British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Discuss political news items / current events.
User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13110
Location: England

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by Robin Hood »

George,
This whole thread began because you decided to believe something that fed your preconceived ideas, without checking it out properly and finding out the true issues.
You used it to bash the NHS because you'll use anything. The truth doesn't matter so long as you can appear to score points.
Your anti-NHS tactics use exactly the same methodology as most anti-Mormons.

I'm quite surprised at you in a way.

dafty
captain of 100
Posts: 428

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by dafty »

gclayjr wrote: July 10th, 2017, 6:31 am dafty,
Would you let them parents take that boy to russia and treat him like a labrat, knowing very well theres no cure for severed spinal cord? I wouldnt
I wouldn't take that choice away from the parents... that is the point. You've sold your soul for bowl of porridge

Regards,

George Clay
lol wow. that argument is RETARDED(am I gonna be banned for this comment? please dont :p )
So you would rather see the baby suffer, just for the sake of the parents being able to make the decision? Are you an Anarchist? or maybe a Hippie? Have you got a problem with authority? Remember, when you make it through to Millennium, you will be RULED by the KING with a ROD of iron. You will not be able to make rushed decisions and in the name of false liberty make decisions that affect others!!!! The poor baby is BRAIN DEAD. the parents will make it suffer more!!! somebody please step in and stop this cruelty!!! ...oh yeah, the crown already did.
PS. Everyday I hope and pray for a miracle. But it would be GODs miracle, nothing else nothing more. NO crazy american doctor will fix what is undeniably not fixable...

Sunain
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2711
Location: Canada

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by Sunain »

dafty wrote: July 10th, 2017, 1:22 am
Sunain wrote: July 9th, 2017, 8:12 pm When a parents agency to choose treatment for their children is overridden by the state isn't even a universal health socialist issue, it's gone way past that into totalitarianism.
Only one comment i will make on , otherwise excellent post of yours. U wrote:

When a parents agency to choose treatment for their children is overridden by the state isn't even a universal health socialist issue, it's gone way past that into totalitarianism. I honestly dont understand why its so hard to understand that what the court did in case of baby G. was reasonable and appropriate? A day after we took A levels, my friend went for a bike ride,got hit by a lorry and got paralised waist down. Long story short, first thing his grieving parents did was to find some doctor in russia that offered EXPERIMENTAL TREATMENT for a substantial sum of money without guarantee of success,but primarily without guarantee that the treatment wouldnt cause more harm and additional suffering. Would you let them parents take that boy to russia and treat him like a labrat, knowing very well theres no cure for severed spinal cord? I wouldnt(well, at that time I was so traumatised and naive, that I would have :ymblushing: )!!! I would hope that some reasonable person/member of their family will stop them and if they dont succeed maybe social services or even police should be involved to objectively assess the case and make the decision for them, as theyre unable to think straight themselves.Did not king Salomon make decision for the citizens? How is that different? PS. If the crowns decision was view to be wrong by UK citizens that look at the case objectively, I guarantee you we would have protests after protests and the case would have been reviewed again, which coincidently has been the case (not due to UK citizens but Pope and Trump :D ).AND REMEMBER, WE ARE NOT TALKING HERE ABOUT PARENTS FREEDOM TO CHOOSE SCHOOLING FOR THEIR CHILDREN,BUT HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE EXPERIMENTAL TREATMENT!!!
I understand why the BHS doctor's and then the courts made that decision, even if they attempted the procedure, there is a low chance it would work. To them, the success rate to pain threshold is too high to okay attempting the procedure.

But I understand the parents side of it even more. They don't want their child to die and any option even with a little chance of success to them is something worth trying. The hospital in the USA said they would give it a try and there is the little chance and hope. The doctor's and the courts took that chance and hope away from them. The totalitarianism issue is now the courts and the government can dictate what treatments a person can get. Miracles, experimental treatments, whatever can't happen.

