Re: BroBo
Shortly after WW2 the NHS was just setup as a billing structure. The reason for this is that the GP's already existed, as did the hospitals. All that was needed was to say that "The NHS will pay $X_Amount for $Y_Service, and you have to agree to be inspected by somebody occasionally to check your work is to spec. Failing quality standards means we won't accept anymore invoices from you."
This system is fundamentally what we have today, although the GP's who used to do house visits to their privately paying patients have long since realised that a better business model is to own a building and just have a frigging huge que of patients waiting to see you as it eliminates travel time and you get paid the same.
As any provider can be paid for a set job, a level playing field exists already.
If the American healthcare providers want to try and sell insurance in the UK then they are welcome to join the existing UK healthcare insurance market, which is used by <10% of the population. How is that going to harm the NHS?
Honestly, I think that your barking in the wrong forest with where your looking. The biggest issue is going to be things like the US saying "well, now your no longer part of the EU, how about you accept drugs approved by the US FDA for use in the NHS without requiring us to get them certified by the EU's EMA?" Which isin't actually utterly unreasonable, and probably not actually *that* problematic given that the standards are pretty similar.
What'll be problematic is the US will probably lean on the government to drugs for the NHS through US providers rather than EU providers. But frankly, given that the EU has threatened to cut off supplies of needed medicines anyway i'm rather inclined to say "screw them then" as long as the prices we pay are pretty similar. (and given how badly some EU firms screw the NHS with multiple thousand percent price increases then buying from US suppliers when commercially viable would serve them right, and save the NHS quite a bit.)
Biting the hand that feeds IT
