# Why do so many Americans seem against an equivalent of the NHS? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 14, 2009, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396 "2009-08-14T12:55:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Captain\_Awesome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Captain\_Awesome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Awesome)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2009, 10:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/101 "2009-08-15T10:56:27Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > The UK has the lowest survival rates for colorectal cancer in the OECD. The US has the second highest. Five year survival rates do not provide a meaningful basis for cancer survival. They bear little to no relationship to mortality and instead have more connection to changes in patterns of diagnosis. [Cite](http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/283/22/2975). For example, the USA has the highest rate of prostate cancer incidence, due largely to widespread PSA testing, so the statistics would appear to suggest that treatment is massively better than western Europe relative to incidence, despite actual mortality per 100,000 being approximately on par ([cite (.xls)](http://publications.cancerresearchuk.org/WebRoot/crukstoredb/CRUK_PDFs/prostate/cs_pro_f2.2.xls)). The numerator and the denominator both need to be considered in you want to make any sort of meaningful comparison, and accounting for all the relevant differences in statistical reporting is far more complex than the way you have presented the issue. I don’t have time to chase down all these statistics, but for example take the number of MRI machines per million as of 2007. In the UK this was _estimated_ to be 8.2 in comparison to the USA’s 25.9 (OEDC figures), less obviously. But less meaningful too once you entertain the notion that the USA is over 37 times the size of the UK, so it’s a fair bet you require more, to adequately serve a less dense population coverage. To simply re-quote, at best scientifically incomparable statistics, and worse deliberately outdated and inaccurate ones, offered by Richard L. Scott’s Conservatives for Patients’ Rights (nice guy: ousted from the Columbia/HCA board for Americas largest Medicaid and Medicare fraud) is simply hack journalism. The NHS is not without criticism, but to use bad science to try and paint it a 3rd world alternative is offensive, and verging on propaganda. Speaking anecdotally, my personal experience of the service has been excellent, and it is not something I would willingly trade for an insurance only based system. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2009, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/102 "2009-08-15T16:11:49Z")
> [@Captain\_Awesome](#): > > I don’t have time to chase down all these statistics, but for example take the number of MRI machines per million as of 2007. In the UK this was _estimated_ to be 8.2 in comparison to the USA’s 25.9 (OEDC figures), less obviously. But less meaningful too once you entertain the notion that the USA is over 37 times the size of the UK, so it’s a fair bet you require more, to adequately serve a less dense population coverage. I don’t see distance as a huge factor in the MRI discussion because we still have a similar population density in communities. If you live in Death Valley or some other obscure place you’re screwed. It’s a helicopter or nothing in an emergency. There are no medical facilities to use. They put these machines in areas dense enough to serve. I bring up MRI’s because I’ve come across UK articles where they were celebrating the introduction of one like it was the moon landing or 2 ply toilet paper. However, I can’t seem to Google anything related to delays because there is a shortage of them so I can’t gauge the situation. The article I linked to in post 64 suggests there is a diagnostic delay so I have to believe your MRI ratio between the UK and the US is related to similar equipment used. Maybe someone in the UK can jump in with their experiences but most every hospital in the US has MRI and we also have independent diagnostic centers that do nothing but X-Rays, MRI’s and a host of other diagnostic scans. ---
**Author:** ![PrettyVacant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/49beb7/32.png) [@PrettyVacant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PrettyVacant)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2009, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/103 "2009-08-15T16:19:00Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > I bring up MRI’s because I’ve come across UK articles where they were celebrating the introduction of one like it was the moon landing or 2 ply toilet paper. However, I can’t seem to Google anything related to delays because there is a shortage of them so I can’t gauge the situation. There are usually street parties ever time a spare bed comes up so for a scanner we tend to have national holidays. You should se the place when someone gets a doctors appointment! ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2009, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/104 "2009-08-15T16:20:51Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Maybe someone in the UK can jump in with their experiences but most every hospital in the US has MRI and we also have independent diagnostic centers that do nothing but X-Rays, MRI’s and a host of other diagnostic scans. Most (US) MRIs are not in hospitals but in small private radiology centers, most of which are heavily underutilized. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2009, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/105 "2009-08-15T20:07:39Z")
> [@Bisected8](#): > > True, but the reaction was still completely different. I don’t think there was ever any protests over the plans to introduce the NHS back in the 40’s (of course this was over 40 years before I was born, so I could be wrong). Indeed Thatcher was demonised for blocking its introduction (amongst other things). > > Note that when a MEP of the conservative party recently spoke out against the NHS on US television, David Cameron (head of the conservative party) immediatly came out and basically said “No, the NHS is a vital part of Britain, this man does not represent my party’s views”. > **[UK defends its healthcare](https://www.ft.com/content/1c23b53a-883b-11de-82e4-00144feabdc0?nclick_check=1)** The reaction from English pols was a lot more than just a defender . The pols are rallying around the national health care system. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Awesome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Captain\_Awesome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Awesome)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2009, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/106 "2009-08-15T21:16:05Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > In a US hospital, the infection rate is 5.7 per 100. In the UK, it’s 9.2 - the worst in the OECD. To take another example, and actually assess the scientific accuracy behind this Richard L. Scott’s dubious statistics, you might realise that the USA doesn’t even measure hospital acquired infections (HAIs) in terms of annual prevalence per 100 people ([cite (.pdf)](http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/pdf/hicpac/infections_deaths.pdf)), so where he sourced this data from is unfathomable. Actual USA rates seem to exist somewhere between 5 and 10% ([cite](http://www.ncsl.org/IssuesResearch/Health/HospitalacquiredinfectionsFAQ/tabid/13970/Default.aspx#1)). Your reporting laws don’t even provide a sensible baseline between states, which have only very recently begun reporting data. > [@](#): > > - Approximately 26 states have enacted laws that require hospitals, and sometimes other healthcare facilities, to report data related to hospital-acquired infections. Since 2005, the number of states with these laws has increased from five to 26. > - The content of the laws differs widely. Some state legislatures have chosen to monitor process measures—for example, how often a prophylactic antibiotic is given to a patient prior to surgery. A greater number of states have mandated the reporting of outcome measures, or occurrences of certain types of infections. > - State legislatures are also split on whether data reported by hospitals is disclosed to the public. Most states have set up publicly-accessible databases comparing hospitals’ infection data, while some have mandated that hospitals only report to a state agency or oversight committee. > - Additionally, state laws vary in their selection of which infections to measure and report. This and other variations in reporting make comparisons across the states difficult. The CDC National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) is the only national system designed for the collection of hospital-acquired infection incidence and prevention data. Because the voluntary network allows for a more uniform collection and analysis of data, several states, including California, Colorado, Illinois, Missouri, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia and West Virginia, require their facilities to report directly to the network. [National Conference of State Legislature](http://ecom.ncsl.org/programs/health/forum/MRSA.htm) These differences make identifying meaningful trends within _actually researched_ figures from 1995 (1.9 million HAIs) and 2002 (1.7 million cases of HAIs and 99,000 deaths) ultimately incomparable ([cite (.pdf)](http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/pdf/hicpac/infections_deaths.pdf)). Even in researching this single untraceable statistic, I’ve come across research necessary to overturn the assumption that hospitals _make_ money on patients who fall ill from HAIs ([cite](http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/2006-11-20-infections-usat_x.htm), [cite](http://ajm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/21/6_suppl/7S)) and explain that ‘we ought to be doing away with infections’, Richard Shannon, study co-author. Treating patients as a means for a business to make profit, is simply not a sensible means for care approach. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Awesome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Captain\_Awesome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Awesome)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2009, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/107 "2009-08-15T21:38:55Z")
Missed the edit window: Further research reveals the source for the 5.7/100 patients comes from the Haley et al. 1985 study, which used data from US between 1975-76. Whilst methodologically sound, it is simply not comparable to medical practice and statistical recording techniques over 30 years later. > [@](#): > > HAI rates from surveillance studies are often compared between countries and over time, but comparisons of crude infection rates should be made cautiously. Rates may be affected by factors such as differences in numerator or denominator definitions, surveillance methods with different sensitivities and specificities for case detection and different intensities of surveillance activities. Nor can it be assumed that Western countries will have similar hospital case mix, severity of inpatient illness, patient classification, length of stay, surgery rates and so on (Freeman, 1981). > > For example, results from the two national prevalence studies performed in the UK 14 years apart are not entirely comparable, as infection definitions and criteria for infection diagnosis were modified for the second survey to bring them in line with the 1988 CDC definitions (Emmerson, 1995; Garner, 1988). Emmerson also noted that significant changes had occurred in medical practice and patient mix in the intervening 14 years - more adventurous surgery in elderly and immunocompromised patients, reductions in hospital bed size and duration of hospital stay, and more infections manifest after hospital discharge - all factors which could influence infection rates (Emmerson, 1995). ([cite](http://www.health.vic.gov.au/ideas/infcon/infcon/bg)) I would honestly recommend reading something along the lines of _How to Lie With Statistics_, if you were prepared to accept ‘data’ quoted from ‘Conservatives for Patients’ Rights’ created by someone so heavily invested in the medical business and previous medical fraud, without for a moment considering the actual science and possible biases behind these figures. