Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: albie on October 23, 2019, 09:52:26 pm
-
Vote in HoC tonight on privatisation in the NHS.
Corbyn proposed it should be halted, but the proposal fell.
Swindleson and the LibDems did not support it;
https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/
Unreal, unless she is angling for a new coalition with Johnson after a GE.
After all, the last coalition worked so well!
-
I didn't mind them under Cable but Swinson's turned them into Tories. The Tories themselves aren't getting the stick they deserve because Lib Dems have distracted people.
-
The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right
-
The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right
And yet you keep defending the tories and brexit which should just about see it off.
-
The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right
And yet you keep defending the tories and brexit which should just about see it off.
See it off where?
-
The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right
And yet you keep defending the tories and brexit which should just about see it off.
See it off where?
To Trump.
-
The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right
Trouble is that if you are a leaver, when you back Johnson because of that, you also buy in to the sale and break up of the NHS.
I would guess that most leavers also want to keep and support the NHS, without moving to a US insurance based system.
Same point about other policy choices, which is why a GE focussed on brexit comes with a package many will find unacceptable.
So what to do!
-
The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right
Trouble is that if you are a leaver, when you back Johnson because of that, you also buy in to the sale and break up of the NHS.
I would guess that most leavers also want to keep and support the NHS, without moving to a US insurance based system.
Same point about other policy choices, which is why a GE focussed on brexit comes with a package many will find unacceptable.
So what to do!
What to do?
Isn’t that why we have politicians ?
-
The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right
Trouble is that if you are a leaver, when you back Johnson because of that, you also buy in to the sale and break up of the NHS.
I would guess that most leavers also want to keep and support the NHS, without moving to a US insurance based system.
Same point about other policy choices, which is why a GE focussed on brexit comes with a package many will find unacceptable.
So what to do!
Let's not kid ourselves, we have an insurance based system, its just compulsory and non discriminatory
-
Ldr,
That might be so, but do you want it to selective in terms of pricing and availability of treatment.
The US businesses looking at UK public assets are concerned with shareholder value...that means generating profit for investors. If that comes at the expense of universal standards of provision, would that be a good thing?
As Blackpool says, if you don't see privatisation as the solution, then you need to be careful not to enable it by mistake, by concentrating on another issue.
The Labour alternative for the NHS is set out here:
https://tribunemag.co.uk/2019/10/inequality-is-britains-greatest-illness
-
No of course not, I also bristle at use of the word privatisation, which is not happening, outsourcing yes, privatisation no. 2 different things, the p word is used in an emotional context by some and is completely inaccurate.
-
No of course not, I also bristle at use of the word privatisation, which is not happening, outsourcing yes, privatisation no. 2 different things, the p word is used in an emotional context by some and is completely inaccurate.
LDR outsourcing is just another name for private health care is it not? so it all depends on the level of outsourcing in any period and whether it is increasing over time to determine whether or not there is a push towards privatisation. Everyone fully understands that johnson is a snake that cannot be trusted on any matter a prime eg removing worker rights from the WA. Unless there is some legal limitation to prevent privatisation I wouldn't bet my house on it not happening under the tories.
-
Outsourcing is a reasonable way to describe contracts let to private service providers for short term periods.
It is not the only method of transferring NHS resources to private interests.
Private Finance Initiative (PFI) under both Labour and Tories, looked to secure infrastructure on the never never.
These contracts are very expensive compared to other means of financing, and often result in payments which are back end loaded, so an increasing burden is placed upon budgets going forward.
At the end of the day neither is public sector provision and control as set out in the original NHS plan, which Labour now intends to reboot for the future.
-
No of course not, I also bristle at use of the word privatisation, which is not happening, outsourcing yes, privatisation no. 2 different things, the p word is used in an emotional context by some and is completely inaccurate.
LDR outsourcing is just another name for private health care is it not? so it all depends on the level of outsourcing in any period and whether it is increasing over time to determine whether or not there is a push towards privatisation. Everyone fully understands that johnson is a snake that cannot be trusted on any matter a prime eg removing worker rights from the WA. Unless there is some legal limitation to prevent privatisation I wouldn't bet my house on it not happening under the tories.
No, healthcare remains public I.e. free to the patient at point of delivery which is the ethos of the NHS.
-
The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right
Trouble is that if you are a leaver, when you back Johnson because of that, you also buy in to the sale and break up of the NHS.
I would guess that most leavers also want to keep and support the NHS, without moving to a US insurance based system.
Same point about other policy choices, which is why a GE focussed on brexit comes with a package many will find unacceptable.
So what to do!
Let's not kid ourselves, we have an insurance based system, its just compulsory and non discriminatory
It's not remotely like a conventional insurance scheme.
In an insurance scheme, you pay according to the cover you want and the risk you represent.
In the NHS, you pay according to your ability to pay, without reference to risk.
-
I'd prefer 99%-100% of it to be done in NHS facilities by NHS staff but understand this cannot always be done, as more outsourcing increases whether it is free to the client or not the easier it is for any future government to press and pull privatisation levers.
If the UK is going to brexit and do trade deals under WTO then there should be legal definable safeguards not to bargain away the NHS, it appears (and thanks to Albie's post) that only the labour party is prepared to put this in writing at present.
It shouldn't be a problem for johnson and his government to put into legislation anything he promises on this matter now if he and his government are going to keep their word in the future should it?
-
The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right
Trouble is that if you are a leaver, when you back Johnson because of that, you also buy in to the sale and break up of the NHS.
I would guess that most leavers also want to keep and support the NHS, without moving to a US insurance based system.
Same point about other policy choices, which is why a GE focussed on brexit comes with a package many will find unacceptable.
So what to do!
Let's not kid ourselves, we have an insurance based system, its just compulsory and non discriminatory
It's not remotely like a conventional insurance scheme.
In an insurance scheme, you pay according to the cover you want and the risk you represent.
In the NHS, you pay according to your ability to pay, without reference to risk.
So what I said then 😁
-
''Outsourcing''/privatisation
parliament today:
Corbyn:
''He told PMs: "I hate it to break it to the prime minister, but under his government and that of his predecessor privatisation has more than doubled to £10bn in our NHS.''
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-cant-explain-workers-20705784
-
Hate to break it to you but without outsourcing the system doesnt cope. 1 year waits become multi year waits
-
Sydney do you understand how the NHS works? Not a dig btw, genuine question
-
Sydney do you understand how the NHS works? Not a dig btw, genuine question
In short no, but I have a fair idea how politics work and if johnson is allowed to get brexit over the line without safeguards to workers rights, the NHS, conservation, greenbelt land etc etc etc we'll all know the answer to your question and I'm not being smart either.
-
Curious as to what you think I was going to say?
-
Curious as to what you think I was going to say?
Not sure what you mean there ldr but the main thrust of my argument for outsourcing is that the more of it that is done the less the NHS is doing and the easier to privatise. Privatisation and the tories go together hand in glove, it's in their political dna.
It is a fundamental for the tories to privatise as much of whatever it can get it's hands on, this helps with its campaign to reduce the size of government, de-unionising of the workforce, helps its mates get their hands on business opportunities, defunds and weakens its political opponents mainly labour.
-
Hate to break it to you but without outsourcing the system doesnt cope. 1 year waits become multi year waits
Private companies are not outsourcing NHS contracts to provide a better service. They are doing it to make money - at taxpayers expense.
http://www.patients4nhs.org.uk/private-companies-involvement-in-the-nhs/
One of the rationales for privatisation has been that the private sector is more efficient in running services. This has turned out to be something of a myth: a number of corporations have withdrawn from large contracts or had their contracts terminated due to serious problems. For example,
In 2015, a £800 million contract for older peoples’ services was eventually awarded to UnitingCare by Cambridgeshire and Peterborough CCG after a tendering process costing over £1 million. Eight months into the contract, UnitingCare withdrew stating that the contract was not financially viable.
The private company running Hinchingbrook Hospital (Circle) cited financial reasons for pulling out of a 10 year contract in January 2015. This was just two years into the contract and just before a highly damning report from the Care Quality Commission on the hospital’s management and culture and the quality of care it provided.
In 2016, the outsourcing giant Capita was awarded a £330 million, seven-year contract to run primary care support services. Its bid included cutting support staff from 1,314 to 314, reducing the cost of the service by 69% (a saving of £60 million). This and other high risk strategies led to widespread failures, such as serious problems with patient record transfers, shortages of medical and other supplies, and delayed payments, loss of earnings and chaos for many GPs, dentists, opticians and pharmacists.
A report on the Capita contract by the National Audit Office in 2018 identified failings on the part of NHSE (e.g. it had not understood primary care support services well enough to set contract targets; and basic principles were still not agreed more than two years into the contract), while Capita’s failings potentially put patients at risk (e.g. 87 women were incorrectly notified that they were no longer part of the cervical screening programme). The British Medical Association (BMA) has called for NHSE to bring primary care support services back in-house.
There are also concerns about whether or not private companies are avoiding paying tax on their profits. For example, Virgin Care pays no tax in the UK: it’s parent company is registered in the British Virgin Islands. In October 2016, BBC Midlands reported that 12 NHS GP practices and urgent care centres across the West Midlands were ultimately owned by Malling Health, a company based in a tax haven in the Bahamas. Malling Health exchanged bank loans with an interest rate of 4% for a loan at 20% interest with the owner of Bahamas-based Butterfly Ventures. The company says this arrangement is more flexible, but experts claim it’s a way of diverting money into a low tax area.
http://www.patients4nhs.org.uk/private-companies-involvement-in-the-nhs/
-
Thanks Wilts for all the data, a typical scenario runs along the lines of starve a government entity of funds and run it down then you can claim it's not efficient not working property and blame the unions, give tax cuts to the already wealthy and business and then claim the country can't afford to run the NHS and do everything for everybody let the private sector do it, bingo full house privatisation jackpot.
-
So no one on this forum has any evidence of a plan by the Tories to sell of the NHS! Or introduce a compulsory 80 hour working week , or bring back the workhouse!🤔
-
Sproty, did I ever tell you the story about the scorpian and the frog? :)
-
Trump has been very direct about everything being up for grabs if the UK wants a US trade deal;
https://www.politico.eu/article/us-takes-aim-at-the-uks-national-health-service/
Why would the Tories and the LibDems not agree to the Corbyn amendment if they had no plans to go down this road?
Lots of background on this site, for those interested;
https://weownit.org.uk/nhs-trade-deal-action
I hope I'm wrong about this, but I fear the worst on the other side of an election.
Clearly Johnson will not big it up until the votes are in the bag.
-
Privatisation has worked well for the prison service and railways too.
-
Sproty, did I ever tell you the story about the scorpian and the frog? :)
Hang on you posted you didnt like things that weren't facts being posted as so, so equally should have some disdain for the nonsense being quoted about Tory policies.
FWIW, outsourcing has huge benefits..I formerly worked within it mostly on public sector contracts and it did yield benefits. All of the clients in my areas were labour councils largely.....
The nhs will never end up like the American system, never. The country wont allow it, would be political suicide.
-
Yes partly correct but why then are the tories running down NHS services and starving it of funds at this very moment when we know because they just told us recently that there is plenty of money to build how many new hospitals.?
-
BFYP,
Perhaps the plan is make sure it does not look like the US system.
I agree it would be very risky for Johnson to do this up front.
The strategy is do it piecemeal, and in the background.
I think you are underestimating the extent to which it is already underway.
This is a criticism of New Labour as well as the coalition/Tories.
There are many links to sources in this piece;
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ournhs/ournhsanother-key-johnson-claim-nhs-demolished/
The NHS estate is also a key resource, and the future use of PFI has a large potential impact;
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ournhs/johnsons-hospital-building-seed-money-and-how-pfi-never-went-away/
Much of this is not in the public mind, as it is complex and needs some understanding of financial systems.
Still real though!
I am interested in what you see the "huge benefits" of outsourcing have been.
-
''Tory NHS shake-up blamed for fall in child vaccination rates
National Audit Office says campaigning by ‘anti-vaxxers’ has only had limited impact
One significant factor identified by auditors was the Conservative former health secretary Andrew Lansley’s 2013 reorganisation of the NHS, auditors said.
“There is evidence that the 2013 health system reorganisation in England resulted in fragmentation in the way the vaccination programme has been delivered,” the report concludes.
Auditors said that responsibility for vaccinations before 2013 was mixed between primary care trusts and service providers, who manage children’s clinical care records. This was then passed on to NHS England after the reorganisation, the report said.''
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/25/tory-nhs-shake-up-blamed-for-fall-in-child-vaccination-rates
-
Polly Toynbee ..... keepin' it real .... ''These brutal cuts to the NHS will haunt the Conservatives'' ......
....... and yet more ............ ''Start with the shocking privatisation in 2013 of the NHS blood plasma supplier, on which thousands of patients depend. To protect the quality of the blood product, David Owen, as health secretary in 1975, took blood plasma collection into public ownership as Plasma Resources UK. But Jeremy Hunt, as health secretary, sold that off for £200m to a US private equity firm, Bain Capital, while Britain kept a 20% stake. Co-founded by Mitt Romney in 1984, Bain has over the years acquired such well known health products as Burger King, Dunkin Donuts, Dominos Pizza and much else. Protesters, David Owen among them, warned that the company had a predatory reputation for asset stripping, but Bain promised it would develop the company into a “life sciences champion” in Hertfordshire. Instead, it sold it on to a Chinese company in 2016 for £820m. Was there any protest from our government, losing its last remnant of control? Not a word. Instead, an irony, the US government is expressing concern at China taking over a vital US-owned health asset''
Apologies if this painful reading for the tory faithful :)
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/25/boris-johnson-conservatives-nhs-funding
-
It wont be painful reading - people are so entrenched nowadays the vast majority (not all) wont believe anything contrary to their viewpoint
Equally applies to Labour v Tory Remain v Leave
I think lots of people have now totally switched off from politicking now anyway
-
Folk might be interested in watching "Dispatches" on Ch4, Monday @8pm.
This episode will look at the NHS debate, including the themes discussed on here.
Lets talk again after you have seen the program.
-
And this
''Revealed: how the UK’s powerful right-wing think tanks and Conservative MPs work together''
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/dark-money-investigations/revealed-how-uk-s-powerful-right-wing-think-tanks-and-conse/
-
No its not!
-
Sydney if someone shared that about labour you would have none of it mate even I can share shite like that🤣
-
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/03/how-labour-broke-nhs-and-why-labour-must-fix-it Not all tories fault eh!
-
Sydney if someone shared that about labour you would have none of it mate even I can share shite like that🤣
Who's a clever boy then, has anyone said you can't, this is a forum and your input is wanted so subjects can be debated such as the biggest subject since ww2 that brexit is a croc, most of us have been waiting for 3 years for you and others to post something good about it.
-
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/03/how-labour-broke-nhs-and-why-labour-must-fix-it Not all tories fault eh!
I hope you read your own link? at 4.5 years it's a bit out of date and labour has moved on, see Albies link above. (Apparently it's not privatisation it's outsourcing :) )
this article was written last year following 9 years of tories.
''NHS operation waiting lists reach 10-year high at 4.3m patients
NHS ability to meet targets will define Matt Hancock’s time as health secretary, say unions''
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jul/13/nhs-operation-waiting-lists-reach-10-year-high-at-43m-patients
-
I no it’s a old one but it still stands and new you would rubbish it, it might well be crap but as you are putting link after link up from any website that fits your agenda I thought I would join the party
-
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/03/how-labour-broke-nhs-and-why-labour-must-fix-it Not all tories fault eh!
Thanks for posting this, Blackpool.
It is a very good summary of how we got to where we are, and the part Labour played in this.
The question now is what to do about it?
Trump is looking to open the UK to US corporations as the price for a trade deal after brexit.
So are you saying that making the NHS more accessible to outside contractors is a good thing, or would you rather we took control to sort it out ourselves?
We are at a fork in the road for public services, and the choice we make will impact future options.
Maybe "Dispatches" on Monday will spell it out!
-
Bpool.
It doesn't work like that. You don't just trawl for whatever headline suits your purpose and say "There's no suhc thing as objective truth: you can find whatever you want to support you."
Have you actually read that article that you posted?
If you're serious about assessing evidence, you have to go way beyond the headlines (which, in this case, is deliberately provocative, and was written at a time that there was a major battle going on between the right and left of the Labour party). You have to look at what the facts are that arguments are based on. That's hard, I know. It requires time and patience and effort. But if you don't go beyond the headlines, you will always (and I mean ALWAYS) be taken for a ride.
That article clearly sets out, right at the start, the fact that the NHS was woefully underfunded by the time Labour came to power in 1997. That was afer two decades of the Tories reducing the proporation of national wealth that went into the NHS, while the rest of the world were strongly increasing their spending on health.
The article sets out the fact that Labour increased the percentage of GDP that went into the NHS by 50% over the next decade. The criticism it makes is that Labour, under Blair, made changes to the NHS that allowed more involvement by the private sector. And, crucially, that this change made it easier (politically) for the Tories to do this on steroids. he says:
"The coalition government seized on the inroads made by New Labour. As well as cementing competition for work on a case-by- case basis under AQP, Section 75 of their Health and Social Care Act 2012 makes it obligatory for commissioners to put every new NHS service (above a trivial size) out to tender. Analysis of data up to 2013 shows more than £12bn of NHS contracts were awarded to private companies during the first three years of the coalition."
THAT is what he's complaining about. That Blair, almost certainly inadvertently, gave an opportunity for the Tories to turbocharge the use of private services in the NHS.
By the way, it's also worth noting that, since coming to power in 2010, the Tories have once again reduced the percentage of GDP that goes into the NHS. When the rest of the developed world is still increasing theirs, and the demands of health care for an aging population are getting more onerous by the year.
This isn't about winning points by saying "but YOUR side are as bad". It's about taking on the responsibility as an adult to think for yourself.
-
That’s my point bst Sydney is trawling through every paper every website to find something that suits his agenda, as I said what I posted might be a load of shite but the headline reads what it does, I just can’t see the point in him posting 30 links a day from left leaning media
-
Don't read em bp it's a forum, I post from reliable sources as far as I'm able and try to stay on topic, any time you feel like it you can put posts up from credible sources about the benefits of a far right wing government and brexit, knock yourself out.
-
Just a heads up for Dispatches tonight, CH4, 8pm;
https://inews.co.uk/news/health/nhs-drugs-cost-brexit-trade-deal-usa-820816
Light the blue touchpaper and retreat to a safe distance.
-
Just a heads up for Dispatches tonight, CH4, 8pm;
https://inews.co.uk/news/health/nhs-drugs-cost-brexit-trade-deal-usa-820816
Light the blue touchpaper and retreat to a safe distance.
And more on the subject here:
essentially the Tory's are in secret negotiations with US pharmaceutical companies to give them priveleged access to NHS medicines - forcing the UK taxpayer to pay more for these medicines and most likely raising the cost of prescriptions
https://twitter.com/C4Dispatches/status/1188831701654482945
-
But we'll need those drugs more than ever when their chicken goes on sale. :)
-
Just a heads up for Dispatches tonight, CH4, 8pm;
https://inews.co.uk/news/health/nhs-drugs-cost-brexit-trade-deal-usa-820816
Light the blue touchpaper and retreat to a safe distance.
And more on the subject here:
essentially the Tory's are in secret negotiations with US pharmaceutical companies to give them priveleged access to NHS medicines - forcing the UK taxpayer to pay more for these medicines and most likely raising the cost of prescriptions
https://twitter.com/C4Dispatches/status/1188831701654482945
[Bentley Bullet]We might not be able to afford healthcare but at least we will have our democracy[/]
-
''Tory NHS shake-up blamed for fall in child vaccination rates
National Audit Office says campaigning by ‘anti-vaxxers’ has only had limited impact
One significant factor identified by auditors was the Conservative former health secretary Andrew Lansley’s 2013 reorganisation of the NHS, auditors said.
“There is evidence that the 2013 health system reorganisation in England resulted in fragmentation in the way the vaccination programme has been delivered,” the report concludes.
Auditors said that responsibility for vaccinations before 2013 was mixed between primary care trusts and service providers, who manage children’s clinical care records. This was then passed on to NHS England after the reorganisation, the report said.''
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/25/tory-nhs-shake-up-blamed-for-fall-in-child-vaccination-rates
I missed this post. Shouldn't parents be responsible for their children. I have two children under two years old and it is very clear what is required when, I fail to see how it can be an issue? Or maybe doncaster and bassetlaw are better than others?
-
And yet there it is in black and white bfyp
-
According to quite a few on here trump will get impeached so trump won’t have much say by the time any trade deal is going to happen
-
And yet there it is in black and white bfyp
Indeed, it says clearly there is an inconsistency between areas. However I find it bizarre that parents cant take responsibility for their own children. Should it need the state to remind parents of a fundamental part of child healthcare?
-
I suppose if we want to ensure there are few if no epidemics or harm to children then the state should be involved to ensure nutjobs and antivaxers don't avoid their responsibilities. I can't see a problem.
-
According to quite a few on here trump will get impeached so trump won’t have much say by the time any trade deal is going to happen
if we brexit then the tories will be desperate to do trade deals with whomever is in power in the US and other countries, no?
-
Yes of course
-
So a trade deal that compromises the NHS is very much alive unless there are safeguards or no-brexit, yes?
-
What safe guards will labour put in to stop everything? Should There be safeguards against corbyns foreign policy? Yes there are risks but there is in everything in life if tories mess with the nhs to much they will soon get voted out
-
We all know the risks to the NHS but you should identify the risk with Corbyn's foreign policy so we know what you mean?
-
We all know the risks to the NHS but you should identify the risk with Corbyn's foreign policy so we know what you mean?
Must be the hypothetical he's going to pally up with terrorists. It's not like how we've been supplying Saudis for years while they've massacred Yemenis.
-
The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right
Trouble is that if you are a leaver, when you back Johnson because of that, you also buy in to the sale and break up of the NHS.
I would guess that most leavers also want to keep and support the NHS, without moving to a US insurance based system.
Same point about other policy choices, which is why a GE focussed on brexit comes with a package many will find unacceptable.
So what to do!
What to do?
Isn’t that why we have politicians ?
I thought it was only the " will of the people on 1 day in 2016 " that REALLY mattered
-
Vote in HoC tonight on privatisation in the NHS.
Corbyn proposed it should be halted, but the proposal fell.
Swindleson and the LibDems did not support it;
https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/
Unreal, unless she is angling for a new coalition with Johnson after a GE.
After all, the last coalition worked so well!
Albie perhaps you can enlighten me as to what effect Lib/ Dem votes would have made here . Would it mean that the NHS would be safe in the hands of the Tories had they have voted with Labour ? .....OF COURSE NOT .
YOU are making something out of nothing here , don't let reality get in the way of your prejudice will you . It's obvious that a Party that is unequivocally against Brexit and any privatisation of the NHS - IS FOR THE NHS
-
brexit is a magic turd Hoola, it has been said that you can squeeze and shape it into anything you want it to be as it's been 'sold' to the masses as a cure-all. It is brightly coloured like cluster bomb fragments and coated in sugar but will blow up in the face of anyone without 'means' in the years to come.
-
We all know the risks to the NHS but you should identify the risk with Corbyn's foreign policy so we know what you mean?
Must be the hypothetical he's going to pally up with terrorists. It's not like how we've been supplying Saudis for years while they've massacred Yemenis.
to be be fair he did call hezbollah his friends
-
So what are the risks to foreign policy?
-
Well calling hamas and hezbollah friends would be a risk to start, in the morning I will put some of your famous links up mate as there are quite a few that question them
-
Hoola,
You are right that the LD decision to abstain made no real difference to the outcome.
That was not my point.
IMO the reason the LD's did not commit is that they are paving the way for a new LD/Tory coalition if we get a hung parliament.
They are avoiding a statement of support for the NHS so that it can't be quoted back if they sign up with Johnson to the trade deal Trump wants to see.
A point of principle is unhelpful if you want to preserve full wriggle room.
As always, I could be wrong.
We might find out after Dec 12!
-
Well calling hamas and hezbollah friends would be a risk to start, in the morning I will put some of your famous links up mate as there are quite a few that question them
I think you need to get your facts right first bp as you don't appear to grasp the context in which the word 'friends' was used, so maybe you could show some initiative and dig out what Corbyn actually said, when he said and the context before you go any further.
-
Lol I don’t need to dig out anything, how do you know what context it was said in? You only know what he has said, you believe him if you like I won’t no problem, none of us can prove it either way
-
lol? watch this and then write 100 times don't believe all you read in the tabloids.
https://www.facebook.com/Channel4News/videos/10153074175846939/
-
That’s just his him getting round it lol means nothing what so ever
-
If a Tory mp had said that then said what Corbyn said you would rip them to pieces, you would not just accept what he said as being true
-
What it actually means is you didn't watch as you haven't had time, yeah I know you've seen it before but you allow shallow journalism to give you an opinion instead of reading and learning from many sources and then having an informed opinion, mate
-
No your just taking his word for it, if boris had said it then said what Jc had said would you believe him?
-
https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrP4lHa6bhdknsAamp0g81Q;_ylu=X3oDMTByZzJoOXByBGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwM0BHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1572428378/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2fnews.sky.com%2fstory%2fsalisbury-attack-jeremy-corbyn-accused-of-appeasement-towards-russia-11289753/RK=2/RS=sUZYn9GVoOdn5GgR6XR9Wvmh1OU- A bad way of going about things again
-
remind what this got to do with the 'friends' discussion or have you abandoned that, mate
-
I’ve already answered you on that, but yes I’ve abandoned it as there I as no proof either way to prove it, so we will keep going round in circles and there is no point really
-
I’ve already answered you on that
no you haven't you just said ner ner ner, which really doesn't mean anything.
