My vote for the coming elections
-
Social studies tend to give "unbiased" views like Straits times. If you really want to know the truth, you have to dig hard. In Japan, healthcare is heavily subsidised but they do not have this problem. The pharmacist and doctor exist independently of each other, the doctors do not benefit from prescribing a more expensive drug.Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:I have studied in Social Studies about UK's health system. Citizens and businesses in UK have to high taxes because of NHC (or whatever it is called). In effect, lots of companies left UK for other countries to do business.
I am not sure about the dependent culture. But one thing about free healthcare is that doctors aren't as ethical. They just prescribe the medicine freely, especially those expensive ones like HIV drugs. It added more costs to the healthcare, and it was written in the textbook that they spent more than 10% on healthcare only. -
Please vote for me, please vote for me, I will bring world peace.Originally posted by Dr Who:I will vote for anyone who will promise me a less stressful life, affordable healthcare, and no casino.
My life is too stressed, and I will be paying a big sum for my mom's hospitalisation ,,,,, ( 2 months in hospital)........I feel the rich are getting richer....job promotions are reserved for scholars,,,,,,,too many foreigners......
I am ashamed my country has to resort to gambling to earn money........so how to vote? -
PAP proposes Subsidies = Dependent Culture.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:My fear is that because the WP does not expect to have to form the government they feel they can demand for more spending without having to handle the negative aspects of the policy, such as higher taxes, decreasing competitiveness and a dependent culture.
If this is true, why subsidise education? It will only make them more dependent. There is also a question of degree. How much helps make them dependent?
It is understandable that giving money to people who do not work can make them lazy. Giving healthcare benefits? These old people do not choose to be sick okay??
What PAP failed to address is the unhappiness about the government's lavish use of funds for government building and fixtures, but little for the citizens. To add to the misery, the CPF - a government policy has failed to provide a safety net for the older workers.
When i was eating at food court, i saw this old aged Uncle (probably late 60s or early 70s) stillcleaning plates and clearing rubbish. Its quite a heart breaking sight to see aged people still working for peanuts pay. Juxtapose that with lavish spending on government buildings and fixtures, and PAP telling you helping these aged people makes them lazy.
If you have a good son in law, introduce to this old man please! he needs it -
It's called NHS - National Health Service. What is wrong with doctors prescribing drugs "freely"? My God.. you sounded brain-washed. The public sector doctors in the UK are helping sick people by giving them the best medicine and you condemn them for over-spending public money.
I am not brain-washed lah. What I mean is that it is given out so freely that UK spends more than 10% of its GDP just on healthcare. I wouldn't say it's unreasonable. But I feel that those drugs, should be kept for people with serious conditions, not prescribed to anybody who has any illnesses. My teacher has told me that they prescribe one of the top flu's drug just for the common flu. He has been to UK and once came down with flu. He visited the doctor and was prescribe some drugs. When he came back to Singapore, he asked more about the flu drug. He was told that it is one of the best ones around. I was surprised.
If the illness isn't too serious and common drugs could treat it, why not use the common drugs? Why use expensive ones? It is wasting taxpayers' money. -
Heavily subsidized and free is different.Originally posted by Calvin86:Social studies tend to give "unbiased" views like Straits times. If you really want to know the truth, you have to dig hard. In Japan, healthcare is heavily subsidised but they do not have this problem. The pharmacist and doctor exist independently of each other, the doctors do not benefit from prescribing a more expensive drug.
I will definitely dig harder if I have the time. I wrote my replies during school time. -
It's called NHS - National Health Service. What is wrong with doctors prescribing drugs "freely"? My God.. you sounded brain-washed. The public sector doctors in the UK are helping sick people by giving them the best medicine and you condemn them for over-spending public money.
The NHS is creaking badly and many trusts are deep in the red. If your elderly mother had a fall and needed a hip replacement, she would have to wait a painful 6 months. Even LKY's wife had to wait in line for a CT scan...
The fact is that the NHS system sounds great in theory but does not work in practice. Recently a woman sued the NHS for access to an expensive breast cancer drug. If the NHS were to supply it to all patients who might benefit from it, it could well bankrupt the NHS. Some trusts are already closing wards and laying off doctors as they do not have enough money to pay for them.
I agree with LKY on this one...it is really a great act of humanity to offer free medical treatment at delivery...but it does not work. -
Wait so long?Originally posted by oxford mushroom:The NHS is creaking badly and many trusts are deep in the red. If your elderly mother had a fall and needed a hip replacement, she would have to wait a painful 6 months. Even LKY's wife had to wait in line for a CT scan...
The fact is that the NHS system sounds great in theory but does not work in practice. Recently a woman sued the NHS for access to an expensive breast cancer drug. If the NHS were to supply it to all patients who might benefit from it, it could well bankrupt the NHS. Some trusts are already closing wards and laying off doctors as they do not have enough money to pay for them.
I agree with LKY on this one...it is really a great act of humanity to offer free medical treatment at delivery...but it does not work.
