[p_l]

Part of it is a Tory problem - when they changed how the funding gets distributed, so that overall bigger fund is divided now into smaller pieces that still have to cover the same population, but without the scaling benefits that previous allocation provided.

It's visible in other systems too, where for example you end up with local government politicians fighting for "prestige" or even perceived need to have a specific kind of hospital in their area, but they don't have a way to bring enough patients to support it, so you get a system too fragmented to sustain despite spending more and more money.

[nvm0n2]

The NHS doesn't have a problem with too few patients anywhere. Just look at the chaos of the recently opened dentists that saw massive queues down the street, where police had to intervene to control the crowds. The reason: the dentist was new and accepting NHS patients.

A system that can't even provide dental slots without needing police to break up fights is a catastrophically failed system and it is a huge problem of the UK that people have loyalty to this dying corpse of a department.

[p_l]

It is a problem with funding when you need to break it down into smaller pieces because some very expensive things that are used by less patients now do not have support of budget for a larger area, and become an extra drain on the administrative region - because you still need to maintain neurosurgery units etc.

Suddenly there's less money for smaller, cheaper things.

And what is the alternative? For-profit systems?

[nvm0n2]

Sure. Most parts of the world don't have the government run the entire healthcare system. It's an obviously bad idea everywhere To everyone except Brits.