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2009, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/108 "2009-08-16T00:09:28Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Most (US) MRIs are not in hospitals but in small private radiology centers, most of which are heavily underutilized. Not in my area. I can’t imagine a Hospital without one. That would mean they have to send a patient via ambulance to such a facility. The stand-alone centers are used as backups for off-site specialists who see walk-in patients. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2009, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/109 "2009-08-16T00:42:45Z")
I’ll answer the OP: What other countries do is up to them. England has a king. That doesn’t mean we should. This country was founded upon the concept of freedom, not the government as a nanny. It’s not the place of this government to play Mommy to it’s citizens. We have the right to take care of ourselves. I think bureacracy has created our health care problems, and I don’t think more bureacracy is the answer. Health care as a commodity enjoys a certain amount of scarcity. I think government taking over the distribution of the system means that the standard of care I and my family will be able to receive will drop. I already support public schools through my taxes that are of such poor quality I would find it irresponsible to send my children there and I must pay again to send them to private schools. There are no competitive forces improving quality versus price when you have a mandated single solution. This is why government is wasteful in so many areas. It has no incentive to be efficient (though it can be efficient in certain areas where planning provides a more reasonable chance of attaining an efficient solution than market forces i.e. Nash equilibrium.) I feel that I can spend the money I earn better than the government. I am not in favor of redistributive legislation. I don’t think the government can give us anything. It takes from us. A certain minimum of this is necessary. Socialized medicine is far beyond this minimum, IMO. ---
**Author:** ![Bisected8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a4c791/32.png) [@Bisected8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bisected8)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2009, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/110 "2009-08-16T01:17:36Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > I’ll answer the OP: > > What other countries do is up to them. England has a king. That doesn’t mean we should. This country was founded upon the concept of freedom, not the government as a nanny. It’s not the place of this government to play Mommy to it’s citizens. We have the right to take care of ourselves. > > I think bureaucracy has created our health care problems, and I don’t think more bureaucracy is the answer. > > Health care as a commodity enjoys a certain amount of scarcity. I think government taking over the distribution of the system means that the standard of care I and my family will be able to receive will drop. > > I already support public schools through my taxes that are of such poor quality I would find it irresponsible to send my children there and I must pay again to send them to private schools. > > There are no competitive forces improving quality versus price when you have a mandated single solution. This is why government is wasteful in so many areas. It has no incentive to be efficient (though it can be efficient in certain areas where planning provides a more reasonable chance of attaining an efficient solution than market forces i.e. Nash equilibrium.) > > I feel that I can spend the money I earn better than the government. > > I am not in favor of redistributive legislation. > > I don’t think the government can give us anything. It takes from us. A certain minimum of this is necessary. Socialized medicine is far beyond this minimum, IMO. I must say the beginning of your post was a bad start (we have a queen, and she’s a figurehead thank-you-very-much). Incidentally, if the government isn’t supposed to look after you, what does it do? Tax you and use it to fill a swimming pool so the prez can act like Scrooge McDuck? The issue isn’t whether you have the right to take care of yourselves, its if there should be a safety net for when you fail (the thing about life is, you always might). Bureaucracy is how _any_ system works. Any large scale system, private or government funded, will need some form of it. Incidentally, a public health care system will reduce it, I can get an appointment with any GP anywhere in the country (even if I’m not registered with them) and spend less than 10 minutes filling in a form (one A4 sheet, half of which was filled in by the doctor when I’d left). By comparison, as I understand it, there’s a lot of faffing around with insurance companies in the US. You are aware that the NHS in Britain isn’t the only form of health care? People who can afford to go private can, and they get what they pay for. Its fine if you can afford to send your children to a public school, note that there are plenty of people who can’t. Hence why there are still kids in the public schools. The thing about democracy is that you have to accept what’s good for everyone as a whole, not just yourself. See above, just because there’s state funded care for those who can’t afford it doesn’t mean its the only source. Although if it doesn’t need to be efficient, why should it be? While I’m here, where does the idea that the NHS makes Britain Orwellian and evil fit in to all of this? ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2009, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/111 "2009-08-16T01:44:56Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > One area where cultural differences between Brits and Americans may come into play: > > Brits seem content with queueing up for things and waiting for medical services for periods of time that would be intolerable to most Americans. Well we do queue in shops and at bus stops. But what is this ‘intolerable period of time you refer to’? I’m 56 and have used the NHS all my life. On average, I wait a couple of days for non-urgent stuff, but emergencies are seen immediately. When the doctor (doing his third house call of the week) diagnosed that my mother’s condition had seriously worsened, he had an ambulance at the house in 8 minutes. None of this treatment required any payment at the time (all prepaid for by taxes). When I needed medical treatment in the US, I phoned my insurance company in the UK first (as instructed). I had taken out a $1,000,000 policy. Only when I got the go-ahead from them could I risk contacting a US doctor. > [@Hermitian](#): > > For the vast majority of the people that I know (and that are against govt health care), they get better care than the average govt run program. > > I get GREAT health care from my employer. If the government starts to give the stuff out for free (or near free), I am sure it will take exactly 0.23 seconds for my employer to drop that coverage. Overall, I am of the opinion that my health care service will go down. > > For some it may go up, but for me, I would anticipate down. It doesn’t take shady big-pharma conspiracy theories or million dollar lobbying to explain why I might not be a huge fan. This is snot supported by the facts. I get both full NHS treatment and have a top-quality private health plan (free) with my employer. This is pretty standard in professional jobs in the UK. > [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > Ah, so Brits are babies who are always running to the doctor! 😉 One worry is that, if something’s free, people are going to take advantage of it, waste it, overuse it, and there won’t be enough left for people who really need it. > > The fear is that government-run health care = socialism = Soviet-style rationing, where you have to wait in line to buy toilet paper and there’s a twelve-year waiting list for a new car. Life expectancy in the UK is greater than in the US. ( **78** to **77** ) UK health care spending as % of GDP (per capita) is almost half that of the US ( **8.3%** to **16%** ) The UK has more acute care hospital beds per capita than the US. ( **3.6** to **2.8** ) The UK under 5 mortality rate (per 1000) is far less than the US ( **6** to **9** ). ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2009, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/112 "2009-08-16T01:59:56Z")
One of our freedoms must be us for to be free to get sick and die. A longer life and preventative medicine just don’t fly here. Another is to go broke and declare bankruptcy when you get a bill. These are American freedoms the English just would not understand. We love our freedoms. Then we lose our coverage if we get laid off or if we quit. If you decide to take a new job ,you will be without any coverage for about 3 months. Do not get hurt, get in an accident or get sick during that time. If your wife gets pregnant the insurance company can declare it a pre existing condition and refuse to pay. Insurance coverage is a problem we spend a lot of time worrying about. We have to work our lives around it quite a bit.But that is the American way. The government getting in our lives is evil. A corporation regulating our lives is patriotic. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2009, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/113 "2009-08-16T03:00:45Z")
That’s probably why the life expectancy in this country has been steadily dropping for the last few decades… Oh, wait! It hasn’t been. _checks the poster_ Oh wait! It was a patented GonzoPost™…of course it doesn’t bear any relationship to reality. :smack: -XT ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2009, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/114 "2009-08-16T03:05:56Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Not in my area. I can’t imagine a Hospital without one. That would mean they have to send a patient via ambulance to such a facility. The stand-alone centers are used as backups for off-site specialists who see walk-in patients. The point is not whether there are MRI scanners in hospitals; there are. The point is that of the 25 per patient that Sam Stone pointed to, most are **not** in hospitals, and are underutilized. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Awesome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Captain\_Awesome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Awesome)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2009, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/115 "2009-08-16T03:11:54Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > That’s probably why the life expectancy in this country has been steadily dropping for the last few decades… > > Oh, wait! It hasn’t been. _checks the poster_ Oh wait! It was a patented GonzoPost™…of course it doesn’t bear any relationship to reality. :smack: > > -XT Well funny you should mention that; > [@](#): > > There was a steady increase in mortality inequality across the US counties between 1983 and 1999, resulting from stagnation or increase in mortality among the worst-off segment of the population. Female mortality increased in a large number of counties, primarily because of chronic diseases related to smoking, overweight and obesity, and high blood pressure. [The Reversal of Fortunes: Trends in County Mortality and Cross-County Mortality Disparities in the United States](http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050066). 2008. ---