ADDED:Are you related to Bentley, just asking? :)
-
Are you related to Vladimir? Just asking
-
dammit I knew you'd be the one to out me :)
-
Hoola.
I worry that you haven't learned from 2010.
The LDs like to paint themselves as being a party of the soft left, but you know exactly what happened in 2010 when they had to make a choice.
They CHOSE to sign up to the most devastating and destructive hard right economic policy since the 1930s.
They CHOSE to enable Austerity and all the shite that has followed it.
I don't understand how anyone who leans left could ever even consider voting LD in a GE again after that.
-
I came upon this today and thought it worth sharing. You can make up your own minds as to what it tells you about the priorities and policies of the last 3 Tory governments. And what might change under Corbyn or Johnson.
https://twitter.com/FromSteveHowell/status/1190215004596948992
-
Wilts.
Doesn't that just perfectly capture the Tory philosophy?
They used to get away with it by having a reputation for general good economic management. They used to pride themselves on being competent hard headed bas**rds.
But this decade has been the most spectacular failure of economic management. The worst decade of growth for over 150 years.
Now they are incompetent grabbing bas**rds.
How does anyone from round here even begin to contemplate voting for them?
-
And you and I and many others on this board know there is a lot more where that came from. We probably wont change many minds. But we will let them know what they are voting for...
-
There IS a lot more to come Wilts.
Here's one example. While the wealth of the richest 100 people in the country has been exploding under the Tories, this is what's happened to average wages for the rest of us, once you allow for inflation.
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/B4BD/production/_108296264_optimised-real.wages-2019-aug-13-nc.png)
It's there. Right in front of you in those two graphs folks.
-
A bit of context to that average weekly earnings figure. This extends the time backwards to see what happened under Blair and Brown.
Of course, folk will say "well wages had to come down because of the Great Crash".
But look at how Labour had stabilised the fall before the 2010 election. And look at how first Austerity, then the Brexit vote hit us.
And, if wages had to fall, how come the richest 1000 have ween their wealth rise by getting on for 200% while the rest of us have had a decade of Tory-imposed wealth loss?
You want to know why the political debate is so toxic these days? It's there. In that graph. a decade of folk working hard and going backwards because of the economic stupidity and greed of the Tories.
(https://i.imgur.com/4Rne0LL.png)
-
After every recession, even the hardest ones, if we manage the recovery correctly, wage growth returns to pre-recession rates. If we hadn't made the once in a lifetime calamitous mistake of Austerity in 2010, average wages ought to have been something like £600-650 per week now.
The fact that they aren't means that, on average, everyone working has lost something between £30-50,000 in income over the past decade under this set of thieves. While their wealthy mates have been coining it in.
And we have idiots in here saying that Labour always hammers the working man. Give me strength.
-
Clearly, since 2014, according to those graphs, we are in recovery mode.
Again, with no political allegiance, am I right in saying that whoever was in power after the global crash would have had difficulty in stabilising the fall.
Also, would Labour opposition say that we were inevitably in another boom and bust period leading to the big crash?
The graph shows a fall in average wages lasting around three years before Labour were voted out and a further three to four years to fix the damage.
As for the top 100 getting richer, come on BST, most people know that money makes money.
I doubt that you are skint and even during Austerity you will have done allright.
-
Hound.
We've had a tepid recovery in wages since 2014.
If economies are managed well, you come out of recession roaring. Because there is so much suppressed demand waiting to be unleashed.
Why to people on the Right refuse to see this? That wages graph shows the fact. That we've had a horrifically mismanaged economy for a decade. It's THERE!
-
Also, why personalise this? What I earn is utterly irrelevant. If I am or am not doing OK,that is irrelevant. This is about the country as a whole. And the country as a whole has been through the mill under these bas**rds,while the richest have been let off the leash to fill their boots.
Why don't you see that?
-
play the man not the ball
-
Hound.
The Great Financial Crash was the biggest hit to capitalist economies since the 1930s.
No one survives a shock like that without damage. It was inevitable that wages would take a hit.
But look at the graph from mid-2008 to mid-2010. Wages stabilised.
That was because the economy turned a corner. That was because Labour implemented classic Keynesian stimulus policies.
Govt increases spending to support the economy while private industry is still reeling from the haymaker it's just taken.
We've known that is the way out of recession since before the War. It has worked every single time.
It was working in 08-10. But Cameron and Osborne screamed that Govt should be tightening it's belt like industry and individuals were. They screamed that it was all about the deficit.
So, when they won in 2010, they immediately cut back Govt spending. Against the advice of the vast majority of economists.
And look what happened. The economic recovery juddered to a standstill. Wages plunged again. Not because of a global shock this time. Because of the most stupid economic decision of our lifetimes.
By the way. Osborne did quietly increase Govt spending in 2014 because he was panicking that the economic slump was going to cost him the election. Look what happened. Just like textbook economics says.
-
Classic tory dna instead of stimulus to break out of a recession use it to break the welfare state and the unionised workforce. Tax breaks for the already rich, empty the coffers then claim the country can't afford penalty rates, sell off the family silver to the rent seekers and carpetbaggers, spiral the economy down so selling the NHS seems like a good idea, but call it outsourcing so no one notices, and all the time you are weakening your political opposition but blame on the weakest and the poorest for not having a go.
Those with real money survive to clean up.
-
Hound.
Oh aye. And your comment that the fall in wages was needed to "fix the damage" is deeply depressing.
There is no economic theory or practical experience that says that depressing wages is necessary to "fix the damage" after a recession. It's actually quite the reverse. The way you come out of a recession is by encouraging economic activity to grow. And you don't do that by screwing people down.
I'll tell you why it's so depressing. That decision,to implement Austerity in 2010 had nothing whatsoever to do with economics. It was all about shrinking the size and scope of Govt. For right wing ideological purposes. But it was dressed up as inevitable because people put on serious faces and said "we have to fix the damage".
There's only two groups in the country who have been isolated from the effects of that catastrophic decision. That's the very wealthiest, who have seen tax rates slashed, and pensioners who have seen consistent above-average pe Sion increases. The rest of the country has been screwed down.
-
Hound.
Oh aye. And your comment that the fall in wages was needed to "fix the damage" is deeply depressing.
There is no economic theory or practical experience that says that depressing wages is necessary to "fix the damage" after a recession. It's actually quite the reverse. The way you come out of a recession is by encouraging economic activity to grow. And you don't do that by screwing people down.
I'll tell you why it's so depressing. That decision,to implement Austerity in 2010 had nothing whatsoever to do with economics. It was all about shrinking the size and scope of Govt. For right wing ideological purposes. But it was dressed up as inevitable because people put on serious faces and said "we have to fix the damage".
There's only two groups in the country who have been isolated from the effects of that catastrophic decision. That's the very wealthiest, who have seen tax rates slashed, and pensioners who have seen consistent above-average pe Sion increases. The rest of the country has been screwed down.
My post must have been eating away at you BST for you to come back today about it.
However, can you tell me where I said “a fall in wages was needed to fix the damage”.
You are seriously twisting what I actually said.
-
Hound.
Of course your post is eating at me. For two reasons.
1) it's emblematic of the way in which people are refusing to look at evidence which goes against what they want to believe. That concerns me. A lot.
You say "The graph shows a fall in average wages lasting around three years before Labour were voted out".
But it doesn't. At all. It shows a severe drop when the Global Financial Crisis hit in 2008 followed by a year of stabilisation in 09/10. That is as clear as a bell.
You say, "am I right in saying that whoever was in power after the global crash would have had difficulty in stabilising the fall." But it's there in front of your nose. The situation WAS stabilised. By Labour. By early 2010, economic growth had come roaring back. We were growing at pre-recession levels, due to the drastic action Labour had taken to address the crisis. Then the rug was pulled from under the legs of the economy by Austerity. The economy flatlined for 4 years and wages fell drastically. It's all there. On that graph.
2) Which brings me to the second point. There's a determined insistence, much of it from people if your generation, not to hold the Tories to account for the damage that Austerity has done. It has done horrific damage to our economy and to our social fabric. You want to know why so many working people are so f**ked off these days? Look at that graph. A decade of working damned hard and seeing living standards fall.
By the way, you accuse me if twisting your words in saying that a fall in wages was needed to fix the damage. How else am I supposed to interpret "The graph shows a fall in average wages lasting around three years before Labour were voted out and a further three to four years to fix the damage."
And THAT is what really tweaks my tail. Because intelligent people have swallowed the lie that we somehow needed this decade of horrific economic performance to fix something. We didn't, and if we don't understand that and start taking down that lie, we are fated to fall for it again. Especially with such a consummately easy liar as Johnson at the helm. And that scares me. A lot.
-
Hound.
Of course your post is eating at me. For two reasons.
1) it's emblematic of the way in which people are refusing to look at evidence which goes against what they want to believe. That concerns me. A lot.
You say "The graph shows a fall in average wages lasting around three years before Labour were voted out".
But it doesn't. At all. It shows a severe drop when the Global Financial Crisis hit in 2008 followed by a year of stabilisation in 09/10. That is as clear as a bell.
You say, "am I right in saying that whoever was in power after the global crash would have had difficulty in stabilising the fall." But it's there in front of your nose. The situation WAS stabilised. By Labour. By early 2010, economic growth had come roaring back. We were growing at pre-recession levels, due to the drastic action Labour had taken to address the crisis. Then the rug was pulled from under the legs of the economy by Austerity. The economy flatlined for 4 years and wages fell drastically. It's all there. On that graph.
2) Which brings me to the second point. There's a determined insistence, much of it from people if your generation, not to hold the Tories to account for the damage that Austerity has done. It has done horrific damage to our economy and to our social fabric. You want to know why so many working people are so f**ked off these days? Look at that graph. A decade of working damned hard and seeing living standards fall.
By the way, you accuse me if twisting your words in saying that a fall in wages was needed to fix the damage. How else am I supposed to interpret "The graph shows a fall in average wages lasting around three years before Labour were voted out and a further three to four years to fix the damage."
And THAT is what really tweaks my tail. Because intelligent people have swallowed the lie that we somehow needed this decade of horrific economic performance to fix something. We didn't, and if we don't understand that and start taking down that lie, we are fated to fall for it again. Especially with such a consummately easy liar as Johnson at the helm. And that scares me. A lot.
But you said that I had said “a fall in wages was needed to fix the damage”.
I clearly did not say that at all.
The words I used, that you highlight above, do not indicate that I suggested a fall in wages was needed at all.
That may be your interpretation but it isn’t mine and certainly wasn’t intended that way.
Anyway, because of your a Labour roots you are always going to argue the point to suit your view that anything the Tories do is wrong and abhorrent.
My original post on the subject following your graphs is my interpretation of what they show me.
Your view is different so we disagree.
Nothing wrong with that is there?
-
Right Hound.
So you accept that that prolonged fall in wages due to Austerity was entirely unnecessary? That's good. That puts you in the side of the overwhelming majority of economics experts.
So. Why do you think it happened?
As for the way you read evidence, I'm lost. Is there or is there not a clear 12-18 month period in the run up to the 2010 election in which wages had stabilised, followed by a clear and prolonged drop afterwards?
I'm not reading the evidence that way because I support Labour. I support Labour because the evidence always says they handle the economy for the average person better than the Tories do. It's there. In front of your eyes.
-
Right Hound.
So you accept that that prolonged fall in wages due to Austerity was entirely unnecessary? That's good. That puts you in the side of the overwhelming majority of economics experts.
So. Why do you think it happened?
As for the way you read evidence, I'm lost. Is there or is there not a clear 12-18 month period in the run up to the 2010 election in which wages had stabilised, followed by a clear and prolonged drop afterwards?
I'm not reading the evidence that way because I support Labour. I support Labour because the evidence always says they handle the economy for the average person better than the Tories do. It's there. In front of your eyes.
Again, you interpret my words differently to what I actually said.
But, on another point, yes there is a short period of stabilisation leading to the 2010 election, wouldn’t any government do that leading into an election?
Similarly, since 2014 wage growth has been improving according to the graphs but as a Labour Party member you find reasons why it isn’t so good this time.
Ah well, only to be expected I suppose.
To save this becoming boring for other posters I won’t prolong this discussion.
-
Yes Hound. I see that wage growth has been improving since 2014. At about 1/3rd of the rate that it was growing before. It's increased by around 1% per year since then. Compared to a growth of 2.5-3% per year on average since the War. And THAT comes after the worst sustained period of wage reduction on record. So, over the entire spell of the Tories being in power, average wage growth has been ZERO %.
That hasn't happened o er such a long period since before the Industrial Revolution. That's how awful this lot has been at managing the economy.
And folk here say Labour always hits the working man. Enough to make you weep...
-
Also, clearly NO, not every Govt would have done that. Cameron and Osborne spent 2009 screaming that the Govt was spending too much and that Brown was a Deficit Denier. So obviously they would have slashed Govt spending in 2009/10 if they'd been in power.
-
Also, clearly NO, not every Govt would have done that. Cameron and Osborne spent 2009 screaming that the Govt was spending too much and that Brown was a Deficit Denier. So obviously they would have slashed Govt spending in 2009/10 if they'd been in power.
Well, for a man who likes to deal in facts, that last sentence is based on opinion isn’t it.
-
I think it's an opinion based on what happened when they got a majority to carry it out later
-
And what they were screaming every day on the news and from the front pages of the Tory papers.
-
Cut debt now or face economic disaster said George Osborne on 3rd February 2010.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2010/7309703/George-Osborne-cut-debt-now-or-face-economic-disaster.html
The General Election was on 6th May.
The National Debt has of course nearly doubled since Mr Osborne gave that warning.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/march2019
-
It has Wilts.
And the date when they were saying they'd eliminate the structural deficit has slipped from 2015 to 2025.
Meantime, we've had the worst decade of economic growth since the 1870s. Just like sensible economists said would happen under Austerity.
-
Yet on that bar chart I posted the other day (the one showing NHS funding had stagnated) it showed the wealth of the richest people in this country had more than doubled in that period. How can that be?
Surely in period of economic stagnation, nil wage growth, austerity designed to cut national debt, we would have all been 'in it together'?
It's almost as if the voters were lied to so as to mask policies that were never intended to cut the national debt but only increase the wealth of the already wealthy at the cost of ordinary workers and the most vulnerable in society.
I'm sure we must have got this mixed up and some proper Tory analyst will be along shortly to explain it to us properly.
-
ere Marge wot's an economist? it's a bit of a fog George nothing to worry abart.
-
It's an odd one Wilts isn't it?
The then economics editor of The Telegraph, Jeremy Warner threw some light on it a few years ago.
He had a testy exchange with Prof Simon Wren-Lewis of Oxford University, the world-renown macroeconomics expert.
Wren-Lewis had written on his blog that the claims that labour massively overspent before the Great Financial Crash were nonsense. Warner wrote a piece in The Telegraph, taking the piss out of such a ridiculous claim and saying it showed the arrogance and out of touch attitude of academics (note that he didn't actually question the facts that SW-L set out but there you go. Common approach these days.)
SW-L replied politely but firmly and they had a set to about the effects of Austerity. SW-L set out a clear case that Austerity was hurting the economy, just as textbook economic theory said it should.
And then Warner lost it. He wrote a piece in The Telegraph where he said he was sick of talking about the economics (he was the Economics Editor think on...) and that in any case, Austerity wasn't about economics. He said (and the words were seared onto my mind) he said that Austerity was about shrinking the role of Govt. He said the only time there was an appetite to do that was in a crisis like the Great Financial Crash aftermath, and that the Tories were right to do it.
That's the Economics Editor of the leading Tory-supporting national broadsheet saying it didn't matter if Austerity was hammering the economy. It was all about the ideology.
Funnily enough, although there are plenty of articles from that time still up online on The Telegraph website, that little outburst has vanished.
But there you go. One of the High Priests of Toryism telling it like it truly was. And still there are folk in Donny prepared to ignore the evidence and support the Tories.
-
ere Marge, you ordered the turkey yet!
-
Got it!
The Telegraph may have taken down Warner's post, but the internet tends not to forget.
Here are his precise words, quoted back by Barry Eichengreen, another world-leading macroeconomist.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=QecwBQAAQBAJ&pg=PT361&lpg=PT361&dq=In+the+end,+you+are+either+a+big-state+person,+or+a+small-state+person,+and+what+big-state+people+hate+about+austerity+is+that+its+primary+purpose+is+to+shrink+the+size+of+government+spending&source=bl&ots=nEcAfmmcPv&sig=ACfU3U276ZZc1ndFXAIcnh0uVp4w3ZS9xg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjSgOD0jc_lAhWlSxUIHb9dDrkQ6AEwC3oECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=jeremy%20warner&f=false
What he means in that quote by "pro cyclical" is key. Pro cyclical means Govt policy that accentuates the effects of the private sector. THE most important thing in Govt economic policy is not to be pro cyclical. That would mean boosting an economy that's already overheating, or, as in this case, sucking more money out of an economy that's on its knees.
What sensible Govt economic policy should be is anti-cyclical. When the private sector is booming too strongly, take the heat out by reducing Govt spending and increasing interest rates. Slow stuff down before it explodes. And when the economy is struggling (like in 2008- onwards) it is vital that Govt steps in and supports business by spending heavily and cutting taxes. That's what Labour did in 2008-10. That's what Austerity put an end to in 2010.
Warner, by admitting that Austerity was pro cyclical is admitting that the Right KNEW Austerity was hammering the economy. But they didn't care. Because it was all about an ideological drive to shrink the state.
People were conned about Austerity. The same people are being conned by the same people about Brexit. In both cases, intelligent people have been encouraged to support a policy that will hurt them badly, by people who have an ideological incentive to see that happen. What a deeply depressing decade.
-
The mirror image was run in Oz starting off with Abbott's reign, dimmest of the dimmies getting into to power with the help of Murdoch to frame climate action as the great big new tax and then cutting everything he said he wouldn't whilst taking joy in 'cutting red tape'
Look at Oz now absolute ramshackle/zero energy policy.
Now we have state and fed gov'ts that are advised by contract accounting firms like PWC (pricks with calculators) and the like and accepting 'unsolicited bids' to build bad infrastructure on the pubic purse which 'pays for itself' via asset recycling which is the new name for carpetbagging.
-
''Labour promises to remove all traces of privatisation from NHS''
I suppose you will have to look at the past records of the main parties to make a judgement of how things will turn out esp' when the economy comes under any pressure to know which party to trust with the NHS.
''The shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, has warned the public not to trust Donald Trump’s assurance that the NHS will not form part of post-Brexit trade deals as he committed Labour to eradicating all traces of privatisation from the service.''
there people in the UK that would trust Trump? nearly forgot for a sec there are people in Britain that trust Johnson :)
''The number of operations cancelled because of staffing issues and equipment failures have each increased by a third in the last two years. In 2018-19, 10,900 were cancelled because of staffing issues, while 4,800 were cancelled because of equipment failures.''
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/03/labour-promises-remove-privatisation-nhs-mcdonnell-trump
-
Interesting statistics Sydney. I mean a better statistic would be the proportion % cancelled and looking at that trend over time. It may well tell a different story....
-
Interesting statistics Sydney. I mean a better statistic would be the proportion % cancelled and looking at that trend over time. It may well tell a different story....
Every piece of reliable data helps with the jigsaw bfyp
-
Interesting statistics Sydney. I mean a better statistic would be the proportion % cancelled and looking at that trend over time. It may well tell a different story....
Every piece of reliable data helps with the jigsaw bfyp
Indeed, I'll find a link but I did see it was about 1%. 10 years ago it was 3ish. There are now more operations thus the stats can be easily skewed. If you went the other way on a % so small you would be able to claim a huge success using actual numbers delivered successfully, thus a little misleading the article.
However, i assume they still strive for zero. As any cancellation is an issue, I just dont like the statistic and lack of context around it.
-
BFYP
You'll be wanting this link I guess.
https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/resource/cancelled-operations#background
Percentage of operations being cancelled has gone up by half under the Tories, after Labour spent a decade bringing it down.
Fascinating how often the facts support the argument that the Tories have systematically f**ked things up from the economy, to prisons, to the NHS, to social care, to poverty.
But folk still cling to this myth that the Tories are the competent ones. Because ...well I've no idea to be honest.
-
bit like whackamole :)
-
BFYP
You'll be wanting this link I guess.
https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/resource/cancelled-operations#background
Percentage of operations being cancelled has gone up by half under the Tories, after Labour spent a decade bringing it down.
Fascinating how often the facts support the argument that the Tories have systematically f**ked things up from the economy, to prisons, to the NHS, to social care, to poverty.
But folk still cling to this myth that the Tories are the competent ones. Because ...well I've no idea to be honest.
Brainwashing by a right wing media
-
Do you remember back in the Referendum campaign when Give was smugly encouraging people not to listen to experts?
I wonder why the Tories don't want folk listening to experts, eh?
-
Was the reason they got waiting lists down during the Blair government not partly due to them opening loads of independent treatment centres run by private companies for profit?
-
Do you remember back in the Referendum campaign when Give was smugly encouraging people not to listen to experts?
I wonder why the Tories don't want folk listening to experts, eh?
I bet you he doesn't use that line when he wants his accounts doing. I reckon he'll want the very best experts then.
-
Bpool.
They came down under Labour because Labour put serious money into the NHS. They are going up now because the Tories have reduced that funding.
https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/rev/google_vis.php?title=Health%20Care&year=1980_2020&sname=United_Kingdom&units=p&bar=0&stack=1&size=m&spending0=5.05_5.24_5.12_4.72_4.67_4.56_4.50_4.36_4.28_4.30_4.30_4.59_5.02_5.35_5.34_5.52_5.07_4.98_4.91_5.06_5.08_5.32_5.57_5.81_6.23_6.61_6.74_6.74_7.14_6.96_7.56_7.45_7.34_7.27_7.26_7.22_7.24_7.16_7.14_7.17_7.37&legend=Health%20Care-total&source=a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_i_i_i_i_i_i_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_e_g&size=800_600
It's not rocket science.
-
Was my point no true thou still? I no they ploughed money into the nhs yes
-
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ournhs/moment-of-honesty-is-required-new-labour-began-dismantling-of-our-nhs/
-
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/03/how-labour-broke-nhs-and-why-labour-must-fix-it
-
If only there had been a Labour politician who has a a long term history of criticism of New Labour and their policies and was now in position to offer a radical reform of the NHS for the benefit of the whole population rather than the shareholders of private medical companies I am sure they would get your vote wouldn't they bpool?
-
Just to show how badly Labour have funded the NHS, and how well the Tories have supported it, particularly the Cameron governments here is a chart. What do you mean that is not what the chart shows...
https://fullfact.org/health/how-nhs-funded/
-
Boris Johnson criticised for selective quotes about NHS in letter to voters
PM wrongly implied medical experts were fully supportive of government policy
Boris Johnson has been criticised for misleading voters over the Tories’ record on the NHS, after he sent letters to voters in swing seats that selectively quoted a charity.
The letter, sent out across marginal seats such as High Peak and Reading West, highlighted comments from various media sources and charities praising the long-term plan for the NHS, which was set out before Johnson took office.
One of the highlighted quotes, from Sarb Bajwa, the chief executive of the British Psychological Society, lauded the plan for a “clear commitment to mental health through increased spending and introducing access standards”.
But Johnson’s letter missed off subsequent parts of the quote saying that there was “still a long way to go”, though the plan showed the NHS was listening to concerns about mental health provision. It also highlighted the need for “immediate action for children and young people’s services as they have become woefully underfunded and overstretched” and for mental health provision outside the NHS to be resourced effectively.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/04/boris-johnson-criticised-for-selective-quotes-about-nhs-in-letter-to-voters
-
Dispatches last Monday was worth a look. Here is the press release;
https://www.channel4.com/press/news/trumps-plan-nhs-channel-4-dispatches
Should be on catch up, if you missed it.
-
If only there had been a Labour politician who has a a long term history of criticism of New Labour and their policies and was now in position to offer a radical reform of the NHS for the benefit of the whole population rather than the shareholders of private medical companies I am sure they would get your vote wouldn't they bpool?
I have voted labour before and if they had someone more centre left and not corbyn or McDonnell probably would have last general election, the only reason I put links up is to balance a little the hundreds of anti Tory ones that get put up
-
But happy to support Tories with Johnson a far right and totally disreputable?
-
If only there had been a Labour politician who has a a long term history of criticism of New Labour and their policies and was now in position to offer a radical reform of the NHS for the benefit of the whole population rather than the shareholders of private medical companies I am sure they would get your vote wouldn't they bpool?
I have voted labour before and if they had someone more centre left and not corbyn or McDonnell probably would have last general election, the only reason I put links up is to balance a little the hundreds of anti Tory ones that get put up
And I for one would like to thank you for that as I enjoy (most) of your posts and hope you keep on doing so as it gives me the opportunity to counter them.
When you cast your vote in the country with the 6th largest economy in the world in 2015 was this what you were expecting? Because this is what you voted for:
-
Yeah Wilts.
But everyone knows people only use food banks because they can't cook.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/metro.co.uk/2014/12/08/poor-people-use-food-banks-because-they-cant-cook-says-tory-peer-4978956/amp/
Or because the existence of food banks generates it's own demand because people will always want something for nothing.
https://m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/07/03/food-banks-lord-freud_n_3538747.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAAfPzYD3w7L98GR9gvZTSrlUjF0369ZdWqKKXrZydfkiINSVgC1j6cEH_yChQx-KPe8Xjz_7H2Ekke4bao1wqzCMpdqFCfsDHcv43Luqvk9E7iUyLVhCsaHT9eFYlx7Y-A-yYnHujmqM9SWod-cf799Hpf0SfJ79ylrSDzhSN9dt
Or because they spend all their money on junk food then need baling out.
https://m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/03/21/tebbit-food-bank_n_5005676.html
And anyway, the Final Solution of course is to cull those on benefits.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/amp/entry/tory-minister-backs-candidate-who-said-people-on-benefits-street-putting-down_uk_5dbfe555e4b03d0aacfc3a36/
The ignorant, entitled callousness of the Tories eh? They create the problem, they refuse to acknowledge it exists, then they blame the people they have f**ked over for having the temerity to be poor.
