Is British's NHS a failure?
-
Can I know why you choose St. Paul Hospital? How do you rate their facilities?Originally posted by maurizio13:Hong Kong "Private" Hospital: SGD 87.72 - SGD 107.21 (HKD 450 - HKD 550 per day) [SGD 1.00 = HKD 5.13]
3 bedded room with: electric bed, colour tv, shower, toilet and telephone
Source: http://www.stpaul.org.hk/english/eng_index.html
Their rooms does look like a scene from some 80s HK horror movie isit?
Plus why is this hospital naming their Specialties Clinic as Speicalties Clinic? Is that they reason why they are better than Singapore public hospital?
-
Rooms look like 80s HK horror flick? You watch alot of 80s Hong Kong movies is it?Originally posted by Gazelle:Can I know why you choose St. Paul Hospital? How do you rate their facilities?
Their rooms does look like a scene from some 80s HK horror movie isit?
Plus why is this hospital naming their Specialties Clinic as Speicalties Clinic? Is that they reason why they are better than Singapore public hospital?
Obviously it looks like HK horror flick because Hong Kong is the Chinese movie capital of Asia. The scenes you watched in the horror movies will typify the hospitals, so elemetary.
It's typo mistake, I think more forgiving than the legal clerks in our Justice department giving out extra canes for the prisoner. Or about my friend who was diagnosed as a MVP decades ago by a specialist, recently went to a government "subsidised" hospital and was given the all ok by a technician reading the results of the test.
I think they make far less typo and grammatical error than you.
Maybe that's the reason why the Australian Immigration Department rejected your application for immigration. -
the question I was asking is why did you choose St. Paul Hospital and how do you rate their facilities??Originally posted by maurizio13:Rooms look like 80s HK horror flick? You watch alot of 80s Hong Kong movies is it?
Obviously it looks like HK horror flick because Hong Kong is the Chinese movie capital of Asia. The scenes you watched in the horror movies will typify the hospitals, so elemetary.
It's typo mistake, I think more forgiving than the legal clerks in our Justice department giving out extra canes for the prisoner. Or about my friend who was diagnosed as a MVP decades ago by a specialist, recently went to a government "subsidised" hospital and was given the all ok by a technician reading the results of the test. -
That's the only hospital I could find with published rates. It's a private hospital, hence unsubsidised by government. Goes to prove what kind of subsidies we are getting in our public hospitals. Alot like the rates of Singtel, Singapore Power and SMRT. Monopoly rates!!!Originally posted by Gazelle:the question I was asking is why did you choose St. Paul Hospital and how do you rate their facilities?? -
Oic...and how you rate their facilities?Originally posted by maurizio13:That's the only hospital I could find with published rates. It's a private hospital, hence unsubsidised by government. Goes to prove what kind of subsidies we are getting in our public hospitals. Alot like the rates of Singtel, Singapore Power and SMRT. Monopoly rates!!! -
Based on infant mortality rates in Hong Kong and Singapore. I would say comparable healthcare service, but at fraction of the cost. You have to bear in mind that we are comparing a non-subsidised private hospital in Hong Kong with a "heavily" subsidised public hospital in Singapore.Originally posted by Gazelle:Oic...and how you rate their facilities?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate_(2005)
Singapore is ranked 194 in terms of infant mortality while Hong Kong is 190. Japan is 193 and Norway is 191. -
I haven't been there to INSPECT their facilities, but based on infant mortality and life expectancy. I would say their healthcare service is equivalent.Originally posted by Gazelle:Oic...and how you rate their facilities?
Maybe you are looking for a swimming pool, indoor golf course, spa and gym. Don't think they have such niceties there. Frankly, if I am in a hospital for treatement, such facilities would be tertiary in consideration. -
If this thread does not confirm the characteristic trait of the TS in making others look bad so as to make oneself better ?
What is the purpose of deriding the British NHS as a failure ?
Does it make the Singapore National Health Program any better ?