User avatar
gclayjr
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2727
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by gclayjr »

dafty, Robin Hood
ol wow. that argument is RETARDED(am I gonna be banned for this comment? please dont :p )
So you would rather see the baby suffer, just for the sake of the parents being able to make the decision? Are you an Anarchist? or maybe a Hippie? Have you got a problem with authority? Remember, when you make it through to Millennium, you will be RULED by the KING with a ROD of iron. You will not be able to make rushed decisions and in the name of false liberty make decisions that affect others!!!! The poor baby is BRAIN DEAD. the parents will make it suffer more!!! somebody please step in and stop this cruelty!!! ...oh yeah, the crown already did.
PS. Everyday I hope and pray for a miracle. But it would be GODs miracle, nothing else nothing more. NO crazy american doctor will fix what is undeniably not fixable...
dafty, I speak out straight and forward, and never snivel about what somebody says about me.

However, despite any subterfuge you guys have made regarding the difference between the crown and the government, I have been correct and right all along. Again, I don't know how much more it is worth to continue this back and forth, because either you don't want to face it, you have become so conditioned that your minds are incapable of grasping it, or your are just trying to take shots while dodging the issue. My original point has been greatly proven by your complete blindness to the problem, even if it is clearly right in front of you. You aren't making any coherent argument as to how this doesn't take away your God given rights, you are just making assertions as to how wise, noble and caring your NHS is that takes care of you, saving you any tough work or decisions.

You have been willing become a bunch of socialists zombies and put your faith in an all caring government system because you think that they are all wise, and it takes away from you the difficulties of making decisions for your self and your family.


And that was Satan's plan all along.

Too bad you can't even see it. That is the greatest tragedy.

Regards,

George Clay

User avatar
gclayjr
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2727
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by gclayjr »

dafty,
Have you got a problem with authority? Remember, when you make it through to Millennium, you will be RULED by the KING with a ROD of iron. You will not be able to make rushed decisions and in the name of false liberty make decisions that affect others!!!!
I think you miss the analogy of the "Rod of iron". It is something WE can grasp on to to know the truth so that we can make proper choices. not a stick for Christ to beat us with.

Regards,

George Clay

dafty
captain of 100
Posts: 428

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by dafty »

gclayjr wrote: July 10th, 2017, 9:50 am dafty,
Have you got a problem with authority? Remember, when you make it through to Millennium, you will be RULED by the KING with a ROD of iron. You will not be able to make rushed decisions and in the name of false liberty make decisions that affect others!!!!
I think you miss the analogy of the "Rod of iron". It is something WE can grasp on to to know the truth so that we can make proper choices. not a stick for Christ to beat us with.

Regards,

George Clay
As a matter of fact ROD is JUSTICE and will judge in RIGHTEOUSNESS...but this subject belongs to another thread. x

User avatar
gclayjr
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2727
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by gclayjr »

dafty,
As a matter of fact ROD is JUSTICE and will judge in RIGHTEOUSNESS...but this subject belongs to another thread
I suppose that you know that this is an LDS board. I understand that the KJV of the bible says

Revelation 2:27
27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
However the JST translation says
And he shall rule them with the word of God; and they shall be in his hands as the vessels of clay in the hands of a potter; and he shall govern them by faith, with equity and justice, even as I received of my Father.
Which when coupled with the BOM makes it clear that he is talking about the scriptures as the basis for law.

So I will take the clear LDS understanding of this. If you are either a disaffected Mormon, or someone with another background who is trying to persuade us Mormons as to the error of our ways, then I would agree, you may start another thread if you want to discuss this.

Regards,

George Clay

dafty
captain of 100
Posts: 428

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by dafty »

gclayjr wrote: July 10th, 2017, 11:01 am dafty,
As a matter of fact ROD is JUSTICE and will judge in RIGHTEOUSNESS...but this subject belongs to another thread
I suppose that you know that this is an LDS board. I understand that the KJV of the bible says

Revelation 2:27
27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
However the JST translation says
And he shall rule them with the word of God; and they shall be in his hands as the vessels of clay in the hands of a potter; and he shall govern them by faith, with equity and justice, even as I received of my Father.
Which when coupled with the BOM makes it clear that he is talking about the scriptures as the basis for law.

