US wants access to NHS in post-Brexit deal, says Trump ally
Source: The Guardian
Woody Johnson, who is a close friend of the US president, said every area of the UK economy would be up for discussion when the two sides brokered a trade deal.
Asked if the NHS was likely to form part of trade negotiations, Johnson told the BBCs Andrew Marr Show: I think the entire economy, in a trade deal, all things that are traded would be on the table. Asked if that specifically meant healthcare, he said: I would think so.
,,,,
The ambassadors comments are terrifying and show that a real consequence of a no-deal Brexit, followed by a trade deal with Trump, will be our NHS up for sale. This absolutely should not be on the table, he said. Nigel Farage and the Tories want to rip apart our publicly funded and provided NHS. Labour will always defend it.
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/02/us-wants-access-to-nhs-in-post-brexit-deal-ambassador-to-uk-says
The theory is that NHS puts UK at an advantage because US companies subsidize their employee healthcare, but in the UK companies don't. It is false but they had to come up with something.
The Brits may be as stupid as Americans.
CatMor
(6,212 posts)no less a close friend. Woody Johnson is the same caliber business man as trump meaning he sucks. It seems his family didnt want him runnig the family business so they bought him a football team. Its scary to think those two bozos will be makung trade deals with England.
spotthebird
(171 posts)Borris Johnson or whatever other corrupt Trump/Putin clone who will replace May will sell the UK out just as efficiently as Trump/Putin have done here.
It is hard to believe no matter how long it is allowed to continue.
JI7
(89,244 posts)and woukd easily sell each other out to save themselves.
lonely bird
(1,685 posts)Rick Scott and his company have been part of trying to break the NHS for years. After all, the US system is sooooo much better than anyone elses.
Please dont step in the steaming pile of sarcasm.
Brainfodder
(6,423 posts)That is one of my pet peeves as well, it's a debacle that only those involved in it's bloat could want it to continue in the U.S.A.?
Industries get out grown and Big Pharma seems ripe?
How many poorly long term tested fallible drugs will be wide spread this next decade?
FDA should be expanded and add a lot of jobs, test all supplements, it's LONG overdue, paid for by those who want to market in this country, no more placebo/wth is in it stuff.
BlueIdaho
(13,582 posts)1. The Brits arent as stupid as Americans. 2. The Conservative Party is on its way out. 3. Brits are demanding an end to privatization and the gutting of the NHS along with an end to the disastrous Conservative Party austerity programs.
While Theresa May falling on her sword may temporarily keep the Conservative Party in power, I think general elections are unavoidable. The recent E.U. Parliamentary elections point to one thing. A huge loss for both Tories and Labor and only modest gains for Brexiteers. The surprise party was the Lib-Dem Party.
In the UK, Trump is seen as the butt of a thousand jokes, not some Svengali. Meanwhile, the Conservative Party has proven to be feckless and Labor none better. The big Brexit revolt fizzled so look for Brits to let someone else run the government. My money is on the left leaning Lib-Dem Party.
spotthebird
(171 posts)but for now the Conservative Party has power, and the one thing these people know is to act quickly. Once May is gone this could be done momentarily.
not fooled
(5,801 posts)is inconsequential to these bastards.
IIRC, didn't the (putin-backed) Brexiteers run on DEFENDING the NHS? Didn't they promise to improve it? Another set of lies, like red don and his "I'm the only one who will defend Social Security and Medicare" babble. Just another con, I guess, on the UK.
spotthebird
(171 posts)increase funding to NHS. Now they are going to lose it all and enter American Healthcare hell.
not fooled
(5,801 posts)is always, always to privatize public assets and loot the country.
The "nationalism", racism and promises to improve the lot of the working person are just window dressing to fool the rubes.
Seems to work the same in every country.
spotthebird
(171 posts)is not covered. It is someone amazing that by now this much is disclosed, it must be because no one else is concerned about its resonance
spotthebird
(171 posts)they are not dependent on government.
