The NHS under the Tories.
Comments
-
Lookyhere wrote:Finally Coopster, Life style? interesting that one, i assume you ride a bike? maybe you also go skiing or running, if you injure yourself doing any of these, then you ll be reimbursing the NHS ? no i didnt think you would.
The most ridiculous argument made yet. All those activities lead to a healthier lifestyle and very few people require medical attention whilst in pursuit of them. However, sitting in your pants all day, eating Doritos, smoking tabs and drinking white lightning is a sure fire way to waste a big pile of taxpayers' cash.0 -
We have to look at demand management as well as at supply. Remember that along with the increasing pressure on the NHS from an ageing population, comes increasing pressure on pensions - which already make up 20% of all public spending (the NHS is the next largest, at 18%). And of course, if the NHS does a good job, that pension pressure continues to increase as our population ages. That's actually the main argument in favour of immigration - that it helps to rebalance the population by adding younger people of working age.
Right now 24% of the population is over 60. By 2030 it's expected to be 29%.
I'm not suggesting Logan's Run here, but if we want to support that increasing burden, with a decreasing tax base, we'd better find cheaper ways of keeping the population healthier to start with. Just throwing money at it won't work. Remember also these projections are pre-Brexit, so they still have lots of immigration which brings both younger people and higher birth rates. If we actually close our borders it will get much worse, much more quickly. The UK birthrate is currently 1.83 children per woman, which is below replacement rate, but on a fairly slow curve. Before the uptick in migration caused by EU accession of Eastern European states, our birth rate was closer to 1.6. Germany's is 1.4. Japan's is 1.3. Japan is totally borked (33% over 60) - they are already seeing many of their pensionable-age cohort being unable to retire. Merkel didn't let in 1m migrants out of the kindness of her heart - just have a look at German employment figures and demographics and you'll see that she was desperately trying to stave off the same demographic crisis we also face.
(Data from http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/current_spending; https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... uksummary; https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/15.3)0 -
If I didn't like a thread on the NHS I wouldn't have replied. As it was I gave you some practical advice on what to do....Lookyhere wrote:
Steve0 if you dont like a thread on the NHS, then you know what you can do dont you?
Blair/Brown poured billions into the NHS, satisfaction levels had never been higher, but in real terms the Tories have taken money out of the NHS and more importantly, community care, expert after expert (do we still listen to them????) says its the lack of community/social care that is a main cause of the current issues and as much as you dont like that, it has been done since 2010, couple this with an a total waste of money on agency staff/cutting nurse training and its easy to see why we are at this juncture.
even now the Tories have taken away the bursaries given to trainee nurses, despite that they train on the job, these are all short term cost cutting measures that end up costing far more to put right later on......
We ALL rely on the NHS even those with BUPA etc, private health creams off the treatments that make money, they are not interested when your Dad has a Stroke or you kid/misses develops Cancer and they wont be in the Welsh valleys airlifting you of that DH section you really should nt have attempted.
Longer term, i think we need across the board taxes rises, we also need to look again at taxing unhealthy food products and stop cutting taxes for the more wealthy in society, IHT does not need a £1m TH.
If we can fund Trident, HS2 & numerous wars, then we can also find the money to fund what used to be something we could all be proud of.
Finally Coopster, Life style? interesting that one, i assume you ride a bike? maybe you also go skiing or running, if you injure yourself doing any of these, then you ll be reimbursing the NHS ? no i didnt think you would.
to me, if the government allows 'pop to be sold for pence a bottle, alcohol cheaper than bottled water, doesnt tax fast food, then it is telling society "its ok, eat/drink what you like"
after decades, we ve finally done things about tabacco, so no one has any excuse to smoke, so we can if we want too.
And as I suspected you're turning into a 'we need to raise tax thread' - bit predictable don't you think?
As said above the NHS a bottomless pit from a funding point of view but the I can't pretend to know enough to have the answers. So I'll carry on helping the NHS by not using it while still paying for it. Unlike some on here who are happy to use it but want others to pay for it, which I find a bit selfish
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
If I didn't like a thread on the NHS I wouldn't have replied. As it was I gave you some practical advice on what to do....Lookyhere wrote:
Steve0 if you dont like a thread on the NHS, then you know what you can do dont you?
Blair/Brown poured billions into the NHS, satisfaction levels had never been higher, but in real terms the Tories have taken money out of the NHS and more importantly, community care, expert after expert (do we still listen to them????) says its the lack of community/social care that is a main cause of the current issues and as much as you dont like that, it has been done since 2010, couple this with an a total waste of money on agency staff/cutting nurse training and its easy to see why we are at this juncture.
even now the Tories have taken away the bursaries given to trainee nurses, despite that they train on the job, these are all short term cost cutting measures that end up costing far more to put right later on......