So I will take the clear LDS understanding of this. If you are either a disaffected Mormon, or someone with another background who is trying to persuade us Mormons as to the error of our ways, then I would agree, you may start another thread if you want to discuss this.

Regards,

George Clay
LOL
Speaking of Joseph Smith- have a look at D&C 113 and then come back to me :p Are you going to deny JS himself saying ROD isnt an actual servant of GOD? Then read the whole book of Isaiah and get back to me again? Are you going to deny Isaiah as well saying ROD is only a "reference to scriptures"?
But as we both agree this discussion is for another thread.

dafty
captain of 100
Posts: 428

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by dafty »

gclayjr wrote: July 10th, 2017, 11:01 am dafty,
As a matter of fact ROD is JUSTICE and will judge in RIGHTEOUSNESS...but this subject belongs to another thread
I suppose that you know that this is an LDS board. I understand that the KJV of the bible says

Revelation 2:27
27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
However the JST translation says
And he shall rule them with the word of God; and they shall be in his hands as the vessels of clay in the hands of a potter; and he shall govern them by faith, with equity and justice, even as I received of my Father.
Which when coupled with the BOM makes it clear that he is talking about the scriptures as the basis for law.

So I will take the clear LDS understanding of this. If you are either a disaffected Mormon, or someone with another background who is trying to persuade us Mormons as to the error of our ways, then I would agree, you may start another thread if you want to discuss this.

Regards,

George Clay
And also why do you presume I must be less active or of non lds background to disagree with you on the subject of NHS? lol do you genuinely believe all faithfull LDS would agree with you? That all LDS would choose a rip off, non existing really, lacking a slightest touch of compassion- US health service over founded upon the principle of charity, brotherhood and compassion-NHS? =)) lol
Are you an anarchist hippy that denies a council of Latter Day prophets to abide by the Law of the land? So let me explain.The crown is the law here in UK, and I shall remain faithfull to my maker by abiding that law.If you choose to apostasize and be rebellious then suit yourself :ymapplause:

dafty
captain of 100
Posts: 428

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by dafty »

Oh and one more, since you mentioned BoM. Have a read through it again, because GOD Himself, decreed a judgement- not upon a NHS loving Brits, but greedy and materialistic US citizens...starting with His own household :-ss

User avatar
gclayjr
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2727
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by gclayjr »

dafty,
And also why do you presume I must be less active or of non lds background to disagree with you on the subject of NHS? l
Do you have a reading comprehension problem? I was talking about your perverted definition of "rod of iron". I acknowledge that the BoM is not specific in regards to NHS. But is IS specific in regards to the definition of "Rod of Iron".

And it ain't yours!
As a matter of fact ROD is JUSTICE and will judge in RIGHTEOUSNESS...but this subject belongs to another thread
Your definition is sometimes found in protestant Biblical analysis, but not in LDS doctrine. So if you want to pursue your fantasy that the rod of iron will be a stick of justice to beat the disobedient with when Christ comes to reign, you will be going contrary to LDS doctrine!

Regards,

George Clay

dafty
captain of 100
Posts: 428

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by dafty »

gclayjr wrote: July 10th, 2017, 6:24 pm dafty,
And also why do you presume I must be less active or of non lds background to disagree with you on the subject of NHS? l
Do you have a reading comprehension problem? I was talking about your perverted definition of "rod of iron". I acknowledge that the BoM is not specific in regards to NHS. But is IS specific in regards to the definition of "Rod of iron
And it ain't yours!
As a matter of fact ROD is JUSTICE and will judge in RIGHTEOUSNESS...but this subject belongs to another thread
Your definition is sometimes found in protestant Biblical analysis, but not in LDS doctrine. So if you want to pursue your fantasy that the rod of iron will be a stick of justice to beat the disobedient with when Christ comes to reign, you will be going contrary to LDS doctrine!

