• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

markysimmo said:
How many extra nurses and even admin staff could you have for that money and even give the others a decent payrise
Click to expand...
You can't run large budgets and staff numbers without some high level execs and they cost money - pocket change in comparison to overall budgets.

What we can't say is if they're effective or value for money without a properly competetive market. I can tell you that private health insurance costs less than the proportion of my income tax and NI that goes to the NHS and provides a significantly better level of care.
 
scaramanga said:
What we can't say is if they're effective or value for money without a properly competetive market. I can tell you that private health insurance costs less than the proportion of my income tax and NI that goes to the NHS and provides a significantly better level of care.
Click to expand...

I worked out my private health insurance which has gone up due to my parkinsonism is still betterthen my NHS contributions.

Would like to know what the average wage for the executives in the beloved oh great EU.
 
scaramanga said:
You can't run large budgets and staff numbers without some high level execs and they cost money - pocket change in comparison to overall budgets.

What we can't say is if they're effective or value for money without a properly competetive market. I can tell you that private health insurance costs less than the proportion of my income tax and NI that goes to the NHS and provides a significantly better level of care.
Click to expand...

I can't believe how poor GP services are. Maybe I need to change GP. There is so little 'care' on offer. Unless you have something serious, you're processed without any semblance of 'customer care'. The chances are what you've contacted them for in less serious instances, is not addressed. NHS hospitals and care for serious conditions or issues is far far better. I don't know what the answer is, but GP services need a complete overhaul.
 
I think the solution is to localise health care and turn hospitals and gps into independent charities. Have them state funded, but autonomous. Apart from critical care, patients can choose where they go, and the more popular ones get more funding. But absolutely non-profit making
 
Gutter Boy said:
I think the solution is to localise health care and turn hospitals and gps into independent charities. Have them state funded, but autonomous. Apart from critical care, patients can choose where they go, and the more popular ones get more funding. But absolutely non-profit making
Click to expand...

people tend to lump the whole NHS into one thing. It being considered as component parts would be a good step to appraising it. Many parts of it are exceptional. Some areas are poor. France etc have far higher successes with things like Cancers maybe because they have a semi-privatised GP system that picks things up easier. Here GPS are almost screeners for care and half their job is getting rid of people from an overloaded system.
 
I think the biggest thing we could do here is have free annual health screenings for everyone. Pick up things early when they are easily curable, rather than get to the stage they need intensive, and often palliative care. In places like Canada and Germany cancer gets picked up like that, where here most cancer diagnoses happen in A&E
 
SpurMeUp said:
I can't believe how poor GP services are. Maybe I need to change GP. There is so little 'care' on offer. Unless you have something serious, you're processed without any semblance of 'customer care'. The chances are what you've contacted them for in less serious instances, is not addressed. NHS hospitals and care for serious conditions or issues is far far better. I don't know what the answer is, but GP services need a complete overhaul.
Click to expand...

The problem is they are paid for every patient on their books. Rather than the amount of patients they treat. So they get as many patients as they can. If you can't get an appointment, it doesn't bother them they still get paid for you.
 
SpurMeUp said:
people tend to lump the whole NHS into one thing. It being considered as component parts would be a good step to appraising it. Many parts of it are exceptional. Some areas are poor. France etc have far higher successes with things like Cancers maybe because they have a semi-privatised GP system that picks things up easier. Here GPS are almost screeners for care and half their job is getting rid of people from an overloaded system.
Click to expand...

Gps in the uk are private. Just paid by the nhs.
 
glasgowspur said:
This must be the most bizarre honours list ever, but blair really does beggar belief.
Click to expand...

It’s extremely disturbing, knighted for services to peace?

He made stuff up that took us to war, destroyed Iraq and opened the door for Islamic terrorists.

It’s incredible what the people who run our institutions think is acceptable.
 
markysimmo said:
How the fudge is that lying Cnut Blair now a Sir
Click to expand...

Knighthoods have historically been given to all manner of criminals and n’er-do-wells, right from when the system was introduced. It could only exist in cap-doffing Britain. You only have to look at what the Duke of York has (allegedly…) been up to to see that a title means nothing.

It’s another feature of a corrupt governing system that should have been abolished decades ago.
 
Mikey10 said:
Knighthoods have historically been given to all manner of criminals and n’er-do-wells, right from when the system was introduced. It could only exist in cap-doffing Britain. You only have to look at what the Duke of York has (allegedly…) been up to to see that a title means nothing.

It’s another feature of a corrupt governing system that should have been abolished decades ago.
Click to expand...
You should have more respect for your betters.
 
Mikey10 said:
Knighthoods have historically been given to all manner of criminals and n’er-do-wells, right from when the system was introduced. It could only exist in cap-doffing Britain. You only have to look at what the Duke of York has (allegedly…) been up to to see that a title means nothing.

It’s another feature of a corrupt governing system that should have been abolished decades ago.
Click to expand...
I think it means a lot - there is no way he'd have been involved if he hadn't been a prince. If anything, it enabled it.
 
I agreed with Laura an
Mikey10 said:
Knighthoods have historically been given to all manner of criminals and n’er-do-wells, right from when the system was introduced. It could only exist in cap-doffing Britain. You only have to look at what the Duke of York has (allegedly…) been up to to see that a title means nothing.

It’s another feature of a corrupt governing system that should have been abolished decades ago.
Click to expand...

Shows how little I follow the royals that I had to Google who the Duke of York was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back