHS: chances are each and every person in the country is either employed by, has a relative employed by, or a friend employed by the NHS.

I guess the only suggestion that I would have for you is to perhaps consider that your system isn't perfect before pontificating to us about our system.

Surely you could have worked in a few more logical fallacies, somehow?

[quote="Kaninchen, post:5, topic:193838"]
Surely you could have worked in a few more logical fallacies, somehow?

[/quote]

I'll try harder next time. :D

[quote="markomalley, post:4, topic:193838"]
I understand one big reason why folks like it: it is a major jobs provider.

Per their own recruiting website:
[INDENT]The NHS is the largest employer in Europe. It employs approximately 1.3 million staff and provides an enormous range of services to over 57 million people. In 2007, the annual budget was around £90 billion.
[/INDENT]1.3 million people, huh? I guess that's about 3% of the population between 18-65. Wow.

That sure is a lot of folks to be working for a single entity.

Well, I could understand why folks in the UK would get upset about Americans knocking the NHS: chances are each and every person in the country is either employed by, has a relative employed by, or a friend employed by the NHS.

I guess the only suggestion that I would have for you is to perhaps consider that your system isn't perfect before pontificating to us about our system.

[/quote]

The NHS is NOT perfect,i have never said it is. The US healthcare system is not perfect either,that is my point. We could both find articles that show how poor the other ones service is,but what is the point of that?
Yes its an absolute disgrace being employed by the NHS,look at that,the biggest employer in Europe is not out to make a profit,its there to care for ALL the citizens of the country,what an EVIL service that is.

So then perhaps you could show a little candor and acknowledge that your system is not perfect when you participate in threads talking about moving our healthcare system in your direction? Why don’t you let some of these American lefties know that all is not wonderful over there. There are good sides and there are bad sides. You could point out issues like this event, or the one reported a few days ago where a dying patient had to use his cell phone to call the hospital switchboard in order to get brought a glass of water…because his nurses continually ignored him. It seems like when I hear a Brit talking to Americans about that precious NHS, the Brit lauds it like it is a panacea for all problems medical.

But you and I know it’s not.

Why do I post something like this about NHS? Because Americans need to know that this happens in a government-controlled health system. It’s not really hard work. We both know that I could go to your broadsheets and pull articles on a daily basis (and I’m not even talking about your tabloid papers). Somebody needs to let these folks know that there are concerns. It would be nice if some Brit would have the candor to let folks know that there are tradeoffs with a State-run health system. But since that’s not going to happen, I guess I’ll just need to provide some empirical data instead.

Yes its an absolute disgrace being employed by the NHS,look at that,the biggest employer in Europe is not out to make a profit,its there to care for ALL the citizens of the country,what an EVIL service that is.

Did I say that?

(Of course, after that incident reported last weekend – linked above – I sure would be embarrassed if I was employed there)

[quote="markomalley, post:8, topic:193838"]
So then perhaps you could show a little candor and acknowledge that your system is not perfect when you participate in threads talking about moving our healthcare system in your direction? Why don't you let some of these American lefties know that all is not wonderful over there. There are good sides and there are bad sides. You could point out issues like this event, or the one reported a few days ago where a dying patient had to use his cell phone to call the hospital switchboard in order to get brought a glass of water...because his nurses continually ignored him. It seems like when I hear a Brit talking to Americans about that precious NHS, the Brit lauds it like it is a panacea for all problems medical.

But you and I know it's not.

Why do I post something like this about NHS? Because Americans need to know that this happens in a government-controlled health system. It's not really hard work. We both know that I could go to your broadsheets and pull articles on a daily basis (and I'm not even talking about your tabloid papers). Somebody needs to let these folks know that there are concerns. It would be nice if some Brit would have the candor to let folks know that there are tradeoffs with a State-run health system. But since that's not going to happen, I guess I'll just need to provide some empirical data instead.
Did I say that?

(Of course, after that incident reported last weekend -- linked above -- I sure would be embarrassed if I was employed there)

[/quote]

For once we agree.
The NHS is not perfect,you are right,there are good bits to the NHS and there are bad bits of the NHS,but the good far outweighs the bad.

[quote="timcfc, post:9, topic:193838"]
For once we agree.
The NHS is not perfect,you are right,there are good bits to the NHS and there are bad bits of the NHS,but the good far outweighs the bad.

[/quote]

So in order to make sure people see both sides...which one should I post today?
Woman sells home to pay for cancer drug denied by NHS

...or...

NHS sends confidential patient records to India

Hmmm...decisions, decisions.

This is a story that should bring tears to your eyes and by the way,this would not have happened in the UK.
nytimes.com/2008/04/11/opinion/11krugman.html

Since you brought up the first link,how many US families have had to sell their homes or declare bankruptcy because they could not afford healthcare,its rather a lot actually.
edition.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/06/05/bankruptcy.medical.bills/

You see how easy it is to try and point score on such an important issue.
I understand that this issue has split the US and im not going to say that the US should have an NHS or not,that is up to the good people of the US to decide.

Nice…

A 2-year old story and a one year old story.

But, these things are the known “horrors” of the US system. A NHS-like system is supposed to prevent that type of thing, isn’t it?

And that’s the point.

Oh, and did you notice the correction at the bottom of the Krugman piece?

[INDENT]In his column on Friday, Paul Krugman discussed an anecdote told by Hillary Clinton about a woman in Ohio who supposedly lost her newborn child, and then her life, because of bills run up when she did not have health insurance. Mr. Krugman relied on early news accounts of the incident, but later accounts, including one from The Columbus Dispatch, show that those bills did not lead to loss of care. Mr. Krugman has posted a detailed explanation on his blog at krugman.blogs.nytimes.com.
[/INDENT]

So, they acknowledge that NHS “isn’t perfect”. But the level of imperfection is horrendous! And then they attack people who publish the imperfections in the U.S. media.

In the United States we openly acknowledge the imperfections of the [previous] United States system. The PROBLEM is that our own members of Congress have stubbornly REFUSED to allow us to correct the problems.

Consider that the Governor of Indiana, Mitch Daniels, “against union opposition, introduced HSAs to the state’s employees. Daniels carefully designed the plan, yet initially workers were highly skeptical, with only 4% signing up in 2006. Today 70% of Indiana state workers have HSAs.”

[source is Forbes magazine, April 26, 2010 issue, page 13]

AND YET, the late Senator Ted Kennedy worked overtime for decades to prevent and disallow Americans from freely choosing HSAs.

In other words, the U.S. acknowledges the shortcomings of our healthcare system, but the people who run things in Washington have repeatedly refused to let competition work to solve the problems.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.