-
I choose wilts not only to vote on the economy but on the people now while boris is not really my cup of tea I prefer him to Jeremy and McDonnell, as I say if them 2 were to go things might be different
-
Why, specifically Bpool? You know that Johnson is a pathological liar with no interest in anything but furthering his own career?
Why is he so much preferable to Corbyn that you would vote for him despite his policies.
And you'll know that I've had my own major criticisms of Corbyn for years, so I hope you appreciate that this is a genuine question.
-
There are many reasons mate some personal mainly due to his Irish connections that I’m not going to get into on here but that is the jist of it really
-
Understood.
-
And Johnson is beholden to the erg, Egregious Regressive Gobshites :)
-
There are many reasons mate some personal mainly due to his Irish connections that I’m not going to get into on here but that is the jist of it really
Maybe it's in your own interests not to bring up a subject that you don't wish to discus, no? :facepalm:
-
So, because he had the audacity to want to speak with people who knew members of the IRA, to try and bring the troubles to an end, you would rather f**k over the majority of people in this country for a generation and vote Tory?
Fantastic.
-
''Poorest hit hardest by cuts to public health spending – research
Most deprived parts of England have lost six times as much funding as prosperous areas
England’s poorest communities have borne the brunt of almost £900m of cuts to public health spending, despite them having higher rates of disease, research has revealed.
Places with high levels of deprivation such as Liverpool, Blackpool and Birmingham have lost much more of their budgets to prevent problems such obesity and smoking than better-off areas.
One pound in every £7 of the £871.6m that has been cut from Whitehall’s public health grant to local councils in England over the last five years has been taken from budgets in the 10 poorest areas of the country.
In contrast the 10 wealthiest places have lost public health funding equivalent to just £1 in every £46''
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/nov/05/poorest-hit-hardest-by-cuts-to-public-health-spending-research
ere Marge ood we vote for last time? we dint go George luv wot's point? :)
-
I choose wilts not only to vote on the economy but on the people now while boris is not really my cup of tea I prefer him to Jeremy and McDonnell, as I say if them 2 were to go things might be different
Well it's your vote to cast how you wish bpool. But I do seem to remember that in the summer you were one of the people defending the right of the Tories to replace May with Johnson without an automatic GE because in a GE the public vote for a party and not a person as PM.
The best way of getting McDonnell & Corbyn to go is to join the Labour Party and vote them out.
-
That won’t happen with momentum involved thou mate
-
Wakey wakey hands off snakey, your morning news:
''Revealed: private surgery for NHS patients soars under Tories
Figure show almost threefold increase since 2010 to over 600,000 procedures last year
The number of NHS patients having surgery in private hospitals has nearly trebled since 2010, sparking accusations that for-profit companies are benefitting from an “enfeebled” health system under the Conservatives.
NHS figures obtained by the Guardian show that it paid for 214,967 people in England to have an operation in a private hospital in 2009-10, Labour’s last year in power. The figure soared to 613,833 last year, a 185% rise in nine years.
The figures come as NHS trusts are increasingly forced to send patients to for private surgery because they are too busy and understaffed to do the operations themselves. The sharp rise in outsourcing has coincided with the waiting-list for non-urgent operations ballooning to 4.6m, the highest figure since records began in 2007.''
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/nov/08/private-surgery-nhs-patients-soars-under-tories
write 100 times, it's not privatisation it's outsourcing, it's not privatisation it's outsourcing, it's not ................... :)
-
Sydney what is the solution to that? And dont say it's all funding, funding is higher than it was 10 years ago so what's the cause?
-
Well if it isn't funding it must be the faeries? no
-
Sydney what is the solution to that? And dont say it's all funding, funding is higher than it was 10 years ago so what's the cause?
Is it? Then again I suppose if you can show that funding at a specific point today is £1 higher than a specific point 10 years ago - ignoring inflation and under funding for 10 years that have run the NHS into the ground - then in might be. But its not what this graph shows.
Or this second graph that shows how the most wealthy have increased their wealth - including those who run the private health care services that now benefit from NHS money - whilst NHS funding has stagnated.
There was a nurse on LBC radio yesterday saying that in his hospital around 75% of the nursing staff are from private agencies - and they get paid a third more than NHS nurses. Not that the nurse will receive that - the agency will.
So the NHS may have slightly more funding than 10 years ago. But this funding is not going to patient care. It is going to the profits of private care companies.
Under fund it, run the service down, allow private companies to take over, charge people for using it. It happened with the railways and royal mail, now its happening with the NHS. Jeremy Hunt literally wrote a book about it:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-hunt-privatise-nhs-tories-privatising-private-insurance-market-replacement-direct-democracy-a6865306.html
-
Definitely not funding then? bfyp
-
'Tory MP's, largely, do not care about these poor people and they don't care about the NHS'.
Said the bloke who is the main advisor to Boris Johnson. So you would think he might know.
https://twitter.com/JohnObee7/status/1193111297048616966
-
Don't you just love the sniggers in the background?
-
Sydney what is the solution to that? And dont say it's all funding, funding is higher than it was 10 years ago so what's the cause?
Is it? Then again I suppose if you can show that funding at a specific point today is £1 higher than a specific point 10 years ago - ignoring inflation and under funding for 10 years that have run the NHS into the ground - then in might be. But its not what this graph shows.
Or this second graph that shows how the most wealthy have increased their wealth - including those who run the private health care services that now benefit from NHS money - whilst NHS funding has stagnated.
There was a nurse on LBC radio yesterday saying that in his hospital around 75% of the nursing staff are from private agencies - and they get paid a third more than NHS nurses. Not that the nurse will receive that - the agency will.
So the NHS may have slightly more funding than 10 years ago. But this funding is not going to patient care. It is going to the profits of private care companies.
Under fund it, run the service down, allow private companies to take over, charge people for using it. It happened with the railways and royal mail, now its happening with the NHS. Jeremy Hunt literally wrote a book about it:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-hunt-privatise-nhs-tories-privatising-private-insurance-market-replacement-direct-democracy-a6865306.html
Your point about staffing is right, at many hospitals they are finding it hard to get staff,there seems to be a large shortage of auxiliary nurses now known as hca, I think one reason is they get paid around 9 pound a hour for hard work and a lot of stress, you can get a cleaning job or work in a supermarket and get 2 pound a hour more so can’t see them sorting the shortage out in a hurry
-
Read this. From that well-known socialist propaganda leaflet, the Financial Times.
https://amp.ft.com/content/e38af71c-0087-11ea-be59-e49b2a136b8d?__twitter_impression=true
Read it. Look at the graphs. Then ask yourself if you believe the Tories when they say the NHS is safe in their hands.
And here's the weirdest thing. By far the most likely age group to vote Tory is pensioners.
By far the biggest users of the NHS is...pensioners.
Those older ones in here who are insistent that have been supporting the Tories. You have LITERALLY been voting to increase the likelihood of the NHS failing you, just as you start to really need it.
Bizarre choices...
-
I think this shows that if you want to keep and improve the NHS where your vote should go.
''General election 2019: Labour vows to outspend Tories on the NHS''
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-50397847
Look at the record of each party.
-
Ever wondered if the winter crisis for the NHS was improving:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EJU9E3cWsAA1Pbh.jpg
The trend line needs to be reversed asap.
I hope that comes before any of us needs to use the service.
-
''NHS bosses accused of gagging staff during election campaign
''Staff say some trusts have gone too far in applying rules on political impartiality
Health workers have been told not to get involved in any political debates on social media during the campaign. NHS organisations have also banned staff from appearing in uniform or featuring any of their equipment, such as an ambulance, in their online posts or profiles''
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/nov/17/nhs-bosses-accused-of-gagging-staff-during-election-campaign
You would think that they would want their staff to be chatting wildly about how good everything is with low waiting lists, plenty of trained staff, good morale, modern facilities etc, anyone here due for a period in the naughty corner for outspoken comments: :)
-
Not looking too clever, this:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nhs-facing-unprecedented-shortage-lifesaving-20905265?d
Still, you can rely on Spaffmeister to sort it!
-
Boris Johnson used taxpayers' money to host the launch of a right-wing think tank that is campaigning to allow American companies to take over NHS contracts.
https://twitter.com/ByDonkeys/status/1196685691964534785
-
The BMA have responded to Spaffman and his NHS plan;
https://www.bma.org.uk/news/media-centre/press-releases/2019/november/incredibly-disappointing-health-spending-in-conservative-manifesto-does-not-meet-levels-needed
Voting for your Nan to spend hours on a trolley in a corridor.....waiting for a US corporation to check she is fully insured!
-
And as I have pointed out before, the demographic who most support Johnson are precisely those who will most need the NHS over the next decade. Truly bizarre self-harming behaviour.
-
News conf, jc has leaked docs detailing negotiations between tory's and US around NHS
-
Except Sydney it appears it doesnt really say that. Note I have not read it so may be wrong.
The general gist of some of the press though appears to be it doesnt really say anything new, which would make it a bizarre announcement.
-
Except Sydney it appears it doesnt really say that. Note I have not read it so may be wrong.
The general gist of some of the press though appears to be it doesnt really say anything new, which would make it a bizarre announcement.
451 pages long, I doubt the press have read it yet, Johnson has bot the BBC onside no doubt about it
-
According to Talk Radio it is a document that they have been quoting from for at least two years, They have been ridiculed all morning all the labour spokesmen have been shot down when asked to substantiate their claims.
-
Its nothing new, just a deflection from last night.
-
According to Talk Radio it is a document that they have been quoting from for at least two years, They have been ridiculed all morning all the labour spokesmen have been shot down when asked to substantiate their claims.
According to WHO on Talk Radio?
-
According to Talk Radio it is a document that they have been quoting from for at least two years, They have been ridiculed all morning all the labour spokesmen have been shot down when asked to substantiate their claims.
Not sure about that, parts of the document are from the summer
-
Billy, on the mike Graham show, one of the exoerts they had going over the paperwork put out by the Labour Party, it is just a damage limitation exorcise, much like all the texts etc. put out after last nights disastrous interview.
Everything is unravelling buddy, they are in the doo doo and more trucks are arriving by the hour.
-
Yes but WHO was the expert?
-
The Tories calling Corbyn a liar? There’s a delicious irony there (40 new hospitals anyone?)
Everything has a price with the Tories. They’ve sold off almost everything else we have and there’s no doubt that in a post Brexit Britain that the NHS will be on the table. How on earth people fall for their faux concern for the NHS is beyond me.
-
What about the womaniser bit, he is into his third marriage and god knows who on the side. Well we know of one, and you just wouldn't if you had any standards would you?
-
The most alarming thing I’ve seen in the document is that I’d says the US will benefit more from a harder Brexit. Exactly what Boris has been peddling. The less legislation we retain from Europe the more profitable we are for the big Yank businesses.
-
The Tories calling Corbyn a liar? There’s a delicious irony there (40 new hospitals anyone?)
Everything has a price with the Tories. They’ve sold off almost everything else we have and there’s no doubt that in a post Brexit Britain that the NHS will be on the table. How on earth people fall for their faux concern for the NHS is beyond me.
So that makes Labour incapable of lying does it?
-
The Tories calling Corbyn a liar? There’s a delicious irony there (40 new hospitals anyone?)
Everything has a price with the Tories. They’ve sold off almost everything else we have and there’s no doubt that in a post Brexit Britain that the NHS will be on the table. How on earth people fall for their faux concern for the NHS is beyond me.
So that makes Labour incapable of lying does it?
Not said that at all LDR. However Labour have provided proof that discussions on selling parts of the NHS have taken place. What more evidence do you want?
-
The Tories calling Corbyn a liar? There’s a delicious irony there (40 new hospitals anyone?)
Everything has a price with the Tories. They’ve sold off almost everything else we have and there’s no doubt that in a post Brexit Britain that the NHS will be on the table. How on earth people fall for their faux concern for the NHS is beyond me.
So that makes Labour incapable of lying does it?
Not said that at all LDR. However Labour have provided proof that discussions on selling parts of the NHS have taken place. What more evidence do you want?
See what I have read is labour have claimed that with nothing to back it up. People believe what they want atm. Both sides are lying which is why I cant in any conscience vote for either
-
The Tories calling Corbyn a liar? There’s a delicious irony there (40 new hospitals anyone?)
Everything has a price with the Tories. They’ve sold off almost everything else we have and there’s no doubt that in a post Brexit Britain that the NHS will be on the table. How on earth people fall for their faux concern for the NHS is beyond me.
So that makes Labour incapable of lying does it?
Not said that at all LDR. However Labour have provided proof that discussions on selling parts of the NHS have taken place. What more evidence do you want?
if labour got in government would the us be in talks with them to? Just because someone asks it does not mean they will sell
-
The Tories calling Corbyn a liar? There’s a delicious irony there (40 new hospitals anyone?)
Everything has a price with the Tories. They’ve sold off almost everything else we have and there’s no doubt that in a post Brexit Britain that the NHS will be on the table. How on earth people fall for their faux concern for the NHS is beyond me.
So that makes Labour incapable of lying does it?
Not said that at all LDR. However Labour have provided proof that discussions on selling parts of the NHS have taken place. What more evidence do you want?
See what I have read is labour have claimed that with nothing to back it up. People believe what they want atm. Both sides are lying which is why I cant in any conscience vote for either
Well I’m not sure what you’re reading LDR but, according to the BBC:
“Labour obtained uncensored documents covering 6 rounds of talks between UK and US officials.”
“They show that the US is interested in drug pricing - mainly extending patents that stop cheaper medicines being used.”
“The US currently pays two and a half times more for drugs than the NHS does.”
“The document make reference to the US wanting total market access as a starting point”
So, what more proof do you need? Or are you in denial?
-
The same article also states
"One document quotes a UK official saying the talks are helpful in determining the areas the US may want to discuss, while acknowledging the UK would have objections."
Wonder why you chose not to quote that bit
-
The same article also states
"One document quotes a UK official saying the talks are helpful in determining the areas the US may want to discuss, while acknowledging the UK would have objections."
Wonder why you chose not to quote that bit
What on Earth does that part of the article prove? The fact here is that we’re discussing the potential sale of parts of the NHS!! Why are you denying this? You’re really clutching at straws here.
-
Another bit you missed
Jeremy Corbyn doesn't provide evidence ministers have agreed the health service should be part of a trade deal with US.
You really are programmed to believe what comes out of Corbyns mouth as gospel regardless aren't you
-
The point km making HA is you want to believe it to be true even though there is nothing proved in there
-
Another bit you missed
Jeremy Corbyn doesn't provide evidence ministers have agreed the health service should be part of a trade deal with US.
You really are programmed to believe what comes out of Corbyns mouth as gospel regardless aren't you
You’re starting to look silly now. Let me explain another way. Labour have provided evidence that UK Government officials game met their US counterparts within preparatory trade talk meetings. Within those meetings the US made clear that drug pricing was on the agenda. We didn’t say it was off the table, we didn’t say it wasn’t for sale. The US said that they wanted total market access. What part of this are you struggling with? Even though the facts are plainly in sight you’re still in denial?
-
Another bit you missed
Jeremy Corbyn doesn't provide evidence ministers have agreed the health service should be part of a trade deal with US.
You really are programmed to believe what comes out of Corbyns mouth as gospel regardless aren't you
You’re starting to look silly now. Let me explain another way. Labour have provided evidence that UK Government officials game met their US counterparts within preparatory trade talk meetings. Within those meetings the US made clear that drug pricing was on the agenda. We didn’t say it was off the table, we didn’t say it wasn’t for sale. The US said that they wanted total market access. What part of this are you struggling with? Even though the facts are plainly in sight you’re still in denial?
Agreed, at that point it should have been made clear that it is not up for discussion, instead the door was left open
-
Ffs you cant educate pork
-
The Tories calling Corbyn a liar? There’s a delicious irony there (40 new hospitals anyone?)
Everything has a price with the Tories. They’ve sold off almost everything else we have and there’s no doubt that in a post Brexit Britain that the NHS will be on the table. How on earth people fall for their faux concern for the NHS is beyond me.
So that makes Labour incapable of lying does it?
It's about evidence Ldr.
There is copious evidence of the Tories lying, from the number of new hospitals they are currently funding (6, not 40 as Johnson keeps insisting) through renaming their Twitter feed FactCheckUk, through to them fabricating a BBC website to give the appearance that the BBC agreed with their lie on school funding. And then there's the career long record of Johnson's lies about everything from bent bananas to the presence of the Press in a room. Given that he has twice been sacked by a boss for lying about matters of objective truth (fabricating a newspaper article and claiming he wasn't having an affair when he was) it's difficult to give him the benefit of the doubt on anything he claims.
Then there's Cummings, with a track record of pushing lies about our EU payment, the accession of Turkey to the EU and the EU being responsible for culling polar bears.
There's a long and consistent trend of lying about objective truth.
I've asked time and again if anyone has equivalent evidence about Corbyn and the Labour Party lying, and no-one has shown anything remotely close.
-
Ffs you cant educate pork
You certainly can’t
-
Ffs you cant educate pork
Now you’re resorting to insults. Classic ploy of a defeated man. Pop off and read your Daily Mail now.
-
According to Talk Radio it is a document that they have been quoting from for at least two years, They have been ridiculed all morning all the labour spokesmen have been shot down when asked to substantiate their claims.
The Tories have been 'quoting' from is a redacted version that was well hidden on line!
You can download and read the whole document here.... https://openload.cc/M8MbD08fn7/OFFICIAL-SENSITIVE_UK-US_TIWG_READOUT_zip
Read it and weep!
-
While both sides will say they are right, corbyn said he has proof the nhs is for sale, that he cannot probe can he? He can prove that they talked about the nhs but not that it is for sale
-
Ldr and bpool are factually correct.
The fact that UK/US officials, including Liam Fox, trade minister, have been in secret negotiations for three years (which they denied were taking place) including how US pharma companies will have access to NHS markets after Brexit does not of course mean that these negotiations will ever be concluded.
Similarly when Grant McCann was in discussion with officials from Hull City about becoming manager at Hull City that did not prove he would be manager of Hull City. But are you really telling us he wouldn't have been in the negotiations if he didn't!!!
Time to rewatch the Channel 4 dispatches lads and educate yourselves - you've been had. This is what Brexit was really about whether you like it or not.
-
If tories win the election then let’s see if they sell the nhs like corbyn says
-
The thing is blackpool, that those people can never be wrong can they.
If it was sold they would say "we told you so" and while ever it isn't sold they will say "ah but wait and see, it will be sold".
-
Yes hound for the last 30 odd years I can remember every general election they have said the same thing, I won’t class as a lie thou
-
Do you mean a bit like saying I bet you a million quid the world won't come to an end this Christmas eve?
-
I see all the actors that want to balance the debate are here :)
-
Another bit you missed
Jeremy Corbyn doesn't provide evidence ministers have agreed the health service should be part of a trade deal with US.
You really are programmed to believe what comes out of Corbyns mouth as gospel regardless aren't you
And it sounds like you take everything Corbyn says to be a lie. You're blinded.
-
If tories win the election then let’s see if they sell the nhs like corbyn says
And then what? None of us normal folk win from that.
-
Don't worry about paying for anything folks, the labour party have found millions of money trees, and YOU are one.
-
I see all the actors that want to balance the debate are here :)
Yep, I noticed you were back.
-
Don't worry about paying for anything folks, the labour party have found millions of money trees, and YOU are one.
Not unless any of us are in the top 5%. Luckily not everyone is as gullible as you.
-
What we know so far, Johnson is an inveterate liar and tell the British public the NHS is not for sale but we are going to do a trade deal with the US.
Document shows details of negotiations with the US.
US say full access to NHS is required to complete a trade deal
Johnson's priority is to crash out no-deal
-
Don't worry about paying for anything folks, the labour party have found millions of money trees, and YOU are one.
Not unless any of us are in the top 5%. Luckily not everyone is as gullible as you.
Pensioners on £14k will pay MORE tax.
-
Supporting proof required bb
-
If the NHS or constituent parts of it or contracts to supply to it are 'Not for Sale' - why doesn't it say so in the documents released today?
Surely at some point in the 6 meetings held over 3 years (its now 7 btw - Johnson had one in August -C4 Dispatches so documents are from before then) you would have thought a British official might have mentioned it?
-
3.6 million married people on low and middle incomes will also pay more tax.
-
General election 2019: UK-US trade deal - what do the leaked documents show?
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50572502
Commonsense would tell you that in any negotiations for a trade deal with the US if they don't get what they want it will mean longer negotiations, months, years? They will want compensation in other areas, more costs to UK, or no trade deal.
-
3.6 million married people on low and middle incomes will also pay more tax.
No proof no cred
-
https://youtu.be/8EySXP15S8k
-
3.6 million married people on low and middle incomes will also pay more tax.
No proof no cred
Would no proof no cred apply to your statement of “they will want compensation in other areas, more costs to UK or no trade deal”.
-
Married allowance gone, 40% capital gains tax on any profit on any house sales, inheritance tax threshold cut, tax on company dividends, tax the few for the many, and let the many come into the country for their share of the free bank, suckers.
-
The thing is blackpool, that those people can never be wrong can they.
If it was sold they would say "we told you so" and while ever it isn't sold they will say "ah but wait and see, it will be sold".
Of course we could be wrong.
Johnson might win the election and then not sell off the NHS, just like he's been solemnly promisi....
Oh hang on! I see your point.
-
Married allowance gone, 40% capital gains tax on any profit on any house sales, inheritance tax threshold cut, tax on company dividends, tax the few for the many, and let the many come into the country for their share of the free bank, suckers.
Don't know why you're so worried Selby you told us all that you're 'comfortable' with a long way to fall, trying to pull the ladder up?
-
Also charging all landlords for annual property checks, probably causing rents to increase to cover the cost.
-
Here's yer proof Sydney! Get back to you later.
https://youtu.be/8EySXP15S8k
-
Here's yer proof Sydney! Get back to you later.
https://youtu.be/8EySXP15S8k
I don't open click bait, you'll have to tell me what's in it?
-
It's a very credible source Sydney, it's directly from your hero's mouth.
-
You're speaking with your hindsight again I can smell it :)
-
Sydney, it's about pensioners on 14k paying more tax, and 3.6 million married people paying more tax, among other things contrary to Corbyn's claims of his new tax system only affecting those earning over £80k.
-
Thank I don't need to open it then :)
-
Oh go on, open it. It's Christmas!
-
Surely you've read about it in The Guardian?
Mind you.................HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
-
Not sure what the point is, talking about tax burdens on a thread about the NHS.
No doubt someone will explain.
Meanwhile, here is a short vid which is relevant;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYQkiXzelZ0
The idea that the US will let mini-Trump Johnson protect the NHS in trade talks is just laughable.
You have been warned.
-
So your link showing one person giving his opinion on Boris selling the NHS, which Boris himself along with every other tory MP insists in not true, is of more relevance than the actual fact that Jeremy Corbyn is misleading the country by his own admission?
-
And Johnson upholds the truth if he's not lying to us or his partner, arranging to have someone assaulted, expressing his racist views, is this the Johnson you're asking us to believe?
-
3.6 million married people on low and middle incomes will also pay more tax.
No proof no cred
Even Corbyn has admitted it, scrapping the marriage allowance is a tax raise for those on low incomes, it doesnt need proof its labour policy.
-
If Boris was THAT bad his opponents would stick to exploiting real mistakes he's made, and not invent ones like claiming it is his desire to sell off the NHS.
-
BB,
You are completely missing the point.
Johnson will not be allowed to exclude the NHS from trade talks by the US.....they have already said so, and the terms of that discussion will be set by the partner with power.
Johnson has no leverage on US trade policy whatsoever...it is an asymmetric discussion.
If he needs a deal (which he will after leaving the EU), the UK has no capability to impose red lines in the negotiation.
Sorry if you don't understand that, but it is shared view among leading economists.
As far as the suggestion Corbyn is making this up, then watch the CH4 "Dispatches" programme again.....it is not a matter of debate that meetings to this end have already taken place.
-
Lets just hope its a hung Parliament
Almost none of them deserve any credit and almost none of them have any creditability left - not that that will bother them in the slightest
Wild predictions / mainfesto promises made on both sides of the divide which we KNOW as "average men in the street" are 99% pie in the sky - and we all KNOW that whoever wins will barely keep a single one of the promises they are spouting now
I am fed up with the f*****g lot of them
-
Albie. Who says Johnson won't be allowed to exclude the NHS from trade talks by the US?
-
Albie. Whohttps://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/Smileys/aaron/smile.png says Johnson won't be allowed to exclude the NHS from trade talks by the US?
The US, do keep up boy :)
-
But we're not selling, Sydney boy!
-
But we're not selling, Sydney boy!
No? You've missed the auction then lad :)
Revealed: private surgery for NHS patients soars under Tories
Figure show almost threefold increase since 2010 to over 600,000 procedures last year
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/nov/08/private-surgery-nhs-patients-soars-under-tories
-
Albie. Who says Johnson won't be allowed to exclude the NHS from trade talks by the US?
BB,
I already referred to the Ch4 "Dispatches" programme;
https://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/on-demand/70263-001
US negotiators have stated this on a number of occasions.
