Um...
Don't want to be contentious, but this isn't a case of going from having something that's super awesome and fair and equitable to something that's evil, unfair and heinous.
It's a slight shift, which means that healthcare provision which already favours the wealthier* might possibly do so a smidgeon more, but that's not really been proved - it's just possible.
*This isn't criticising the current system unduly. You can't really stop rich people buying themselves advantages in health, education etc etc. It's sort of what people want to spend money on if they have it.
(
prince-igor si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses, Wed 12 Oct 2011, 15:15,
Reply)
It's that opening of the door for private sector providers though...
Experience and hard evidence tells us that this has never resulted in improvements or efficiencies, merely increased amounts of tax revenues going to shareholders rather than public agencies and service users.
It's not that the wealthy will receive a better standard of care, but the standard for those who cannot afford it will go through the floor :o(
(
barryheadwound Mul-ti-pass? Multipass!, Wed 12 Oct 2011, 15:36,
Reply)
It's opening the door to a growth in the privatised provision of healthcare services.
It also means a vast multiplication of admin, which in turn means a gross increase in waste, which in turn means that the taxpayer loses, which in turn means that the
It's the thin tip of a corporate cock that's about to rip through our collective rectums like wet tissue-paper.
My quality of life is maintained by an expensive medication, so I'm extremely worried about all this. We're only a couple of steps away from having to have health-insurance like the yanks. Insurance that won't cover me (like millions of Americans) due to my "pre-existing condition".
We're turning into a mini-America, so if you've got some decent in-demand qualifications then you'd do well to go somewhere else. I don't, so unless I win the lottery then I'm stuck.
(, Wed 12 Oct 2011, 17:08, Reply)