Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?

#91

Post by 0xy » Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 3:46 AM UTC

was_a_dev wrote: post #2

It is well-known that the austerity ushered in by Cameron's new Conservative goverment heavily contributed to excess deaths. After a decade of continued underfunding of public services, leading to a collapsed social and health service, you realise the question really isn't that deep

Austerity like NHS spending increasing by 6.5% yearly since 2010? Absolutely absurd argument made from political propaganda, not fact.

Not only has it increased in raw numbers, it's increased per capita, making this argument false by any measurement.

Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?

#92

Post by nradov » Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 3:47 AM UTC

58028641 wrote: post #85

nradov wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK NHS budget has been steadily increasing. You can't plausibly claim that the Tories have defunded public health over decades. Some might claim that the funding should have increased at a faster rate, but there are limits to what any society can spend on healthcare. https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/nhs-in-a-nutshell/nhs-...

Just cause the dollar amount is increasing doesn't mean it isn't being defunded. You have to account for inflation, population size, and population age distribution.

What are you saying exactly? How much should spending have increased to account for inflation, population size, and population age distribution? Please give a specific number. Would that be a good use of limited resources?

Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?

#93

Post by 0xy » Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 3:48 AM UTC

The UK's doctors and nurses are essentially slaves compared to their US counterparts. They make a quarter of the pay or less for equivalent work.

When your healthcare strategy is "just employ slaves so we can have free healthcare" of course people will die.

Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?

#94

Post by lstamour » Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 3:48 AM UTC

anonporridge wrote: post #69

yeuxardents wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does something like that even happen...? All I can consider is the relatively small size of the UK, and how one can drive from one side of the other in the UK in just 15 or so hours...

My understanding after reading this article is that the problem has nothing to do with ambulances or medics. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/20/world/europe/uk-ambulance... First order problem, the hospitals have no beds. This means that ambulances end up waiting for hours and medics twiddling their thumbs at the ER until the staff can finally take the patient. Medics can't just abandon the patient because there lega…

> when Britain's own young people were never going to do that work for the wages offered

Too true. I’m from Canada where we worry nurses will go south of the border, but was recently in London at an NHS hospital and was talking about this with a nurse. Pay for nurses in Canada is on par with a Jr Developer here. (Still low for the hours and effort required!) By comparison, nurses in the UK make about as much as an intern or admin assistant. After all, single payer means there isn’t much pressure to raise wages from other sectors, you’ve a monopoly on nursing so you can set the wages at whatever level keeps staffing adequate, which isn’t the same thing as paying a living wage…

Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?

#95

Post by Retric » Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 3:49 AM UTC

nradov wrote: post #76

Retric wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everywhere has problems, it’s less about perfection than simply being a better option. I’ve generally considered Canada the best option for a while. English speaking, low crime, same time zone with family, etc. New Zealand, or one of the Nordic countries aren’t that far behind. Australia, England, and Western Europe etc are much lower, but still have plenty going for them. The biggest thing America has going for it i…

Crime rates are a city by city and neighborhood by neighborhood issue. Most of the USA is very safe; my city has zero murders most years. The statistics are thrown off by a few neighborhoods in a few cities like Chicago that have degenerated into third-world war zones. While that's a terrible situation and we need to fix it, most HN users can easily avoid those places.

Even the “safe” parts of the US aren’t all that safe.

Ontario which includes Canada’s largest city and 38% of the population had a lower average murder rate between 2016 and 2020 than every single US state but New Hampshire. Quebec population 8.5 million is significantly lower.

These statistics aren’t completely equivalent due to various factors, but it’s close enough for reasonable comparisons.

Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?

#96

Post by 6510 » Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 4:06 AM UTC

cpleppert wrote: post #72

6510 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You pick one thing (or a few) and do it well. Agricultural exports (billions): US $134.8, Brazil $87.2, Netherlands $81.3, China $72.7 Population (millions): US 331.9, Brazil 214.3, Netherlands 17.5, China 1412 Size (km²) US 9834000, Brazil 8516000, Netherlands 41850, China 9597000

Agriculture is something like 2% of the economy of the netherlands. Additionally, the vast majority of agricultural production in the other countries you mentioned is consumed domestically. The netherlands isn't richer because of agriculture in any way whatsoever. Its richer because its population is much more productive across its entire economy.