You must surely agree that Johnson has zero negotiating power?
If you cannot see that, you have not paid attention to the US negotiating position across many issues, down the years.
EDIT:
Same vid on YT if you prefer;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neKDg1zYnuk
Enjoy!
-
bb's gone to hunt for his copy of the incredible book of facts by b johnson
-
Albie. Who says Johnson won't be allowed to exclude the NHS from trade talks by the US?
BB,
I already referred to the Ch4 "Dispatches" programme;
https://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/on-demand/70263-001
US negotiators have stated this on a number of occasions.
You must surely agree that Johnson has zero negotiating power?
If you cannot see that, you have not paid attention to the US negotiating position across many issues, down the years.
EDIT:
Same vid on YT if you prefer;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neKDg1zYnuk
Enjoy!
Albie, you have to sign in! So I assume it's a film about Trump. Does it show you Boris Johnson saying that he's going to sell the NHS?
-
bb's gone to hunt for his copy of the incredible book of facts by b johnson
Sydney, you're like a badly injured animal tonight trying to cover up your injuries. Jeremy Corbyn's no David Attenborough, owd lad.
-
Talking with hindsight again bb?
-
No BB, with the YT link no sign in required.
It is irrelevant what Johnson says, he is of no consequence to the US.
Stop posting nonsense, and watch the vid, otherwise folk will start to think you are a timewaster, and we don't want that!
-
Talking with hindsight again bb?
Well, actually you're about 9 hours ahead of me Sydney, so you should definately show more hindsight than me.
-
Albie, no doubt your comments will appeal to those who struggle to understand and thus find empathy in your opinion of me, but it is very relevant what Boris says.
-
Albie, no doubt your comments will appeal to those who struggle to understand and thus find empathy in your opinion of me, but it is very relevant what Boris says.
And those that have no answer, apparently :)
-
Here's a nice publicity photo of Johnson on a recent NHS visit
(https://i.imgur.com/moAUM5L.jpg)
Want to read the story behind it?
(https://i.imgur.com/p8P2Qku.jpg)
https://twitter.com/HinduMonkey/status/1198924351795605508
I'm absolutely amazed that anyone thinks the NHS is safe in his hands. Have any of you BoJo supporters bothered to download and read the document I linked to earlier? No? Thought not, If fact I doubt you'e read further than the first paragraph in the above. No, You seem to prefer to get your truth from the like of the Sun, Express and Mail!
-
Anyone could have written that does not mean it’s true
-
Anyone could have written that does not mean it’s true
Do you have any proof that it isn't true. I know people who work in NHS who will tell you of similar experiences - but hey.
Yet you believe, (and perpetrate), the lies in the likes of the Daily Mail which have been openly disproved. Just because it's in your favourite paper doesn't mean it's true!
I posted a link to a document that proves that the NHS is being discussed, (behind the scenes), as being required to be included in any trade deal with the US. Have you bothered to read it? Or do you simply choose to believe an inveterate liar like Johnson who says it isn't?
Edited to say that it's now being discussed on the Jeremy Vine TV show. Still believe it isn't true?
-
Even taking out the politics and that johnson can't be trusted and looking at a trade deal for what it is-a business deal it doesn't make sense for the US to make a deal that doesn't suit them.
If Johnson gets his way and the UK crashes out where is the leverage going to come from to force a good deal through?
Even with May's deal the US still knows that until a contract is signed the UK pays top dollar.
Johnson would sell his grandmother you would have to be insane to trust him with the NHS, some thing he wants to sell anyway.
-
You posted a link by someone called Hindu monkey who on every tweet supports labour and slags the tories off, I also no many in the nhs who don’t feel the same way
-
You posted a link by someone called Hindu monkey who on every tweet supports labour and slags the tories off, I also no many in the nhs who don’t feel the same way
Hindu Monkey sounds rather sane then.
-
You posted a link by someone called Hindu monkey who on every tweet supports labour and slags the tories off, I also no many in the nhs who don’t feel the same way
What has his twitter name got to do with anything? Why is it wrong to support labour and to slag off the Tories? You post here under the odd name bpoolrover, support the Tories and slag off Labour. Notice any similarity?
Now, can you post any links from people in the NHS praising visits by Johnson?
-
https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/1199979089672757248?s=19 (https://twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/1199979089672757248?s=19)
Luckily the NHS is getting 50,000 more nurses.
-
You posted a link by someone called Hindu monkey who on every tweet supports labour and slags the tories off, I also no many in the nhs who don’t feel the same way
What has his twitter name got to do with anything? Why is it wrong to support labour and to slag off the Tories? You post here under the odd name bpoolrover, support the Tories and slag off Labour. Notice any similarity?
Now, can you post any links from people in the NHS praising visits by Johnson?
That I can do for you give me 5 mins
-
This is a letter from a nhs doctor I received it’s a anonymous 1 thou, dear polar bear, today at our local hospital we received a visit from boris, what a kind gentleman he was, he promised us 50k more nurses which is far more than that scruffy labour guy, many of the nurses were desperate to meet boris some even swopping fb details with him, all in all it was a wonderful occasion and will hopefully be repeated soon xxx
-
This is a letter from a nhs doctor I received it’s a anonymous 1 thou, dear polar bear, today at our local hospital we received a visit from boris, what a kind gentleman he was, he promised us 50k more nurses which is far more than that scruffy labour guy, many of the nurses were desperate to meet boris some even swopping fb details with him, all in all it was a wonderful occasion and will hopefully be repeated soon xxx
50k more nurses. :laugh:
-
That what he said and that’s what he said to the guy in the anonymous letter who are we to disagree
-
That what he said and that’s what he said to the guy in the anonymous letter who are we to disagree
Have you heard the breakdown of the 50k? 19k are already nurses in the NHS, they just plan to keep them. So it's actually 31k.
-
This is a letter from a nhs doctor I received it’s a anonymous 1 thou, dear polar bear, today at our local hospital we received a visit from boris, what a kind gentleman he was, he promised us 50k more nurses which is far more than that scruffy labour guy, many of the nurses were desperate to meet boris some even swopping fb details with him, all in all it was a wonderful occasion and will hopefully be repeated soon xxx
50k more nurses. :laugh:
The letter also said Boris was big and strong and can lift a car over his head. And also that Dominic Cummings is the most handsome man in Britain, and so smart and funny too! Also how all the nurses want to Get Brexit Done (TM).
-
This is a letter from a nhs doctor I received it’s a anonymous 1 thou, dear polar bear, today at our local hospital we received a visit from boris, what a kind gentleman he was, he promised us 50k more nurses which is far more than that scruffy labour guy, many of the nurses were desperate to meet boris some even swopping fb details with him, all in all it was a wonderful occasion and will hopefully be repeated soon xxx
50k more nurses. :laugh:
The letter also said Boris was big and strong and can lift a car over his head. And also that Dominic Cummings is the most handsome man in Britain, and so smart and funny too! Also how all the nurses want to Get Brexit Done (TM).
Do you have to pay Boris now for saying that?
-
That what he said and that’s what he said to the guy in the anonymous letter who are we to disagree
Have you heard the breakdown of the 50k? 19k are already nurses in the NHS, they just plan to keep them. So it's actually 31k. I do t believe for 1 minute that they would get 50 k nurses
-
That what he said and that’s what he said to the guy in the anonymous letter who are we to disagree
Have you heard the breakdown of the 50k? 19k are already nurses in the NHS, they just plan to keep them. So it's actually 31k. I do t believe for 1 minute that they would get 50 k nurses
Of course they won't Bpool.
Because the idiots cut funding for student nurses a few years ago, and the number of home trainees has collapsed.
-
That what he said and that’s what he said to the guy in the anonymous letter who are we to disagree
Have you heard the breakdown of the 50k? 19k are already nurses in the NHS, they just plan to keep them. So it's actually 31k.
. I I don’t believe there will be 50 k more nurses
-
This is a letter from a nhs doctor I received it’s a anonymous 1 thou, dear polar bear, today at our local hospital we received a visit from boris, what a kind gentleman he was, he promised us 50k more nurses which is far more than that scruffy labour guy, many of the nurses were desperate to meet boris some even swopping fb details with him, all in all it was a wonderful occasion and will hopefully be repeated soon xxx
I see no link bp. And why would someone, who appears to have difficulty with capital letters and spelling, (unusual for either a Nurse or a Doctor), be writing a letter like that to you. Or was it something you wrote yourself?
-
Correct kato pathetic is it not? Do you not think mr monkey could well have done the same?
-
Correct kato pathetic is it not? Do you not think mr monkey could well have done the same?
Much of what you write is pathetic bp, so no surprises there. But as Johnson's visit to that hospital, and what happened there, was discussed on the Jeremy Vine TV show this morning, then no.
-
No I agree with you all that happened people were shaking and playing hide in rooms to avoid big bad boris
-
'Do you have a magic nurse tree too as well as a money tree?'
Yesterday Johnson was in Cornwall where he met a group of NHS nurses. The encounter was filmed but judged so embarrassing that BBC and Sky wouldn't show it. Fortunately ITV did
https://twitter.com/ITVNewsPolitics/status/1199655368105836545
-
Lets just hope its a hung Parliament
Almost none of them deserve any credit and almost none of them have any creditability left - not that that will bother them in the slightest
Wild predictions / mainfesto promises made on both sides of the divide which we KNOW as "average men in the street" are 99% pie in the sky - and we all KNOW that whoever wins will barely keep a single one of the promises they are spouting now
I am fed up with the f*****g lot of them
Join the club Wolfie mate. I've been saying all of that on here for ages, and have been acused of "lazy thinking".
-
Lets just hope its a hung Parliament
Almost none of them deserve any credit and almost none of them have any creditability left - not that that will bother them in the slightest
Wild predictions / mainfesto promises made on both sides of the divide which we KNOW as "average men in the street" are 99% pie in the sky - and we all KNOW that whoever wins will barely keep a single one of the promises they are spouting now
I am fed up with the f*****g lot of them
Join the club Wolfie mate. I've been saying all of that on here for ages, and have been acused of "lazy thinking".
I have also joined your club Steve but if I post anything similar to what Wolfie has written I get bombarded by people telling me how wrong I am.
Apparently even respected bodies like the IFS are wrong when they question the manifestos of the leading parties.
-
Hound. For the fifth or sixth time today, it's not ME saying the IFS is wrong. It's the country's leading macroeconomist.
You could read the article of his that I posted where he explains in detail why he thinks they are wrong.
Or you could just carry on insinuating that people who don't agree with you are argue from a position of bad faith.
Here's a thought. Do you reckon I support Labour's economic policies because they are Labour's? Or because the preponderance of evidence says they are, on balance, better for the country than those of the Tories?
-
Hound. For the fifth or sixth time today, it's not ME saying the IFS is wrong. It's the country's leading macroeconomist.
You could read the article of his that I posted where he explains in detail why he thinks they are wrong.
Or you could just carry on insinuating that people who don't agree with you are argue from a position of bad faith.
Here's a thought. Do you reckon I support Labour's economic policies because they are Labour's? Or because the preponderance of evidence says they are, on balance, better for the country than those of the Tories?
Fifth or sixth time today. Really.
Honestly BST, I think you would back the Labour policies come what may.
You would never favour those of the hated Tories.
-
BST, for gods name don't try and prove it with a graph or a pie chart.
-
Hound.
That is a profoundly depressing thing to read. So once again you're implying that I'm lying.
If the Tories proposed economic policies that would benefit the country as a whole and the working classes and North in particular,and Labour didn't, I would vote Tory. Categorically.
The fact is that that has never been the case in my lifetime.
-
PS.
Having just seen Selby's response Hound, at least your post was only the second most depressing one on this thread.
God f**king help us, eh Selby? Don't try to demonstrate anything with shit like facts.
-
Well ok. If you don't like graphs and numbers, what about a politician REALLY going toe to toe with Andrew Neil and putting him in his place?
This is how to deal with an aggressive interviewer. Do your homework, know your facts and be confident.
https://mobile.twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/1200068008741343232
-
Hound.
That is a profoundly depressing thing to read. So once again you're implying that I'm lying.
If the Tories proposed economic policies that would benefit the country as a whole and the working classes and North in particular,and Labour didn't, I would vote Tory. Categorically.
The fact is that that has never been the case in my lifetime.
BST, I haven’t implied you were lying at all.
You asked me a question and I answered.
I answered honestly because I don’t think that you would ever back a Tory policy that went against a Labour one on a similar subject.
You have a serious dislike of anything Tory.
-
Lets just hope its a hung Parliament
Almost none of them deserve any credit and almost none of them have any creditability left - not that that will bother them in the slightest
Wild predictions / mainfesto promises made on both sides of the divide which we KNOW as "average men in the street" are 99% pie in the sky - and we all KNOW that whoever wins will barely keep a single one of the promises they are spouting now
I am fed up with the f*****g lot of them
Join the club Wolfie mate. I've been saying all of that on here for ages, and have been acused of "lazy thinking".
I have also joined your club Steve but if I post anything similar to what Wolfie has written I get bombarded by people telling me how wrong I am.
Apparently even respected bodies like the IFS are wrong when they question the manifestos of the leading parties.
The IFS said that Labour had vastly underestimated how much their plan could boost the economy, £22 billion, with its associated increased tax take, which was £17 billion more than Labour themselves had projected.
In contrast they said the Tory's 'would end up spending more than their manifesto implies and thus taxing or borrowing more”, with their proposals riddled with uncosted commitments and vague aspirations.
Perhaps you need to look at what the IFS actually said rather than what people say they said?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/28/ifs-manifesto-labour-economy-investment
-
One very obvious thing about this forum is that anyone who criticises Labour must be voting Tory.
[/quote]
That's a very silly thing to say.
But here is a fact, for anyone deciding how to vote.
There are only two post-election possibilities.
1) Boris Johnson is PM
2) There is a Labour PM
(The only reason I don't say Corbyn for 2 is that there are rumours that smaller parties might insist on Corbyn being replaced as a price for supporting a Labour minority Govt. I don't believe it will happen but it's a possibility.)
[/quote]
There is no need to talk down to me BST, like a headmaster speaking to a pupil.
I am well aware there are only two possible outcomes for PM, I said the same thing a few days ago on here.
In my view there is no chance of Corbyn becoming PM.
To be honest, I don’t fancy either of them to do the job.
I am very concerned for our futures.
[/quote]
Criticising labour is not a crime but it's a waste of time and energy to keep saying they are all as bad as each other when clearly the facts if you're interested tell you/everyone this is not true.
So you don't fancy either of them and you're fearful for the future, again the facts tell you that either the tories don't understand basic economics or they have used Austerity as a weapon to undermine the welfare state including the NHS, so either way why would you use your vote to allow them another term?
Now you can do a bb or a bp and say some like 'but that's not true is it' or you could engage with the facts in a reasoned way.
-
One very obvious thing about this forum is that anyone who criticises Labour must be voting Tory.
That's a very silly thing to say.
But here is a fact, for anyone deciding how to vote.
There are only two post-election possibilities.
1) Boris Johnson is PM
2) There is a Labour PM
(The only reason I don't say Corbyn for 2 is that there are rumours that smaller parties might insist on Corbyn being replaced as a price for supporting a Labour minority Govt. I don't believe it will happen but it's a possibility.)
[/quote]
There is no need to talk down to me BST, like a headmaster speaking to a pupil.
I am well aware there are only two possible outcomes for PM, I said the same thing a few days ago on here.
In my view there is no chance of Corbyn becoming PM.
To be honest, I don’t fancy either of them to do the job.
I am very concerned for our futures.
[/quote]
Criticising labour is not a crime but it's a waste of time and energy to keep saying they are all as bad as each other when clearly the facts if you're interested tell you/everyone this is not true.
So you don't fancy either of them and you're fearful for the future, again the facts tell you that either the tories don't understand basic economics or they have used Austerity as a weapon to undermine the welfare state including the NHS, so either way why would you use your vote to allow them another term?
Now you can do a bb or a bp and say some like 'but that's not true is it' or you could engage with the facts in a reasoned way.
[/quote]
Another headmaster like post from a Labour supporter. :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:
As I have just said to BST, some of you Labour boys are assuming that I am going to vote Tory.
-
:thumbsup:
You told everyone you're not, but the message coming through in you're posts is that you think they're all the same which is rubbish
-
So are you saying that I am lying.
To be honest I don’t really care how you interpret my posts.
And yes, I do think that most politicians are habitual stretchers of the truth.
As DW has said earlier tonight, they are probably mostly in it for themselves.
I didn’t see you jump on his post for saying that by the way.
-
Hound.
I dislike them because of the policies that they usually stand for! Like I just said, if they proposed policies that I considered beneficial and Labour did not, I'd vote for them.
-
Hound.
Once again, I for one have never suggested you were going to vote Tory. But as I said, if you don't want a Labour PM, by definition you want Johnson as PM.
This is a straightforward binary choice. So, whatever your protestations, if you're not going to vote in a way that makes a Labour PM more likely, you're supporting Johnson. That's just a fact.
For balance, I'll say again what I have said frequently. Those on the Left who couldn't bring themselves to vote for a Gordon Brown Labour Govt in 2010 (and there are several hundred thousand of them) were endorsing a Cameron Govt and the ensuing problems of Austerity.
-
Hound.
I dislike them because of the policies that they usually stand for! Like I just said, if they proposed policies that I considered beneficial and Labour did not, I'd vote for them.
Ok, let’s leave it there then.
If that is the case then you are very different to some of the extreme Labour supporters on here.
-
So are you saying that I am lying.
To be honest I don’t really care how you interpret my posts.
And yes, I do think that most politicians are habitual stretchers of the truth.
As DW has said earlier tonight, they are probably mostly in it for themselves.
I didn’t see you jump on his post for saying that by the way.
Ramp it up by all means.
What I am saying is that you're not engaging with the facts, if you don't happen to like Cornyn which many don't, who cares, but if you suggest that he's as bad as Johnson without saying why then you don't deserve respect in what is supposed to be a reasoned debate.
Yes I'm guilty of dragging the debate down at times but it's usually because of the bb syndrome, circular arguments, avoiding questions to fairly basic questions, not supporting ones statements and changing the subject.
-
Hound.
Once again, I for one have never suggested you were going to vote Tory. But as I said, if you don't want a Labour PM, by definition you want Johnson as PM.
This is a straightforward binary choice. So, whatever your protestations, if you're not going to vote in a way that makes a Labour PM more likely, you're supporting Johnson. That's just a fact.
For balance, I'll say again what I have said frequently. Those on the Left who couldn't bring themselves to vote for a Gordon Brown Labour Govt in 2010 (and there are several hundred thousand of them) were endorsing a Cameron Govt and the ensuing problems of Austerity.
I wanted to call it a day over this but I just saw your add on post.
As I have said numerous times, my vote locally won’t make any difference to the outcome in Don Valley.
I vote Labour and they win by one more vote.
I vote for another candidate (whoever it is) and Labour win by one less vote.
If I vote for say, Lib Dem, that implies that I want Swinson to be PM which doesn’t fit well with your suggestion that I want Johnson to be PM.
Whoever I vote for is irrelevant as we both know that JC or BJ will be PM and my vote won’t change that.
-
So are you saying that I am lying.
To be honest I don’t really care how you interpret my posts.
And yes, I do think that most politicians are habitual stretchers of the truth.
As DW has said earlier tonight, they are probably mostly in it for themselves.
I didn’t see you jump on his post for saying that by the way.
Ramp it up by all means.
What I am saying is that you're not engaging with the facts, if you don't happen to like Cornyn which many don't, who cares, but if you suggest that he's as bad as Johnson without saying why then you don't deserve respect in what is supposed to be a reasoned debate.
Yes I'm guilty of dragging the debate down at times but it's usually because of the bb syndrome, circular arguments, avoiding questions to fairly basic questions, not supporting ones statements and changing the subject.
Ramp it up?
What are you on?
-
Hound.
Once again, I for one have never suggested you were going to vote Tory. But as I said, if you don't want a Labour PM, by definition you want Johnson as PM.
This is a straightforward binary choice. So, whatever your protestations, if you're not going to vote in a way that makes a Labour PM more likely, you're supporting Johnson. That's just a fact.
For balance, I'll say again what I have said frequently. Those on the Left who couldn't bring themselves to vote for a Gordon Brown Labour Govt in 2010 (and there are several hundred thousand of them) were endorsing a Cameron Govt and the ensuing problems of Austerity.
I wanted to call it a day over this but I just saw your add on post.
As I have said numerous times, my vote locally won’t make any difference to the outcome in Don Valley.
I vote Labour and they win by one more vote.
I vote for another candidate (whoever it is) and Labour win by one less vote.
If I vote for say, Lib Dem, that implies that I want Swinson to be PM which doesn’t fit well with your suggestion that I want Johnson to be PM.
Whoever I vote for is irrelevant as we both know that JC or BJ will be PM and my vote won’t change that.
That yougov poll yesterday suggests Caroline Flint may lose Don Valley
-
So are you saying that I am lying.
To be honest I don’t really care how you interpret my posts.
And yes, I do think that most politicians are habitual stretchers of the truth.
As DW has said earlier tonight, they are probably mostly in it for themselves.
I didn’t see you jump on his post for saying that by the way.
Ramp it up by all means.
What I am saying is that you're not engaging with the facts, if you don't happen to like Cornyn which many don't, who cares, but if you suggest that he's as bad as Johnson without saying why then you don't deserve respect in what is supposed to be a reasoned debate.
Yes I'm guilty of dragging the debate down at times but it's usually because of the bb syndrome, circular arguments, avoiding questions to fairly basic questions, not supporting ones statements and changing the subject.
Ramp it up?
What are you on?
By suggesting I'm calling you a liar,
But you could have addressed the other concerns which I mentioned but you didn't so here we go again on the hamster wheel.
-
Hound.
I'd just reinforce what Filo said.
According to the YG poll yesterday, your constituency (my old one) is now a marginal, leaning towards the Tories.
You can check here.
https://yougov.co.uk/uk-general-election-2019/#uk-elections-constituency-search-anchor
So your vote is actually one of the most powerful in the country.
-
So are you saying that I am lying.
To be honest I don’t really care how you interpret my posts.
And yes, I do think that most politicians are habitual stretchers of the truth.
As DW has said earlier tonight, they are probably mostly in it for themselves.
I didn’t see you jump on his post for saying that by the way.
Ramp it up by all means.
What I am saying is that you're not engaging with the facts, if you don't happen to like Cornyn which many don't, who cares, but if you suggest that he's as bad as Johnson without saying why then you don't deserve respect in what is supposed to be a reasoned debate.
Yes I'm guilty of dragging the debate down at times but it's usually because of the bb syndrome, circular arguments, avoiding questions to fairly basic questions, not supporting ones statements and changing the subject.
Ramp it up?
What are you on?
By suggesting I'm calling you a liar,
But you could have addressed the other concerns which I mentioned but you didn't so here we go again on the hamster wheel.
You know how to twist words SR, I will give you that.
I didn’t suggest that you called me a liar, I ASKED whether you were doing so.
There is a difference.
-
Maybe you should have a nice cup of tea and read through our comments again
-
Maybe you should have a nice cup of tea and read through our comments again
Don’t need to, I know what I wrote.
-
hound ''So are you saying that I am lying.'' :)
-
hound ''So are you saying that I am lying.'' :)
That clearly is a question.
I know I could have put a question mark at the end to make it easier for you to understand.
-
hound ''So are you saying that I am lying.'' :)
That clearly is a question.
I know I could have put a question mark at the end to make it easier for you to understand.
Please yourself hound believe what you want if it makes you feel better :)
-
hound ''So are you saying that I am lying.'' :)
That clearly is a question.
I know I could have put a question mark at the end to make it easier for you to understand.
Please yourself hound believe what you want if it makes you feel better :)
Haha.
-
There is a Full Fact briefing on the 40 hospitals fairytale from Spaffman;
https://fullfact.org/health/six-hospitals-not-forty/
For those interested in the NHS topic.
-
There is a Full Fact briefing on the 40 hospitals fairytale from Spaffman;
https://fullfact.org/health/six-hospitals-not-forty/
For those interested in the NHS topic.
How much are the Yanks prepared to pay for the NHS ? 😗😗😗
-
There is a Full Fact briefing on the 40 hospitals fairytale from Spaffman;
https://fullfact.org/health/six-hospitals-not-forty/
For those interested in the NHS topic.
How much are the Yanks prepared to pay for the NHS ? 😗😗😗
In the first instance, Sproty, it is about making the NHS pay top dollar for life saving drugs.
That can't be afforded without rationing care, so that comes next.
After that, you have created a failing system, so softened up for cherry picking at discount prices by US insurers.
Watch the "Dispatches" I linked yesterday (in this thread)...it sets out the scene.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neKDg1zYnuk
-
Questions that require answers are when will any of the hopital rebuild projects be shovel ready, when will they be running at full capacity?
-
There is a Full Fact briefing on the 40 hospitals fairytale from Spaffman;
https://fullfact.org/health/six-hospitals-not-forty/
For those interested in the NHS topic.
How much are the Yanks prepared to pay for the NHS ? 😗😗😗
I don't think you quite understand the situation Sproty, The Yanks won't be asked to pay anything, it will be us paying them!
-
(https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article18975008.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/0_drug-table-new.jpg)
Yeah they won't be paying.
-
Sounds reasonable if you have shares in these companies.☹️
-
So we allow American drug suppliers to compete in our Market,they won't be selling much at those prices,unless the Govt lets them buy up all of the manufacturing facilities in the UK and shut them down, a bit like ICI. Can't see that happening really. So don't worry the Sky isn't falling in!
-
Trump has already said that it isn't faire that Americans are paying more for the drugs and medications than foreign customers are paying.