Regards,

George Clay
Look, I mentioned ROD only to illustrate my point with regards to there being a monarchy during Millenium and King being able to make decisions for us (in difficult cases i presume), very similar to what the Crown did with baby G. Then, in one of the consecutive posts you said Im here to correct your LDS ways as an disaffected mormon. I ASSUMED you must still be talking about NHS as per D&C113 and the book of Isaiah - ROD as a servant is a doctrine of the Church. I see that my assumption was incorrect, for which I apologise, my bad :ymhug:
I really enjoyed discussing the subject with you, both NHS and the baby G's case. I hope one day, we'll both know for sure whats what.
But for now,...Here in UK we would say "break a leg", but seeing the state of the US health service, I better just wish you luck my friend =)) :)) :ymhug: :ymparty:

JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9830

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by JohnnyL »

Sunain wrote: July 9th, 2017, 6:25 pm
JohnnyL wrote: July 9th, 2017, 5:17 pm
Sunain wrote: July 9th, 2017, 4:30 pm Despite the "socialist" issues with the BHS and UHS in Canada, having used both in my family, they are light years ahead of the United States. In this day and age, no one should be denied health care services because they can't afford to do so, especially in First World Countries like Canada, the UK and the USA. Would Christ deny healing services to only those that could afford to do so? I think not. Socialism in a Health Care system isn't an issue that many members of the church tend to believe.
No, he would--like so many people on this board say--heal them with the priesthood.

What does affording health care have to do with being in a first-world country?

A better question to ask would be, "Would Christ steal money from someone so they could afford those healing services?" And that answer is so much easier and clearer: Nope.

If I wreck my car, should you pay for my new one? I feel that's my right, ya know.
Do you love your money so much that you would allow another person to suffer because they couldn't get treatment? Not everyone is as fortunate as you. That happens all to often in the United States every day! The parents in the article here in this thread had to crowd fund over a MILLION dollars for the chance to treat their child in the USA because medical treatments cost SO much there. You honestly think that's fair?! Would that not completely ruin the financial lives of 99.999% of any American?! That's where universal health care systems come into play balancing the capitalist society that has infected the American Medical system. While the UK, Canadian and even Australian health care systems are far from perfect, they do work very well for millions of people by balancing the costs for all.

I rest well at night knowing, if I or someone I love gets sick, I can take them to the hospital and not have to worry about going bankrupt. This is the reason I live in Canada and not the United States. I can take a friend to the hospital as well and not have to worry:
Do they have medicaid?
Do they have insurance?
Will they be mad that I took them to the hospital for treatment they can't afford?!

The greed of money has polluted the ideals of the people of the United States that they value money above the welfare of the people. Start now to learn the tenants of the United Order, everyone with enough that is sufficient for their needs. I honestly don't think any American these days could even cope with the United Order/law of consecration. Money is linked with the class system, so you guys are fine being above people with your loads of money to get the proper health care you need and are therefore better than those that get sick and can't afford treatment. Yup. That sounds real Christlike to me!
And the Lord called his people Zion, because they were of one heart and one mind, and dwelt in righteousness; and there was no poor among them. (Moses 7:16, 18.)
And they had all things common among them; therefore there were not rich and poor, bond and free, but they were all made free, and partakers of the heavenly gift. (4 Ne. 1:3)
The health of a nation cannot be compared to wrecking your car. If my money from my taxes goes to help someone else get better because of cancer, they had a baby, they broke their arm, or whatever, I feel at the end of the day, in general my money was used to help others. Is that not what Christ wants us to do? Help others anyway we can? Now if I get sick, I can be grateful there are others that pay for me in return. It is not much different than the Fast Offerings we give. A missionary companion of mine recently had his first child and it cost him $8000k because he was living in the USA! He's concerned that this maybe his only child because he'd have to save up for years to afford another one at that price. Thankfully they had a healthy baby, unlike the parents in the article we are discussing. Here, it's free because the service is paid through the universal healthcare system plus they even give free parenting classes before and after childbirth.

