Private health companies often use the same facilities and stuff as public health. It ends up basically paying to jump the queue. Also the private health companies take the low risk, glamorous stuff and leave the complex, high risk, unglamorous stuff to public health.
So long as both public and private exist, and the existence of private options doesn’t create incentives to erode funding of the public option (that’s the big danger), that’s fine.
People who can afford it choosing private options frees up the queue for the public option. And they’re still finding the public option. Likewise, when the private option innovates, those innovations eventually make their way to the public space. A public option also forces the private facilities to keep costs relatively competitive, even as they do charge for premium service. They can’t go apeshit on charges like the American facilities do.
jabjoe@feddit.uk 2 days ago
reddig33@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Privatize the profits, socialize the losses.
lost@lemmy.wtf 2 days ago
Yeah, but having to wait four years because you are poor doesn’t sound fair to me.
Photuris@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
It’s not.
But here in the US, we just die, so.
LordOfLocksley@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Oh I completely agree. Private and public funding options should be working in harmony, but private must be prevented from overreaching into the public sector
purplemonkeymad@programming.dev 2 days ago
Doesn’t help that the Tories were “stressing” the NHS for years, which makes it harder for things to get back on track.