Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

The 2015 Popularity Contest (aka UK General Election )

Who will you be voting for?

  • Tory

    Votes: 38 9.9%
  • Diet Tory (Labour)

    Votes: 132 34.3%
  • Tory Zero (Greens)

    Votes: 44 11.4%
  • Extra Tory with lemon (UKIP)

    Votes: 40 10.4%
  • Lib Dems

    Votes: 9 2.3%
  • Other

    Votes: 31 8.1%
  • Cheese on toast

    Votes: 91 23.6%

  • Total voters
    385
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Also, Labour minority government. Can't go with SNP due to Trident, can't go with Lib Dems due to the fact they're Lib Dems. Tories won't form government if they have the lowest share of seats, even if foreseeably possible in terms of numbers, as the public wouldn't accept it.

The minority government will limp along for around 6 months until everyone realises Milliband is utterly pathetic, some issue or other causes the government to collapse and a new election is fought.

Oh, and Cameron certain to be dismissed if he doesn't get a majority, meaning the election around a year from now will involve two new leaders.

#MysticMeg
 
Difference is Bruce that despite your idealism private companies will for the most part live for the profit. They aren't charities.

If you put health in the hands of those chasing profit, then standards will slip if profit will result from those standards being lower. Hospitals aren't five-star hotels that receive a proportional increase in profit based on standards, unless you charge for the care, which means the less well off get poor treatment, the better off get proper treatment.

If that's the choice with privatisation, I'd prefer keeping the NHS myself.

I'm not sure that is the choice to be honest. We've seen in a whole host of industries a level of exponential growth, yet healthcare keeps getting more and more expensive. It's well known that people, generally speaking, prefer things to stay just as they are. I mean Machiavelli knew that 500 years or so ago, nothing much has changed in that sense.

If your opinion of private organisations is so poor, I dread to think what you must think of the people working for them. They must be just as cold hearted and dastardly as public sector workers are saintly. Of course that isn't really the case, and indeed many of the private ventures in healthcare are run by doctors, but that doesn't fit the narrative I guess.

I mean if a doctor goes on strike because she wants more money she's regarded as a working class hero, yet if that same doctor starts a company to provide her services in a different way to way the NHS prescribes she's a money grabbing charlatan.

Makes no sense.
 
Last edited:
I mean if a doctor goes on strike because she wants more money she's regarded as a working class hero, yet if that same doctor starts a company to provide her services in a different way to way the NHS prescribes she's a money grabbing charlatan.

Makes no sense.

When did doctors go on strike? I'm assuming you're refering to the non-urgent care industrial action of a few years ago. You make it sound rather more dramatic. And your characterisation of people striking as "working class heroes" and doing it "because they want more money" is a puerile oversimplification of an often complex issue. But then, you always misrepresent Unions since you don't actually think they should even exist (which makes your views on the subject null and void to many, I expect).

And are we talking about "doctors starting a company to provide services in a different way"? I'm thinking of profiteering companies getting their foot in the NHS door to make money out of healthcare. Sounds a bit less altruistic than the terms you framed it in.

It is not a left-field view to think Healthcare services should be non-profit-making. It is you whose views are outside the mainstream, not us.
 
I'm not sure that is the choice to be honest. We've seen in a whole host of industries a level of exponential growth, yet healthcare keeps getting more and more expensive. It's well known that people, generally speaking, prefer things to stay just as they are. I mean Machiavelli knew that 500 years or so ago, nothing much has changed in that sense.

If your opinion of private organisations is so poor, I dread to think what you must think of the people working for them. They must be just as cold hearted and dastardly as public sector workers are saintly. Of course that isn't really the case, and indeed many of the private ventures in healthcare are run by doctors, but that doesn't fit the narrative I guess.

I mean if a doctor goes on strike because she wants more money she's regarded as a working class hero, yet if that same doctor starts a company to provide her services in a different way to way the NHS prescribes she's a money grabbing charlatan.

Makes no sense.

I'm not saying private business is "cold hearted and dastardly" - I'm saying the core reason they exist for the most part is to make a profit. I should know, I bloody run one! For example, if it's a supermarket making a business decision to sell cheap in volume to beat a supermarket who sells at a moderate price but dominates market share, they aren't selling cheap out of the goodness of their own heart; they're doing so as it enables growth and profit.

The difference is the subject matter - health. The moment you privatise health, you underpin it with the need to make a profit. You've seen Circle jump ship as profit was hard to come by, meaning instability for the hospital, and you've seen standards slip alarmingly whilst chasing those profits. For a supermarket, downsizing is an option, as is negotiating with suppliers and so on - for a hospital, not so much. That's why it's dangerous.
 