Since we don't seem to have the Melchizedek Priesthood keys or faith to the healing power that Christ did to heal the blind, raise the dead, heal the sick, that's a non-issue these days. The church has always told and taught us to seek professional medical attention when we can. Priesthood blessings are also used in conjunction with this medical assistance.
Who are you to judge my car??? Seriously. It's based on what you "feel"? What if my car is needed for work? Or for any other of myriad possibilities of doing good?
Who are you to decide what is deserves someone else's money, and what doesn't?
Who is the government to decide?

Let me repeat: A better question to ask would be, "Would Christ steal money from someone so they could afford those healing services?" Could you respond to that? Y/N

$1 million for a life. I wonder how many thousands of lives that could save in many third-world countries...
Is it not plain arrogant and proud, and completely un-Christlike, to believe that using money for a 1% chance at improvement for a near-dead person is more important than saving the lives of thousands of children?

JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9830

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by JohnnyL »

dafty wrote: July 10th, 2017, 1:15 pm Oh and one more, since you mentioned BoM. Have a read through it again, because GOD Himself, decreed a judgement- not upon a NHS loving Brits, but greedy and materialistic US citizens...starting with His own household :-ss
US, or Canadians and Mexicans? At least, that's what 90% of BoM "researchers" would say...
Of course, it says Gentiles. Do Brits fit? :p
Wait, are you saying that the US or Americans are the household of God?! J/j.

User avatar
gclayjr
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2727
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by gclayjr »

Excellent Column by Jonah Goldberg, that makes my point elegantly . He makes a good case that technically. probably the state is making a correct choice but...
I see it far more as a matter of due process. In every liberal democratic country dedicated to the rule of law, the state has to jump through hoops to deny citizens their rights. Even when the state knows a criminal is guilty, it still must go through the motions and prove its case.

Charlie's parents aren't criminals, they're distraught parents. And parents have rights. They aren't absolute rights. Parents can't kill their children or let them die through inaction.

But the state can.

Societies depend on the principle that parents are their children's best guardians. It's appalling for the state -- particularly one that runs the health-care system -- to claim that it, not the loving parents, have the final say.
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/jonah071217.php3

Regards,

George Clay

Michelle
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1795

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by Michelle »

JohnnyL said
"$1 million for a life. I wonder how many thousands of lives that could save in many third-world countries...
Is it not plain arrogant and proud, and completely un-Christlike, to believe that using money for a 1% chance at improvement for a near-dead person is more important than saving the lives of thousands of children?"

BOOM!

You did it! You just distilled the entire argument into the difference between ethics and morals, force and agency, socialism and capitalism, relativism and absolute truth.

You just created a real life ethical situation to match the ethical "train on the track" question discussed in another thread.

It may be argued that allowing Charlie to die is ethical, because of all the lives the money could save, if not moral. Moral meaning submissive to God's law. You have decided that ethics trumps morals, that the importance of Life as an absolute truth is fallible and submissive to the reasoning of man.

You have asked Charlie's parents to pull the lever to put the train on the track where there son stands to save the passenger car from falling off the cliff and you have judged them as wrong for choosing their son!

You have said "agency only exists if you choose as I want you too, otherwise your agency will be delegated to those smarter, wiser, less emotionally attached than you."

You fail to understand that the million dollars they were given , were given voluntarily for a specific purpose and person: Charlie. Those same people, could have chosen to donate that money to third world countries. For all we know, they may do that too. But we do know in this case their purpose. Who are you to say that the "greater good" is better met by another worthy goal and that Charlie's parents should ignore the wishes of the donors (members of society) and use it for another purpose you, or any other person or group of people, deems more important?

You have sided with socialism. The good of society outweighs the needs of an individual in society. That you are a mathematical equation of a person whose worth is based in economics not eternal truths.

There was another group of socialists, socialist was actually a part of the name of the group, who made the same argument. They placed, based on their fallible reasoning, some individuals above another and allowed to die, or flat out killed those who ruined their "perfect" equation.