Is there any objectivity in such a comparison ? -
Like I said before, TS prefer to compare himself to a orang utan, so that he can look smarter.Originally posted by Atobe:If this thread does not confirm the characteristic trait of the TS in making others look bad so as to make oneself better ?
What is the purpose of deriding the British NHS as a failure ?
Does it make the Singapore National Health Program any better ?
Is there any objectivity in such a comparison ?
These days instead of comparing with countries like Switzerland and aspiring to be there. We have to contend with Ethiopia and find solace that we didn't end up like them.
When you compare with those lower, you will end up lower than them, because your aim is low not high. -
I wouldn't say that Singapore healthcare industry is not good, but it's just terribly over priced by the regime.
-
Nah...I am not asking you about Hong Kong health care as a country, I am more interested to know about this St Paul Hospital that you are using to compare to SGH.Originally posted by maurizio13:I haven't been there to INSPECT their facilities, but based on infant mortality and life expectancy. I would say their healthcare service is equivalent.
Maybe you are looking for a swimming pool, indoor golf course, spa and gym. Don't think they have such niceties there. Frankly, if I am in a hospital for treatement, such facilities would be tertiary in consideration.
Just because that is the only hospital that publish rate on their website, that doesnt mean that all other public hospital are offering the same isnt it?
So I am asking you again, how do you rate this hospital facilities, not pool or golf course, but facilities and equipment that to treat patients. -
Just take it as the TS is interested to know why so many sheep in this forum are bragging about the so-call "free" healthcare system overseas.Originally posted by Atobe:If this thread does not confirm the characteristic trait of the TS in making others look bad so as to make oneself better ?
What is the purpose of deriding the British NHS as a failure ?
Does it make the Singapore National Health Program any better ?
Is there any objectivity in such a comparison ? -
Maybe you can provide other published rates of private and public hospitals in Hong Kong?Originally posted by Gazelle:Nah...I am not asking you about Hong Kong health care as a country, I am more interested to know about this St Paul Hospital that you are using to compare to SGH.
Just because that is the only hospital that publish rate on their website, that doesnt mean that all other public hospital are offering the same isnt it?
So I am asking you again, how do you rate this hospital facilities, not pool or golf course, but facilities and equipment that to treat patients.
Have you inspected their medical facilties?
I based my comparison on infant mortality and life expectancy. I don't care what kind of facilities they have, you can have the best equipment in the world, but if you employ Filippino and Indonesian graduates manning those ultra state of the art equipment, there won't be much difference. A tool is only as good as the craftman that wields it.
For example, my friend who was diagnosed with MVP, decades later do it again with a Filippino technician (specialist), the results came up zero. I told my friend, your MVP has miraculously healed.
If I have a disease, a hospital can get me healed, I don't care what kind of equipment they have. Only final outcome matters, not the sequence of events. What's the point of having millions of dollar state of the art equipment run by graduates with open book exams from 3rd world countries?
From the infant mortality and life expectancy between Hong Kong and Singapore, I would say the standards are approximately the same. -
M13, you shi.tting all over the forum and now you asking others to clean up your shi.t?Originally posted by maurizio13:Maybe you can provide other published rates of private and public hospitals in Hong Kong?
Have you inspected their medical facilties?
I based my comparison on infant mortality and life expectancy. I don't care what kind of facilities they have, you can have the best equipment in the world, but if you employ Filippino and Indonesian graduates manning those ultra state of the art equipment, there won't be much difference. A tool is only as good as the craftman that wields it.
For example, my friend who was diagnosed with MVP, decades later do it again with a Filippino technician (specialist), the results came up zero. I told my friend, your MVP has miraculously healed.
If I have a disease, a hospital can get me healed, I don't care what kind of equipment they have. Only final outcome matters, not the sequence of events. What's the point of having millions of dollar state of the art equipment run by graduates with open book exams from 3rd world countries?