As said, theories and realities don't go together. -
You really believe that?Originally posted by oxford mushroom:The NHS is creaking badly and many trusts are deep in the red. If your elderly mother had a fall and needed a hip replacement, she would have to wait a painful 6 months. Even LKY's wife had to wait in line for a CT scan... -
But Japan's Health care is top notch. The patient pays only 30% of the medical costs. Usually the aged people buy insurance, so even the 30% is covered. I agree that free will lead to abuse, but a subsidized model has work well in Japan.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:The NHS is creaking badly and many trusts are deep in the red. If your elderly mother had a fall and needed a hip replacement, she would have to wait a painful 6 months. Even LKY's wife had to wait in line for a CT scan...
The fact is that the NHS system sounds great in theory but does not work in practice. Recently a woman sued the NHS for access to an expensive breast cancer drug. If the NHS were to supply it to all patients who might benefit from it, it could well bankrupt the NHS. Some trusts are already closing wards and laying off doctors as they do not have enough money to pay for them.
I agree with LKY on this one...it is really a great act of humanity to offer free medical treatment at delivery...but it does not work. -
He's a doctor, how could he not know? Besides, it is the truth.Originally posted by BillyBong:You really believe that? -
His daughter is a nerosurgeon...not him.Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:He's a doctor, how could he not know? Besides, it is the truth. -
OM is a qualified medical practitioner, if you aren't aware.Originally posted by BillyBong:His daughter is a nerosurgeon...not him.
I suppose you are talking about Dr Lee Wei Ling. -
Who is OM?Originally posted by iveco:OM is a qualified medical practitioner, if you aren't aware.
I suppose you are talking about Dr Lee Wei Ling. -
oxford mushroom.Originally posted by BillyBong:Who is OM? -
Agence France PresseOriginally posted by BillyBong:You really believe that?
November 4, 2003
London
ONE of London's leading hospitals has denied giving preferential treatment to the wife of Singapore's senior minister Lee Kuan Yew at the behest of British Prime Minister Tony Blair's office.
Lee's wife Kwa Geok Choo, 82, was rushed to state-run Royal London Hospital on October 26 when she suffered a stroke, where according to the former prime minister she was told she'd have to wait hours for a CT scan, a technique which makes it possible to diagnose certain diseases earlier and more accurately.
But Lee, who was visiting London at the time, said back in Singapore last Sunday that the scan was advanced by 4-1/2 hours after Singapore's ambassador to Britain put in a plea to Downing Street 90 minutes after Kwa was admitted.
In a statement to AFP received Tuesday, Barts and The London NHS Trust -- which includes Royal London Hospital, in the capital's east end -- said it could not discuss individual patients' cases without their consent.
But it said that "patients are assessed and treated according to clinical priority -- no patient would be prioritised to the clinical detriment of other patients."
(Excerpt from http://www.singapore-window.org/sw03/031104a3.htm)
And here's something from the Daily Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2003/11/04/dl0402.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2003/11/04/ixopinion.html -
Yes, this was exactly the fishy article that sparked off the whole furore.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Agence France Presse
November 4, 2003
London
ONE of London's leading hospitals has denied giving preferential treatment to the wife of Singapore's senior minister Lee Kuan Yew at the behest of British Prime Minister Tony Blair's office.
Lee's wife Kwa Geok Choo, 82, was rushed to state-run Royal London Hospital on October 26 when she suffered a stroke, where according to the former prime minister she was told she'd have to wait hours for a CT scan, a technique which makes it possible to diagnose certain diseases earlier and more accurately.
But Lee, who was visiting London at the time, said back in Singapore last Sunday that the scan was advanced by 4-1/2 hours after Singapore's ambassador to Britain put in a plea to Downing Street 90 minutes after Kwa was admitted.
In a statement to AFP received Tuesday, Barts and The London NHS Trust -- which includes Royal London Hospital, in the capital's east end -- said it could not discuss individual patients' cases without their consent.
But it said that "patients are assessed and treated according to clinical priority -- no patient would be prioritised to the clinical detriment of other patients."
(Excerpt from http://www.singapore-window.org/sw03/031104a3.htm)
And here's something from the Daily Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2003/11/04/dl0402.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2003/11/04/ixopinion.html
Can we geniunely read anymore truths in the desperate nature of Barts and the London Trust's claim that NO PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT was extended to Mdm Kua Geok Choo, this coming prior to the 'priority' treatment and claims of SIA being used as a private 'paid' flying ambulance? -
I had my doubts about this article when I read it in the Straits Times. I mean, a stroke requires immediate medical attention, and no preferential treatment is extended. Unless it isn't a stroke.Originally posted by BillyBong:Yes, this was exactly the fishy article that sparked off the whole furore.
Can we geniunely read anymore truths in the desperate nature of Barts and the London Trust's claim that NO PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT was extended to Mdm Kua Geok Choo, this coming prior to the 'priority' treatment and claims of SIA being used as a private 'paid' flying ambulance?