I know I am being very direct. This is not meant to be a slap down, but a wake up call. Considering my past experience with you, I'd be surprised if you read this far, but if you have, thank you. This post is just as much for JohnnyL as any other person who innocently wondered the same thing.

If relativism and socialism are ok in this instance, it is only a matter of time before you become their victim as well.

Teancum
captain of 100
Posts: 873

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by Teancum »

dafty wrote: July 10th, 2017, 7:04 am

lol wow. that argument is RETARDED(am I gonna be banned for this comment? please dont :p )
So you would rather see the baby suffer, just for the sake of the parents being able to make the decision?
This actually was Satan's argument against Father's plan. And yes, Father in Heaven would "rather see the baby suffer, just for the sake of the parents being able to make the decision", as that is why we have suffering and trials in this life. The gift of agency (the ability to choose) was so important, that Father in Heaven was willing to let 1/3 of his children go to outer darkness because of it, and is willing to let millions suffer in this life as the direct result of decisions of a few or even one - With the caveat that there is a Savior and an everlasting and infinite atonement through him that will "fix" the injustices and sufferings all endure in mortality, if they will accept him and follow him.
dafty wrote: July 10th, 2017, 7:04 am
You will not be able to make rushed decisions and in the name of false liberty make decisions that affect others!!!! The poor baby is BRAIN DEAD. the parents will make it suffer more!!! somebody please step in and stop this cruelty!!!
Yes, there was one who offered to stop people from making decisions that affect others. Can't you see that the very plea you are asking for is the one the devil put forth in the pre-existence? The way I understand it is, people in the millennium will still have the ability and freedom to make those choices which would harm others, but will not do it because of their goodness and strength. The devil will just not be able to get them to do those things - he will be bound.

The whole point of the thread is freedom to make choices has been curtailed or taken away. Yes it is a loss of freedom whether taken away forcibly or willingly given. That is why it is an evil because it is contrary to God's will, plan, and gift of agency. We should use our agency to OFFER assistance and render aid when accepted and wanted, rather than force our assistance and help others without regard for their choice. That is the point of this thread.

Teancum
captain of 100
Posts: 873

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by Teancum »

JohnnyL wrote: Is it not plain arrogant and proud, and completely un-Christlike, to believe that using money for a 1% chance at improvement for a near-dead person is more important than saving the lives of thousands of children?
JohnnyL, There were those who thought as you do in the scriptures. They complained about a very expensive oil being used on one rather than the oil be sold and the money used for many. Because of preoccupation with money and the economic ramifications of different choices, one chose to sell out his God for some silver. It is my belief that when we focus on the cost of things and the monetary and economic ramifications, we loose sight of doing good or rather doing good comes a second place to whether it makes sense according to the numbers monetarily. In the City of Zion, where all is had in common, money considerations will not be an issue. If they are for you, then I might venture you would not want to live there because the street will be constantly torn up in front of your house. :D :ymhug:

I have found myself afflicted with this from time to time. I see the ornate furnishings of the church buildings, the care of the grounds, the cost of this or that and think to myself, man if I just had the money that it cost for this tree, or lighting of this building for a month, or water bill, etc... I could finally live without my roof leaking, or shoes that don't fall apart etc... I know of some who live in a small run down trailer and that could help them get the things they need. I am evil in my heart for thinking like this. Instead, perhaps I should offer to those who I see, with whatever need they have, those things I am blessed with (whether it be time, talents, abilities, knowledge, physical things, or wealth) that might ease their burden, and leave any cost comparisons and economics out of it.

Sunain
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2711
Location: Canada

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by Sunain »

NHS holds on to top spot in healthcare survey
Commonwealth Fund analysis of healthcare systems in 11 nations finds NHS is the best, safest and most affordable

The NHS has been judged the best, safest and most affordable healthcare system out of 11 countries analysed and ranked by experts from the influential Commonwealth Fund health thinktank.

It is the second time in a row that the study, which is undertaken every three years, has found the UK to have the highest-rated health system.