We ALL rely on the NHS even those with BUPA etc, private health creams off the treatments that make money, they are not interested when your Dad has a Stroke or you kid/misses develops Cancer and they wont be in the Welsh valleys airlifting you of that DH section you really should nt have attempted.
Longer term, i think we need across the board taxes rises, we also need to look again at taxing unhealthy food products and stop cutting taxes for the more wealthy in society, IHT does not need a £1m TH.
If we can fund Trident, HS2 & numerous wars, then we can also find the money to fund what used to be something we could all be proud of.
Finally Coopster, Life style? interesting that one, i assume you ride a bike? maybe you also go skiing or running, if you injure yourself doing any of these, then you ll be reimbursing the NHS ? no i didnt think you would.
to me, if the government allows 'pop to be sold for pence a bottle, alcohol cheaper than bottled water, doesnt tax fast food, then it is telling society "its ok, eat/drink what you like"
after decades, we ve finally done things about tabacco, so no one has any excuse to smoke, so we can if we want too.
And as I suspected you're turning into a 'we need to raise tax thread' - bit predictable don't you think?
As said above the NHS a bottomless pit from a funding point of view but the I can't pretend to know enough to have the answers. So I'll carry on helping the NHS by not using it while still paying for it. Unlike some on here who are happy to use it but want others to pay for it, which I find a bit selfish
But surely Stevo, all that downhilling you're doing is costing us billions of pounds a year!0 -
Good point Garry. In my defence I've paid for all my own body armourGarry H wrote:But surely Stevo, all that downhilling you're doing is costing us billions of pounds a year!
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
The NHS is struggling this winter as it does every year and will in future regardless of who is in power.
20 years ago, Labour said there were 24 hrs to save the NHS
10 years ago, patients died needlessly in hospitals and were even drinking water from flower vases.
Andy Burnham was SoS Health at the time and resisted calls for any enquiry. He will no doubt be voted mayor for Manchester in May.
But lets shout "Tory cuts! "0 -
And therein lies the problem.Ballysmate wrote:The NHS is struggling this winter as it does every year and will in future regardless of who is in power.
20 years ago, Labour said there were 24 hrs to save the NHS
10 years ago, patients died needlessly in hospitals and were even drinking water from flower vases.
Andy Burnham was SoS Health at the time and resisted calls for any enquiry. He will no doubt be voted mayor for Manchester in May.
But lets shout "Tory cuts! "
Too many people more concerned with scoring points than solving the problem.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Garry H wrote:Lookyhere wrote:Finally Coopster, Life style? interesting that one, i assume you ride a bike? maybe you also go skiing or running, if you injure yourself doing any of these, then you ll be reimbursing the NHS ? no i didnt think you would.
The most ridiculous argument made yet. All those activities lead to a healthier lifestyle and very few people require medical attention whilst in pursuit of them. However, sitting in your pants all day, eating Doritos, smoking tabs and drinking white lightning is a sure fire way to waste a big pile of taxpayers' cash.
well probably not actually as theyll pop their clogs quite quickly with that lifestyle and cost peanuts, whereas mr health nut lives into old age and gets dementia/alzheimers or some degenerative osteoarthritis condition and ends up needing 24hr round the clock support, bundles of pills and physio treatment that keeps going for years.0 -
Good, that gives us 1 week's extra NHS spending each yearlettingthedaysgoby wrote:my starting point is far simpler - scrap the trident replacement.0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:If I didn't like a thread on the NHS I wouldn't have replied. As it was I gave you some practical advice on what to do....
And as I suspected you're turning into a 'we need to raise tax thread' - bit predictable don't you think?
As said above the NHS a bottomless pit from a funding point of view but the I can't pretend to know enough to have the answers. So I'll carry on helping the NHS by not using it while still paying for it. Unlike some on here who are happy to use it but want others to pay for it, which I find a bit selfish
ummmmmm the Tories have raised Taxes, not Labour, all of our CT is going to go up, isnt it... headline "tories rise tax to pay for NHS...." doesnt sit well with you but thats the reality.
Might be better to riase general taxation, rather than a PC lottery tax rise, this fund some adult care in wealtheir areas, less in poorer areas, where the need is greater.
Sure with an ageing population and growth in treatments available, its going to be v expensive but attacking GP services after under funding them for years is hardly a positive is it?0 -
What do you mean by 'all of our CT is going up'? Then explain what you mean by a general tax rise rather than a PC lottery.Lookyhere wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:If I didn't like a thread on the NHS I wouldn't have replied. As it was I gave you some practical advice on what to do....