From the infant mortality and life expectancy between Hong Kong and Singapore, I would say the standards are approximately the same.
grow up lah..if you dont know what you are talking about the best is to shut. the fcuk up and go hide under the skirt, there is were you belong. -
I thought it's common that if you want to refute my claim, you need to substantiate evidence yourself. You claim that other hospitals could have different charges, then it's for you to show us.Originally posted by Gazelle:M13, you shi.tting all over the forum and now you asking others to clean up your shi.t?
grow up lah..if you dont know what you are talking about the best is to shut. the fcuk up and go hide under the skirt, there is were you belong.
After reading your post in here, I know why Australian Immigrations decide to reject your application.
I don't think any first world country would want to end up with immgrants like you, they think it's better you remain a burden to Singapore. -
thats beside the point...just shut the fcuk up and you will be arite.Originally posted by maurizio13:I thought it's common that if you want to refute my claim, you need to substantiate evidence yourself. You claim that other hospitals could have different charges, then it's for you to show us.
After reading your post in here, I know why Australian Immigrations decide to reject your application.
I don't think any first world country would want to end up with immgrants like you, they think it's better you remain a burden to Singapore. -
Originally posted by Gazelle:thats beside the point...just shut the fcuk up and you will be arite.
-
Public Hospital Charges in Hong Kong.
Source: http://www.ha.org.hk/hesd/nsapi/?MIval=ha_visitor_index&lang=E&intro=ha%5fview%5ftemplate%26group%3dOSR%26Area%3dGOP -
FreeOriginally posted by maurizio13:Anything that is given to you free, there should be no contention.
If you walk along the streets, some company gives you a free umbrella on a rainy day. The umbrella breaks apart half way in the rain. Can you raise an objection with the company? In the laws of contract you have no case because there was no exchange of consideration. If you think you deserve a better quality umbrella, you purchase a better quality umbrella from the stores.
Likewise with the NHS, the healthcare is provided free, if you think that you deserve better service or can't wait, you purchase it from the open market. That's why some chose to go overseas for treatment while others chose to wait in line.
Whereas in the case of Singapore, things are much different. You pay for hospital fees much higher than a Hong Konger would pay in their country and you get crappy service.
A few months ago, one of my family member had to be warded for a minor procedure. There wasn't any beds available, just think about it, I am paying for a service at above average rates (when compared to a Hong Kong Hospital), yet I have to wait 12 hours to be allocated a bed.
U mean those heavy taxes that UK make their ppl pay to support welfare doesn't go into the NHS 
I didn't know that 
I always thought that high taxes are use to 'pay' for welfare like Healthcare, and other stuffs..... So M13, FREE really is better..... when u don't have to pay tax to support it
Like a early post said - ''Nothing in life is free'' -
Surprisingly, Hong Kong which has a higher average wage per worker has lower public hospital charges than Singapore.
Maybe we can learn from Hong Kong how they maintain affordable healthcare for the citizens. -
Originally posted by hloc:
First of all, you need to understand taxes in western perspective. The tax bracket you are in depends on the income you earn, the more you earn, the more taxes you pay. In effect the income will be redistributed from the high income earners to the low income earners in the form of necessary medical services.
Free
U mean those heavy taxes that UK make their ppl pay to support welfare doesn't go into the NHS I didn't know that
I always thought that high taxes are use to 'pay' for welfare like Healthcare, and other stuffs..... So [b]M13, FREE really is better..... when u don't have to pay tax to support it
Like a early post said - ''Nothing in life is free''
[/b]
If you think in the same perspective as our notorious gazelle, then nothing in this world is free. Free is to those that are consuming the service. The poor and needy who have not much money but still avail to them the basic healthcare. -
Originally posted by hloc:
I think this idea of income redistribution is totally alien to you or other Singaporeans.
Free
U mean those heavy taxes that UK make their ppl pay to support welfare doesn't go into the NHS I didn't know that
I always thought that high taxes are use to 'pay' for welfare like Healthcare, and other stuffs..... So [b]M13, FREE really is better..... when u don't have to pay tax to support it
Like a early post said - ''Nothing in life is free''
[/b]
Tax the rich to provide basic healthcare to the poor and needy. -
Originally posted by maurizio13:Like I said before, TS prefer to compare himself to a orang utan, so that he can look smarter.
