The UK is not an household and to draw that parallel is entirely incorrect. Households are always currency users not currency issuers.
The UK government does not need to raise GBP through taxation to spend GBP as it is the monopoly issuer of GBP.
Nor does the UK government need to borrow GBP to spend GBP - for exactly the same reason.
As it happens the private sector has a near insatiable desire for lending its idle cash balances to the UK government - the government debt being swapped for cash and being an asset of the private sector. Essentially this is an interest bearing risk free asset as the liabilities to pay interest and then to repay the principle at the end of the term is a government liability in GBP. This means that the UK government cannot be forced to default on what it owes.
My personal view is that I am against the entitlement culture of expecting a return on risk free assets. I also think that the issuing of government debt on a huge scale is something that feeds financial innovation - which feeds value extraction rather than value creation.
QE - Quantitative Easing - does not ease any quantities where it involves purchase back and holding of government debt by the government. It is merely an asset swap - a way of spending GBP into the economy. But what it does is it spends money into idle cash balances - and this has a portfolio affect in the private sector, i.e. holding more cash from the QE operation leads the private sector to purchase other assets to rebalance its portfolio. This bids up the value of assets generally making the 1) the private sector feel wealthier 2) providing collateral for borrowing and so increasing economic activity.
This is why total debt in our economy is 370% of GDP. There is a web of financial liabilities on one side and financial assets on the other that are only worth what someone is willing to pay for them - which isn't that much when sentiment turns.
As an aside QE reduces government net debt because it is now holding some of its own debt.
So to the extent that the cost of the NHS can be met by the payment of GBP any shortage of money in the NHS is because it is government policy to have it that way.
In my view the biggest problems that we face today are not the limits of financial resources but of real resources.
There is an immense challenge to invest in the capital structure of the economy to replace its fossil fuel dependency. That is value creating investment in the productive economy and not the placement of cash in the value extracting secondary markets for existing financial assets.
There is one particular resource that we are wasting on a daily basis and it is the primary resource of any productive economy: labour time. Lost hours of labour time due to unemployment can never be recovered. What they could have produced is permanently lost.
The latest data available from the ONS suggests that there were 3.1 unemployed people per vacancy at the end of July (seasonally adjusted) - still higher than the Summer of 2008. But the 2.08 million unemployed are only a part of the story. Add to them the 2.3 million who are economically inactive but want a job. Then there are 1.3 million in part time work who want full time work.
But while there are also economic reasons for pursuing full employment - as opposed to using unemployment as a tool of macroeconomic policy and political control - there are huge individual benefits to being in work that would help society. And, again a personal view, I want to live in a society rather than the Victorian Luddite economy of cheapened domestic labour and cheap immigrant labour.