Hacker News Reader

Comment by marcinzm | Hacker News Reader

I think many people talk about it but from a different context. The NHS is being de-funded by the same politicians whose friends benefit from these deals. Hard to hire competent people when your budget keeps getting cut.

View on HN

https://fullfact.org/health/spending-english-nhs/

Total health spending in England was around £129 billion in 2018/19 and is expected to rise to nearly £134 billion by 2019/20, taking inflation into account.

That comes out to $2k/year/UK resident which is amazingly low I'd say. Staff are also limited to 1% salary increase per year since 2010 which is below inflation.

A little pedantic - England is not the UK and that budget quoted above was for England. The budget for all countries is larger, and England spends a bit less per citizen than Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. https://fullfact.org/health/what-is-the-nhs-budget/

Fair point although England is by far the majority of the population so per capita spend only goes up 20%. Still not a very high number and near the bottom for G7 nations.

Yes, it’s a big difference. I also noticed that the per capita spend is a fair bit higher in the UK when you exclude England, Northern Ireland in particular. This could be skewed to look more significant than it really is, because the economies of scale could be helping England.

How much of that is spent on front-line service provision, and how much on "management"?

Roughly 8% is spent on management which makes up 4% of the workforce. Which is significantly less than the private sector. That took me 60 seconds to Google btw.

I have worked extensively with the NHS and organisations who are attached to it. Part of the problem is that the NHS cannot pay market rates for developers, so they resort to contractors instead who are accounted for differently, and where the total cost is _much_ higher.

£136.7 billion seems like a lot. It also seems like it's been exponentially going up since 1950.

“Exponential” is almost certainly a good approximation, as I expect it to match the product of wage inflation and population.

Healthcare spending per capital for G7, note how the UK has historically been at the bottom, way below Germany, let alone the u.s.

https://i.imgur.com/iab51Zq.png

From OECD https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm

It seems it was between 1997 and 2003 where spending on the NHS began to dramatically increase. I'm not sure it's fair to say that between 1950 and 1997 that it's growth was exponential.

https://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/images/election2017_images/bn...

https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9186

Perhaps a more fair statement to make would be that demand for NHS services has seen a dramatic increase since 1997 and as a consequence it's budget has seen dramatic adjustments.

That comes out to $2k/year/UK resident which is amazingly low I'd say. Staff are also limited to 1% salary increase per year since 2010 which is below inflation.

Compare that to systems which are not nationalised.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com