That is an easy message
roamer65
(36,745 posts)nycbos
(6,034 posts)Now we wants to fuck up US/UK relationship
muriel_volestrangler
(101,295 posts)If Trump is tying himself to Boris Johnson (plus Farage?), and that means US companies might take chunks out of the NHS, that will hit Boris. The Tory MPs know it will hurt them electorally, and even Tory members may not like it. This may force Boris to distance himself from Trump, or say "but the NHS won't be part of the negotiations".
BlueIdaho
(13,582 posts)Id put money on Boris NOT being the next Prime Minister or Conservative Party Leader.
The King of Prussia
(737 posts)The electorate for this particular election is a tiny number of elderly, white racists.
comradebillyboy
(10,143 posts)BlueIdaho
(13,582 posts)But dont underestimate the greed and thirst for power in U.K. Party politics. At last count ten ministers have thrown their hat in the ring. Add to that, the fact that these party elections seldom go to plan and I say all bets are off.
Either way, the Conservative Party is loathed right now so I suspect a General election isnt that far off - regardless of who the party insiders tap.
House of Roberts
(5,168 posts)and I could subsidize my own healthcare. I'm earning that money either way. Besides, I currently subsidize a portion of my healthcare out of each two week check.
3Hotdogs
(12,369 posts)would they give the money to you or would they keep it?
House of Roberts
(5,168 posts)The company doesn't give us health 'INSURANCE', they pay for a major medical policy and underwrite routine care out of their own pocket. I'm not sure what they would do if we transitioned to a Medicare For All system.
I've pondered that questioned before. Perks like paid health insurance should be itemized on every worker's W2, even if not taxed. I'd have liked to know at several jobs what their costs for me really was, because for a number of years, our 'raises' were mostly in our company insurance, and not in wage increases.
riversedge
(70,186 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)What would we do with it? A health system is a program that works in another country with medical providers and citizens of that country. It's not a tangible thing to buy.
But it is true that American companies subsidize employee healthcare. Many, if not most, companies pay for employee health care, either wholly or partially. It factors into the company's expenses and cost of doing business, of course.
I don't know specifically about Great Britain, but the NHS is funded by the federal govt, which collects taxes from everyone. Not just companies. That's my understanding.
spotthebird
(171 posts)all the exploitation that Americans experience in an effort to get care now. The redistribution of wealth, people spend their children's legacy on the kids' or their own survival, nothing for them to inherit. The list is very long.
When the instinct for survival is monetized the money well is deep.
spotthebird
(171 posts)there is no possibility for an enrapture to thrive if s/he needs healthcare, especially for those who don't live in an ACA included state.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,295 posts)Leaving the public sector to cope with the difficult areas (both types of care, and actual areas - easier to run a primary practice in a region with a younger, healthier population), and tempting the better staff off with higher pay. There's been some trials already; Hinchingbrooke Hospital in Huntingdon was run for a few years by Circle, and it was a failure:
...
Just as opponents to the Health & Social Care Act pointed out, what the private sector really want to do is cherry pick, taking the government money to run all the predictable and easy stuff - starving the rest of the NHS of funds as a result.
...
In nearby Bedfordshire, Circle recently won a huge integrated prime contractor contract for all musculo-skeletal services in the area - and promptly tried to sub-contract the undesirable bits back to the NHS on Circles own terms. As the local NHS hospital told the BBC, Our concern is that if we don't have the planned work coming through, then with the way the NHS is financed, we don't know whether we will have sufficient money to provide the emergency service. Recent reports suggest Bedford Hospital is now in severe financial difficulties.