I'm not saying private business is "cold hearted and dastardly" - I'm saying the core reason they exist for the most part is to make a profit. I should know, I bloody run one! For example, if it's a supermarket making a business decision to sell cheap in volume to beat a supermarket who sells at a moderate price but dominates market share, they aren't selling cheap out of the goodness of their own heart; they're doing so as it enables growth and profit.

The difference is the subject matter - health. The moment you privatise health, you underpin it with the need to make a profit. You've seen Circle jump ship as profit was hard to come by, meaning instability for the hospital, and you've seen standards slip alarmingly whilst chasing those profits. For a supermarket, downsizing is an option, as is negotiating with suppliers and so on - for a hospital, not so much. That's why it's dangerous.

Watch it, you're making far too much sense.
 
This is what happens when there is profit to be made from health care. Dog eat dog for the money. An absolute disgrace. As bad as some doctors and nurses wanting to charge a fee to see a GP.
Analysis: battle with GPs led to Circle's retreat

Battle with GPs led to Circle’s retreat from Hinchingbrooke hospital
Contract began with high hopes and company claimed small successes, but it became clear things were not going to plan
Hinchingbrooke-hospital-011.jpg

Hinchingbrooke hospital. Photograph: Terry Harris/Rex Features
When the coalition government privatised Hinchingbrooke hospital in 2012, there were high hopes. Since 2006 the hospital had been in deep trouble, losing five chief executives in as many years, building up £40m of debt and undergoing two independent external reviews.

The second review, in 2011, led to the colorectal department being moved to another hospital after six serious incidents, two of which had led to patient deaths and another of which had involved a medical instrument being left inside a patient. Things could not get worse.

For a little while they didn’t. Then at the end of 2012 Circle lost its chief executive, not long after it posted higher than expected losses. In 2013 the hospital’s latest boss departed.

Circle claimed small successes in turning around patient confidence, andperformance at its accident and emergency department. However, it became clear that things were not going to plan. A low point came this summer when staff were accused of treating patients in an “undignified and emotionally abusive manner”.

At the heart of this was an unseen battle between local GPs and the hospital over who should profit from patients. In the new NHS structure, family doctors were meant to pay Hinchingbrooke for every patient they sent there – and with money tight, GPs saw their budgets being drained to fund the hospital.

Worse was that Circle aimed to make profits, even if it meant GPs sitting on losses. Last March when the hospital looked as if it would finally break even, GPs in the area initially slapped a £5m fine on the hospital for “poor performance”. After much wrangling this was lowered to about £1m. But a company aiming to make money from a hospital with a £100m budget could not continue to risk having its profits siphoned off by GPs.

None of this should have surprised anybody. Andrew Lansley, the then health secretary, was a local MP and well aware of the perils of pitting doctor against doctor. Unhelpfully, he removed a layer of NHS management that specifically managed these local turf wars.

We have been here before. In 2003 New Labour signed a three-year “franchising” deal allowing a private company, Tribal Secta, to run Birmingham’s Good Hope hospital. The contract was terminated eight months early after the hospital deficit increased from £839,000 to £3.5m.

That debacle left pro-marketeers in every party with nowhere to turn in debates about policy. To improve healthcare, Labour flooded the NHS with taxpayers’ cash. That era ended when the banks went bust".

Osbourne want to return the health service back to pre NHS 1948.

At least some in the BMA can see what will happen when the TTIP is signed.

BMA - Keep NHS free from trade treaty, urge doctors

Overseas examples
London foundation doctor 2 Rita Issa said: ‘The TTIP is a continuation of the process we have seen moving the NHS away from being a social body acting in the interests of patients.’

She cited cases where companies in other countries had sued governments for taking public healthcare actions that threatened their business investments.

The potential for so-called IP (investor protection) and ISDS (investor to state dispute settlement) mechanisms used by some corporations to attack public services have sounded alarm bells for many.

The mechanisms are contentious as they give foreign corporations the right to sue countries in which they are investing if they believe a government decision, such as standardised tobacco packaging, has unfairly impacted on their investment.

Dr Issa asked: ‘Do we really want to open our doors to American companies and laws and drag our healthcare system [down] to the level of the States?’

She added that the Canadian government had successfully managed to exempt its healthcare system from free trade agreements".

But not this anti EU Tory government who want to hide behind 'free trade' to get their, and their friends, grubby hands on the £130 billion worth of taxpayers money. The Tories could 'bat for the UK NHS' but decided not too. A titanic disaster that the UK is being steered into and the effects on peoples lives will be monumental.
 