The NHS has held on to the top spot despite the longest budget squeeze in its 69-year history, serious understaffing and the disruption caused by a radical restructuring of the service in England in 2013.

Its ranking is even more notable because the thinktank found the UK to put the fourth smallest amount of GDP into healthcare among the 11 countries. While the US spends 16.6% of its national income on health, the UK comes near the bottom, investing just 9.9%. Only New Zealand (9.4%), Norway (9.3%) and Australia (9%) put in less.

The UK emerged with the best healthcare system overall, just ahead of Australia, with the Netherlands a little further behind. A group of experts assessed them against 11 criteria designed to measure the effectiveness of different health systems.

The rankings:
1 UK
2 Australia
3 Netherlands
4 Norway
5 New Zealand
6 Sweden
7 Switzerland
8 Germany
9 Canada
10 France
11 United States
Seems the BHS is one of the best ranked medical systems in the world.

JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9830

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by JohnnyL »

Michelle wrote: July 12th, 2017, 12:46 pm JohnnyL said
"$1 million for a life. I wonder how many thousands of lives that could save in many third-world countries...
Is it not plain arrogant and proud, and completely un-Christlike, to believe that using money for a 1% chance at improvement for a near-dead person is more important than saving the lives of thousands of children?"

BOOM!

You did it! You just distilled the entire argument into the difference between ethics and morals, force and agency, socialism and capitalism, relativism and absolute truth.

You just created a real life ethical situation to match the ethical "train on the track" question discussed in another thread.

It may be argued that allowing Charlie to die is ethical, because of all the lives the money could save, if not moral. Moral meaning submissive to God's law. You have decided that ethics trumps morals, that the importance of Life as an absolute truth is fallible and submissive to the reasoning of man.

You have asked Charlie's parents to pull the lever to put the train on the track where there son stands to save the passenger car from falling off the cliff and you have judged them as wrong for choosing their son!

You have said "agency only exists if you choose as I want you too, otherwise your agency will be delegated to those smarter, wiser, less emotionally attached than you."

You fail to understand that the million dollars they were given , were given voluntarily for a specific purpose and person: Charlie. Those same people, could have chosen to donate that money to third world countries. For all we know, they may do that too. But we do know in this case their purpose. Who are you to say that the "greater good" is better met by another worthy goal and that Charlie's parents should ignore the wishes of the donors (members of society) and use it for another purpose you, or any other person or group of people, deems more important?

You have sided with socialism. The good of society outweighs the needs of an individual in society. That you are a mathematical equation of a person whose worth is based in economics not eternal truths.

There was another group of socialists, socialist was actually a part of the name of the group, who made the same argument. They placed, based on their fallible reasoning, some individuals above another and allowed to die, or flat out killed those who ruined their "perfect" equation.

I know I am being very direct. This is not meant to be a slap down, but a wake up call. Considering my past experience with you, I'd be surprised if you read this far, but if you have, thank you. This post is just as much for JohnnyL as any other person who innocently wondered the same thing.

If relativism and socialism are ok in this instance, it is only a matter of time before you become their victim as well.
Actually, I stopped reading after the first paragraph--you are so off. It was an argument against what was going on, using Sunain's reasoning.

They can do what they want with the money, and whoever gives to them--though yes, I would consider it foolish, compared to what COULD be done with it.

That "good steward" kind of thang, ya know?

User avatar
gclayjr
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2727
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by gclayjr »

Sunian,

Whenever you see "quality ranking" statistics, you always shouid check to see what the agenda of the ranking institute might be. Would you trust a 10 best presidents list from the Republican party?

