[Re: Demographic timebomb will force government to downsize, Friday]
There are plenty of other healthcare models to explore to avoid the incipient funding crisis. One is the Singapore model of health savings accounts, which provides direct subsidies to the less well-off and catastrophe insurance to pay for huge one-off costs. Another is the Dutch social insurance model, a private insurance scheme in which everyone pays the same. Neither of these alternatives is the complete solution. For that, we need significant supply-side reform, including in the way we train doctors. Unfortunately, the British Medical Association’s recent successes over pay have come at the expense of taxpayers.
People are living longer, so we will either have to work longer, take a smaller pension, or pay more in contributions. And as a country, we’ll have to adopt more voluntary and charitable networks to support our elderly. Wealthier people should also be encouraged to use private health insurance. As a young person, I’m disheartened that I pay for such expensive services, used so liberally.
How many young people can truly say they can expect the same standard of care in 2040 as the elderly get now, if we keep the same funding model? We’re worrying about the wrong issues – university fees won’t seem so important at 65.
The government gets away too easily with the current dire situation. Increasing public spending must be denounced as insane.
I no longer expect this coalition to make the bold, radical changes Britain so urgently needs.
Are any of the 17 army units cut by the government last week being put on standby this week for Olympic security?
If it’s possible to prosecute traders for manipulating Libor, can we prosecute the Bank of England for manipulating the base rate?