Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A ticking time bomb: healthcare under threat across western Europe

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 74 posts

Re: A ticking time bomb: healthcare under threat across western Europe

#61

Post by guerrilla »

nradov wrote: post #53
guerrilla wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Corporations are kept in line with proper competition, where possible. What feedback mechanism is their to keep government bureaucracy in line? Sometimes they have audits, but those are never detailed or frequent enough. No they aren't. This flies in the face of all the evidence right in front of you. They just form cartels and monopolies. The US where everything is private and is the most expensive (by far!!) with…

The US has the best 5-year survival outcomes for most forms of cancer.

Because so many people can't even afford diagnosis and those that do manage get help are put into debt slavery. You can't seriously think that that is comparable to what is actually available to actually everyone in Europe.

Re: A ticking time bomb: healthcare under threat across western Europe

#62

Post by deepthunder »

crote wrote: post #44
wolongong942 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right wing parties haven't had much say in western Europe as of recent, unless you've re-defined right wing. We're having the same issues here in NZ and it accelerated with a left wing govt.

Since 2000, left-wing parties have ruled for the past X years in: Ireland: 0 years The Netherlands: 2 years (Kok - 2000-2002) Belgium: 3 years (Di Rupo, 2011-2014) France: 5 years (Hollande - 2012-2017) Germany: 6 years (Schröder - 2000-2005, Scholz - 2021-now) United Kingdom: 10 years (Blair - 2000-2007, Brown - 2007-2010) Austria: 18 years (Fischer, 2004-2016, Buren - 2016-2017, Van der Bellen - 2017-now) So yeah,…

Agreed. One correction => Blair 1997-2007

Re: A ticking time bomb: healthcare under threat across western Europe

#63

Post by virtual_void »

VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #26
virtual_void wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He’s clearly not saying that though. The statement was that a wealthy person was complaining about having to wait. Everyone else is also having to wait. They could speed things up by paying privately if they so wish. Also the wealthy should have a larger tax burden in absolute terms compared to the less well off. I say this as someone how is very fortunate - I don’t think we are taxed enough to make things sane and f…

> means testing for elective surgeries this means they shouldn't be allowed to access the healthcare that they're paying for.

The amount you pay in is not the amount you are entitled to. It’s about having a better, fairer society.

It is interesting though because it’s hard to draw a line between elective stuff that should be covered vs what should not. Breast implants for cancer survivors who had mastectomy? Sure. What about people who have self image trouble? Harder to draw the line. Some people might be having serious mental anguish that diminishes health in turn.

In general i think there needs to be limits on what public healthcare pays for. I don’t know how to draw that line. It is by no means certain that a wealthy person can or should have the public purse pay for elective surgery.

It feels like you are reacting as if it’s cut and dry that since they paid in they are entitled to everything, which sort of defeats the purpose of this sort of distribution of health / wealth.

Re: A ticking time bomb: healthcare under threat across western Europe

#64

Post by orwin »

crote wrote: post #48
notpushkin wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen those terms redefined so many times that now I think right-wing and left-wing don't mean anything really, outside the context of US politics.

Interestingly, right-wing . left-wing is usually defined specifically for the European political spectrum. The United States has a liberal - conservative divide, but it is vastly different from what we see in Europe. If anything, left/right does not mean anything in the US due to the radically different Overton window. As a European, I would consider the Democrat party to be right-wing. If you want left-wing, you hav…

And even then, Sanders and AOC are 'third way' left, like Blair, DSK and Holland (who is left of the two others, but still). At most center-left.

Re: A ticking time bomb: healthcare under threat across western Europe

#65

Post by manuel_w »

crote wrote: post #44
wolongong942 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right wing parties haven't had much say in western Europe as of recent, unless you've re-defined right wing. We're having the same issues here in NZ and it accelerated with a left wing govt.

