24 2 mins 10 yrs

The details are shocking even for those of us who regard our communist “hospitals” as little more than human abattoirs.

Examples included patients being so thirsty that they had to drink water from vases and receptionists left to decide which patients to treat in A&E.

Nurses were not trained properly to use vital equipment, while inexperienced doctors were put in charge of critically ill patients.

Some patients needing pain relief either got it late or not at all, leaving them crying out for help, and there were cases where food and drinks were left out of reach.

What about prosecutions of those NHS butchers who killed hundreds of innocents? Forget about it. In true regime style not a single negligent, corrupt, heartless bastard has even been disciplined for this incredible barbarity. What we’ve learned is that in order to meet targets handed down by the central state, costs were cut, staff levels were cut and hundreds left to die. No doubt many thousands suffered horrendously, This to advance the lucrative careers of state apparatchiks. Nothing can possibly change that incentive while health rationing is collectivised.

Tonight we learn that five more of these inhumane organisations are under investigation. It’s been said in these here parts before, and the killing wards of Staffordshire prove it more necessary than ever: do everything you possibly can to avoid “treatment” in the state system.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

24 thoughts on “SLAUGHTERHOUSE 1200

  1. “Nothing can possibly change that incentive while health rationing is collectivised.”

    But if private enterprise rations health care then that is OK.

  2. FO –

    All commodities and services are rationed. The question is whether you do it by natural economic means or by political/bureaucratic fiat.

  3. Private health care does not “ration.”

    Private health care provides service in exchange for money. The more money they receive, the more health care services they will provide. Providers respond to monetary stimulus by seeking to provide more.

    People make choices if their own money is at stake – the trend with private industry is towards more efficiency and therefore, cheaper service/goods. Because people make choices and choose the best for the least amount if possible – if not prevented from doing this by govt. edict and/or industry monopolies.

    For those in need of health care but lacking funds, in America until ObamaCare, we had many charities and government subsidies. No one was turned away for lack of funds. despite the propaganda to the contrary.

  4. Every private business rations, as anyone in business knows.

    If your customer pays you $250,000 a year, that looks like a good customer, but not if you give him $300,000 worth of goods and or services.

    Smart businesses track profitability very closely.

    And government subsidies? Why that’s socialism!, the purest of evils! Who authorized that theft?

  5. ration = a fixed amount allowed of a particular commodity.

    business does not “ration.”

    business supplies in response to demand.

    business increases supply in response to increase in demand.

  6. They’ll increase supply up the ying yang so long as the customer will pay for it. Many customers won’t esp in a lousy economy.

    In the absence of what the provider thinks is a fair return, the customer gets zilch.

    Poor people don’t have enough scratch to pay for fancy medical care, esp long term care.

    The private market in the absence of socialist subsidies -which is what they are – gives these people a ration of zero, and effectively throws these people in the gutter.

    No money, no honey. That’s what private industry gives you in the absence of charity or subsidy.

  7. “…effectively throws these people in the gutter.”

    no one was ever thrown in the gutter or refused care, Phantom.

    Before Obamacare — the hospitals. charities and govt. subsidies picked up the slack so that no one was ever turned away and the indigent received the exact same care as the paying customer.

    I personally have a friend with 5 kids, no money who received Blue Ribbon treatment for breast cancer and follow-up for nothing in local los angeles hospital. I personally know several illegal Mexican women who delivered babies locally for free with follow-up etc. I have been in emergency rooms when uninsured young man arrived with skin rash (not emergency) and was treated dermatologically and given cream etc. the list goes on and on.

    we did not live in a Charles Dickens world of poverty and vast wealth before socialist ObamaCare.

  8. People were not usually denied cover for acute care, but they were denied many other types of care not typically given in an emergency room.

    And the subsidies given over the decades, by way of cost shifting and other means was socialist in nature. On that one, Pete is correct. It had to be- otherwise those people would have been thrown in the gutter, or the hospitals would all have gone bust.