This is what happens when there is profit to be made from health care. Dog eat dog for the money. An absolute disgrace. As bad as some doctors and nurses wanting to charge a fee to see a GP.
Analysis: battle with GPs led to Circle's retreat

Battle with GPs led to Circle’s retreat from Hinchingbrooke hospital
Contract began with high hopes and company claimed small successes, but it became clear things were not going to plan
Hinchingbrooke-hospital-011.jpg

Hinchingbrooke hospital. Photograph: Terry Harris/Rex Features
When the coalition government privatised Hinchingbrooke hospital in 2012, there were high hopes. Since 2006 the hospital had been in deep trouble, losing five chief executives in as many years, building up £40m of debt and undergoing two independent external reviews.

The second review, in 2011, led to the colorectal department being moved to another hospital after six serious incidents, two of which had led to patient deaths and another of which had involved a medical instrument being left inside a patient. Things could not get worse.

For a little while they didn’t. Then at the end of 2012 Circle lost its chief executive, not long after it posted higher than expected losses. In 2013 the hospital’s latest boss departed.

Circle claimed small successes in turning around patient confidence, andperformance at its accident and emergency department. However, it became clear that things were not going to plan. A low point came this summer when staff were accused of treating patients in an “undignified and emotionally abusive manner”.

At the heart of this was an unseen battle between local GPs and the hospital over who should profit from patients. In the new NHS structure, family doctors were meant to pay Hinchingbrooke for every patient they sent there – and with money tight, GPs saw their budgets being drained to fund the hospital.

Worse was that Circle aimed to make profits, even if it meant GPs sitting on losses. Last March when the hospital looked as if it would finally break even, GPs in the area initially slapped a £5m fine on the hospital for “poor performance”. After much wrangling this was lowered to about £1m. But a company aiming to make money from a hospital with a £100m budget could not continue to risk having its profits siphoned off by GPs.

None of this should have surprised anybody. Andrew Lansley, the then health secretary, was a local MP and well aware of the perils of pitting doctor against doctor. Unhelpfully, he removed a layer of NHS management that specifically managed these local turf wars.

We have been here before. In 2003 New Labour signed a three-year “franchising” deal allowing a private company, Tribal Secta, to run Birmingham’s Good Hope hospital. The contract was terminated eight months early after the hospital deficit increased from £839,000 to £3.5m.

That debacle left pro-marketeers in every party with nowhere to turn in debates about policy. To improve healthcare, Labour flooded the NHS with taxpayers’ cash. That era ended when the banks went bust".

Osbourne want to return the health service back to pre NHS 1948.

At least some in the BMA can see what will happen when the TTIP is signed.

BMA - Keep NHS free from trade treaty, urge doctors

Overseas examples
London foundation doctor 2 Rita Issa said: ‘The TTIP is a continuation of the process we have seen moving the NHS away from being a social body acting in the interests of patients.’

She cited cases where companies in other countries had sued governments for taking public healthcare actions that threatened their business investments.

The potential for so-called IP (investor protection) and ISDS (investor to state dispute settlement) mechanisms used by some corporations to attack public services have sounded alarm bells for many.

The mechanisms are contentious as they give foreign corporations the right to sue countries in which they are investing if they believe a government decision, such as standardised tobacco packaging, has unfairly impacted on their investment.

Dr Issa asked: ‘Do we really want to open our doors to American companies and laws and drag our healthcare system [down] to the level of the States?’

She added that the Canadian government had successfully managed to exempt its healthcare system from free trade agreements".

But not this anti EU Tory government who want to hide behind 'free trade' to get their, and their friends, grubby hands on the £130 billion worth of taxpayers money. The Tories could 'bat for the UK NHS' but decided not too. A titanic disaster that the UK is being steered into and the effects on peoples lives will be monumental.

You only need to post the link, mate.

Is anyone else finding the constant copy/pasting of huge swathes of others' writing quite annoying?
 
I couldn't trust any politician as far as I could throw them (admittedly not far looking at the state of some of them) so unfortunately, as it stands, none of them will get my vote.
 
You only need to post the link, mate.

Is anyone else finding the constant copy/pasting of huge swathes of others' writing quite annoying?

Let me get this right.

You are ok with a link being posted but not what the link shows 'others' writing'. So you are ok to read the link but not when the 'others' writings' (the link) is shown.
 

I couldn't trust any politician as far as I could throw them (admittedly not far looking at the state of some of them) so unfortunately, as it stands, none of them will get my vote.

Which suits all of them down to the ground. They can all just get on with feathering their beds and serving their own interests at our expense.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Back
Top