[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jaxie

I don't think the articles you have posted really explain themselves or the figures quoted or where they come from very well. I should also point out they are two and three years old so I'm not sure how they apply to this year.

As far as I am aware 98% of NHS funding comes from the state through taxes and national insurance. If it needs government funding I'm not sure how or where it can be seen as making a profit and making a profit on what? If it is making a profit, then surely to be a profit, that profit would be greater than the funding to be seen as a profit. Under that premise the NHS wouldn't have needed any state funding for the last however many years. Unless when they say loss they mean that they have spent more than they were given. It's not specially clear where the profit and loss come from or goes to and how it relates to the budget given. There must be tons of departments and branches in the NHS. The article seems to relate to hospital trusts only and is about overspending of budgets rather than finishing the year (2 years ago) within the budget given.

Every year new medicines and treatments are developed, items, drugs, treatments, procedures get more expensive to do. The NHS needs large funding and this is not something that will ever change. It seems to me that the problem is finding the money and what Paul to rob to pay Peter.

How can I explain the drop in profit if I only post figures from this year?...

If you believe that 98% of NHS costs are met by the taxpayer then there's no point continuing a discussion with you, I have no idea how you think in any universe that was possible.