Commonwealth Fund

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_Fund
The Commonwealth Fund, one of the first foundations to be established by a woman, was founded in 1918 with an endowment of almost $10 million by Anna M. Harkness. The widow of Stephen V. Harkness, a principal investor in Standard Oil, Mrs. Harkness wanted to “do something for the welfare of mankind.” Anna’s son, Edward Stephen Harkness, became the Commonwealth Fund’s first president and hired a staff of people to help him build the foundation. Edward Harkness possessed a "passionate commitment to social reform" and was "determined to improve health and health services for Americans."[2] Through additional gifts and bequests between 1918 and 1959, the Harkness family's total contribution to the fund's endowment amounted to more than $53 million. Today,[when?] the Commonwealth Fund’s endowment stands at almost $700 million.
Regards,,

George Clay

JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9830

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by JohnnyL »

gclayjr wrote: July 16th, 2017, 1:40 pm Sunian,

Whenever you see "quality ranking" statistics, you always shouid check to see what the agenda of the ranking institute might be. Would you trust a 10 best presidents list from the Republican party?

Commonwealth Fund

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_Fund
The Commonwealth Fund, one of the first foundations to be established by a woman, was founded in 1918 with an endowment of almost $10 million by Anna M. Harkness. The widow of Stephen V. Harkness, a principal investor in Standard Oil, Mrs. Harkness wanted to “do something for the welfare of mankind.” Anna’s son, Edward Stephen Harkness, became the Commonwealth Fund’s first president and hired a staff of people to help him build the foundation. Edward Harkness possessed a "passionate commitment to social reform" and was "determined to improve health and health services for Americans."[2] Through additional gifts and bequests between 1918 and 1959, the Harkness family's total contribution to the fund's endowment amounted to more than $53 million. Today,[when?] the Commonwealth Fund’s endowment stands at almost $700 million.
Regards,,

George Clay
And the fact that they used GDP as a main factor is not a really fair part of the judgment.

I also find it interesting that many social health countries are not on the list--what happened?

dafty
captain of 100
Posts: 428

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by dafty »

JohnnyL wrote: July 16th, 2017, 1:51 pm
gclayjr wrote: July 16th, 2017, 1:40 pm Sunian,

Whenever you see "quality ranking" statistics, you always shouid check to see what the agenda of the ranking institute might be. Would you trust a 10 best presidents list from the Republican party?

Commonwealth Fund

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_Fund
The Commonwealth Fund, one of the first foundations to be established by a woman, was founded in 1918 with an endowment of almost $10 million by Anna M. Harkness. The widow of Stephen V. Harkness, a principal investor in Standard Oil, Mrs. Harkness wanted to “do something for the welfare of mankind.” Anna’s son, Edward Stephen Harkness, became the Commonwealth Fund’s first president and hired a staff of people to help him build the foundation. Edward Harkness possessed a "passionate commitment to social reform" and was "determined to improve health and health services for Americans."[2] Through additional gifts and bequests between 1918 and 1959, the Harkness family's total contribution to the fund's endowment amounted to more than $53 million. Today,[when?] the Commonwealth Fund’s endowment stands at almost $700 million.
Regards,,

George Clay

I read this article with its ranking a couple of days back and chose not to post it because I was sure it would be ignored and dismissed as inaccurate by the greedy, materialistic and non-charitable among us...and of course you have proven me right. I guess the old saying that you cant drag a dumb-@#$ to water is still applicable,...wait a sec-or is it lead horse to water? well, same principle =))

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13110
Location: England

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by Robin Hood »

There you go with your jealousy again George.
If the ranking had the US top and the UK 11th, I'm sure you'd be rubbing our faces in it and making a big deal; telling us how universal healthcare doesn't work and so on.
You guys need to get into the 21st century. 😉

User avatar
gclayjr
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2727
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: British health service even more evil than hellish socialism it bows down to

Post by gclayjr »

Robin Hood,
You guys need to get into the 21st century.
I think we had better ideas and morals in 1787.

You Liberals/Progressives think that forward in time is forward in progress. Not necessarily so. We have been losing our freedom and and rights as Satan takes an even greater hold on our souls, usually by selling something for nothing.

Regards,

George Clay

PS; So you think that % GDP is the best measure of Health Care. I guess as a countryman of John Meynard Keynes, you would agree that the amount you spend is more important that what you get!... especially if you are convinced that it is someone else's money... especially the Evil 1% ers... unfortunately you will eventually discover that that is a lie also.

Post Reply