Turn on thread page Beta

We must privatise the NHS now watch

Announcements
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maker)
    How do you know what advantages someone from a well connected family can get if you have never been in that situation? You are only speaking from personal experience which by definition is very limited.
    If corruption in medical schools was widespread enough to fill up all the places for the poor I am sure it would have been reported by now. If one person pays a bribe and gets into medicine then it doesn't really matter, any corruption that does go on is obviously on such a small scale that it won't impact on others.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    **** OFF
    I want FREE Healthcare, I'm not bothered to pay for it you rich scum!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emaemmaemily)
    You're right about how things are right now, but that doesn't mean they won't change. The working-class are leaning towards becoming more politically active than before, and there's a lot of un-rest with our current political system.
    I don't mean it'll happen anytime soon, but it could do at some point, and I really hope it does.
    True, I do agree it could happen under the right situation, and people becoming discontent with politics could lead them to make change. I wish the government made it compulsary to learn about politics and the history of politics at high school. I think it would really help with political progression. I also hope it happens though; Capitalism really sucks.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sternumator)
    If corruption in medical schools was widespread enough to fill up all the places for the poor I am sure it would have been reported by now. If one person pays a bribe and gets into medicine then it doesn't really matter, any corruption that does go on is obviously on such a small scale that it won't impact on others.
    It's not necessarily the medical schools that are the issue.
    It's getting the experience... Which has already been explained how that's an issue for working-class people.
    Prior to all of that too... Some working-class families can't even afford to support their children through 6th form, and push them towards going straight into full-time employment instead to contribute.
    ... And we've already explained issues of capitalist society affecting children, their chances and their attitudes from an early age.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emaemmaemily)
    There are always some exceptions to the rule, but this is the general trend. It also depends what part of medicine.
    Dentisry is another thing all-together, not really comparable.
    I'm sorry, but you are completely wrong. Having 'contacts' does not play a part in applying to medicine/dentistry at all. And in fact the application process for both medicine and dentistry are very similar (work experience requirements for dentistry are actually higher than for medicine...).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emaemmaemily)
    It's not necessarily the medical schools that are the issue.
    It's getting the experience
    To get into med school you generally only need to have completed 1 work work experience, and are you suggesting that NHS hospitals are discriminating based on class to choose who they accept to do work experience? You are the epitome of naviety.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dentalprodigy)
    I'm sorry, but you are completely wrong. Having 'contacts' does not play a part in applying to medicine/dentistry at all. And in fact the application process for both medicine and dentistry are very similar (work experience requirements for dentistry are actually higher than for medicine...).
    Again, I'm not talking about applying to study it, I'm talking about getting into the profession properly, GETTING the work experience. It's actually proven that this happens.
    I didn't say it's about getting onto the course at all.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emaemmaemily)
    Again, I'm not talking about applying to study it, I'm talking about getting into the profession properly, GETTING the work experience. It's actually proven that this happens.
    I didn't say it's about getting onto the course at all.
    Ok if it's proven, please could you provide me with a source that backs you up?...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Whether the mechanisms of healthcare are public or private, I certainly think that it should be free at the point of access. I don't buy this argument that handing responsibility to corporations is automatically 'makes it about money rather then people's healthcare' though, as the government is certainly equally greedy, and consumer choice tends to increase quality. Healthcare seems to be less clear cut, though.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dentalprodigy)
    Ok if it's proven, please could you provide me with a source that backs you up?...
    You know, I don't have that information right now. I can tell you (which a quick google search will tell you) that only 1% of medical students are from the lower-end of the income bands in the UK, but that doesn't prove my exact point.
    I watched a documetry recently where they did investigations on exactly these kinds of things, and I can't for the life of me remember the channel it was on. I'll get back to you if I find it.

