Time to close the health service

mountainyman

The state spends 8 billion a year on 'health' is it time to take the nuclear option and close the health service?

Mena

And then?

mountainyman

We save 8 billion. Not to mention the associated savings on education and pensions.

ejmaztec

I thought that it had already closed.

sceptre

What are you planning on doing with the sick people then?

(and why has it taken four replies for someone to ask that...)

Mena

mountainyman wrote: »

We save 8 billion. Not to mention the associated savings on education and pensions.

But what do we do then with no hospitals etc? Ship all the sick people to the UK? Or do you just mean to close the administrative section of the HSE?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

sceptre

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Oh, I assumed that was the intention, it's the only reasonably rational interpretation. My question still stands.

cabra64

i think raising the price of cigarettes could combat the big hole that is the health bill. A significant % of the cost comes from treating dieases caused by fags. Its win win. Less people smoking = less cost = money (also lifes btw) saved.
Seriously tho employing loads of managers and general admin staff is pure pants. Only doctors nurses and actually medically trained people should by doing the doctoring end and should be offered long contracts and then PROVEN successful people to manage and direct the monster that is the HSE. Three year contract to these people and if there's an improvement then another three years. No improvement = new contract.

mountainyman

Mena wrote: »

But what do we do then with no hospitals etc? Ship all the sick people to the UK? Or do you just mean to close the administrative section of the HSE?

They can sort out their own problems. They can pay for private healthcare or go to the UK or get better on their own or die.

mountainyman

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Surely if the state abandons all health spending entrepreneurs will step into the breach?

gurramok

No need to close it. There needs to be a root branch review of wage costs in the service and the slashing of a needless army of HSE admins.

Neglecting the sick who are poor is not on.

Mena

mountainyman wrote: »

They can sort out their own problems. They can pay for private healthcare or go to the UK or get better on their own or die.

Hmm, I've first hand experience of exactly this type of system. It's not pretty. As crap as the HSE is, I'd take it over nothing any time of the day.

mountainyman

cabra64 wrote: »

i think raising the price of cigarettes could combat the big hole that is the health bill. A significant % of the cost comes from treating dieases caused by fags. Its win win. Less people smoking = less cost = money (also lifes btw) saved.
Seriously tho employing loads of managers and general admin staff is pure pants. Only doctors nurses and actually medically trained people should by doing the doctoring end and should be offered long contracts and then PROVEN successful people to manage and direct the monster that is the HSE. Three year contract to these people and if there's an improvement then another three years. No improvement = new contract.

Getting rid of (state run) oncology services would save way more money.

Mena

mountainyman wrote: »

Surely if the state abandons all health spending entrepreneurs will step into the breach?

They might.

Quick story. Friend of my dad's was involved in a car accident, a serious one. Ambulance got him to the hospital, but they would not touch him until he could show proof of his health insurance. He of course, being unconscious, could not, so the wife was contacted. By the time she got their with the proof he had died.

I'd be very careful asking for a privatised system.

mountainyman

Mena wrote: »

Hmm, I've first hand experience of exactly this type of system. It's not pretty. As crap as the HSE is, I'd take it over nothing any time of the day.

Some doctors would volunteer a day a week for nothing. Some wouldn't. This isn't India everyone in Ireland can afford to go to the doctor.

Serenity Now!

sceptre wrote: »

Oh, I assumed that was the intention, it's the only reasonably rational interpretation. My question still stands.

If you're in an accident, better have your creidt card or cheque book handy then...
The health service is supposed to be accessible to all. It is a social necessity and responsibility of this country's govt to run. Privatised healthcare especially if only choice available will polarise accessibility to people who need it.
Not everybody can afford private health care.

mountainyman

gurramok wrote: »

No need to close it. There needs to be a root branch review of wage costs in the service and the slashing of a needless army of HSE admins.

Neglecting the sick who are poor is not on.

Why not. Why are they poor and sick?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

mountainyman

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

There's four years to an election by the time the next election rolls around we'll all haev our health care sorted out and the don't have cares will be disporportionaltely don't votes.

sceptre

mountainyman wrote: »

Surely if the state abandons all health spending entrepreneurs will step into the breach?

Even if so, that's why I asked my question. Narrowing it down a little (and gurramok already touched on this), what might you be planning on doing with the sick people who can't afford to pay for treatment when they're sick?

You need something specific as an answer, a "maybe" won't cut it.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

cabra64

Mena wrote: »

They might.

Quick story. Friend of my dad's was involved in a car accident, a serious one. Ambulance got him to the hospital, but they would not touch him until he could show proof of his health insurance. He of course, being unconscious, could not, so the wife was contacted. By the time she got their with the proof he had died.

I'd be very careful asking for a privatised system.

What! your saying so everyone without Private health insurance in serious traffic accidents dies!? Hardly. Im 100% sure that medical ppl were not just standing around waiting for the wife to turn up. If a person with or without insurance could have been saved he would have been. Hypocratic Law of being a doctor-help sick/dying person.

mountainyman

sceptre wrote: »

Even if so, that's why I asked my question. Narrowing it down a little (and gurramok already touched on this), what might you be planning on doing with the sick people who can't afford to pay for treatment when they're sick?

You need something specific as an answer, a "maybe" won't cut it.

Some of them will get better on their own.
Some of them will get help from charities.
Some of them won't get better.

gurramok

Are you trolling or just being heartless?

A society needs to take care of its less off, its called social responsibilty. Guess when you lose your job and cannot afford healthcare, one of those 3 options you listed will apply.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

mountainyman

gurramok wrote: »

Are you trolling or just being heartless?

A society needs to take care of its less off, its called social responsibilty. Guess when you lose your job and cannot afford healthcare, one of those 3 options you listed will apply.

I am inviting a thought experiment. I will always be able to afford healthcare. Also I look after my health.

mountainyman

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

What about people who don't want to get insurance?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

sceptre

cabra64 wrote: »

Hypocratic Law of being a doctor-help sick/dying person.

You're misinterpreting what the Hippocratic oath says (it's an oath that many (not all) doctors take by the way, not a law). Or assuming you've never read it, it says nothing about having to step up and heal people - the guiding principle of the oath is not taking any action that causes harm. All legal precedent in the UK and Ireland is that doing nothing doesn't cause harm. It doesn't apply. And the oath isn't legally enforceable in any case. Barking up the wrong tree I'm afraid.

mountainyman wrote: »

Some of them will get better on their own.
Some of them will get help from charities.
Some of them won't get better.

Your proposal just entered the idiotic realm. We've moved on a little in social attitudes since the poorhouses and soup kitchens were something that people hoped for. With a proposal like that, even getting elected as dog catcher would only be a dream.

gurramok

What about people who cannot afford health insurance?

So you want an American style health insurance system?

donegalfella, how did Holland solve the problem of the poor not been able to afford their health system?