**Author:** ![MarcusF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/67e7ee/32.png) [@MarcusF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MarcusF)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2009, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/116 "2009-08-16T12:11:14Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Has nothing to do with what I posted which was the use of cortisone shots (not a pain medication) to reduce pain. This was a cost issue (of small proportions) involving a standard procedure used in the US. Well no, the Telegraph article you linked to was about a National Institute of Clinical Health and Excellence (NICE) guidline on the treatment of non-specific Lower Back Pain (LBP). It does say that cortisone injections into the lower back should not be used but not because they cost too much but rather because there is no evidence they are effective. That is what NICE is there for, to look at what actually works - this is called evidence based medicine. (see pp159-162 [here](http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/CG88fullguideline.pdf) Warning pdf)). Whether American doctors routinely give such injections has no bearing on whether they are the best treatment. The same guidelines actually recommend the use of the more expensive MRI scans rather than X-rays in the diagnosis of LBP. Again based on evidence. ---
**Author:** ![PrettyVacant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/49beb7/32.png) [@PrettyVacant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PrettyVacant)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2009, 12:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/117 "2009-08-16T12:33:35Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > What other countries do is up to them. England has a king. That doesn’t mean we should. This country was founded upon the concept of freedom, not the government as a nanny. It’s not the place of this government to play Mommy to it’s citizens. We have the right to take care of ourselves. Not so much a straw man as a whole family of wild-eyed wicker men. It just reads like someone reciting a stream of lobbyist sound-bites and billboard slogans. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2009, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/118 "2009-08-16T12:48:17Z")
> [@Bisected8](#): > > I must say the beginning of your post was a bad start (we have a queen, and she’s a figurehead thank-you-very-much). You know, as I wrote that I wondered if somebody was going to be small-minded enough to pick that nit. > [@](#): > > Incidentally, if the government isn’t supposed to look after you, what does it do? Tax you and use it to fill a swimming pool so the prez can act like Scrooge McDuck? Maintain borders, conduct foreign policy, provide a stable currency and regulatory environment, enforce the law of the land. > [@](#): > > The issue isn’t whether you have the right to take care of yourselves, its if there should be a safety net for when you fail (the thing about life is, you always might). Right. That’s why we have medicaid. > [@](#): > > Bureaucracy is how _any_ system works. Any large scale system, private or government funded, will need some form of it. Incidentally, a public health care system will reduce it, I can get an appointment with any GP anywhere in the country (even if I’m not registered with them) and spend less than 10 minutes filling in a form (one A4 sheet, half of which was filled in by the doctor when I’d left). By comparison, as I understand it, there’s a lot of faffing around with insurance companies in the US. It’s even easier for me. My Doctor just takes a photocopy of my insurance card and I pay a $10 copay. > [@](#): > > You are aware that the NHS in Britain isn’t the only form of health care? People who can afford to go private can, and they get what they pay for. Yes. I do understand that which is why I gave the example of public and private schools. > [@](#): > > Its fine if you can afford to send your children to a public school, note that there are plenty of people who can’t. Hence why there are still kids in the public schools. The thing about democracy is that you have to accept what’s good for everyone as a whole, not just yourself. But it’s not good for everybody. The Public schools suck. In my county the money spent per student in public school is four times that as the private school I send my children to. We are being forced to pay 4 times as much for something that isn’t near half as good. The kids without means are still getting screwed. > [@](#): > > See above, just because there’s state funded care for those who can’t afford it doesn’t mean its the only source. Although if it doesn’t need to be efficient, why should it be? Because I think it is the right and responsibility of a taxpayer to demand good value for their tax dollars. > [@](#): > > While I’m here, where does the idea that the NHS makes Britain Orwellian and evil fit in to all of this? Where did I make that argument? ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2009, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/119 "2009-08-16T12:51:36Z")
> [@PrettyVacant](#): > > Not so much a straw man as a whole family of wild-eyed wicker men. > > It just reads like someone reciting a stream of lobbyist sound-bites and billboard slogans. The term “straw man” actually has a meaning. It refers to a speciific type of fallacious argument. You may find fault in my argument, but calling it a “straw man” reveals only your ignorance. A “straw man” would be if I made up an argument and pretended you said it in order to knock it down. ---
**Author:** ![PrettyVacant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/49beb7/32.png) [@PrettyVacant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PrettyVacant)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2009, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396/120 "2009-08-16T13:05:55Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > The term “straw man” actually has a meaning. It refers to a speciific type of fallacious argument. You may find fault in my argument, but calling it a “straw man” reveals only your ignorance. > > A “straw man” would be if I made up an argument and pretended you said it in order to knock it down. Not only “made up”, misrepresented suffices. One example: “Mommy to it’s citizens” is a misrepresentation of a position, of the reality, of anyone’s informed view of how the system works - on which you build an argument variously in the same post. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-so-many-americans-seem-against-an-equivalent-of-the-nhs/506396.md?page=7)