-
So we allow American drug suppliers to compete in our Market,they won't be selling much at those prices,unless the Govt lets them buy up all of the manufacturing facilities in the UK and shut them down, a bit like ICI. Can't see that happening really. So don't worry the Sky isn't falling in!
Sproty,
The trade deal with the US is likely to specify that the NHS bulk purchase agreement is set to the standard US prices.
That means the NHS will be expected to buy from US suppliers (big pharma) at rates way above current levels, and that patent protection will be extended, limiting future use of generics (or biosimilars).
The UK is in a very weak position to resist, given the need to conclude a deal covering other sectors post-Brexit. We will have lost the existing trading agreements set up via the EU.
The US set out their position back in February. All the posturing from Spaffman is just a piece of theatre for the GE....nothing more!
-
Actually the US first set out their position in the TTIP negotiations. What the recent negotiations have confirmed is that is still their plan and unlike the EU (who broke off TTIP) May:
'one of the main aims of TTIP is to open up Europe’s public health, education and water services to US companies. This could essentially mean the privatisation of the NHS.'
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/what-is-ttip-and-six-reasons-why-the-answer-should-scare-you-9779688.html
One of the things Johnson said in his interview with Nick Ferrari was that his Brexit deal would allow us to agree TTIP - and TTIP is the opening of NHS service to private American companies.
-
So we allow American drug suppliers to compete in our Market,they won't be selling much at those prices,unless the Govt lets them buy up all of the manufacturing facilities in the UK and shut them down, a bit like ICI. Can't see that happening really. So don't worry the Sky isn't falling in!
Sproty,
The trade deal with the US is likely to specify that the NHS bulk purchase agreement is set to the standard US prices.
That means the NHS will be expected to buy from US suppliers (big pharma) at rates way above current levels, and that patent protection will be extended, limiting future use of generics (or biosimilars).
The UK is in a very weak position to resist, given the need to conclude a deal covering other sectors post-Brexit. We will have lost the existing trading agreements set up via the EU.
The US set out their position back in February. All the posturing from Spaffman is just a piece of theatre for the GE....nothing more!
Will be expected to but won't have to, any negotiation would be vive versa so we can export our cheaper mess to the US thereby assisting the Us health system
-
Trump has already said that it isn't faire that Americans are paying more for the drugs and medications than foreign customers are paying.
That's right so it Meeks sense to do a Trade deal with the Uk whereby we can export our cheaper drugs to the US Market.
-
Actually the US first set out their position in the TTIP negotiations. What the recent negotiations have confirmed is that is still their plan and unlike the EU (who broke off TTIP) May:
'one of the main aims of TTIP is to open up Europe’s public health, education and water services to US companies. This could essentially mean the privatisation of the NHS.'
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/what-is-ttip-and-six-reasons-why-the-answer-should-scare-you-9779688.html
One of the things Johnson said in his interview with Nick Ferrari was that his Brexit deal would allow us to agree TTIP - and TTIP is the opening of NHS service to private American companies.
Right Wilts I have just wasted ten minutes of my life reading that crappy article you posted by Lee Williams , it's a load of sensationalist tosh, no evidence whatsoever.
Can any of you Labourvoters produce any evidence that says in black and white, that a Tory government would, sign away tens of thousands of jobs and force itself to have to find billions of extra funding for drugs...come on I'm waiting???
-
This how trade works,Courtesy of Adam Smith:According to Figure 1, England commits 80 hours of labor to produce one unit of cloth, which is fewer than Portugal's hours of work necessary to produce one unit of cloth. England is able to produce one unit of cloth with fewer hours of labor, therefore England has an absolute advantage in the production of cloth. On the other hand, Portugal commits 90 hours to produce one unit of wine, which is fewer than England's hours of work necessary to produce one unit of wine. Therefore, Portugal has an absolute advantage in the production of wine.
If the two countries specialize in producing the good for which they have the absolute advantage, and if they exchange part of the good with each other, both of the two countries can end up with more of each good than they would have in the absence of trade.[5][6] In the absence of trade, each country produces one unit of cloth and one unit of wine, i.e. a combined total production of 2 units of cloth and 2 units of wine. Here, if England commits all of its labor (80+100) for the production of cloth for which England has the absolute advantage, England produces (80+100)÷80=2.25 units of cloth. On the other hand, if Portugal commits all of its labor (90+120) for the production of wine, Portugal produces (90+120)÷90=2.33... units of wine. The combined total production in this case is 2.25 units of cloth and 2.33 units of wine which is greater than the total production of each good had there been no specialization. Assuming free trade this will lead to cheaper prices for both goods for both countries.
And that's what trade is about we have an absolute advantage in the manufacturing of Pharmaceutical products so we will be exporting £Billions upon £ billions of drugs to the US.
-
Sproty
If you reckon that Big Pharma, which spends the thick end of a quarter of a billion dollars a year on lobbying Washington, is going to say, "Aye, no worries. Import as many cheap drugs as you like Mr President," then I admire your optimism, if not your judgement.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/01/23/health/phrma-lobbying-costs-bn/index.html
-
That's me Billy I always look on the bright side of life,my Glass is lways half full!
-
That's me Billy I always look on the bright side of life,my Glass is lways half full!
Maybe you shouldn't drink and post Sproty? :)
-
For the sake of this site I hope labour win
-
For the sake of this site I hope labour win
Will you be voting for them? X
-
That's me Billy I always look on the bright side of life,my Glass is lways half full!
Maybe you shouldn't drink and post Sproty? :)
😂😂😂🍺🍺🍺🍺🍺🍺
-
Wilts,
Yes, the discredited TTIP proposals are certainly back on the agenda.
The idea is that US corporations should have the right to seek damages, if a sovereign government introduced measures which would obstruct them taking profit from activities they would otherwise have undertaken.
Even worse, these decisions would be taken in secret, by a special tribunal.
It has a wide ranging impact beyond just the NHS;
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/leaked-us-trade-talks-show-how-trump-is-dictating-johnsons-approach-to-a-hard-brexit/
Still, best not worry as we are "taking back control", after all!
-
Wilts,
Yes, the discredited TTIP proposals are certainly back on the agenda.
The idea is that US corporations should have the right to seek damages, if a sovereign government introduced measures which would obstruct them taking profit from activities they would otherwise have undertaken.
Even worse, these decisions would be taken in secret, by a special tribunal.
It has a wide ranging impact beyond just the NHS;
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/leaked-us-trade-talks-show-how-trump-is-dictating-johnsons-approach-to-a-hard-brexit/
Still, best not worry as we are "taking back control", after all!
Will the members of this secret tribunal be wearing white robes and masked pointy hats by any chance!
-
Claim
The prime minister said he planned a rise in funding for the NHS, worth £34bn, which would be the “largest in modern memory”.
Reality
Johnson is correct that the funding boost is the biggest cash increase, worth an additional £34bn a year. Accounting for inflation, it is worth £20.5bn by 2023-24.
However, in percentage terms, it is worth about 3.4% more a year on average.
This is far from being the biggest increase on record. It is below the 3.5% average annual growth recorded prior to 1979, and far below the 6% average increase in the Blair/Brown years of Labour government.
It is also below the 4.3% increase pledged by Labour in its 2019 manifesto.
What do you want from your NHS?
-
Claim
The prime minister said he planned a rise in funding for the NHS, worth £34bn, which would be the “largest in modern memory”.
Reality
Johnson is correct that the funding boost is the biggest cash increase, worth an additional £34bn a year. Accounting for inflation, it is worth £20.5bn by 2023-24.
However, in percentage terms, it is worth about 3.4% more a year on average.
This is far from being the biggest increase on record. It is below the 3.5% average annual growth recorded prior to 1979, and far below the 6% average increase in the Blair/Brown years of Labour government.
It is also below the 4.3% increase pledged by Labour in its 2019 manifesto.
What do you want from your NHS?
Sorry I don't understand cn you xplain properly and explain in layman term. What if there is no inflation between now and then, please explain?
-
The big thing about NHS funding is that, as lifespan gets longer and we find more advanced ways of keeping us healthier into old age, the cost of ANY health system increases significantly more than normal inflation, year-on-year.
That means, if you want a state of the art health service, you have no choice but to increase the amount of national income that goes into paying for that health service.
That's just simple economics. It's about what you prioritise. Nearly every developed country in the world is spending more of its GDP on health, year after year.
Except us...
Look at whats happened over the past decade under the Tories.
(https://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/images/election2017_images/bns/bn201_fig1.jpg)
Our health spending as a % of GDP has stagnated for a decade.
So where IS the money we make going?
Well it's not gone into increased wages. Today, our GDP after adjusting for inflation is about 20% higher than it was a decade ago. But, under the Tories, for the first time since the Napoleonic War, we've had a decade where wages (after adjusting for inflation) have not risen at all.
(https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/tutor2u-media/subjects/economics/real_wages_uk.jpg?mtime=20171229140701)
It's not gone into education. Shockingly, the amount of the national income that we spend on schools, teachers and colleges has shrunk by nearly 1/5th under the Tories.
(https://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/Figure%201.1.%20UK%20education%20spending.PNG)
So where have the proceeds of our growth gone? Here's a clue.
(https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/qz-production-atlas-assets/charts/atlas_S1mA2ihk-.png)
It doesn't HAVE to be like this folks. But you know damn well in your hearts that it always will be under the Tories.
-
Johnson speaking in the HoC in 2002 on why the NHS should be broken up
https://twitter.com/TheRedRoar/status/1201545913300373505
Safe in their hands ehh
-
Private health insurance companies in Australia are subsidized to the tune of 6bn and cannot survive without it. For years they increased prices above inflation and now they are restricted by public outcry they are reducing items covered. The policies are pretty much useless for a couple of reasons there is a huge financial gap payment for most which can run into the thousands and in an emergency you are not going to wait for the doctor of your choice.
People are now running away from private insurance.
-
Meanwhile, in the latest installment of "Clues to his real beliefs that Boris Johnson has given us in the past", this is him 17 years ago calling for the break up of the NHS and more private provision.
https://mobile.twitter.com/TheRedRoar/status/1201545913300373505
Anyone REALLY think he's a convert now?
-
Wilts just posted that above bst.
-
Oops. Apologies. I missed that.
-
Just read on the Gaia Fawkes website that the much waved about Us /UK trade proposals document is a Russian fabrication:Researchers at Britain's Oxford and Cardiff universities, the Atlantic Council thinktank and social media analytics firm Graphika said the way the documents were first shared online mirrored a campaign called Secondary Infektion.
Secondary Infektion uncovered by the Atlantic Council in June, used fabricated or altered documents to try to spread false narratives across at least 30 online platforms, and stemmed from a network of social media accounts which Facebook said "originated in Russia."
Apparently the Text has the same Gramatical Errors and Language misses as other false leaks from the Russian group, it also is all over their websites.
Labour and the UK Govt have refused to comment...looks like somebody shot himself in the Foote!
-
Got a link for that Sproty?
Only it's odd, if it's a fabrication of purportedly Govt documents, that the Govt hasn't pointed this out.
Edit.
It ok. I've seen the stories. There's no indication that anything in the reports has been fabricated.
-
Claim
The prime minister said he planned a rise in funding for the NHS, worth £34bn, which would be the “largest in modern memory”.
Reality
Johnson is correct that the funding boost is the biggest cash increase, worth an additional £34bn a year. Accounting for inflation, it is worth £20.5bn by 2023-24.
However, in percentage terms, it is worth about 3.4% more a year on average.
This is far from being the biggest increase on record. It is below the 3.5% average annual growth recorded prior to 1979, and far below the 6% average increase in the Blair/Brown years of Labour government.
It is also below the 4.3% increase pledged by Labour in its 2019 manifesto.
What do you want from your NHS?
Hey Sydney it cuts both ways when it comes to inflation:
The Labour Party has recently unveiled plans to bring large swathes of the British economy into what they term ‘public ownership’. Even before their bumper manifesto, they had already promised to nationalise the Royal Mail, the railways, energy suppliers, and water and sewage companies. Estimates vary for exactly how much that might costs, but the Centre for Policy Studies puts the extra borrowing required at a pretty eye-watering £176bn.
Since then, Labour has decided to go one better by pledging to nationalise BT and to provide everyone in the UK with ‘free’ broadband. BT chief executive, Philip Jansen, said that this policy alone would cost an additional £100bn – equivalent to about 4.5% of our annual national output.
Who would have thought ‘free’ stuff could be so expensive?
But even these enormous costs are an underestimate as they do not include future liabilities. For example, if the government were to issue bonds to buy the Royal Mail at its current market value of around £2.1bn, this would not only add an additional £2.1bn to the national debt, but the government would also need to find money each and every year to service the interest on that debt, as well as fund future infrastructure investment in the business. Ultimately, taxpayers would be left to foot the bill for ongoing investment costs, as well as left to pick up the tab for any potential losses.
-
I suppose you have to balance that against all the subsidies that these now privatized companies are going to claim or are claiming.
"Net government support to the rail industry in Great Britain for 2017/18 was £6.4 billion, of which £2.1 billion was for HS2. This financial support is the level of funding the government provides towards “operating, maintaining, renewing and enhancing the railway”.
https://fullfact.org/economy/how-much-does-government-subsidise-railways/
" The £93bn handshake: businesses pocket huge subsidies and tax breaks
This article is more than 4 years old"
Guardian’s analysis reveals that hidden subsidies, direct grants and tax breaks to big business amount to £3,500 a year given by each UK household''
-
Claim
The prime minister said he planned a rise in funding for the NHS, worth £34bn, which would be the “largest in modern memory”.
Reality
Johnson is correct that the funding boost is the biggest cash increase, worth an additional £34bn a year. Accounting for inflation, it is worth £20.5bn by 2023-24.
However, in percentage terms, it is worth about 3.4% more a year on average.
This is far from being the biggest increase on record. It is below the 3.5% average annual growth recorded prior to 1979, and far below the 6% average increase in the Blair/Brown years of Labour government.
It is also below the 4.3% increase pledged by Labour in its 2019 manifesto.
What do you want from your NHS?
Hey Sydney it cuts both ways when it comes to inflation:
The Labour Party has recently unveiled plans to bring large swathes of the British economy into what they term ‘public ownership’. Even before their bumper manifesto, they had already promised to nationalise the Royal Mail, the railways, energy suppliers, and water and sewage companies. Estimates vary for exactly how much that might costs, but the Centre for Policy Studies puts the extra borrowing required at a pretty eye-watering £176bn.
Since then, Labour has decided to go one better by pledging to nationalise BT and to provide everyone in the UK with ‘free’ broadband. BT chief executive, Philip Jansen, said that this policy alone would cost an additional £100bn – equivalent to about 4.5% of our annual national output.
Who would have thought ‘free’ stuff could be so expensive?
But even these enormous costs are an underestimate as they do not include future liabilities. For example, if the government were to issue bonds to buy the Royal Mail at its current market value of around £2.1bn, this would not only add an additional £2.1bn to the national debt, but the government would also need to find money each and every year to service the interest on that debt, as well as fund future infrastructure investment in the business. Ultimately, taxpayers would be left to foot the bill for ongoing investment costs, as well as left to pick up the tab for any potential losses.
What a load of rubbish
Nationalising water, energy and Royal Mail would cost only a quarter of that, £49.7 billion and pay for itself in 7 years say the Public Service Research Institute.
Ulitmately taxpayers would be saving on rip off bills and have a public asset
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nationalise-royal-mail-energy-water-savings-bills-national-grid-a9203636.html
-
As for railways they have actually nearly all been re-nationalised - although by other countries state run railway companies. The British taxpayer subsidizes TrenItalia, Deutsche Bahn, Hong Kong Rail and the like:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/trains-uk-railways-renationalise-countries-operators-companies-a9058961.html
-
Network rail the biggest chunk was never privatized but why should the public bail out those train companies that get into trouble cos they can't run a train set set, that's what business is about isn't it, balancing the risk to make a profit?
Keeping the profits, public bail outs for the losses.
"East coast line bailout puts rail privatisation back in spotlight
Once again, a franchise operator has bid too much for a contract and run out of steam''
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/10/east-coast-line-bailout-rail-privatisation-spotlight
-
Not quite correct Sydney.
The network WAS privatised as Railtrack.
It was an unmitigated disaster. Mismanagement led to a string of major accidents in the 90s and it was re-nationalised.
But hey! Private sector is always best, eh?
-
Thanks, can't remember that bst, if I knew?
Pouring public money into train companies that are only interested in returns for shareholders has to stop.
-
Sydney.
Railtrack was a disaster almost beyond comprehension.
It oversaw three major mainline crashes in 4 years, all due to signalling or track problems.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southall_rail_crash
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladbroke_Grove_rail_crash
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatfield_rail_crash
After the last crash, the mainline rail network virtually ground to a standstill as they put emergency track checks and Draconian speed limits in place, to make up for the lack of maintenance they'd carried out over previous years. I was regularly having meetings in London then and I'd usually book a train that was timetabled to arrive 2-3 hours earlier than necessary, to account for the time we'd be delayed.
Oh aye. And in the middle of all that, after making a £1/2bn loss and having to be bailed out by the Govt, the Railtrack board paid a £130bn dividend to shareholders.
Private sector, eh?
-
It's astonishing when you examine the detail, privatization because the private sector can do it better?
“Government direct subsidy of the railways is around £5 billion per year, an increase of over 200% since privatisation… Fares across all operators are 20% higher in real terms than they were in January 1995.”
"Between 1995 and 2018, rail tickets on average went up 20% in price, taking into account inflation.''
https://fullfact.org/economy/how-much-does-government-subsidise-railways/
-
"'General election: NHS staff lead protests as Trump visits London for Nato talks – live''
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1201622678001586176/video/1
-
What Trump said about NHS and trade deal
This is what President Trump said when he was asked if he thought the NHS should be on the table in trade deals. He replied:
"No, not at all, I have nothing to do with it. Never even thought about it, honestly ...
I don’t even know where that rumour started. We have absolutely nothing to do with it and we wouldn’t want to if you handed it to us on a silver platter, we want nothing to do with it''
I believe you :thumbsup:
-
It must be fun for those that have to record the meeting between Johnson and Trump, some contest?
World's Biggest Liar
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%27s_Biggest_Liar
-
Mark Landler of @NYTimes says the NHS is almost certainly on the table in Boris Johnson and Donald Trump’s post-Brexit trade talks.
If you’re voting for Johnson, then you’re voting for the end of NHS.
This will see people die because they can’t afford medical insurance.
Can you afford to pay healthcare premiums for your entire family?
People with existing conditions will face loaded premiums.
-
Just a thought when Johnson says the NHS is not on the table.
https://twitter.com/Trickyjabs/status/1201167719279644672
-
And as for the Brexit Party, well...do you really need to ask?
https://twitter.com/RichardBurgon/status/1201476781947129856
It is truly baffling how many older voters, who are the ones who are going to need the NHS more and more over the next few years, are rushing to vote for Johnson and Farage.
Talk about lack of self-interest!
-
Demonic Rabid puts everyone's mind at rest in the Independent;
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dominic-raab-brexit-nhs-privatisation-trump-us-drugs-price-increase-a9230661.html
Good to know all is well!
-
Trump's says.
"I have nothing to do with it (the NHS). Never even thought about it, honestly. I don't even know where that rumour started."
Hang on. Hang on. Oh yeah.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DIianrVDMilE&ved=2ahUKEwjE9J_s4JnmAhXYQEEAHf8pAx4QwqsBMAB6BAgHEAQ&usg=AOvVaw0E7Gr_UuS3y4Pf-o2fMKQ5
-
Trump's says.
"I have nothing to do with it (the NHS). Never even thought about it, honestly. I don't even know where that rumour started."
Hang on. Hang on. Oh yeah.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DIianrVDMilE&ved=2ahUKEwjE9J_s4JnmAhXYQEEAHf8pAx4QwqsBMAB6BAgHEAQ&usg=AOvVaw0E7Gr_UuS3y4Pf-o2fMKQ5
I don't know Billy, I expected Sydney to be first to come out with that rubbish! It must be reallly disappointing mate ,there there!
-
I haven't got a Scooby what you're on about Sproty.
Are you saying you believe Trump or you don't?
-
Apparently the Daily Torygraph published a piece today saying that the US-UK trade documents were a Russian fake (also posted by a notable contributor to this site too yesterday).
Both of whom conveniently overlook/forget that the Daily Torygraph published a story in July on how the the US-UK trade talks had stalled - based on the same documents!
Funny old world
https://scramnews.com/telegraph-published-same-leaked-trade-documents-as-jeremy-corbyn-claims-russian-disinformation/
-
Trump's says.
"I have nothing to do with it (the NHS). Never even thought about it, honestly. I don't even know where that rumour started."
Hang on. Hang on. Oh yeah.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DIianrVDMilE&ved=2ahUKEwjE9J_s4JnmAhXYQEEAHf8pAx4QwqsBMAB6BAgHEAQ&usg=AOvVaw0E7Gr_UuS3y4Pf-o2fMKQ5
I don't know Billy, I expected Sydney to be first to come out with that rubbish! It must be reallly disappointing mate ,there there!
I'm just happy knowing you read my posts Sproty :)
-
It seems that another leading Tory has been found to be confused today.
Dominic Raab on the Today programme “I can tell you, categorically I have never advocated privatisation of the NHS.”
In a book co-authored by Raab and a number of his Tory colleagues in 2011 he said about the NHS “ The current monolith should be broken up. Non profit and private providers should be allowed into the service & compete on price.”
Is there anyone left in the country who genuinely believes that the Tories aren’t looking to flog parts of the NHS?
-
Someone once said, when people show you who they are and what their beliefs are, believe them.
https://amp.businessinsider.com/boris-johnson-said-patients-charged-to-use-the-nhs-2019-12?r=US&IR=T&__twitter_impression=true
-
The evidence just keeps on growing;
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ournhs/the-president-the-us-private-health-giant-and-top-nhs-officials-special-relationships/
Clickable links for lovers of detail.
Still, if you want to believe the Spaffman, ignore all that.
Best not to look, it might get in the way.
-
Video of reps from top US pharma companies telling US trade negotiators that US-UK trade deal is “an important opportunity” to deal with “artificially depressed prices” in UK - “dictated” via our “primary payer” system
Getting better at faking them Russians
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1201861148926205952
-
Trump's says.
"I have nothing to do with it (the NHS). Never even thought about it, honestly. I don't even know where that rumour started."
Hang on. Hang on. Oh yeah.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DIianrVDMilE&ved=2ahUKEwjE9J_s4JnmAhXYQEEAHf8pAx4QwqsBMAB6BAgHEAQ&usg=AOvVaw0E7Gr_UuS3y4Pf-o2fMKQ5
I don't know Billy, I expected Sydney to be first to come out with that rubbish! It must be reallly disappointing mate ,there there!
I'm just happy knowing you read my posts Sproty :)
😉👍🏻
-
There is a site where you can find out the impact on the NHS of austerity and privatisation in your area;
https://nhscuts.org.uk/
Important to realise that this process is ongoing, and further effects are in the pipeline.
-
There is a new film from veteran film maker John Pilger;
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tories-dirty-war-nhs-exposed-21036152
Unfortunately, it can't be shown by ITV until after the election because of broadcasting rules.
At least the Mirror is publishing a brief summary.
Buyers regret.....we wouldn't want that, once you have cast your vote!
-
Just heard that an earlier film about the running down of the NHS, "The Great NHS Heist", has been put up on YouTube until December 11.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwlvLe-X27o&feature=youtu.be
Its the full 2 hour version.
If you have not seen it, worth a look.
-
There is a site where you can find out the impact on the NHS of austerity and privatisation in your area;
https://nhscuts.org.uk/
Important to realise that this process is ongoing, and further effects are in the pipeline.
Wow! So this leftie social media lobby group reckons dem der wicked Tories are going to reduce the Araes budget by Half 🤔
-
Sproty,
If you click on the "about" button in the bottom right hand corner, it explains how the calculation is done, and the data sources used.
I hope that helps!
-
What about the lefty Yorkshire Post reporting this propaganda?
https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/people/it-was-chaos-shocking-photo-shows-leeds-four-year-old-suspected-pneumonia-forced-sleep-floor-lgi-due-lack-beds-1334909
That's what happens when you systematically underfund the NHS for a decade.
World's 5th or 6th richest country. And this is the f**king shambles these bas**rds have turned the NHS into, through deliberate policy decisions.
And some of you lot in here are going to celebrate if they win on Thursday.
THIS is what it's about. It's not about scoring points on an internet forum. It's about whether in your heart, you really care about this.
-
Sproty,
If you click on the "about" button in the bottom right hand corner, it explains how the calculation is done, and the data sources used.
I hope that helps!
cheers Albie, all I got was a formula not the working out, needless to say these figure will be out of date by that date due the fact that if Labour gets in! We will be in the hands if the IMF regulators, and the population will have grown by Ten Million.
-
What about the lefty Yorkshire Post reporting this propaganda?
https://mobile.twitter.com/RCorbettMEP/status/1203289732672819201
That's what happens when you systematically underfund the NHS for a decade.
World's 5th or 6th richest country. And this is the f**king shambles these bas**rds have turned the NHS into, through deliberate policy decisions.
And some of you lot in here are going to celebrate if they win on Thursday.
THIS is what it's about. It's not about scoring points on an internet forum. It's about whether in your heart, you really care about this.
BST, who are these people on here who will be celebrating if the Tories win the GE.
Just curious who you think they are.
-
I will be Does it make me a bad person?
-
I'm not pointing the finger at you Hound. But there's several on here. They know who they are.
-
Am I one?
-
I'm not pointing the finger at you Hound. But there's several on here. They know who they are.