    But my point wasn't just on becoming doctors, but lots of other professions.
    You seem to have missed my point earlier too... I'm not necessarily saying NHS hospitals discriminate. What I said was mainly that students from working-class families can't afford to do the experience because it means working for free and they have no one to support them.
    Also, if you are from a family with your uncle who's a doctor (or something), your uncle CAN get you in to get experience. But I guess this is debateable, so I'll leave that specific point for now.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    More like we must nationalise the trains now. The NHS is an extremely good thing. I would probably be in millions of pounds in debt if we didn't have it. My medical folder is twice as large as the average 40 year old's.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ConorMC)
    As well as all if this, kids with a working class background have another major disadvantage. They don't fully understand the value of education at such a young age. It is most probable that their parents are uneducated and so won't be encouraging their children to work hard on their studies, unlike children from middle class backgrounds. These Kids and those who are also brought up in a run down area are surrounded by no motivation. They've never been encouraged to work hard so why would they? It's not their fault that they have been born into the position they're in. You'll find the majority of working class children follow the footsteps of their parents and so the theme will continue for generations. This needs to be stopped by focussing on helping and motivating those from run down and uneducated backgrounds. Of course there are always exceptions to things though. Just to note, I apologise for any generalisations people feel I have made and by no means do I think that working class people are stupid, some just have never been shown their full potential.
    This is the main reason why there is social segregation. I was unmotivated at school and didn't do as well as I could have done, I thought at the time as long as you got 5 A to Cs I would be sorted. Had I been in a pushy public school I am sure I would have done a lot better and I blame my parents now for not working hard enough to send me there. It is always going to be the way, unless you propose to seperate children from there parents or stop poor people having children, which obviously must be avoid, then this effect will always be there.

    I think you are wrong at the bottom though. The majority of child abusers were abused as children themselves but this does not justify their actions. The probability of somebody abused as a child abusing somebody else is much higher than an average person. You could say about people for the abusers, to quote you, 'It's not their fault that they have been born into the position they're in.' But the truth is these people are still responsible for their own choices and they are to blame if they commit any offenses. (Please, nobody take offense to this, I did try hard to think of a less sensitive example but I really couldn't. Am am not trying to make any points regarding abuse issues) Just because there is a trend in data that shows on average working class people have lower education attainment it does not mean a working class person has less of an opportunity.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I haven't read a single post in this thread.

    I just read the title, and realised it was my duty to instruct the OP to kill himself.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ramses II)
    Whether the mechanisms of healthcare are public or private, I certainly think that it should be free at the point of access. I don't buy this argument that handing responsibility to corporations is automatically 'makes it about money rather then people's healthcare' though, as the government is certainly equally greedy, and consumer choice tends to increase quality. Healthcare seems to be less clear cut, though.
    Businesses exist because entrepreneurs want to make money, not because they care about helping people. The government is there to serve the people, not to make a proft. Consumer choice tends to increase quality? Not when there is assymmetric information between the consumer and producer. Consider this: a doctor tells a patient they need to take x drugs and go under y procedure. The patient knows nothing about medicine so trusts the doctors and takes his/her advice. Afterwards, the patient is told everything is fine and better. Patient goes away happy thinking "what good quality". However, In reality the patient never really needed to take x drugs and have y procedure. The consumers choice isn't always the best choice due to their lack of knowledge in the area they are buying. It's not like buying a nice towel or something. The person who decides whether someone needs treatment or not should not think about the financial benefits of either decision. Sadly, when it's all about making profit, it seems that doctors veer towards such things. So please, realise that basic economic theory that consumers choice tends to increase quality is only applicable when the consumer is fully aware of what they ate buying and whether it is necessary. Otherwise people think they are getting quality when they actually aren't, allowing doctors in the private sector to not have to worry about being the best, as long as they give the best appearance.
    The idea of privatising the NHS is as bad as the idea of privatising all education in the uk (ie. It's a TERRIBLE one!)
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WelshBluebird)
    There we go. You just admitted you were wrong. We were not debating about if it was possible. I already said that I agreed that it isn't impossible. All I was saying (and what you were disagreeing with) is that for a lot of the higher paid professions, it is more difficult for people from working class backgrounds. I'm glad you have now agreed with that.

    They were certainly lucky.
    As I said, I don't know much about medicine, but from the professions I do know more about, getting experience off the back of a letter is not common at all.
    Especially in this economic climate.

