The Pros And Cons Of A & E Cuts

465 Words2 Pages

These days the play-book on the subject healthcare from the left seems to consist of screaming that people will die no matter what is proposed. Their ‘solution’ is some version of national socialized healthcare, but shouldn’t we look at it’s failure elsewhere BEFORE imposing it on the states? Word has it that 23 million people will DIE because of cuts to healthcare. But this isn’t taking place in the states, no this is occurring in a bastion of national socialized healthcare with the NHS. From the BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40416102 A&E cuts will hit 23m people, British Medical Association says Nearly 23 million people in England - more than 40% of the population - could be affected by proposed cuts to A&E departments, doctors …show more content…

After analysing local plans, the BMA found: ▪ 18 of them, covering a population of 22.9 million, involved the closing or downgrading of an A&E department ▪ 14 of them, responsible for 17.6 million patients, propose closing or merging a hospital ▪13 of them, covering a population of 14.7 million, have put forward closing hospital beds [..] 'Deep-seated problems' But NHS England rejected the criticism. It argues changes will only take place when there is a viable plan to improve care elsewhere whether through centralising care at a nearby hospital or extending community services, such as with longer GP opening. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40416102 Now, according the low standard of discourse set by the socialist left in the states, 40% of the population in the UK WILL DIE! According to the left the only solution is national socialized healthcare [Or as Elizabeth Warren terms it: a‘ national single-payer plan.’] So shouldn’t we take a very long and hard look at that concept borne of socialism and examine it’s failure around the world in disparate places such a Venezuela and the