Zo ve are going in billie der graphs little black book... hmmmmm!
-
I have my own chapter.....
-
You can quite easily tell who they are.
They are the ones who will be voting for a party that has put 4 million children in poverty, created the worst ever A&E waiting times, left kids sleeping on hospital floors, 4000 schools in need of urgent repair, 1.5 million people using foodbanks and doubled the National Debt. They have a certain style of posting.
Are they bad people? I guess that depends on whether or not you think that a party that created all that misery is one worth voting for - I doubt history will be kind.
-
You can quite easily tell who they are.
They are the ones who will be voting for a party that has put 4 million children in poverty, created the worst ever A&E waiting times, left kids sleeping on hospital floors, 4000 schools in need of urgent repair, 1.5 million people using foodbanks and doubled the National Debt. They have a certain style of posting.
Are they bad people? I guess that depends on whether or not you think that a party that created all that misery is one worth voting for - I doubt history will be kind.
So come on then wilts, name names.
-
You can quite easily tell who they are.
They are the ones who will be voting for a party that has put 4 million children in poverty, created the worst ever A&E waiting times, left kids sleeping on hospital floors, 4000 schools in need of urgent repair, 1.5 million people using foodbanks and doubled the National Debt. They have a certain style of posting.
Are they bad people? I guess that depends on whether or not you think that a party that created all that misery is one worth voting for - I doubt history will be kind.
So come on then wilts, name names.
Nope sorry hound I won't do that - you can make up your own mind and name and shame people if you want to but it is not up to me to do it for you.
I will argue with any poster if I disagree with anything they have written on here (and you and I have had quite a few back and forths all of which have been civil as I recall) and on politics and policies in general. But I am not up for personal attacks for the sake of it.
Vote for who you want. Justify it how you will. But know what you are voting for.
-
Alexa, I have been playing tennis with some nice people from russia and then we had a few drinks, after I woke up my arse was really sore can you help me.
Sorry, no one can help you there's a 6 week waiting list to see a doctor and there are no beds.
-
Try talking out of your mouth until your arse gets better.
-
Try talking out of your mouth until your arse gets better.
Pot, kettle, black BB
-
You can quite easily tell who they are.
They are the ones who will be voting for a party that has put 4 million children in poverty, created the worst ever A&E waiting times, left kids sleeping on hospital floors, 4000 schools in need of urgent repair, 1.5 million people using foodbanks and doubled the National Debt. They have a certain style of posting.
Are they bad people? I guess that depends on whether or not you think that a party that created all that misery is one worth voting for - I doubt history will be kind.
So come on then wilts, name names.
Nope sorry hound I won't do that - you can make up your own mind and name and shame people if you want to but it is not up to me to do it for you.
I will argue with any poster if I disagree with anything they have written on here (and you and I have had quite a few back and forths all of which have been civil as I recall) and on politics and policies in general. But I am not up for personal attacks for the sake of it.
Vote for who you want. Justify it how you will. But know what you are voting for.
Wilts, I don’t have any opinions on who is a Tory voter on here.
To be honest, I don’t really care who people vote for, as you suggest, it is their choice.
Not everyone agrees do they.
I have cast my vote so the deed is done.
-
What about the lefty Yorkshire Post reporting this propaganda?
https://mobile.twitter.com/RCorbettMEP/status/1203289732672819201
That's what happens when you systematically underfund the NHS for a decade.
World's 5th or 6th richest country. And this is the f**king shambles these bas**rds have turned the NHS into, through deliberate policy decisions.
And some of you lot in here are going to celebrate if they win on Thursday.
THIS is what it's about. It's not about scoring points on an internet forum. It's about whether in your heart, you really care about this.
The celebration won't be about politics BST, that's not even worth celebrating about. It will be about democracy. Just like the dangerous precedent set by the Bolton fiasco, when a referendum or election result is overturned by politicians who don't agree with it, then you're on a very dangerous road that can lead to a complete breakdown in democracy and trust in politicians.
-
What about the lefty Yorkshire Post reporting this propaganda?
https://mobile.twitter.com/RCorbettMEP/status/1203289732672819201
That's what happens when you systematically underfund the NHS for a decade.
World's 5th or 6th richest country. And this is the f**king shambles these bas**rds have turned the NHS into, through deliberate policy decisions.
And some of you lot in here are going to celebrate if they win on Thursday.
THIS is what it's about. It's not about scoring points on an internet forum. It's about whether in your heart, you really care about this.
The celebration won't be about politics BST, that's not even worth celebrating about. It will be about democracy. Just like the dangerous precedent set by the Bolton fiasco, when a referendum or election result is overturned by politicians who don't agree with it, then you're on a very dangerous road that can lead to a complete breakdown in democracy and trust in politicians.
Nail on the head
-
SS.
I admire your belief. Genuinely.
I just think you've been played by THE most venal and amoral UK politician of recent history. Hear me out.
I've said all along that the basic error in the logic of saying the 2016 vote was decisive is that there was no such single thing as "Leave". A whole heap of different ideas of what "Leave" meant were shovelled up into one option on the ballot slip. So no-one knew what "Leave" meant. What the endgame would be.
As a result, interpretation of what "Leave" meant has been entirely determined by the Tory party.
Had it been clear what "Leave" meant when folk voted for it in 2016, Johnson wouldn't have ostentatiously flounced out of Cabinet in 2018 saying he didn't agree with May's Deal, nor would he have voted it down twice.
Get that. Johnson voted down the opportunity to Leave in the winter. Brexit could have got done back then. But he voted it down.
He did it for one reason. Just as he decided to support Leave over Remain for one reason. The same reason he's done everything in his career. To further his own ambition.
You regularly berate politicians for their untrustworthiness. You're about to celebrate THE most untrustworthy, lying cheat to ascend our politics since the War being rewarded by 5 years in power.
-
For those interested in the topic, a piece in Tribune about how the run down of the NHS has taken place;
https://tribunemag.co.uk/2019/12/the-nhs-isnt-failing-its-being-failed
Course, if folk just want to score points off each other, then it won't be of interest.
-
PS
SS.
Here's proof that not everyone who supported Leave in 2016 supported ANY form of Leave.
https://uup.org/assets/images/uup%20ge%20manifesto%20twentynineteen.pdf
The Ulster Unionists were passionate Leave supporters in 2016.
Look what they say in their manifesto.
"If the only choice is between accepting Boris Johnson's deal or Remain, we have to choose Remain."
And THAT is the point I've been trying to make for 3 years. The 2016 vote is valid if and only if EVERY Leave voter would have preferred ANY form of Leave over Remain. You DO see the logic of that?
The DUP hasn't said this as explicitly, but it's clear they would also prefer Remain to any Leave deal that put a border between GB and NI (as Johnson's deal does). The DUP would NEVER accept any deal that weakened the bond between NI and GB.
Here's a slightly daft thought but it emphasises what the Ulster Unionists think. Would YOU have voted Leave if it turned out that the deal we negotiated included 1000 first born children being sent to Strasbourg to be sacrificed in front of Jean-Claude Juncker? Of course you wouldn't, because that would be utterly outrageous. And it's a stupid example because,of course that was never going to happen. But the Ulster Unionists never believed a border in the Irish Sea would happen when they enthusiastically supported Leave, either. And to them, the deal that we now have is stupid and outrageous.
Something like 400,000 people are UUP and DUP supporters. There is no way on God's earth they would have voted Leave in 2016 if they knew that was going to result in Johnson's deal. If they had voted Remain instead of Leave, that immediately more than halves the 2016 majority.
Then you have those on the far left who supported Leave but are horrified by the way that's been interpreted. Do you think THEY would have voted Leave if they'd realised it was going to be a Hard Right Leave?
Then there's Farage. Everyone would agree that May's deal would have put us outside the EU. But Farage said that May's deal wouldn't be leaving at all! He said he'd rather have supported Remain than accept May's deal!
You see my point? There was no clarity about what Leave meant in 2016. The argument that the Leave vote was categorical and unquestionable is just wrong. The ONLY way to have a truly democratic choice with a binary, A or B vote is for both A and B to be absolutely clear and unequivocal. What's actually happened is that your Leave vote in 2016 has been used as a weapon by right wing politicians, determined to argue that THEY and they alone knew what you were thinking when you voted Leave.
-
Or. To put it another way.
What right do YOU have to insist that we have Johnson's deal, when the groups of people I listed up above voted Leave without believing it would be THIS sort of Leave?
-
BFYP, Filo and Sproty all voted to leave in 2016. Only one sounds like he wanted to leave without a deal at that moment. Like what's been said not everyone voted for the same one thing.
-
I think nearly everyone that voted "Leave" just wanted that same one thing
I voted Remain and will openly defend that position - but I have read and heard all the Leavers insisting they Voted to Leave and they understood what they were voting for (to Leave) even though they had only the information that was given up to the minute that their Vote was registered
Whatever happens from here it will be interesting (if that is the right word) to see which of the two groups were proved to be right - though it might take 10 years maybe even more to be settled either way
One thing is it will be featured in every Election for decades.
-
I didn’t vote 👍
I will vote leave if there is another referendum the remain contingent
On here have made my mind up for me !
-
The current population of the UK is 67 million the population in 2000 was 58 million, the birth rate per 1000 has decline from 12 to 11 children barely 2 per family. Where have the 9 million come from, has there been any planning and investment in services and the infrastructure to cope with this rise since 2000 ?
-
Well they can't be migrants? David Cameron was bringing migration down to the 10's of thousands per year wasn't he?
-
Sproty.
The investment is PRECISELY the thing.
The increase in population is mainly of prime working age people. Precisely the people who do NOT put a burden on public services. But the Tories have overseen a decade of stagnant NHS funding. And THAT is why it's in crisis.
They want you to think it's the fault of them bas**rd migrants. It's not. It's the fault of the bas**rds in charge.
-
Sproty.
The investment is PRECISELY the thing.
The increase in population is mainly of prime working age people. Precisely the people who do NOT put a burden on public services. But the Tories have overseen a decade of stagnant NHS funding. And THAT is why it's in crisis.
They want you to think it's the fault of them bas**rd migrants. It's not. It's the fault of the bas**rds in charge.
Who was in power from 1997 to 2010 Billy?
-
Been in A&E for three hours couldn’t crew a Pirate ship with tonight’s offering, actually quite a few people look ill for a change
-
The current population of the UK is 67 million the population in 2000 was 58 million, the birth rate per 1000 has decline from 12 to 11 children barely 2 per family. Where have the 9 million come from, has there been any planning and investment in services and the infrastructure to cope with this rise since 2000 ?
We are living an average 3/4 years longer than the year 2000. It has unfortunately stopped growing in the last few years though.
-
Sproty.
The investment is PRECISELY the thing.
The increase in population is mainly of prime working age people. Precisely the people who do NOT put a burden on public services. But the Tories have overseen a decade of stagnant NHS funding. And THAT is why it's in crisis.
They want you to think it's the fault of them bas**rd migrants. It's not. It's the fault of the bas**rds in charge.
Who was in power from 1997 to 2010 Billy?
Sproty.
Before you make a fool of yourself again, do a bit of research.
NHS funding 1997-2010 and 2010-2019.
Go have a look. It's stunning.
-
The current population of the UK is 67 million the population in 2000 was 58 million, the birth rate per 1000 has decline from 12 to 11 children barely 2 per family. Where have the 9 million come from, has there been any planning and investment in services and the infrastructure to cope with this rise since 2000 ?
We are living an average 3/4 years longer than the year 2000. It has unfortunately stopped growing in the last few years though.
There is that point and how do you pay for the ageing population? Personally I'm not sure I want to get old seeing what is happening to people of an age, there is a question as to if people do live too long and if the body can cope with it mentally. Given my strength is all in my head it's not something I feel I could ever cope with and so sad to see.
-
Sproty.
The investment is PRECISELY the thing.
The increase in population is mainly of prime working age people. Precisely the people who do NOT put a burden on public services. But the Tories have overseen a decade of stagnant NHS funding. And THAT is why it's in crisis.
They want you to think it's the fault of them bas**rd migrants. It's not. It's the fault of the bas**rds in charge.
Who was in power from 1997 to 2010 Billy?
Sproty.
Before you make a fool of yourself again, do a bit of research.
NHS funding 1997-2010 and 2010-2019.
Go have a look. It's stunning.
I’m not making a fool of myself I worked very closely with RDASH under Labour and boy did they know how to burn the Publics money. The management wiring structure diagrams were a site to behold, all of those key clinical staff put into management roles off the front line, here’s a good example every time I went to a meeting which was once a week it was a ‘working lunch with a private catering firm provit the Buffet when I asked why they did it they said it was the only way they could get Key Partners to attend their meetings. One manager blew £60 K on a bespoke IT system which failed, another blew £50 employing a firm to do community research work which was totally unnecessary, and then I would get emails in March, we have a load of money to get rid of, do you fancy a Jolly to a Clinical commissioning meeting in London First class on the train.it was not a proper way to spend the Taxpayers money, but it was the LABOUR Way!
-
The current population of the UK is 67 million the population in 2000 was 58 million, the birth rate per 1000 has decline from 12 to 11 children barely 2 per family. Where have the 9 million come from, has there been any planning and investment in services and the infrastructure to cope with this rise since 2000 ?
Knowing you are a man of facts sproty there's some here for you :)
Spending on the NHS in England
https://fullfact.org/health/spending-english-nhs/
And here
10 charts that show why the NHS is in trouble
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-42572110
And here
The NHS explained in eight charts
https://theconversation.com/the-nhs-explained-in-eight-charts-91854
apologies for being so childish :)
-
Ch4 news has an interesting overview of the state of the NHS under the Tories;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqyMHsMGD5M
Ignore it at your peril.
-
The current population of the UK is 67 million the population in 2000 was 58 million, the birth rate per 1000 has decline from 12 to 11 children barely 2 per family. Where have the 9 million come from, has there been any planning and investment in services and the infrastructure to cope with this rise since 2000 ?
You'll fing this interesting I'm sure sproty
Claim: Immigration has put a "massive burden" on the NHS
Reality Check: Nigel Farage made this claim in response to Andrew Neil's questions about how he'd fill vacancies in the NHS and social care, if there were controls, after Brexit, on EU migrants coming to the UK to work. Mr Farage said, in fact, immigration had put a "massive burden" on the health service.
So, what does the evidence show?
The Migration Advisory Committee, an independent public body that advises the government, looked at this as part of its report into the effects of immigration from the European Economic Area (EEA).
It found that migrants from Europe "contribute much more to the health service and the provision of social care in financial resources and through work than they consume in services."
It said migrants from the EEA tend to be younger and healthier than the UK-born population, and consume fewer NHS services than them.
It found "no evidence that migration has reduced the quality of healthcare."
According to the Health Foundation 13.3% of the entire workforce of NHS staff in England, and 28.4% of doctors, are from outside the UK (both EU and non-EU).
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50676321
:)
-
Ch4 news has an interesting overview of the state of the NHS under the Tories;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqyMHsMGD5M
Ignore it at your peril.
If I worked for a trust I'd be shocked-or maybe I wouldn't, it's pretty damning Albie.
-
Oh by the way lthough A&E was crammed last night on my way to x Ray I counted 68 empty trolleys in all sorts of shapes and sizes.
One of the nurses mentioned the little Boy in Leeds and he had been put on a Trolley, his mum took him of and took the photo.one of her mates from uni works at Leeds.
-
I suppose this is not true either sproty?
Thousands of patients die waiting for beds in hospitals – study
Doctors’ report finds 5,449 deaths since 2016 followed delayed admission to A&E
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/dec/10/thousands-of-patients-die-waiting-for-beds-in-hospitals-study
-
Whether the photo is ‘fake’ or not, what isn’t fake is Boris’ reaction. He is so far removed from the realities of life for normal people it’s unbelievable. Yet silly people still believe he cares.
-
Oh by the way lthough A&E was crammed last night on my way to x Ray I counted 68 empty trolleys in all sorts of shapes and sizes.
One of the nurses mentioned the little Boy in Leeds and he had been put on a Trolley, his mum took him of and took the photo.one of her mates from uni works at Leeds.
Odd. My mates neighbours cousin was at an A&E in Bristol. One of the Nurses has a mate who had a sister who knew a bloke who worked in a shop in Leeds in 1974. He said it was all b*llocks.
-
There is talk that it's faked but that's easy to say given the current climate, it's also very easy to believe, but more easily IMO to believe that the rumours of it being fake are fake....
What I can believe is the baby having to sleep in a chair for some time. Last year we were unfortunate enough to have our youngest (who was less than 6 months at the time) contract meningitis. The service from doctors surgery through to hospital was superb, the only downside was waiting 3/4 hours for a bed whilst they diagnosed her, which meant sitting with her in my arms for a few hours. There has to be a better way to do that, which wouldn't be too hard. After that 3/4 hours they were superb, she had a room with sensory lighting etc and her Mum could stay in with her. It was first class, the only grumble was that period waiting.
-
It is not 100% genuine. The child was on a drip in a chair which, though not ideal, is a perfectly acceptable clinical situation. The childs mother has out him on the floor. A drip needs gravity in general to work not placed on the floor. Also and more importantly infection control would not allow placing of a patient on the floor. In the uncropped photo chair and trolley can be seen
-
It is not 100% genuine. The child was on a drip in a chair which, though not ideal, is a perfectly acceptable clinical situation. The childs mother has out him on the floor. A drip needs gravity in general to work not placed on the floor. Also and more importantly infection control would not allow placing of a patient on the floor. In the uncropped photo chair and trolley can be seen
How do you know this LDR?
-
HA combination of looking at the uncropped photo and reading the mothers own account in the YP. The infection control bit is assuming Leeds would work to the same standard policies of the trust where I work
-
Where's the tube going that's going up out of shot?
added
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50717606
-
HA combination of looking at the uncropped photo and reading the mothers own account in the YP. The infection control bit is assuming Leeds would work to the same standard policies of the trust where I work
So you don’t know LDR?
-
Emergency call? :)
-
There is talk that it's faked but that's easy to say given the current climate, it's also very easy to believe, but more easily IMO to believe that the rumours of it being fake are fake....
What I can believe is the baby having to sleep in a chair for some time. Last year we were unfortunate enough to have our youngest (who was less than 6 months at the time) contract meningitis. The service from doctors surgery through to hospital was superb, the only downside was waiting 3/4 hours for a bed whilst they diagnosed her, which meant sitting with her in my arms for a few hours. There has to be a better way to do that, which wouldn't be too hard. After that 3/4 hours they were superb, she had a room with sensory lighting etc and her Mum could stay in with her. It was first class, the only grumble was that period waiting.
Of COURSE there's talk that it's faked. The Tory spin machine has been in hyperdrive on that theme for 24 hours.
This is what happens when we lazily assume EVERYONE is lying. We equate ACTUAL, DEMONSTRABLE lying with "ooh I heard that maybe perhaps, someone suggested that thing I heard that I didn't want to believe might not be true."
-
On that subject, I assume you saw the consummate lying by the Tories to deflect from the story about NHS underfunding? Piping that lie through Kuenssberg and Peston that a Labour activist punched a Tory worker at the hospital?
You're a smart lad BFYP. I cannot believe that people like you are going to reward this behaviour. It is beyond scary that a political party can behave like this and not be sanctioned by the voters. You KNOW where this leads.
-
Cameron-may-johnson :)
-
Deflect from the Story...??? Isnt deflection exactly what Labour have been trying to do on the NHS this last few weeks?? Desperate to get the headlines away from their frankly chaotic brexit position..They have been drastically pushing the story onto the NHS with there leaked reports that didn't really tell you anything..The Tory's insist the NHS isn't for sale yet that's automatically a fact lie as far as labour are concerned..
Reports of taxiing labour activists in to follow the health secretary to heckle him on the nhs wherever he goes all week, and now a Labour activists son appears in a photo that doesn't smell right at all and has supposedly been rubbished by staff working there...
And you go on about the great Tory spin machine??????
-
Only if in your of the opinion the talks with the US were all fluff and the privatisation by stealth isn't really happening WC.
-
I do believe it was Labour who first went down that route Sydney.However I don't believe that even if it was the intention of some trade deals involving the NHS it wasn't to sell it on mass..And that wont happen now regardless...It needs investment yes but managed investment..Some of the money these trusts waste is frankly criminal at times..
In some ways I hope that picture of that lad isn't false,because if it turns out some left wing labour activist has staged that Photo for political impact then thats a insult to every single Nurse and Doctor in this Country who work so hard on our care, and would signal a new low in Politics
-
There you go WingCo. You've swallowed it.
"Reports of Labour taxi-ing activists to the hospital."
Lies! From Conservative HQ, repeated by Kuenssberg. Lies. And you swallow them and repeat them!
-
The Child's family confirmed it happened, the hospital confirmed it happened, a Nurse who works at that hospital has just contacted a radio phone and confirmed that there were no paediatric ICU beds available at the hospital, Boris refused to look at the photo and snatched a reporters phone rather than view the image....and yet....Tory voters are scurrying around in a desperate and cynical attempt to deny it by claiming the Parents/Hospital/Yorkshire Post (take your pick) are lying!
It would be hilarious if it wasn't despicable.
-
Alternatively a local Journo has this account
A local Journo appears to be digging deeper..
Confirmed that my source is indeed a nurse from the hospital. Her account: 'Every member of staff' there at the time knows that 1.Yes it was busy. 2. No, the child was not treated on the floor. 3.A bed WAS available. 4.The child was 'placed' on the floor for a photo. Will update.
-
Billy how can you prove they are lies??? You are quick to believe one side as I am the other..
-
WC I will be totally pissed too if some leftwing idiot has done that, in fact I would happily disown anyone that fakes it, I don't like dishonesty, but being left is also a battle because, deep breath-most of the msm is centre or right so I/we always have to (i believe) have to take the high ground.
The NHS won't be sold en-masse, there will be agreements to allow access for US companies to buy in or for drug companies to extend patents etc.
-
Alternatively a local Journo has this account
A local Journo appears to be digging deeper..
Confirmed that my source is indeed a nurse from the hospital. Her account: 'Every member of staff' there at the time knows that 1.Yes it was busy. 2. No, the child was not treated on the floor. 3.A bed WAS available. 4.The child was 'placed' on the floor for a photo. Will update.
Who’s the journalist WC?
-
I'm curious, why have the BBC not credited the photo to the childs mother but to a registered press photographer?
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-50713236
https://thebppa.com/author/benlackpicsgmail-com/
-
I'm curious, why have the BBC not credited the photo to the childs mother but to a registered press photographer?
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-50713236
https://thebppa.com/author/benlackpicsgmail-com/
Because it was taken by a press photographer and not the Mother
-
WingCo.
I go on the balance of evidence.
Tory Party HQ lies as a matter of policy. They lied about the claim that a Labour heckler had punched a Tory worker outside the hospital. The same source was the one that claimed Labour had been taxi-ing in activists. They have produced zero evidence for that claim. Meanwhile, one of the hecklers, posting under his own name, posted on Twitter last night that he works 200m round the corner and legged it round there when he heard that Matt Hancock was there.
Wing Co. You've SEEN it from the Tories throughout this campaign. They lie so often and so systematically that people can't cope with it. Smart people like you are not processing the tidal wave of lies and are assuming that they must be based on truth. While also implicitly assuming that the other side must be just as bad. As in, your thoughts on whether that photo was staged.
-
Do you often take your local friendly press photographer with you when you are in an ambulance with your child?
-
The tube Ldr, where does the tube go? :)
-
Do you often take your local friendly press photographer with you when you are in an ambulance with your child?
Of course not LDR, which probably explains why it wasn’t the Mother who called the press. It was someone else at the hospital. As explained in a conversation on a radio phone in this morning with a journalist involved. So, the parents say it’s true, the hospital say it’s true, the press says it’s true and even Matt Hancock says it’s true. The only people who are continuing to walk around with their eyes closed are Tory apologists. As usual.
-
Oh by the way lthough A&E was crammed last night on my way to x Ray I counted 68 empty trolleys in all sorts of shapes and sizes.
One of the nurses mentioned the little Boy in Leeds and he had been put on a Trolley, his mum took him of and took the photo.one of her mates from uni works at Leeds.
Odd. My mates neighbours cousin was at an A&E in Bristol. One of the Nurses has a mate who had a sister who knew a bloke who worked in a shop in Leeds in 1974. He said it was all b*llocks.
I know him! Jimmy Saville! It will all come out in the wash those corridors wii have CCTV all they need to do is review it trolley goes in to room comes out again empty 2 mins later, story is true 😎
-
There were press photographers all over A&E last night taking photos of poorly people... NOT
-
So, the mother admits she put him on the floor, press photographer called, and you cant admit the overt politicising of this? I guess not because dear comrades wouldn't manipulate for gain at all would they. I get it happened, i dont like the inference the staff put him there when the mother states he was on a chair. I am proud of where I work and dont like it smeared (by either side) for political gain
-
Where's the tube going that's going up out of shot?
added
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50717606
You can see the wheels of the trolley in that photo chuffing unreal!
-
This is better than CSI, next please :)
-
So, the mother admits she put him on the floor, press photographer called, and you cant admit the overt politicising of this? I guess not because dear comrades wouldn't manipulate for gain at all would they. I get it happened, i dont like the inference the staff put him there when the mother states he was on a chair. I am proud of where I work and dont like it smeared (by either side) for political gain
Not sure I said the Mother admits she put him on the floor?
You might not like the NHS ‘smeared’ by either side and I get you’re proud of where you work. However, the NHS is extremely important to the majority of people in this country and is (still) a publicly funded organisation, so it’s obvious it will always be an important factor in any election. Also, I don’t think anyone is criticising the staff at the hospital either. From everyone I’ve heard and everything I’ve read the opinion is that hospital staff do a very good job DESPITE the Tories and their policy of cost cutting and not because of them.
