Very long article. I'll have to read it properly to extract the main message which I think boils down to the "economics" of health care

Just a random point from near the end of the article

"We might hope that as developed industrial economies like the UK unravel due to growing shortages of energy and resources along with an increasing dependence on imports, what remains of the NHS might be scaled back rationally. But hope is always a triumph of optimism over experience. And just as we witnessed corporations – particularly those that donate to the Tories – lining up like pigs at a trough to feed on the Covid currency being ostensibly created to fund essential medical equipment during the pandemic, so we should expect to see the same corporations and vested interests lined up like vultures to feed on the still warm corpse of the dream of universal healthcare."

Universal health care is something that can be provided in rich countries and poor ones. The care provided should be proportionate to the needs of the population, its resources, and its most important principle is that it is done equably - no one individual should feel short changed as compared with any other in the same society. If the country is more economically equable this will happen by default, the problem arises because of the severe destructive economic imbalances in so many countries. There is no need for health care corpses in a well run fair society whatever its wealth..