-
Inefficient
I know you mean well, but the NHS is exceptionally efficient.
(also disagree that dismantling the NHS is a widely held Tory belief)
hugo7-
I think I put 'ineffecient' in parentheses, because it's something people love to say all the time, but it's not actually true. I agree it's exceptionally efficient, but the system is currently failing (leading to maddening inefficiencies such as delayed discharge) due to the political choice to starve the NHS and social care of money. The other maddening misconception is that there are too many managers. I think it's something like 1/3rd of the number of managers in the NHS compared to private companies. The problem is more the calibre of managers, but hey-ho!
-
In terms of it being a widely held Tory belief - fair enough, but the people guiding policy in this area (Hunt, Letwin etc) I think do have those beliefs, it's just often not politically expedient to mention them. However, actions speak louder than words, and I think the myriad reorganisations towards a market based healthcare system with massive private-sector involvement that have accelerated under their watch speaks volumes about the current view of the Tory decision makers towards the NHS. They also know these changes are not popular, either within their own party or the general public, so have cleverly couched them in terms of 'efficiencies' and obscure language.
kimchi
'Inefficient' because it's been cut to the fucking bone by the Tories, because the NHS is inherently socialist and they disagree with it on ideological grounds, and therefore want to get rid of it even though it is actually bloody good at what it does (see graphic above, or multiple commonwealth fund reports).
Inb4 you start bleating on about private-market based healthcare somehow being more efficient, take a look at America which spends nearly $2,000 per capita on healthcare compared to similar countries and gets... worse outcomes.
Try harder.