-
No HA, the mother says that in the YP article not you mate
-
Where's the tube going that's going up out of shot?
added
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50717606
You can see the wheels of the trolley in that photo chuffing unreal!
Yep, the Tory voters know more than the parents, hospital, press and health secretary
-
No HA, the mother says that in the YP article not you mate
:)
-
It is not 100% genuine. The child was on a drip in a chair which, though not ideal, is a perfectly acceptable clinical situation. The childs mother has out him on the floor. A drip needs gravity in general to work not placed on the floor. Also and more importantly infection control would not allow placing of a patient on the floor. In the uncropped photo chair and trolley can be seen
Not a drip an oxygen mask, so the tube presumably went to the supply socket at the wall?
''A four-year-old boy with suspected pneumonia was forced to sleep on a hospital treatment room floor because of a lack of beds.
Jack was photographed lying on a pile of coats and with an oxygen mask at Leeds General Infirmary (LGI) on 3 December.
His mother, Sarah, told The Daily Mirror seeing the NHS crisis for herself meant she would vote Labour.
The hospital apologised and said it had had its busiest week since 2016.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-50713236
-
The fact that we are all arguing about these points at all really does show the level our politics has become it's pretty gutter stuff and I'm not sure anybody can take much credit from it at national level at least..A poorly 4 year old boy being kicked around as a political football..Jesus is this what it's come too.??
I thought my faith was being restored,i had a Labour activist knock on my door this weekend.And although it's fare to say we didn't agree on much we had a decent debate tbh on Brexit,nhs and other topics.Strangely the thing we disagreed on most was the requirement for a prospective mp to actually live in the constituency,but it was good hustings stuff...
-
Thanks for that WC but it looks like the 'story' is true unless some of the amateur detectives can come up with something else
-
Why do you say that???..it would be the hospital trusts policy to apologise straight away then investigate after..Right now I don't think anybody can tell anybody for definite whether it's true or not.Frankly I'm past caring on this particular isolated point,it's poor stuff...
-
Hey WC talk to those with the conspiracy theory.
-
WC.
You've just hit the nail on the head.
"after..Right now I don't think anybody can tell anybody for definite whether it's true or not."
This is PRECISELY what the Tories want. They have based their campaign on THE most outrageous policy of lying from day one. They want you to be fed up with it and to say "I can't tell what is true anymore". And then that approach has won.
These are terrifying times. We HAVE to draw a distinction between what is demonstrable lying (and there's been a monsoon of that from the Tories) and what is nudge-nudge hints of lying. You CANNOT let them win by just chucking your hands up and assuming all sides are equally culpable when there is no evidence to support that. Otherwise, you're effectively giving up on rational democracy. The sides that lie HAVE TO BE PUNISHED BY THE VOTERS!
-
For me I base my choice on two things..One the quality of the prospective candidates who are standing in my local area.I have said before that my Mp has done a awful lot in my constituency for local causes from lobbying and getting local flood defences improved,working hard to bring Siemens into the area,and lots of other things including personally helping me with my sons education funding.He not a national politician looking for a big job but someone who works for the community..
The prospective Labour Mp doesn't even live in the constituency and has based his campaign,hustings and literature solely on the national picture of Austerity and not once mentioned local issues probably because he doesn't know anything about them..
The second thing I consider is the national/world picture and the manifestos.I don't believe Labour can come close to raising the money from business that they need to implement these policy's even forgetting the broadband,dental,housing promises that are simply not deliverable.Borrowing would go through the roof,interest rates will rise as will unemployment.Labour foreign policy and their ability to do business with the likes of the USA which whether you like it or not is absolutely crucial is another massive concern of mine..I think Labours front bench as it is now would be disastrous for this country,and that's before we even mention the wishy washy position on brexit which in reality is probably supporting remain in anything other than name.
Personally I dont look at fake websites,spin rooms or the like.Now I appreciate you don't agree with those beliefs but that's my view and why on this occasion I couldn't put a cross in Labours box
-
For me I base my choice on two things..One the quality of the prospective candidates who are standing in my local area.I have said before that my Mp has done a awful lot in my constituency for local causes from lobbying and getting local flood defences improved,working hard to bring Siemens into the area,and lots of other things including personally helping me with my sons education funding.He not a national politician looking for a big job but someone who works for the community..
The prospective Labour Mp doesn't even live in the constituency and has based his campaign,hustings and literature solely on the national picture of Austerity and not once mentioned local issues probably because he doesn't know anything about them..
The second thing I consider is the national/world picture and the manifestos.I don't believe Labour can come close to raising the money from business that they need to implement these policy's even forgetting the broadband,dental,housing promises that are simply not deliverable.Borrowing would go through the roof,interest rates will rise as will unemployment.Labour foreign policy and their ability to do business with the likes of the USA which whether you like it or not is absolutely crucial is another massive concern of mine..I think Labours front bench as it is now would be disastrous for this country,and that's before we even mention the wishy washy position on brexit which in reality is probably supporting remain in anything other than name.
Personally I dont look at fake websites,spin rooms or the like.Now I appreciate you don't agree with those beliefs but that's my view and why on this occasion I couldn't put a cross in Labours box
If thats the case, you don’t have to put a cross in the Conservative box either
-
Here’s the Yorkshire Post Explaining the story in a tweet
https://twitter.com/jaymitchinson/status/1204344653174181888
-
On that subject, I assume you saw the consummate lying by the Tories to deflect from the story about NHS underfunding? Piping that lie through Kuenssberg and Peston that a Labour activist punched a Tory worker at the hospital?
You're a smart lad BFYP. I cannot believe that people like you are going to reward this behaviour. It is beyond scary that a political party can behave like this and not be sanctioned by the voters. You KNOW where this leads.
I did see it and I really do not like it. As you know in an election we have to weigh up lots of things and what is my alternative? I want Brexit to happen, I don't believe in nationalisation or tax rises that I believe labour will have to deliver at a much higher level than they claim to fund this (probably blaming the world economy), thus where do I go? Do I just not vote or do I accept that I don't like the Tory leaders but can hack that for the closeness to their policies, which are not hard right despite what the left may say?
I would probably vote Lib Dem if it wasn't for Brexit (probably not surprising as I really favoured them in the past). I again don't agree with all their policies (such as raising income taxes by 1%) but there are some aspects that I do like (childcare from the age of 9 months really would help families earn a decent wage) and they are almost a sensible compromise, but they went hugely too far with the remain at all costs option.
There are massive, massive downsides to all of them, the Tories will be largest party because of Brexit, but largely not for anything else.
-
Roll up, roll up....for the big health data sale;
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/12/12/nhs_data_leak/
I wonder why they are doing this....who could be interested in accessing your health data, anonymous or not?
-
It helps big pharma in targeting, not that US big pharma would do that of course.
-
And the day after a huge Tory win, another record has been broken. For the first time ever, every single A&E unit in the country has missed its waiting time targets. Nice one Tories, nice one...
-
It could of course has been due to the large number of Labour supporters who have slit their wrists.
-
And the day after a huge Tory win, another record has been broken. For the first time ever, every single A&E unit in the country has missed its waiting time targets. Nice one Tories, nice one...
Tell me how throwing another 100 million pounds or whatever sum you want the government to spend is going to cure waiting lists.
It’s so simple isn’t it. Come on tell me how it’s going to solve it.
We never had waiting time targets missed under a labour government did we. Never never never. :facepalm:
-
It could of course has been due to the large number of Labour supporters who have slit their wrists.
By the way, we haven’t heard from foxbat for a few days.
-
And the day after a huge Tory win, another record has been broken. For the first time ever, every single A&E unit in the country has missed its waiting time targets. Nice one Tories, nice one...
Tell me how throwing another 100 million pounds or whatever sum you want the government to spend is going to cure waiting lists.
It’s so simple isn’t it. Come on tell me how it’s going to solve it.
We never had waiting time targets missed under a labour government did we. Never never never. :facepalm:
As I said. It’s never happened before. Ever. Never under Tory, Labour or Liberal governments. Until now. If you voted Tory you are part of the problem.
-
HA, that's because you didn't have anywhere near enough people on your side to be part of the cure.
-
HA, that's because you didn't have anywhere near enough people on your side to be part of the cure.
No BB. It’s because not enough people care about the cure.
-
And the day after a huge Tory win, another record has been broken. For the first time ever, every single A&E unit in the country has missed its waiting time targets. Nice one Tories, nice one...
Tell me how throwing another 100 million pounds or whatever sum you want the government to spend is going to cure waiting lists.
It’s so simple isn’t it. Come on tell me how it’s going to solve it.
We never had waiting time targets missed under a labour government did we. Never never never. :facepalm:
OK Campsall, we know it's failing as it is, so how do YOU suggest it gets fixed?
-
And the day after a huge Tory win, another record has been broken. For the first time ever, every single A&E unit in the country has missed its waiting time targets. Nice one Tories, nice one...
Tell me how throwing another 100 million pounds or whatever sum you want the government to spend is going to cure waiting lists.
It’s so simple isn’t it. Come on tell me how it’s going to solve it.
We never had waiting time targets missed under a labour government did we. Never never never. :facepalm:
OK Campsall, we know it's failing as it is, so how do YOU suggest it gets fixed?
Thought I was the one who asked the question. Strange isn’t it i have not received an answer.
-
And the day after a huge Tory win, another record has been broken. For the first time ever, every single A&E unit in the country has missed its waiting time targets. Nice one Tories, nice one...
Tell me how throwing another 100 million pounds or whatever sum you want the government to spend is going to cure waiting lists.
It’s so simple isn’t it. Come on tell me how it’s going to solve it.
We never had waiting time targets missed under a labour government did we. Never never never. :facepalm:
OK Campsall, we know it's failing as it is, so how do YOU suggest it gets fixed?
Thought I was the one who asked the question. Strange isn’t it i have not received an answer.
You’ve had an answer. You’ve chosen to ignore it.
-
HA, that's because you didn't have anywhere near enough people on your side to be part of the cure.
No BB. It’s because not enough people care about the cure.
No HA, enough people care about the cure, but most of them don't think Corbyn's idea of curing it was the right one.
-
And the day after a huge Tory win, another record has been broken. For the first time ever, every single A&E unit in the country has missed its waiting time targets. Nice one Tories, nice one...
Tell me how throwing another 100 million pounds or whatever sum you want the government to spend is going to cure waiting lists.
It’s so simple isn’t it. Come on tell me how it’s going to solve it.
We never had waiting time targets missed under a labour government did we. Never never never. :facepalm:
OK Campsall, we know it's failing as it is, so how do YOU suggest it gets fixed?
Thought I was the one who asked the question. Strange isn’t it i have not received an answer.
Putting more money into he NHS would pay for more equipment, more facilities, more doctors, more nurses and more hospitals, (look how many local hospitals the Tories closed to 'centralise' and 'save money').
OK I've answered your question, now you answer mine!
-
HA, that's because you didn't have anywhere near enough people on your side to be part of the cure.
No BB. It’s because not enough people care about the cure.
No HA, enough people care about the cure, but most of them don't think Corbyn's idea of curing it was the right way.
So the answer lies with the party that have screwed it up?
-
According to the vast majority, yes.
-
So that justifies what I’ve said BB!
-
Why does it justify what you said, Herbert?
-
That the party who’ve continually reduced funding for the NHS have suddenly convinced people that they’re the party to make it work! BB, the Tories have never, ever considered the NHS as anything other than a drain of the countries resources. Do the latest A&E figures mean nothing?
-
And the day after a huge Tory win, another record has been broken. For the first time ever, every single A&E unit in the country has missed its waiting time targets. Nice one Tories, nice one...
Tell me how throwing another 100 million pounds or whatever sum you want the government to spend is going to cure waiting lists.
It’s so simple isn’t it. Come on tell me how it’s going to solve it.
We never had waiting time targets missed under a labour government did we. Never never never. :facepalm:
As I said. It’s never happened before. Ever. Never under Tory, Labour or Liberal governments. Until now. If you voted Tory you are part of the problem.
But there have been waiting time targets not met under Labour. Yes or No?
The NHS is a national problem. Not a Tory or Labour problem. There is no quick fix. If there was it would have been sorted by Labour between 1997 and 2010
What did labour do. Did they build new hospitals did they put a massive investment into the NHS? No they did not.
No the Labour Party masquerade as being the party of the people, the party of the working class & what a dreadful mess they have made of that.
Any way please tell me what being working class means or what being middle class means in 2019
I hate the class word because i don’t believe in it. What makes someone working class or middle class.
Where is the distinguishing line between the two.
So example. 40 year old man who’s father was a miner and he has a job as a senior manager in a middle size or large company. What class is he? Load of old 1970’s tosh. Please can we confine class to the history books where it belongs.
Blue collar or white collar are all workers are they not. It really is a load of garbage. Bin it where it belongs.
The Labour Party need to bin it or they are history. If they don’t appeal to a very wide range of income groups then they are never going to govern this country again.
-
Campsal it's the third chart down you need to look at
https://fullfact.org/health/spending-english-nhs/
-
That the party who’ve continually reduced funding for the NHS have suddenly convinced people that they’re the party to make it work! BB, the Tories have never, ever considered the NHS as anything other than a drain of the countries resources. Do the latest A&E figures mean nothing?
Herbert I enjoy reading your posts on the football site but i can’t believe how blinkered you are with regards to politics.
You talk as though you have been brain washed by the Labour Party to actually believe in what you are saying.
Your opinion and i am not being offensive just astonished at your very left wing politics.
-
Just look at the chart campsal it's not politics it's fact
-
That the party who’ve continually reduced funding for the NHS have suddenly convinced people that they’re the party to make it work! BB, the Tories have never, ever considered the NHS as anything other than a drain of the countries resources. Do the latest A&E figures mean nothing?
Herbert I enjoy reading your posts on the football site but i can’t believe how blinkered you are with regards to politics.
You talk as though you have been brain washed by the Labour Party to actually believe in what you are saying.
Your opinion and i am not being offensive just astonished at your very left wing politics.
Thanks Campsall. However, you can’t argue with the fact the A&E waiting time’s are the worst EVER! How can you possibly claim this is Labour brainwashing!!! I’m genuinely astounded you’d make such a claim!
-
And the day after a huge Tory win, another record has been broken. For the first time ever, every single A&E unit in the country has missed its waiting time targets. Nice one Tories, nice one...
Tell me how throwing another 100 million pounds or whatever sum you want the government to spend is going to cure waiting lists.
It’s so simple isn’t it. Come on tell me how it’s going to solve it.
We never had waiting time targets missed under a labour government did we. Never never never. :facepalm:
OK Campsall, we know it's failing as it is, so how do YOU suggest it gets fixed?
Thought I was the one who asked the question. Strange isn’t it i have not received an answer.
Putting more money into he NHS would pay for more equipment, more facilities, more doctors, more nurses and more hospitals, (look how many local hospitals the Tories closed to 'centralise' and 'save money').
OK I've answered your question, now you answer mine!
Boris Has said 6 new hospitals to be built immediately and a total of 40 over the next few years.
That’s a massive investment in the NHS.
Did Labour do that? Think we know the answer to that one.
The point is if we don’t have a strong economy nothing will get done will it. The electorate certainly didn’t trust Labour with that task did they. Seen the shambles they leave the country in after each of their terms.
-
changing the argument campsal look at the chart at tell us who spent more on the nhs.
-
That the party who’ve continually reduced funding for the NHS have suddenly convinced people that they’re the party to make it work! BB, the Tories have never, ever considered the NHS as anything other than a drain of the countries resources. Do the latest A&E figures mean nothing?
Herbert I enjoy reading your posts on the football site but i can’t believe how blinkered you are with regards to politics.
You talk as though you have been brain washed by the Labour Party to actually believe in what you are saying.
Your opinion and i am not being offensive just astonished at your very left wing politics.
Thanks Campsall. However, you can’t argue with the fact the A&E waiting time’s are the worst EVER! How can you possibly claim this is Labour brainwashing!!! I’m genuinely astounded you’d make such a claim!
No I am not arguing about it at all. It’s shocking but to blame it all on Tory policies is just wrong when the previous Labour government never invested what was needed in the NHS..
It’s just using the NHS to score political points. There is a much wider issue to sorting the NHS problems.
-
And the day after a huge Tory win, another record has been broken. For the first time ever, every single A&E unit in the country has missed its waiting time targets. Nice one Tories, nice one...
Tell me how throwing another 100 million pounds or whatever sum you want the government to spend is going to cure waiting lists.
It’s so simple isn’t it. Come on tell me how it’s going to solve it.
We never had waiting time targets missed under a labour government did we. Never never never. :facepalm:
OK Campsall, we know it's failing as it is, so how do YOU suggest it gets fixed?
Thought I was the one who asked the question. Strange isn’t it i have not received an answer.
Putting more money into he NHS would pay for more equipment, more facilities, more doctors, more nurses and more hospitals, (look how many local hospitals the Tories closed to 'centralise' and 'save money').
OK I've answered your question, now you answer mine!
Boris Has said 6 new hospitals to be built immediately and a total of 40 over the next few years.
That’s a massive investment in the NHS.
Did Labour do that? Think we know the answer to that one.
The point is if we don’t have a strong economy nothing will get done will it. The electorate certainly didn’t trust Labour with that task did they. Seen the shambles they leave the country in after each of their terms.
[/quote
Campsall, the Tories have had almost a decade to sort out the NHS!! How much longer do they need? Where have they suddenly found this money from for 40 new hospitals (which I guarantee you won’t happen)? History tells us they’ve always viewed the NHS as an albatross around the neck of the country. Why you believe Boris (who’s a proven bullshitter don’t forget) is beyond me. There will not be 40 new hospitals Campsall.
-
campsall you haven't read the chart have you or you wouldn't be making yourself look so foolish
-
And the day after a huge Tory win, another record has been broken. For the first time ever, every single A&E unit in the country has missed its waiting time targets. Nice one Tories, nice one...
Tell me how throwing another 100 million pounds or whatever sum you want the government to spend is going to cure waiting lists.
It’s so simple isn’t it. Come on tell me how it’s going to solve it.
We never had waiting time targets missed under a labour government did we. Never never never. :facepalm:
OK Campsall, we know it's failing as it is, so how do YOU suggest it gets fixed?
Thought I was the one who asked the question. Strange isn’t it i have not received an answer.
Putting more money into he NHS would pay for more equipment, more facilities, more doctors, more nurses and more hospitals, (look how many local hospitals the Tories closed to 'centralise' and 'save money').
OK I've answered your question, now you answer mine!
Boris Has said 6 new hospitals to be built immediately and a total of 40 over the next few years.
That’s a massive investment in the NHS.
Did Labour do that? Think we know the answer to that one.
The point is if we don’t have a strong economy nothing will get done will it. The electorate certainly didn’t trust Labour with that task did they. Seen the shambles they leave the country in after each of their terms.
[/quote
Campsall, the Tories have had almost a decade to sort out the NHS!! How much longer do they need? Where have they suddenly found this money from for 40 new hospitals (which I guarantee you won’t happen)? History tells us they’ve always viewed the NHS as an albatross around the neck of the country. Why you believe Boris (who’s a proven bullshitter don’t forget) is beyond me. There will not be 40 new hospitals Campsall.
HA, without wishing to create a big argument, you ask where the Tories are going to get the money for the investment in the NHS.
It could be said it will come from a similar place to where a Labour were going to find it to fund all the free stuff that their manifesto promised us.
-
So you think johnson is going to tax the rich and close tax loopholes for business hound?
-
So you think johnson is going to tax the rich and close tax loopholes for business hound?
Do I?
Sorry, I don’t remember writing that.
-
but that's where labour were going to start and you did say ...... money from the same place bb
-
I actually said “it could be said that it might come from a similar place to where Labour were going to find it” and I never mentioned BB.
Facts sir, get them right.
-
so that's where taxing the rich and closing tax loopholes for business enters the frame hound
-
And the day after a huge Tory win, another record has been broken. For the first time ever, every single A&E unit in the country has missed its waiting time targets. Nice one Tories, nice one...
Tell me how throwing another 100 million pounds or whatever sum you want the government to spend is going to cure waiting lists.
It’s so simple isn’t it. Come on tell me how it’s going to solve it.
We never had waiting time targets missed under a labour government did we. Never never never. :facepalm:
As I said. It’s never happened before. Ever. Never under Tory, Labour or Liberal governments. Until now. If you voted Tory you are part of the problem.
But there have been waiting time targets not met under Labour. Yes or No?
The NHS is a national problem. Not a Tory or Labour problem. There is no quick fix. If there was it would have been sorted by Labour between 1997 and 2010
What did labour do. Did they build new hospitals did they put a massive investment into the NHS? No they did not.
No the Labour Party masquerade as being the party of the people, the party of the working class & what a dreadful mess they have made of that.
Any way please tell me what being working class means or what being middle class means in 2019
I hate the class word because i don’t believe in it. What makes someone working class or middle class.
Where is the distinguishing line between the two.
So example. 40 year old man who’s father was a miner and he has a job as a senior manager in a middle size or large company. What class is he? Load of old 1970’s tosh. Please can we confine class to the history books where it belongs.
Blue collar or white collar are all workers are they not. It really is a load of garbage. Bin it where it belongs.
The Labour Party need to bin it or they are history. If they don’t appeal to a very wide range of income groups then they are never going to govern this country again.
Campsall.
I'm trying to keep out of this but that post cannot go unaddressed.
It's a fact that Labour massively increased spending on the NHS between 2001-2010. And that, as a proportion of GDP, it has stagnated under the Tories.
That's not a matter to debate. It's a fact.
(https://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/images/election2017_images/bns/bn201_fig2.jpg)
What about waiting times?
(https://fullfact.org/media/uploads/AE_waiting_times_May_2018_update.png)
Draw your own conclusions.
But let's draw our conclusions from facts in the future, eh? Not from wild and wrong assertions.
-
Better graph on long term NHS funding here.
https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/ukgs_line.php?title=Health%20Care&year=1980_2020&sname=United_Kingdom&units=d&bar=1&stack=1&size=m&spending0=626.78_640.41_639.78_611.17_619.55_625.55_640.04_647.84_666.91_683.13_685.50_720.22_785.53_855.09_887.30_942.73_889.15_900.35_918.77_978.88_1022.06_1100.18_1178.28_1265.87_1390.35_1494.64_1553.33_1592.68_1655.32_1970.65_2072.06_2067.52_2051.39_2048.58_2078.10_2109.08_2143.91_2145.23_2160.35_2189.72_2262.05&legend=Health%20Care-total&source=a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_i_i_i_i_i_i_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_e_g
It's generally accepted that, to keep track with new treatments and an aging population, spending per person has to grow year on year in any health service
Even under Thatcher and Major, NHS funding in teased by 50% over 15 years. Under Labour it more than doubled over 13 years.
Under this lot? Barely a blip in a decade.
I appreciate your right to have a different decision than me over which party to support. But when your understanding of easily checkable facts is so wildly wrong, that's troubling for democracy.
-
That the party who’ve continually reduced funding for the NHS have suddenly convinced people that they’re the party to make it work! BB, the Tories have never, ever considered the NHS as anything other than a drain of the countries resources. Do the latest A&E figures mean nothing?
That the party who’ve continually reduced funding for the NHS have suddenly convinced people that they’re the party to make it work! BB, the Tories have never, ever considered the NHS as anything other than a drain of the countries resources. Do the latest A&E figures mean nothing?
Herbert, you seem to think that all Tory voters don't care about the NHS, and only care for themselves. That's about as daft as Remoaners who claimed all leave voters were racists.
Many voters from all over the country changed alliance from Labour to Tory in this election, many from the staunch left South Yorkshire area who were previously life-time Labour supporters. Do you really think they have all turned their backs on the NHS by voting Tory? People just don't change principals like that.
Maybe they changed their vote because they believe Boris Johnson will end austerity and take us forward more than they believe in Corbyn's back to the 70's policies. Perhaps many voters want to forget those times.
-
That the party who’ve continually reduced funding for the NHS have suddenly convinced people that they’re the party to make it work! BB, the Tories have never, ever considered the NHS as anything other than a drain of the countries resources. Do the latest A&E figures mean nothing?
That the party who’ve continually reduced funding for the NHS have suddenly convinced people that they’re the party to make it work! BB, the Tories have never, ever considered the NHS as anything other than a drain of the countries resources. Do the latest A&E figures mean nothing?
Herbert, you seem to think that all Tory voters don't care about the NHS, and only care for themselves. That's about as daft as Remoaners who claimed all leave voters were racists.
Many voters from all over the country changed alliance from Labour to Tory in this election, many from the staunch left South Yorkshire area who were previously life-time Labour supporters. Do you really think they have all turned their backs on the NHS by voting Tory? People just don't change principals like that.
Maybe they changed their vote because they believe Boris Johnson will end austerity and take us forward more than they believe in Corbyn's back to the 70's policies. Perhaps many voters want to forget those times.
BB
If people genuinely do care about the NHS why on earth vote for a party that consistently cuts funding for it? Will they miraculously begin to provide the funding it needs, as Labour did? Of course not! Based on the evidence and historical awareness, I’m amazed anyone still believes that the NHS is in safe hands. After 9 years of Tory rule we now have the worst A&E waiting times ever! What more do you need to happen to convince you?
-
Herbert, Jeremy Corbyn would have NEVER convinced me to vote for him. If it was a choice of Tory or Labour I would have voted Tory.
It seems I'm in the majority.
-
Herbert, Jeremy Corbyn would have NEVER convinced me to vote for him. If it was a choice of Tory or Labour I would have voted Tory.