These days instead of comparing with countries like Switzerland and aspiring to be there. We have to contend with Ethiopia and find solace that we didn't end up like them.
When you compare with those lower, you will end up lower than them, because your aim is low not high. -
Nice & good...... but is NHS free as u saidOriginally posted by maurizio13:First of all, you need to understand taxes in western perspective. The tax bracket you are in depends on the income you earn, the more you earn, the more taxes you pay. In effect the income will be redistributed from the high income earners to the low income earners in the form of necessary medical services.
U mean no one have to pay tax for the NHS Then there must be very little 'high income' earner in UK.... looking at how UK ppl have to go overseas for their healthcare rather then wait & wait.......
M13..... isn't this the problem
No matter how much I earn and which 'bracket' i belong to, I still have to pay my taxes.... just more or less in percentage. But my waiting time on the NHS will still be the same. Which means that I could pay taxes in the mid range, but yet would have to suffer in pain because the NHS is overwhelm with cases...... then is my taxes well paid for If I paid little taxes but is in real need to remove a rotting tooth, but have to DIY myself due to the wait is too long..... does it means that 'free' benefits me
NHS should have been only for ppl who can't pay for their Healthcare..... the Old, the sickly, the weak..... etc. But instead, it pays for every UK citizen. Which means that even those who could afford to see doctor on their own also joins in...... overwhelming the system..... but could you blame these ppl After all those year of taxes they have been paying....... -
Originally posted by hloc:
Almost everyone pays taxes, it's just the percentage, the more you make, the more you pay.
Nice & good...... but is NHS free as u said
U mean no one have to pay tax for the NHS Then there must be very little 'high income' earner in UK.... looking at how UK ppl have to go overseas for their healthcare rather then wait & wait.......
M13..... isn't this the problem
[b]No matter how much I earn and which 'bracket' i belong to, I still have to pay my taxes.... just more or less in percentage. But my waiting time on the NHS will still be the same. Which means that I could pay taxes in the mid range, but yet would have to suffer in pain because the NHS is overwhelm with cases...... then is my taxes well paid for If I paid little taxes but is in real need to remove a rotting tooth, but have to DIY myself due to the wait is too long..... does it means that 'free' benefits me
NHS should have been only for ppl who can't pay for their Healthcare..... the Old, the sickly, the weak..... etc. But instead, it pays for every UK citizen. Which means that even those who could afford to see doctor on their own also joins in...... overwhelming the system..... but could you blame these ppl After all those year of taxes they have been paying.......[/b]
No resource comes free. But the term "free" goes to the person consuming the resource, ultimately someone has to pay for it. I think you are so brainwashed by OM and Gazelle. When you go Madonald's you order a Extra Value Meal, it comes free with an apple pie. Yes, you can say that the apple pie isn't free, it comes at a cost to Macdonald's, but it's free to you. That is the definition of free, if you choose to subscribe to Gazelle's form of definition, then nothing in this world is free, we might as well strike off the word from our dictionary.
There is private healthcare in the UK too, instead of the NHS. Those that OM highlighted before are well to do individuals who decides to go overseas for a holiday and medical treatment. Seems like OM highlighted some very skewed case of rich individuals going overseas for medical treatment because UK does not have private healthcare, UK has it's own private healthcare system.
http://www.privatehealth.co.uk/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2001/mar/19/2
The free healthcare provides basic needs to the poor and needy. If you cannot stand the wait, then you can probably choose private healthcare by buying a medical insurance. It provides the basic healthcare to those who can't afford the fees, but can afford the wait.
The case of this elderly UK lady highlighted by our propaganda new media is to sway public opinion. Do you think you can find elderly individuals here in Singapore with rotting tooth but can't afford the dental charges to have it removed? Why didn't the local propaganda media highlight these cases of poor elderly Singaporeans not being able to afford "public" healthcare? These are the people that can afford the wait but can't afford the dental charges. I know alot of these poor elderly folks who can't afford the charges but can afford the wait.