    Plus, even if that was normal, surely you can see that it would be even easier if the persons parents were doctors anyway? They wouldn't even have had to write the letter. And my earlier comments about unpaid internships still apply, not really in medicine, but certainly in other fields.
    I accept that it is slightly harder for some working class people to get work experiance in some proffessions but there is no point in picking a small issue and balloning it out of proportion. I don't know how you figured that me admitting that meant I accept that it is harder for working class people to get high paid job. I could say working class people tend to live in inner cities and upper class people tend to live in country estates, therefore working class people are closer to fiancial centers and so it is easier for them to get jobs in the city. If you conceded that yes the average travelling time to an interview is lower for working class people, it would be silly for me to say: There we go. You just admitted you were wrong. We were not debating about if it was possible for an upper class person to get a good job. I already said that I agreed that it isn't impossible. All I was saying (and what you were disagreeing with) is that for a lot of the higher paid professions, it is more difficult for people from working class backgrounds. I'm glad you have now agreed with that.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sternumator)
    This is the main reason why there is social segregation. I was unmotivated at school and didn't do as well as I could have done, I thought at the time as long as you got 5 A to Cs I would be sorted. Had I been in a pushy public school I am sure I would have done a lot better and I blame my parents now for not working hard enough to send me there. It is always going to be the way, unless you propose to seperate children from there parents or stop poor people having children, which obviously must be avoid, then this effect will always be there.

    I think you are wrong at the bottom though. The majority of child abusers were abused as children themselves but this does not justify their actions. The probability of somebody abused as a child abusing somebody else is much higher than an average person. You could say about people for the abusers, to quote you, 'It's not their fault that they have been born into the position they're in.' But the truth is these people are still responsible for their own choices and they are to blame if they commit any offenses. (Please, nobody take offense to this, I did try hard to think of a less sensitive example but I really couldn't. Am am not trying to make any points regarding abuse issues) Just because there is a trend in data that shows on average working class people have lower education attainment it does not mean a working class person has less of an opportunity.
    Hmm. I get your point, and I do agree that it is the parents fault, no justifying that. It's nearly impossible to change the attitude of an adult in such circumstances. It wouldn't be right to make any infringement upon the civil rights of such people, however governments should try breaking up the chain, ie. Giving extra support to those from working class backgrounds.

    I do not dispute that they sometimes have equal opportunity, however there is a different in attitude as previously stated. A lot of working class parents encourage their children to go into work than pursue higher education. This is down to attitude and their ignorance, in short, they don't know what's 100% best for their children due to their own upbringing. I am not justifying this! I just believe it needs to be stopped. If we stopped this chain and made all working class people aware of the importance of education, then they would start a new chain and teach their children that etc. Also, to dispute with you about the whole equal opportunity thing. Alot of working class people grow up in similar run down areas with bad schhols. Alot of middle class people grow up in a similar ambitious area with good schools. Both schools are state schools yet they offer different opportunities. It's rare to find the classes mix that much. Unless all schools have a good standard of teaching, those living in good areas will benefit from a better education compared with those living in a run down area. And no, before you ask they can't simply move.
    Also, is it fair that the moderately rich can give their children a better education and thus a better chance in life than those from a poor backgroud? People don't choose what situation they are born into.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emaemmaemily)
    You're right about how things are right now, but that doesn't mean they won't change. The working-class are leaning towards becoming more politically active than before, and there's a lot of un-rest with our current political system.
    I don't mean it'll happen anytime soon, but it could do at some point, and I really hope it does.
    I think there will be a movement towards socialism in the next few years. I can't see any other outcome over the next few years than the cuts hitting people hard and Ed getting voted in, god knows what he would do in power. I am practicing my French already. I think the only hope for the capitalists is that some how the coalition surives the cuts and then we get some growth in the run up to an election at the end of the term.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sternumator)
    I think there will be a movement towards socialism in the next few years. I can't see any other outcome over the next few years than the cuts hitting people hard and Ed getting voted in, god knows what he would do in power. I am practicing my French already. I think the only hope for the capitalists is that some how the coalition surives the cuts and then we get some growth in the run up to an election at the end of the term.
    I can only hope that things turn out for the best (ei, capitalism dies).
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ConorMC)
    Hmm. I get your point, and I do agree that it is the parents fault, no justifying that. It's nearly impossible to change the attitude of an adult in such circumstances. It wouldn't be right to make any infringement upon the civil rights of such people, however governments should try breaking up the chain, ie. Giving extra support to those from working class backgrounds.