  9. no hospital, public or private, can turn patients away for emergency care–federal law passed in the mid-80s. Private hospitals may turn people away for nonemergencies but not public ones. Depending on the locale, even some private hospitals are deemed ‘critical access’ hospitals, especially in rural areas and they receive special funds by virtue of being designated as such.

  10. Emergency care is only part of the issue.

    If a lot of people had the care that they needed all along, they wouldn’t have to use the emergency room as their doctor’s office.

    The fact that so many – including many hard working people – don’t have health coverage means that they’ve often never been getting routine care, which means that the first care that they receive is in a horrible emergency room setting, when their condition is more advanced than it would have been.

    This has been a national disgrace for a long time. I don’t even speak of the many who go bankrupt over medical costs.

    Obamacare is a corrupt monstrosity, but it is a little better than doing nothing, which is what nearly all Republicans wanted to do.

  11. regarding “bankruptcies,” Phantom: The only people who asked to protect their assets from the court – in other words, “went bankrupt” – are people with assets to protect – in other words, people who had money but who chose not to buy catastrophic healthcare insurance even though they could have.

    they made poor financial decisions. that doesn’t mean everyone else in the country should pay.

  12. Its not a poor financial decision if you can’t afford it, and many Americans can’t. Many work for employers who do not provide health insurance, and a single person or famly would pay a huge amount for insurance by themselves.
    Don’t look down on them- many of these people are responsible – they’re the working poor, and there are many of them.

    One of the reasons insurance it is so expensive is that the paying customers are absorbing the costs of the uninsured. The hospitals need to be made whole somehow.

    It has been a deeply broken system and it will remain so. Obamacare will be really bad. Obama did a dirty deal, but the Republicans had no leaders, no ideas and no plan. The entire system has failed the country.

  13. One of the quite amazing things to come from the Stafford Hospital Inquiry is that no-one will be held responsible, – in any way – for the many years of indolent mismanagement by the various layers of bureacracy which was supposed to ‘run’ the hospital, a bureacracy that lived by the edict that ‘the system must be protected at all costs’, and which repeatedly ignored mistakes in all departments, to the point of causing the deaths of several hundred folk.

    Is ‘bureacrat’ the new word for ‘numskull’, or perhaps ‘dimwit’? it would certainly seem to be so, as these avoidable mistakes occurred over quite a few years, and still they continued to happen.

    I always believed that being a ‘manager’ incurred an increased element of responsibility, both for successes and disasters alike, and yet it seeems that in today’s simpleton’s world of bureacracy if you can prove you had the ‘system’s best interests a heart’, well, – you can actually get away with murder, and yes, – if it happens in ‘your department’, then you are responsible.

    It seems that pensions and possible re-employment in a similar post, at another venue, are all ‘on the cards’, but it seems that even a public reprimand is totally out of the question, – and this at the suggestion of the QC who headed the inquiry. Before you ask – yes – he is also a bureacrat!

    Meanwhile, back in the cabbage patch, things are so easily put right – if only we are addressed as ‘Mr’,’Mrs’,’Ms’, or perhaps even ‘Sir’ or ‘Madam’… 🙂

  14. Further to my post above, – and how bureacrats avoid any responsibility for their mistakes and still manage to come up ‘smelling of roses’.

    ‘Sir David has been chief executive of the NHS since 2007, a job which comes with a £270,000 salary. Before that he was chief executive of the West Midlands strategic health authority which had overall responsibility for Mid Staffordshire Trust at the time of the scandal.’

    The above refers to Sir David Nicholson. He is described as the most powerful man in the NHS, and in a earlier article as having been a devout communist, – and this is a man in control of a large chunk of the UK economy!

    His dodging, diving, denials and sheer bare-faced effrontery are an insult to every taxpaying Brit. Driven by the ‘I’m alright Jack’ attitude of so many in the public and political sectors.