> the vast majority of agricultural production in the other countries you mentioned is consumed domestically.

A sensible argument, lets see...

2019 Arable Land (Million Hectares):US 157.7, India 156, Russia 121.6, China 119.5, Brazil 55.8, Nigeria 34, Ukraine 32.9, Argentina 32.6, Netherlands 1

Arable Land/Population (Hectares): US 475 000, Brazil 260 000, China 84 630, Netherlands 57 000

> Agriculture is something like 2% of the economy of the netherlands.

And employs only 2% but for the size of the country it seems quite the accomplishment?

https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/universi...

But laugh a little, we sell more Cheese than France and Italy!

2020 top exporters of Cheese (billions): Germany $4.79, Netherlands $4.11, Italy $3.57, France $3.49, Denmark $1.71

And more beer than Germany!

2020 top exporters of Beer (billions): Mexico $4.89, Belgium $2.08, Netherlands $2.08, Germany $1.28, US $0.503

You see how I'm making your point for you?

Perhaps semiconductors from Hong Kong is a better example.

Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?

#97

Post by HWR_14 » Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 4:11 AM UTC

nradov wrote: post #76

Retric wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everywhere has problems, it’s less about perfection than simply being a better option. I’ve generally considered Canada the best option for a while. English speaking, low crime, same time zone with family, etc. New Zealand, or one of the Nordic countries aren’t that far behind. Australia, England, and Western Europe etc are much lower, but still have plenty going for them. The biggest thing America has going for it i…

Crime rates are a city by city and neighborhood by neighborhood issue. Most of the USA is very safe; my city has zero murders most years. The statistics are thrown off by a few neighborhoods in a few cities like Chicago that have degenerated into third-world war zones. While that's a terrible situation and we need to fix it, most HN users can easily avoid those places.

Chicago's homicide rate isn't that high once you use per-capita numbers.

Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?

#98

Post by mikewarot » Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 4:15 AM UTC

HWR_14 wrote: post #97

nradov wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crime rates are a city by city and neighborhood by neighborhood issue. Most of the USA is very safe; my city has zero murders most years. The statistics are thrown off by a few neighborhoods in a few cities like Chicago that have degenerated into third-world war zones. While that's a terrible situation and we need to fix it, most HN users can easily avoid those places.

Chicago's homicide rate isn't that high once you use per-capita numbers.

One day, on my way to work, there was a two hour backup, because the Eisenhower was closed for a murder investigation.

One day at work, making gears, I heard what sounded like fire-crackers... turns out there was a shooting in front of the gear factory. I had to drive through a murder crime scene to exit the parking lot.

Per capita numbers don't erase that from my memory.

Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?

#99

Post by HWR_14 » Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 4:19 AM UTC

0xy wrote: post #93

The UK's doctors and nurses are essentially slaves compared to their US counterparts. They make a quarter of the pay or less for equivalent work. When your healthcare strategy is "just employ slaves so we can have free healthcare" of course people will die.

Alternatively, I don't understand why we don't have more doctors in the US and drive down prices. I mean, I understand why the AMA wants that, but doctor-work doesn't seem that hard and I have no idea why they need to make mid-six figures.

I could be very wrong, of course, but it seems like most people I went to school with are capable of most doctor work.

Re: Why did 250k Britons die sooner than expected?

#100

Post by slaw » Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 4:21 AM UTC

epicureanideal wrote: post #37

somewhereoutth wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest it is all about population. Industrial/technological first mover advantage has now gone really. You need the concentration of talent that only drawing from a very large pool can achieve. US, EU, China are the 3 poles at the moment - with Africa and South America as potential for the future if they can get their governance sorted out. The UK stopped being a global power after Suez - not for nothing is Bre…

One counter-argument to this would be: A nation with a 10x higher per capita of truly productive scientists and engineers (with a well functioning R&D system that wasn't just publish-or-perish or other friction that reduces efficiency) would perform roughly as well as a nation with 10x the population. Somewhat but not perfectly analogous to how some countries invest more, or more wisely in their military budget, and…

To add an example. Israel with 9.3 million population has more productive scientists and engineers than whole continent of Africa with 1.2 billion population.