Everyone knows Godwin's law:
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1".
"and whoever does so, has lost the argument".
"The longer any discussion about the NHS goes on, the closer the probability a spurious invocation of the US system of healthcare gets to one, and whoever does so has lost the argument".
- I am in favour of free(ish) at the point of delivery services. By Free(ish) I don't rule out the likes of Prescription charges and nominal charges to see a GP or charges for missed appointments, which seem like reasonable demand-management to me.
- I am in favour of Tax Payer funding of healthcare. I cannot see any practical difference between compulsory insurance and tax-payer funding. Insurance is just risk-pooling. Taxpayer funding is a bigger risk pool.
- The NHS isn't very good. And it isn't very good principally because of its vastness and consequent bureaucracy, not because of its funding mechanism.
- More competition is necessary. And competition isn't about firms competing for government monopolies, that's mere crony capitalism, a kind of cargo-cult market that achieves nothing a market should do, and simply allows firms to profit from state monopolies. Competition means the funds following the patient, with the GP as gatekeeper and advisor to the patient.
The only serious black mark against the NHS was its poor record on keeping people alive. On a composite "healthy lives" score, which includes deaths among infants and patients who would have survived had they received timely and effective healthcare, the UK came 10th.
Ease of access and equality are based on Patient-reported surveys. And as the NHS is healthcare in the mind of most Britons, and such surveys are skewed towards patients who, ahem, survived, then I can't see such data's all that reliable. It's just a reflection of the almost mythical, religious support Britons have been brainwashed into giving what politicians STILL call "the envy of the World".
Where the data does stack up is the NHS's excellence in dealing with Chronic conditions. Here the ability to marshall resources and the bureaucracy to back it up helps. The problem in the NHS is the customer facing bit - particularly diagnosis and A&E. This is where patient choice and a functioning market with competing providers would make all the difference. Once in the machine, the NHS functions as a first-world healthcare system. Getting into the machine requires sharp elbows, luck and knowledge. Delays in getting into the machine are behind the NHS's poor record in combating cancer in particular. There is very little immediate punishment for failure, which is too easily covered up; South Stafford Hospital for example.
The sooner the NHS starts treating its patients as customers for whose business they compete, not an irritating cost to be borne by the long-suffering nurses, the sooner the NHS will warrant the plaudits lefties so desperately want to give it.
But in prioritising "efficiency" over "keeping people alive" in order to give your pre-chosen answer (a state-run system) a big gold star is a bit desperate, and nothing short of policy-based evidence making. Or as I prefer to put it, immoderately, LYING.