    He did consider resigning – but decided against it, concluding that the scandal had been caused by a ‘system failure’.’


  15. The fish stinks from the head.

    If this guy had no idea that things like this were going on in a major hospital in his system, then he was the wrong guy for the job.

  16. Phantom,

    He was ‘Top Dog’ at the hospital when it all happened…he was later (2007) kinighted and promoted to ‘CEO’ of the NHS. Now how is that for just punishment?

  17. Noted.

    That’s beyond horrible. He should be sacked, and more, and not just him either.

    Yes, I believe in accountability.

    Something like this would have been seen by so many people that you would think that any thinking and feeling human who worked there would be screaming bloody murder about it and demanding that things change pronto.

  18. It was in 1957 that I first walked the wards of the then largest general hospital in Western Europe – St James’s Hospital, Leeds. I remember it well. The hospital smell of lysol, the rows of wagging bottoms of the cleaners, the student nurses to flirt with and the power of Matron and the Sisters.

    At that time it would have been impossible to picture patients laying in their own filth, patients drinking water from flower vases, patients being left to fend for themselves at meal times. Something has gone wrong, seriously wrong and I think it is in the training of nurses. There was something to be said for sitting next to Nellie and absorbing the professional ethos which she exhibted. Sister was seen everywhere on the Ward not encased in an office.

    There is much to learn from the past and not everything new is good.

  19. To get some perspective on the antigovernmental screed aspect of this.

    There is neglect and abuse in private nursing homes and other facilities in the US. ( Details upon request ) I’ll bet my house that there is neglect and abuse in private or nonprofit facilities outside the US too.

    This isn’t only a ” government ” problem, not by a long shot. It’s a management problem, a lack of competence problem, a lack of humanity problem. Some of the worst run organizations in the world are private and some of the best are government owned and run. I’ll agree that private organizations tend to be leaner and more accountable, but there are many exceptions.

  20. Phantom,

    Yes there is an anti govenment perspective about this, but your attempr to somehow compare a public and a private service using the same parameters rather misses the point.

    Sure both have good and bad facilities, and ususlly caused by bad or greedy management, but the major differences between the two regimes is that of the onus of responsibility and of the prospect of economic failure.

    The public service, is subject to neither constraint. Capital is there for the asking, and the concept of responsibility just doesn’t cross the bureacratic mind, – how seldom do we read of a resignation and even less of an acrimonious discharge, without benefits? – very rarely. There just isn’t any over-riding incentive to strive for anything but a bare minimum service. Pride is long the loser when matched against indolence.

    In the private service there is always a very concious consideration of the costs and capital involved, and in the case of a total failure as exposed by death, complaint, or sheer lack of business there would invariably be some penalty to pay. Either in the form of loss of capital for plain incompetence, or for criminal charges as might be appropriate for negligence.

  21. There just isn’t any over-riding incentive to strive for anything but a bare minimum service

    I see your point, but I will say that there is much in the US private nursing home business that is a bare minimum service. There are no barriers to entry for those who might want to provide a better service other than economic ones – but those are all important.

    The low means of many patients means that these places do not hire the best and brightest – as employees or managers. Florida and the rest of the US has many of these places. There isn’t enough money in the pot to staff the place properly, or so it is thought, so they hire a bare minimum staff. This is very common.

    Non profit or religious institutions have their own horrors and abuses. An orthodox Jewish counselor ( not health care, but in the same sea ) recently was convicted of abuse of a young girl for years. The only role the government played was in convicting the son of a bitch. The congregation sided with the molester over the girl. You may not have this exact exposure in the UK, but it goes to show that completely nongovernmental organizations can be as corrupt and abusive and nonaccountable as anything the govt ever thought of.


  22. Phantom,

    Well, the case you mention proves my point, – he was in the private sector and he ended up doing time, – would the same thing have happened had he been employed in the public sector? Would the legal arm of government, – the Justice dept. – have been so keen to presecute had it been a State employee involved.

Comments are closed.