Since 2000, left-wing parties have ruled for the past X years in: Ireland: 0 years The Netherlands: 2 years (Kok - 2000-2002) Belgium: 3 years (Di Rupo, 2011-2014) France: 5 years (Hollande - 2012-2017) Germany: 6 years (Schröder - 2000-2005, Scholz - 2021-now) United Kingdom: 10 years (Blair - 2000-2007, Brown - 2007-2010) Austria: 18 years (Fischer, 2004-2016, Buren - 2016-2017, Van der Bellen - 2017-now) So yeah,…

I appreciate the effort you put into compiling this list, but need to point out some flaws:

1.

You listed the Austrian presidents rather than Prime Ministers. Under normal circumstances, the Presidents dutys are mostly of representative nature. They don't need to come from the same party and are not elected at the same time.

2.

> left-wing parties have ruled for the past X years in ...

The Schüssel governments from 2000 to 2007 were composed exclusively of right-wing parties, every government since then was a coalition of both right- and left-wing parties.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Austria

Re: A ticking time bomb: healthcare under threat across western Europe

#66

Post by albertopv »

brainchild-adam wrote: post #33

I, for the life of me, cannot understand how something as essential as healthcare does not take priority over comparatively less essential things. It must be an unintended result of our complex societal setup with each stakeholder pursuing their own limited gain with no regard for the bigger picture, because it just makes no sense. Same is true for other essentials such as firefighting, basic infrastructure, etc. Why…

Italian health care costs 125B€ per year, defense costs about 26B, pensions about 300B. We already spend an insane amount of money, everything else is peanuts, including defense, which btw will have to be increased thanks to russian invasion.

Re: A ticking time bomb: healthcare under threat across western Europe

#67

Post by chongli »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #54
chongli wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with state-run healthcare (as well as education) is that costs (especially salaries) can become a political issue. In parts of Canada we’re experiencing severe shortages of healthcare workers (such as nurses) because governments have frozen their pay for political reasons.

Why does the electorate vote for politicians who won’t pay nurses what they’re worth?

Because they campaign on promises to “cut the fat” from government. Lots of people earn less than nurses and are resentful of that fact.

Re: A ticking time bomb: healthcare under threat across western Europe

#68

Post by zw7 »

nradov wrote: post #53
guerrilla wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Corporations are kept in line with proper competition, where possible. What feedback mechanism is their to keep government bureaucracy in line? Sometimes they have audits, but those are never detailed or frequent enough. No they aren't. This flies in the face of all the evidence right in front of you. They just form cartels and monopolies. The US where everything is private and is the most expensive (by far!!) with…

The US has the best 5-year survival outcomes for most forms of cancer.

I wonder how much of this reflects more screening?

See Gigerenzer 2013[1] for issues with 5-year survival rates.

I would be more interested in how mortality rates compare. EDIT: This[2] suggests US cancer mortality rate is lower but overall mortality rate is higher.

[1]: https://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f548.full https://sci-hub.se/10.1136/bmj.f548 [2]: https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/mortali...

Re: A ticking time bomb: healthcare under threat across western Europe

#69

Post by nec4b »

virtual_void wrote: post #17

Services, such as healthcare, public infrastructure, public transport, energy etc should be run by the state. There is always a conflict of interest when companies run these things because they care about profit / shareholder return more than they care about the people. Now, the fact that the state is often corrupt is another problem that should also be fixed but i just don’t buy the argument that companies should ru…

>> Services, such as healthcare, public infrastructure, public transport, energy etc should be run by the state.

That is a bold claim and from where I'm standing, it doesn't seem to be rooted in reality. The countries with the best health care system seem to be the ones where insurance (or state) pays for competing doctors. Those countries where doctors only work in state owned hospitals look terrible by comparison.

Re: A ticking time bomb: healthcare under threat across western Europe

#70

Post by nopenopenopeno »

ProjectArcturis wrote: post #60
nopenopenopeno wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least a few explicit examples would be a good place to start. I look forward to it.

Examples of what? You're just using a word wrong. There's nothing more to it.

Examples of any practical reason to categorize Jacinda Ahern's government as left wing.

https://jacobin.com/2021/05/new-zealand-labour-party-sociali...

Post reply on HN