Monday, January 15, 2007
Sick
The Daily Mail on Saturday tells us of NHS "patients" being offered the option to pay for their operation and thereby "jump the queue" and receive treatment.
Of course the "journalist" manages to miss an important point. The treatments have already been paid for, either by the patients themselves or others ("from each according to his means to each according to his needs")in the form of National Insurance (Insurance being misleading as the only side of the bargain is payment of the premium). So by asking for another payment, note there's no suggestion of a refund for the premiums paid, the poor people are being asked to pay twice for the same thing.
All of us who pay the National Insurance tax have all paid for these operations, now they cannot happen, we should all get a refund.
Imagine if this was a private company, taking payments in return for healthcare, then when people fell ill, expecting them to pay for treatment, they'd be an outcry. We'd have pictures showing directors houses and cars, we'd have calls for legislation to "protect" the public, every leftie going would be denouncing capitalism, directors salaries and complaining of how people get conned, and how others profit from their misfortune, the reality is that if you have the money and are in pain, you'll be very tempted to give it to the NHS.
I see the NHS as a huge gravy train, not for the majority of staff perhaps, but those at the top are bigger swindlers and robbers than many others. There's been a programme on BBC2 showing some self-made millionaire trying to get Rotherham hospital running efficiently; the chief executive of the hospital (for me) is no manager, but no fool either, he produces government figures and is probably classed as good at his job, ultimately I think he must know the hospital could be run better, I also think he knows he'll get no credit for doing so, just a lot of hassle, but does he resign? Does he forego his (judging from his house and car) generous salary? Yet (for me) he knows as much as the director of a company that continues trading with inevitable bankruptcy that people are being fleeced.
Years ago, when the worker was portrayed as slaving away for the capitalist, at least the capitalist provided something (capital). Now the worker slaves away for the apparatchik - who waxes fat on the food of the poor, but the apparatchik is supposed to work for the people, the reality is he does nothing, but produce figures and take the salary. What a sick system.
Of course the "journalist" manages to miss an important point. The treatments have already been paid for, either by the patients themselves or others ("from each according to his means to each according to his needs")in the form of National Insurance (Insurance being misleading as the only side of the bargain is payment of the premium). So by asking for another payment, note there's no suggestion of a refund for the premiums paid, the poor people are being asked to pay twice for the same thing.
All of us who pay the National Insurance tax have all paid for these operations, now they cannot happen, we should all get a refund.
Imagine if this was a private company, taking payments in return for healthcare, then when people fell ill, expecting them to pay for treatment, they'd be an outcry. We'd have pictures showing directors houses and cars, we'd have calls for legislation to "protect" the public, every leftie going would be denouncing capitalism, directors salaries and complaining of how people get conned, and how others profit from their misfortune, the reality is that if you have the money and are in pain, you'll be very tempted to give it to the NHS.
I see the NHS as a huge gravy train, not for the majority of staff perhaps, but those at the top are bigger swindlers and robbers than many others. There's been a programme on BBC2 showing some self-made millionaire trying to get Rotherham hospital running efficiently; the chief executive of the hospital (for me) is no manager, but no fool either, he produces government figures and is probably classed as good at his job, ultimately I think he must know the hospital could be run better, I also think he knows he'll get no credit for doing so, just a lot of hassle, but does he resign? Does he forego his (judging from his house and car) generous salary? Yet (for me) he knows as much as the director of a company that continues trading with inevitable bankruptcy that people are being fleeced.
Years ago, when the worker was portrayed as slaving away for the capitalist, at least the capitalist provided something (capital). Now the worker slaves away for the apparatchik - who waxes fat on the food of the poor, but the apparatchik is supposed to work for the people, the reality is he does nothing, but produce figures and take the salary. What a sick system.
Tags: NHS, state apparatchiks, statism, welfare state
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License.
Labels: NHS, state apparatchiks, statism, welfare state