A little further afield in Nottingham, Circle runs the largest Independent Sector Treatment Centre in Europe, having pulled off an eyebrow-raising deal to force the NHS to pay it £42 million to buy its clinic in the hospital grounds, then lease it back to it. Circle then continued to expand, recently successfully bidding to take over the hospitals routine NHS dermatology services - to the disgust of the doctors who left rather than be transferred to Circle. Now, the local NHS hospital is closing its acute dermatology services too, because it cant afford to provide only the more expensive dermatology services Circle doesnt want. Patients will be forced to travel ever further afield for anything more complicated or less profitable.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ournhs/hinchingbrooke-why-did-englands-privatised-hospital-deal-really-collapse/
The US wants a trade deal that would force any British government to allow corporations to take profit from any part of the NHS that they can - knowing that US health companies are experts at squeezing that profit out. It would also, no doubt, try to tie the NHS's hands on negotiating drug prices, for the profit of US pharma companies.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Makes no sense. Sounds like something someone made up .
muriel_volestrangler
(101,295 posts)but they only want to take the low-risk, easy-to-run parts. They want to make the NHS give out contracts to provide these services (say, routine scheduled operations). The NHS would have to be there to take the tough cases.
At best, this would mean a lot of extra paperwork to try and work out the true cost of easy services versus the complicated stuff, and then the taxpayer paying extra to cover the bureaucracy and private profit; more likely, it would also involve the cost of the easy and hard stuff getting averaged, giving the cherry-picking private companies even more profit.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Could they put pressure on the healthcare systems of other countries? Of course. As they could on ours. But it makes no sense to say the U S would "buy" another country's system. It's a system. Not a "thing."
muriel_volestrangler
(101,295 posts)that it's about "business access to the NHS"; and I've explained what that means. The UK politicians don't want bits of it to be privatised (either existing infrastructure, as Hinchingbrooke Hospital was, or the job of providing a service - ie the NHS being forced to use a contract to buy services from for-profit, possibly American, suppliers).
But, yes, systems can be bought and sold. An electricity generating system, or water utility, can be bought and sold. This would be like saying that the new NAFTA must force all the public water and sewage utilities in the USA must be sold to private companies, who would then run them, for profit.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)A water utility is not a "system." It is an entity that has buildings, pipes, etc. You can buy its stock. I own part of an electrical "system," except that it's not a system. It's a company. The NHS is a nationwide system....care providers aren't "owned" by the system, or their buildings. The U S is not trying to buy medical buildings in the UK that may be owned by the govt, if it owns any.
It's like another country trying to buy the American health care system. Another country can't...it's not a "thing," and isn't "one" system...it's a mix of a lot of different systems, independent providers, buildings owned by different owners (some the govt, some private corporations, some care providers), etc.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,295 posts)Find a summary, and it'll explain a large part of what's happened in global economics. The point is that sometimes, countries do get forced to sell infrastructure to private companies. The US government wouldn't force that so it could be itself that buys it, but so the corporations who control Republican economic policy can.
Yes, of course, a water utility is a system. It's the system that provide water and treats sewage. In some places, it's privately owned; in others, a municipality owns it. As well as the pipes etc., it's the organisation - the collected experience and skills of the employees, which you can't just create overnight.
And various countries have been pressured into selling off such utilities to for-profit companies over the past few decades, because of the "private is always better" mantra. The same thing could happen to parts of the NHS (though much of the physical infrastructure is already 'owned' by private companies thanks to the financial disaster of the Public Finance Initiative which had them build new assets but retain ownership, and then rent it to the NHS).
suffragette
(12,232 posts)Takket
(21,554 posts)Since the author of the article just assumes everyone knows what the a acronym means.
mwooldri
(10,302 posts)Thyla
(791 posts)That thinks it is a good idea to make any agreement with a Trump led US.
I thought the plan was to wait it out and deal with real politicians later.
McCamy Taylor
(19,240 posts)lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)...and therefore they will do everything possible to prevent us from getting it?
apnu
(8,754 posts)Standing conservative theory is, if you turn the public service to shit (NHS) it will be devalued enough to "sell" it off to private interests. This is about looting the government by corporations.