I just went off public private combined.
Labour Conference
- Thread starter Roy Bloom
- Start date
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,587
- Reaction score
- 549
- Country
Here some better data.
www.bma.org.uk
Health funding data analysis
Our analysis looks at health and social care funding in the UK, highlighting how it has changed over time, the impact of COVID-19, and the variation across the UK.
www.bma.org.uk
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,587
- Reaction score
- 549
- Country
But whilst we are at it - now can you add in the demographic profiles - if you have older populations then your spending will be higher.
Thanks I await your data.
Thanks I await your data.
Is it me, I said France and Germany was more.Here some better data.
Health funding data analysis
Our analysis looks at health and social care funding in the UK, highlighting how it has changed over time, the impact of COVID-19, and the variation across the UK.
Youl have to wait seems like I'm wasting my time.
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,587
- Reaction score
- 549
- Country
Seems like you been found out, off you twaddle with Roy.
If you say so.
I said pre pandemicLie number one missed the 7 to get your pulse rate up.
Public spending on health as GDP share Spain 2023| Statista
In 2023, public spending on health represented approximately *** percent of the Spanish GDP, a slight decrease relative to the figures reported a year prior.www.statista.com
Got this one near.
Do you want germanys and Frances they spend more.
Italy: public healthcare expenditure 2023| Statista
Public healthcare expenditure in Italy increased steadily in the past two decades.
Per capita, health spending is around a third less than Germany and Norway – at £5,884 compared to £9,104 and £8,817 respectively.
Health spending in UK ‘lags behind’ European neighbours, SNP says
Research commissioned by party finds per capita spending is around a third less than Germany and Norway
www.independent.co.uk
So once we’ve removed the false figures, your research finds out that I am correct.
thank you
The NHS employs ridiculous numbers of people. Many of which are heavily unionised, many of which know that they earn lots of money for doing very little, most of which have dependent family members.
So if you attempt any debate about the NHS anywhere in the UK, there's a good chance that some of those with their snouts in the trough will defend the current mess at all costs, deliberately skewing numbers and lying to try and make a case for keeping everything just as it is.
So debate is probably pointless, far too many have parasitic dependence on it to be able to have an objective discussion. Ironically, the massive level of inefficient and overpaid employment probably means it's too big to be criticised.
The Labour party won't ever reform it, as they're part-funded by the unions who make their money from the people who work there. Corrupt all the way.
So if you attempt any debate about the NHS anywhere in the UK, there's a good chance that some of those with their snouts in the trough will defend the current mess at all costs, deliberately skewing numbers and lying to try and make a case for keeping everything just as it is.
So debate is probably pointless, far too many have parasitic dependence on it to be able to have an objective discussion. Ironically, the massive level of inefficient and overpaid employment probably means it's too big to be criticised.
The Labour party won't ever reform it, as they're part-funded by the unions who make their money from the people who work there. Corrupt all the way.