    I do not dispute that they sometimes have equal opportunity, however there is a different in attitude as previously stated. A lot of working class parents encourage their children to go into work than pursue higher education. This is down to attitude and their ignorance, in short, they don't know what's 100% best for their children due to their own upbringing. I am not justifying this! I just believe it needs to be stopped. If we stopped this chain and made all working class people aware of the importance of education, then they would start a new chain and teach their children that etc. Also, to dispute with you about the whole equal opportunity thing. Alot of working class people grow up in similar run down areas with bad schhols. Alot of middle class people grow up in a similar ambitious area with good schools. Both schools are state schools yet they offer different opportunities. It's rare to find the classes mix that much. Unless all schools have a good standard of teaching, those living in good areas will benefit from a better education compared with those living in a run down area. And no, before you ask they can't simply move.
    Also, is it fair that the moderately rich can give their children a better education and thus a better chance in life than those from a poor backgroud? People don't choose what situation they are born into.
    I almost entirely agree with this post. Although I think that teaching standards are very much overated and the kids in the classes is much more important. If you swaped the kids from the best public school with the kids from a bad state school and they each attended the other schools I think the kids from the public school would achieve highest. This is because the attitudes of parents, as previously discusses, and behavioural issues are much more important than the teachers or the school itself. I think it is a bit of a myth that some how throwing money at education will make you learn better, you can have the best top notch projectors and sports pitches but it won't make you learn more. Private schools are generally better than state schools simply becuase by charging they restrict access to working classes, and of course if they weren't better then nobody would go and they would shut.

    I totally agree that we should do everything we can to break the cycle but what can we do? I can't think of any possible scheme that the government could introduce that would make the necessary changes to working classes parents attitude to school which is what we need in order to ensure the pass this on to their children. It angers me that it is the people who complain about the rich and a capitalist society will be the ones who are telling there children to leave school at 16 so that they can earn enough money to move out, of course there are socialists and well educated too.

    Is it fair that the moderately rich can give their children a better education and thus a better chance in life than those from a poor backgroud?

    This is a tough question to answer. I think they should be allowed because I tend to value efficiency higher than equality. By eliminating private schools you will lower educational standards as a whole, in effect you are saying fairness is so important that we will bring drag down top schools down to the same level which will result in a less well educated workforce. It reminds me of Thatchers famous debate in paliment where she assuses socialism of making everybody worse off just to make the gap between rich and poor smaller. Of course the issue of education is differs from income in that education is more of a competiton for the best jobs. If you believe that there is a fixed pie whcih has to be allocated and education is merely a means to divide the pie then of course private schools should be scraped but if this were the case then it isn't a fair system to allocate resources on the basis of academic ability. But as a capitalist I recognise with higher educational standards there will be more pie to go around and so I would prioties wealth creation. It isn't really fair if by fairness you mean equality. It is especially not worth the sacrifce of wealth because if you ban private schools kids of welathy parents will get the benefits in other ways. Unless you want to sacfrifice properity to the extreme and have a communist system, you have to accept that people born to rich parents are on average going to enjoy more goods and services in their life. It is not really fair that my mate gets 35 allowance and I get 30 but life is not fair afterall.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emaemmaemily)
    You know, I don't have that information right now. I can tell you (which a quick google search will tell you) that only 1% of medical students are from the lower-end of the income bands in the UK, but that doesn't prove my exact point.
    I watched a documetry recently where they did investigations on exactly these kinds of things, and I can't for the life of me remember the channel it was on. I'll get back to you if I find it.

    But my point wasn't just on becoming doctors, but lots of other professions.
    You seem to have missed my point earlier too... I'm not necessarily saying NHS hospitals discriminate. What I said was mainly that students from working-class families can't afford to do the experience because it means working for free and they have no one to support them.
    Also, if you are from a family with your uncle who's a doctor (or something), your uncle CAN get you in to get experience. But I guess this is debateable, so I'll leave that specific point for now.
    1% of coalminners were from top rate tax paying families. It does not follow that it is much more difficult for a top rate tax payer to become a coalminner.
 
 
 
Poll
Cats or dogs?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.