It solves this problem of rich people having too much of a hard time getting ahead of poor people for medical treatment.

And it solves the issue in a way that the middle class thinks they’re on the winning side, but in fact they’re on the losing side, so it ends up solving a second problem: how to further deepen inequality in a way that the mass populace stays under a delusion of fairness.

And it solves the issue in yet another relevant way, in that the poorest segment of society gets to die off without care. What we call politics of extermination, where falling off to the edges of economic activity doesn’t merely make you marginalized, it actually erases you of the surface of the earth.

Triple win for the wealthy, double loss for the working class, and a final loss for the poor - death.

Canadian in the UK here. It’s a disaster.

The NHS is treated like “medical for the poors”. If you can afford it, you get private cover and get treated faster by the same doctors sometimes even in the same hospitals.

So you get the same American bullshit: “sorry, that hospital is out of network” and “if your insurance deems this scan to be uncovered, you’ll be liable for a £12k fee. Sign here.” with the added bonus that tonnes of public money is sunk into a national system that’s being parasitised by private interests.

That alone would be bad enough, but the above model also ensures that support for spending on the NHS isn’t as politically attractive, because those with the money have a “fuck you, I got mine” mentality thanks to the private option.

If you want a healthy national health care system, the rich and upper class need to be standing in line with the poor for their health care.

It solves the ‘problem’ of havimg to provide reasonable care for the poor not rich vermin in society.

The entire point of such a policy is to hurt everyone not part of the wealthy elite - to PUNISH them for the moral failing of being poor.

It solves the issue of people who own companies in the field of healthcare being connected to members of the UCP, so when they privatize these services, it’s those same members who benefit. This is the kind of policy that really pairs well with legalizing gifts to MLA’s from private corporations. link

These folks want to make more money, and they have the influence they need to make that money. In 2025, I can’t help but wonder why any company would ever invest in trying to build a good sustainable business when lobbying a corrupt government is a sure thing. Why would anyone with the capital ever risk losing that capital when they don’t have to?