It seems I'm in the majority.
Many people thought the same BB. It seems that people are willing to sacrifice things such as the NHS to ‘get Brexit done’. Which is tragic, but those who’ve voted Tory in labour heartlands are going to have to reap what they sow unfortunately
-
By 'they' I assume you mean 'we'? If that's the case you're assuming what we reap will be unfortunate for us. Maybe we might be fortunate and reap more than we would have under Labour?
-
Herbert, Jeremy Corbyn would have NEVER convinced me to vote for him. If it was a choice of Tory or Labour I would have voted Tory.
It seems I'm in the majority.
Many people thought the same BB. It seems that people are willing to sacrifice things such as the NHS to ‘get Brexit done’. Which is tragic, but those who’ve voted Tory in labour heartlands are going to have to reap what they sow unfortunately
Why are you so bitter Herbert. Why are you convinced Boris will not invest in the NHS when he has already said what is planned.
I think you are deluded if you think all these voters that put a tick in the Conservative candidate box don’t care about the NHS.
I care very much about it & so do probably at least 99% of the population.
There is a reason why People didn’t vote Labour, you really do need to try & understand that and accept it.
-
And the day after a huge Tory win, another record has been broken. For the first time ever, every single A&E unit in the country has missed its waiting time targets. Nice one Tories, nice one...
Tell me how throwing another 100 million pounds or whatever sum you want the government to spend is going to cure waiting lists.
It’s so simple isn’t it. Come on tell me how it’s going to solve it.
We never had waiting time targets missed under a labour government did we. Never never never. :facepalm:
OK Campsall, we know it's failing as it is, so how do YOU suggest it gets fixed?
Thought I was the one who asked the question. Strange isn’t it i have not received an answer.
Putting more money into he NHS would pay for more equipment, more facilities, more doctors, more nurses and more hospitals, (look how many local hospitals the Tories closed to 'centralise' and 'save money').
OK I've answered your question, now you answer mine!
Boris Has said 6 new hospitals to be built immediately and a total of 40 over the next few years.
That’s a massive investment in the NHS.
Did Labour do that? Think we know the answer to that one.
The point is if we don’t have a strong economy nothing will get done will it. The electorate certainly didn’t trust Labour with that task did they. Seen the shambles they leave the country in after each of their terms.
Immediately? I don't think so. To be delivered by 2025.
A further 21 have to produce a business case with a view to delivering between 2025 and 2030 SUBJECT TO APPROVAL
The remainder will be subject to a bidding process, (yet to be defined), but may involve the development of more than one hospital site, (whatever that ultimately means).
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-hospital-building-programme-announced
https://fullfact.org/health/six-hospitals-not-forty/
I suppose it is a step in the right direction by a government that systematically closed hospitals and centralised services, (including A&E), to save money! Pity they closed and centralised so many in the first place.
Just like they're going to employ more police officers to replace the ones they systematically cut - it's worrying to see how people can be so easily seduced by single sound-bites without looking into the details. Get Brexit Done anyone?
-
I actually said “it could be said that it might come from a similar place to where Labour were going to find it” and I never mentioned BB.
Facts sir, get them right.
so that's where taxing the rich and closing tax loopholes for business enters the frame hound
Sydney, once more, “MIGHT come from a SIMILAR place”.
Not necessarily what you are implying what I said.
-
It will take most of this governments term to get the NHS back to what is was when they first came to office 9 long years ago and they will have to borrow heavily or cut services in other areas to do it, I hope I'm wrong I hope johnson keeps his promises. History would tell anyone this won't happen but I will be pleasently surprised.
johnson gets bored easily and struggles with detail as shown throughout his public career so it will be most likely be left for someone else to deal with, brexit like it or not will leave the UK short of funds it badly needs and if he wants a tariff free trade deal with the EU he will have to pay for it with concessions to EU demands he will not have a choice.
-
Herbert, Jeremy Corbyn would have NEVER convinced me to vote for him. If it was a choice of Tory or Labour I would have voted Tory.
It seems I'm in the majority.
Many people thought the same BB. It seems that people are willing to sacrifice things such as the NHS to ‘get Brexit done’. Which is tragic, but those who’ve voted Tory in labour heartlands are going to have to reap what they sow unfortunately
Why are you so bitter Herbert. Why are you convinced Boris will not invest in the NHS when he has already said what is planned.
I think you are deluded if you think all these voters that put a tick in the Conservative candidate box don’t care about the NHS.
I care very much about it & so do probably at least 99% of the population.
There is a reason why People didn’t vote Labour, you really do need to try & understand that and accept it.
Campsall, as I’ve said on numerous threads the primary reason Labour lost is Labour themselves. However, it infuriates me that people have voted a PM who’s a proven liar and seem quite comfortable with that. Why should we believe Johnson?
I’m still waiting for the invasion of Turks that he said was going to happen if we remained in the EU. He claimed he’d build 40 new hospitals when in actual fact he’s building 6 new hospitals. He claimed Labour would increase corporation tax to the highest rate in Europe. In fact it would be below 6 other countries. He claimed he’d recruit 50,000 new nurses when in fact this includes nurses already in nursing positions!
I say it again, for the first time ever after 9 years of Tory Goverment all A&E depts have missed their targets and we’ve fallen into the trap yet again of giving them power again!
If you and others are willing to blindly believe him, despite the evidence, then that’s up to you.
-
Maybe those who voted for Boris prefered a liar to someone who they think is a threat to national security and has previous dodgy associations with terrorists?
-
Maybe those who voted for Boris prefered a liar to someone who they think is a threat to national security and has previous dodgy associations with terrorists?
Maybe your right. Just a shame that Boris refused to release the report on Russian interference within UK politics before the election. You’d think he had something to hide. And people thought Corbyn was a risk to national security?
-
Maybe those who voted for Boris prefered a liar to someone who they think is a threat to national security and has previous dodgy associations with terrorists?
This is brilliant. The US has considered whether Boris has been compromised, having been spotted with convicted Russian spies and assumed Russian spies. Boris is the one who wasn't trusted with state secrets by his predecessor.
-
I wonder when the government will show the kids the report about the russians and the tories?
-
One Nation Conservatism in practice: -
https://inews.co.uk/news/nhs-patient-data-google-privacy-634080
-
My old Maths teacher once wrote in my school report, "must try harder, has difficulties" could that be applied to Hancocks grasp of mathematics when discussing the number of nurse they intend to recruit?
-
For your consideration, one and all:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ournhs/tories-target-northern-voters-nhs-message-all-about-blaming-migrants/
Join the dots and the message will appear.
-
For your consideration, one and all:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ournhs/tories-target-northern-voters-nhs-message-all-about-blaming-migrants/
Join the dots and the message will appear.
Yep the yellow press sends out the messages drip drip drip to blame those on welfare and immirants for all your troubles and the government reinforces it at election time knowing that the sun and the mail have done all the groundwork.
-
There you go, easy fixed :)
''Matt Hancock signals A&E waiting targets likely to be scrapped
Health secretary defends NHS’s performance and says targets should be ‘clinically appropriate’
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jan/15/matt-hancock-accident-emergency-nhs-waiting-targets-likely-scrapped''
-
Interesting graphic which showsthe proposed NHS spending in a historical context;
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EOUJJZhW4AEbzPM.jpg
Clear as a bell I would say.
The Tory budget increase is way below the level of spending under Labour governments.
It is also below the long term average across all administrations, and is a partial restoration of budgets lost during austerity.
Those reductions under austerity have a continuing cumulative impact on the service, and so have to be fully restored over a number of years to get back to 2010 levels of investment.
Anyone who can't see this is not really looking, are they?
-
The sad fact shocking as it is. no one is surprised Albie
-
The sad fact shocking as it is. no one is surprised Albie
Set a target that an never be achieved, sounds like Blairite garbage, good riddance.
-
Can't do the job, move the goalposts, sounds like smoke and mirrors sprot :)
-
The sad fact shocking as it is. no one is surprised Albie
Set a target that an never be achieved, sounds like Blairite garbage, good riddance.
Yet another post that is depressingly ignorant of the facts.
Pretty much every first world country spends more of their GDP on health care than we do.
Why on earth should it be impossible for us to spend more? Why are we so different?
-
PS.
Here's what has happened to A&E waiting times during a decade of chronic underinvestment in the NHS by the Tories.
(https://www.health.org.uk/sites/default/files/styles/full_width_image/public/2019-11/Fig-2-a-e-4-hour-target.png)
Here's what they plan to do about it...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/amp/entry/matt-hancock-nhs-waiting-targets-problem_uk_5e1ee23dc5b674e44b900824/
It's to be hoped you don't catch a soft bit in a zip Sproty. By the time you got seen, it'd have dropped off.
-
Bad example BST, that should go to a walk in centre, not a and e1
-
You mean a crawl-in centre?
-
Well I doubt much walking would go on 😉. Does highlight a point, how to stop the masses of unnecessary a and e attendances?
-
They have had nearly 10yrs Ldr the graph shows the decline, one doesn't usally decide to put the brakes on immediately before the wall it's normally a progressive act, see the obstruction, remove foot from accelerator lightly press on brake as required indicate make a u-turn.
If walk in centres are the answer then when triage takes place in A&E which should be within minutes of entry then any patients that can be sent next door to the walk-in should be and be seen in a timely manner.
If the walk-in not not near hospital escaltes a case to emergency then an abulance can be called and patient sent to A&E, this is not rocket science this admin.
-
Think education of people has a massive part to play. National mindset seems to be pitch up to a and e with anything
-
Think education of people has a massive part to play. National mindset seems to be pitch up to a and e with anything
When it can be sometimes virtually impossible to get an appointment at your GP, what do you expect people to do?
-
Ring 111.
-
Over the years I've a lot to be thankful for to our NHS.And I'm in full agreement that more needs to be spent on it.However throwing money at it is sometimes not the only answer.Weve discussed many times about the levels of waste and how much that costs.I only know two people who work in the NHS.One is a nurse who works crazy hours,is permanently stressed and is considering leaving and going temporary as theres no relief from it all.The others a guy who works in the management side who has spent all his career working in the private sector.He thinks he's fallen on his feet,his benefit package is beyond belief and he struggles to pad his day out in doing a days work what he says he could do in 2hrs..
Also like what has been said the A&E is flooded with people who just cant get a gp appointment.There is no doubt that system is broken.A&E waiting times are somewhat irrelevant to me as until the GP problem is addressed then no targets are achievable.
-
This, spot on WC
-
There are two sets of clearly established facts here.
Facts 1) We spend far less of our GDP on health care than other developed countries. Yet our clinical outcomes are not that far behind them.
Conclusion? Whatever the shortcomings in the MANAGEMENT of the NHS, it is not grossly inefficient by international standards.
Facts 2) The rate of increase of spending on the NHS by the Tories over the past 10 years has been significantly lower than a) previous eras and b) the rate of increase that most health economics experts believe is required to keep pace with a growing,ageing population. At the same time, outcomes on GP appointments and waiting times for A&E and elective surgeries have become progressively worse.
Conclusion? You don't spend enough, the system starts to fall apart.
Step away from your anecdotal stories and look at the big picture. As set out by those incontrovertible facts above.
-
Oh for god's sake Billy stop being so patronising to anybody who doesn't totally comply with your view,with your i know more attitude,it's not impressive..
I did say that more money needed to be spent on the NHS if you had bothered to read the whole of my post,but that needs to be balanced with a proper operational review on how we get best value for money for it to,what areas need the money spending on most .That will benefit us all which is what the NHS is about..
Now i know that your solution is to just tax companies or borrow it and throw billions at it and stand back, but that will just lead to more and more waste as people and companies take advantage and we will end up no further forward..It's all about getting the best value for money..
-
Yes of course WingCo. Of course it is about getting value for money. The point I'm making is that, by I ternational standards (and off the scale by American standards) the NHS already IS very efficient.
One of the major problems with the NHS today is the disastrous managerial reorganisation that Andrew Lansley brought in 7-8 years ago. It costs a fortune and made the situation worse. So there is a danger, with an organisation as big and complex as the NHS, that by focussing on operational review, you actually make the situation worse. Whereas the experience of the 2000s showed that increasing the amount we spend on the NHS DID lead to huge improvements in service quality and outcomes.
-
The major problem in this scenario BST is lack of access to GPs. GPs being private businesses that contract NHS services rather than being NHS in the main
-
And the problem is supply and demand?
The population has increased. The age of the population has increased. And we haven't invested sufficiently in the GP service.
I will say that the one major reorganisation I'd like to see in the NHS is doing away with GPs and moving to a polyclinic system.
The role of GPs is to act as a barrier to entry to more detailed service. They are there to weed out the coughs and sneezes that don't require detailed treatment. And one way of acting as the gatekeeper is to make it in teasingly difficult for us to get GP appointments to get INTO the system in the first place.
And of course, by their very definition, they are not specialists. I'll go against my policy of not relying on anecdotes but this cuts hard for me personally. Twenty years ago, my dad was sent home by a GP with a bottle of Gaviscon as a treatment for his chest discomfort. He was actually in the first stages of a terminal heart attack. Had he been seen by someone better equipped to diagnose him, he may have survived.
Then 6 years ago, I got a severe bout of vertigo. Couldn't open my eyes without vomitting. Managed to get to the GP who gave me a cursory look over and told me it was a self-limiting virus that would clear up in a couple of weeks.it didn't. I was unable to drive and mostly confined to bed for 4 months.
And it wasn't a virus It turned out (and this was a self-diagnosis) to be BPPV which is caused by crystals in the inner ear affecting the balance sensors. It's treatable immediately with head manipulation. I found the videos online eventually and learned to do it myself. But that was after 4 months of hell for me and of lost economic output from me for the country. It could have been treated the first day at a polyclinic, with an expert who understood what it was. The GP saved the NHS money by acting as a barrier to me getting treatment. But in terms of the UK plc balance sheet, and my family's quality of life, the costs were far higher.
-
BST, did the treatment you speak about above involve laying flat and turning your head sideways into certain positions because it sounds very much like the problem that my wife had a few years ago.
Luckily our GP knew what to do and was able to clear the problem for her.
-
BST, did the treatment you speak about above involve laying flat and turning your head sideways into certain positions because it sounds very much like the problem that my wife had a few years ago.
Luckily our GP knew what to do and was able to clear the problem for her.
Hound.
It was precisely that, with the head hanging over the side of the bed. Pretty much saved me from going mad, finding that treatment on YouTube did. I was beginning to think I was going to be permanently incapacitated. Looking back at it, the treatment from my GP was shocking. I've heard of maybe a couple of dozen friends and acquaintances who have had a similar problem, so it's not exactly rare. And everyone who has had it knows that it is pretty much totally debilitating. You can't drive, can't work, can barely set foot out of the house without support.
But the GP was utterly lacking in knowledge that I, as a layman, was able to find on-line, and dismissive of a case which effectively left me disabled for 4 months. I've come to realise that "it's a virus" is GP-speak for "I don't know what the problem is, but you look like you're not dying. I have relatively little interest in your case; the door's over there Sir, now f**k off."
I hope Mrs Hound hasn't had any recurrence. I truly wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. For those of you who haven't had it, imagine suddenly, from nowhere, feeling like you are drunk to the point of not being able to stand, and having that feeling come back every time you open your eyes.
-
BST, did the treatment you speak about above involve laying flat and turning your head sideways into certain positions because it sounds very much like the problem that my wife had a few years ago.
Luckily our GP knew what to do and was able to clear the problem for her.
Hound.
It was precisely that, with the head hanging over the side of the bed. Pretty much saved me from going mad, finding that treatment on YouTube did. I was beginning to think I was going to be permanently incapacitated. Looking back at it, the treatment from my GP was shocking. I've heard of maybe a couple of dozen friends and acquaintances who have had a similar problem, so it's not exactly rare. And everyone who has had it knows that it is pretty much totally debilitating. You can't drive, can't work, can barely set foot out of the house without support.
But the GP was utterly lacking in knowledge that I, as a layman, was able to find on-line, and dismissive of a case which effectively left me disabled for 4 months. I've come to realise that "it's a virus" is GP-speak for "I don't know what the problem is, but you look like you're not dying. I have relatively little interest in your case; the door's over there Sir, now f**k off."
I hope Mrs Hound hasn't had any recurrence. I truly wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. For those of you who haven't had it, imagine suddenly, from nowhere, feeling like you are drunk to the point of not being able to stand, and having that feeling come back every time you open your eyes.
Over the years Mrs Hound has had a couple of further instances of the problem but because I had seen it done, I was able to administer the treatment myself for her.
Hopefully it has gone for good now.
-
I had something similar Hound. When I first found that treatment, it massively reduced the symptoms, but they would then gradually come back over a few days. Then after about 2 months, I did the head movements as I'd been doing them before, but there was a sudden massive feeling of disorientation and dizziness, followed by the symptoms vanishing. The head movement exercises are all about encouraging the crystals in the ear to fall away from the sensitive hairs that are the sensors in the balance organs. I'm guessing the crystals weren't fully moving when I originally did the exercises, then on that last occasion, they properly left the building.
I've not had the problem since then. Fingers crossed.
-
Having a badly perforated ear drum, I'm susceptible to labyrinthitis, which produces terrible vertigo. When it happens my GP usually prescribes Prochlorperazine, which does actually work for me.
I agree with BST though about GPs. Many years ago they did everything, including doing rounds of home visits. Most of them were brilliant at their jobs. Nowadays however, they do very little. Things like blood tests, vaccinations, blood pressure, asthma clinics and other things are done by the nurses.
-
Hound and BST - I hope everyone concerned is well.
I can tell you from a couple of experiences that it is not always better in other countries.
For more than 30 years I had a yearly medical examination organised in our offices in The Netherlands with a very senior Dutch GP. In the yearly form prior I once mentioned in the 'any other medical issues' section that I suffer from permanent anosmia (I was born without a sense of smell and I have no idea what smell is).
The doctor then enquired............. asking if my sleeping had improved :headbang: Fortunately not a serious issue, so it was funny, but still incompetent.
On another occasion I had horrific dental pain in a couple of upper teeth. I informed my Dutch dentist that I had suffered a broken cheekbone on the same side 6 months earlier (top edged a cricket ball into my face). He treated a tooth and sent me packing. The next day was weekend, no difference in pain, and an emergency dentist treated yet another tooth, with no effect. I then had to go away for an important event I was organising and saw two more dentists while I was away. It was the fourth dentist who first thought to give me an X-ray which showed infection and broken roots where I had been hit by the cricket ball. He then fixed me in no time. Three Dutch dentists, faced with my history, either never thought of or could be bothered to give me an X-ray. Shocking.
-
I went to my GP suffering from insomnia and he told me to try not to lose any sleep over it.
-
Interesting referenced opinion piece from an NHS professional here:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jan/21/workforce-crisis-nhs-teetering-brink
I think everyone can see the need to change how the NHS works, the question is how best to reform the system once the critical funding issues are addressed.
-
I was stunned reading about the cost of litigation in the NHS, something like 5% of the annual budget spent on addressing legal costs from wrongful treatment, stunned me that.
-
But it's not difficult to understand why. A mostly dedicated body of staff that have been short changed with equipment, buildings, wages staff and training over 10 years.
''‘This report is absolutely right to call for a funded and credible workforce plan for England that addresses the shortage of at least 40,000 nurse jobs. It clearly states that nursing workforce shortages are the most concerning staffing pressure in the entire health service. This should be seen in the context of a massive shortage across all health and care settings, and all sectors of provision''
https://www.nursinginpractice.com/professional/nurse-shortages-most-concerning-nhs
And this is just the nurses
-
Nothing here is addressing the shortage of GPs (mainly private businesses). We need to address this which has knock on benefits further down the chain
-
Fair point Ldr,
Do you think GP practices should be private businesses, contracting to a public service provider.....or do you think that there is a better model for the health sector?
On the subject of private business interests in the NHS, Sir Branson of pickle has recent form doing well:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/richard-bransons-virgin-healthcare-paid-21366075
Tax free take home eh.....virgin on the ridiculous now!
-
Maybe look at one stop shop model, I think BST menTioned it earlier. GPs have always tended to be private from the formation of the service so nothing new
-
Not a chance of it happening. GPs are the most powerful group of workers in the country. They would block any move to reduce that. Blair tried bringing in polyclinics when he had the biggest majority in Parliament since the War and he had to admit failure.
Doctors, including GPs nearly prevented the entire creation of the NHS. Aneurin Bevan admitted that he'd "stuffed their mouths with gold" to get them to sign up.
-
Don't forget Boris has promised to recruit 6000 more GP's by 2025.
Then again so did David Cameron in 2015 and achieved the grand total of 272.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-50351861
-
Don't forget Boris has promised to recruit 6000 more GP's by 2025.
Then again so did David Cameron in 2015 and achieved the grand total of 272.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-50351861
And why is this? Lack of interest, lack of funds, lack of ability? I always wanted to be a doctor, unfortunately my intelligence and application was not of a high enough level. Are there enough people actually capable of the job?
-
Don't forget Boris has promised to recruit 6000 more GP's by 2025.
Then again so did David Cameron in 2015 and achieved the grand total of 272.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-50351861
And why is this? Lack of interest, lack of funds, lack of ability? I always wanted to be a doctor, unfortunately my intelligence and application was not of a high enough level. Are there enough people actually capable of the job?
Occam's Razor BFYP.
When Labour came to power in 1997, the number of GPs per 100,000 of the population had been steady in the low 50s for well over a decade. That decade had been one of very low increases in NHS spending by historical standards. Labour greatly increased the level of NHS funding and the number of GPs per 100,000 went up to 67 by 2009. That's a 20% increase in about a decade.
Since then, the Tory Govts over the past decade have put the brakes on NHS funding increases. We've had the lowest percentage increase in NHS funding of any decade since the NHS was founded. And, whaddya know? The number of GPs per 100,000 has dropped back down to about 58.
So, we had more GPS ten years ago. Unless there's been a remarkable drop in educational standards or motivation over the past decade, the only thing that explains the sharp drop in GP numbers is the sharp tightening of NHS funding. As William of Occam taught us, when the bleeding obvious cause and effect is staring you in the face, you risk fooling yourself by going and looking for other explanations.
PS. This is very personal for me. The Blair Govt didn't start increasing NHS spending very much until after the 2001 Genenral Election. By 2001, the number of GPs had barely risen after the spending brake imposed by the Tories in the 80s and 90s, and followed by Blair in his first term. It was one of those overworked GPs in early 2001 who sent my dad home with a bottle of Gaviscon to have his terminal heart attack. You don't spend what you need to spend and it has consequences in real people's lives.
-
Occupational stress is a factor in play here;
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-01-uk-doctors-burnt-stressed-poll.html
Securing improved (and sufficient) funding, and a different relationship between GP practises and the NHS, would need to address this objective of stress reduction across the sector.
-
My GP surgery is a joke, theres 3 GP’s serving 10k people they work one day a week and one Nurse Practitioner takes up the rest of the time, getting an appointment is nigh on impossible
-
This is not a snarky 'we have a better system than yours' post Filo but shows what a better funded system can provide. My own GP has just changed from being a single doctor surgery to a MyHealth franchise. I can book online and often get in on the same day but definately if I will see any doctor.
https://myhealth.net.au/leichhardt/
-
That's what a good system should be
-
''Parts of NHS 'seriously financially unstable', auditors find
Trust have built up debts of £10.9bn, which NAO says they are unlikely to ever repay''
Unless the government is going to oversee the shutdown of various facilities it may as well reach into that bottomless money pit now and pay all these debts off ......... pst .......... pst ......... what? ....... that was before the election, oh right thanks ............. :)
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/feb/05/parts-of-nhs-seriously-financially-unstable-auditors-find
-
Sydney, most of the financial problems are caused by the introduction by LABOUR of PFI funding.
A friend of mine went to a meeting representing Wakefield Council over the Pinderfields health trust at the time, and was thrown out of the meeting for objecting to the terms of the loan.
The debt is now massive, and my friend? he was retired early.
-
I get what PFT is and who brought it in and no I don't like the situation but the tories picked it up and ran with it then starved the whole NHS for 10 years, you're talking about anchient history selby this is the here and now.
Just asking but did you get your free balaclava when you voted for johnson, the one without eyeholes?
-
Syd I see you are going along with the common problem of denial that the Labour party supporters have, and could well keep you out of power for the next fifteen years, and could well make your party as insignificant as the Liberals.
That is your future buddy if people like yourself don't start to think, and project the party differently, a slow hard fall into insignificance, left to post reams of statistics, that few can be bothered to read, but at least I suppose the main thing is, they make you feel superior to others, and smug about yourself. Poor little man.
-
Selby don’t bother with Sydders our resident Whinging POM he doesn’t even live here and hasn’t got a say
-
Sproty does your mum know your overdoing your screen time :)
-
I wish other things were as predictable as this fish taking a bite and the float under.
-
Gee and I thought I was fishing :)
-
''Labour’s Gareth Thomas says his local hospital has not met its four-hour A&E target since 2014.
Johnson says the highest number of people ever attended A&E last month, 2m. The demand is exceptional. The government is responding with a record investment, he says''
Record investment for the tories maybe? the johnson connovirus is in plague proportions :)
-
Just in case some had not noticed;
https://evolvepolitics.com/breaking-tories-vote-down-amendment-to-protect-nhs-from-foreign-control-in-brexit-trade-deals/
Puts to bed the discussion about the NHS being safe in the hands of Cummings and his retinue.
Check out the votes here;
https://evolvepolitics.com/heres-a-list-of-all-338-tory-mps-who-voted-against-protecting-our-nhs-from-brexit-trade-deals-last-night/
New MP's for Don Valley and Bassetlaw up for it I see!