And as I suspected you're turning into a 'we need to raise tax thread' - bit predictable don't you think?
As said above the NHS a bottomless pit from a funding point of view but the I can't pretend to know enough to have the answers. So I'll carry on helping the NHS by not using it while still paying for it. Unlike some on here who are happy to use it but want others to pay for it, which I find a bit selfish
ummmmmm the Tories have raised Taxes, not Labour, all of our CT is going to go up, isnt it... headline "tories rise tax to pay for NHS...." doesnt sit well with you but thats the reality.
Might be better to riase general taxation, rather than a PC lottery tax rise, this fund some adult care in wealtheir areas, less in poorer areas, where the need is greater.
Sure with an ageing population and growth in treatments available, its going to be v expensive but attacking GP services after under funding them for years is hardly a positive is it?
If you want to turn it into a tax debate, be my guest "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I suspect it's too controversial for even the Tories but given the ageing population and the likely increase in those needing the service compared to those paying taxes I reckon there is too much money spent on prolonging life i.e. keeping someone with a terminal illness and little quality of life alive for a bit longer rather than curing an illness or maintaining quality of life for those that are terminal.
The bid difficulty is deciding what services the NHS should and shouldn't treat free as we've seen above. Arguably if you choose to take part in an activity that has a high risk of injury you should get insurance to cover medical treatment but then what is high risk? DH riding probably is but is XC which may have difficult descents, then we have road racing, group riding or just riding a bike in traffic? Arguably people involved in RTCs should have the costs of their treatment paid by the at fault driver's insurance but that would push insurance costs up resulting in other issues. It would be easy to target smokers but what about alcohol? Do you test everyone treated and charge them if they have alcohol in their system? If you charge people due to problems caused by obesity what go you use as the baseline?0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
What do you mean by 'all of our CT is going up'? Then explain what you mean by a general tax rise rather than a PC lottery.Lookyhere wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:If I didn't like a thread on the NHS I wouldn't have replied. As it was I gave you some practical advice on what to do....
And as I suspected you're turning into a 'we need to raise tax thread' - bit predictable don't you think?
As said above the NHS a bottomless pit from a funding point of view but the I can't pretend to know enough to have the answers. So I'll carry on helping the NHS by not using it while still paying for it. Unlike some on here who are happy to use it but want others to pay for it, which I find a bit selfish
ummmmmm the Tories have raised Taxes, not Labour, all of our CT is going to go up, isnt it... headline "tories rise tax to pay for NHS...." doesnt sit well with you but thats the reality.
Might be better to riase general taxation, rather than a PC lottery tax rise, this fund some adult care in wealtheir areas, less in poorer areas, where the need is greater.
Sure with an ageing population and growth in treatments available, its going to be v expensive but attacking GP services after under funding them for years is hardly a positive is it?
If you want to turn it into a tax debate, be my guest
Council tax rises to pay for social care and this is acknowledged to lead to issues with poorer areas raising less money, also only householders are paying for this extra care instead of the ALL working people, is this fair???? in addition, all of this extra cash raised will be spent on high min wage and not on more staff and more beds in care homes, increases in min wage are not something councils are in anyway responsible for.
IF tax rises are needed to pay for social care (which is surely a national issue, rather than a local one?) why not do this via income tax/NI rises?
its not a tax debate and certainly shouldnt be a political one but the Tories are running the country and therefore are accountable.0 -
OK, here we go.Lookyhere wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:What do you mean by 'all of our CT is going up'? Then explain what you mean by a general tax rise rather than a PC lottery.
If you want to turn it into a tax debate, be my guest
Council (or income) tax rises to pay for social care and this is acknowledged to lead to issues with poorer areas raising less money, also only householders (income taxpayers) are paying for this extra care instead of the ALL working people, is this fair???? in addition, all of this extra cash raised will be spent on high min wage and not on more staff and more beds in care homes, increases in min wage are not something councils are in anyway responsible for.
IF tax rises are needed to pay for social care (which is surely a national issue, rather than a local one?) why not do this via income tax/NI rises?
its not a tax debate and certainly shouldnt be a political one but the Tories are running the country and therefore are accountable.
Councils provide a lot of the social care so funding through council tax has its logic. However if you change the words as above it still looks unfair. (Don't understand your minimum wage point btw?).
As for the effect of raising income tax, here is HMRC's own study on the impact of the outgoing act of New Labour, raising the top income tax rate from 40% to 50% - basically sod all when looking at NHS funding. So why would it be any different this time?
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130129110402/http:/www.hmrc.gov.uk/budget2012/excheq-income-tax-2042.pdf
And you still need to explain CT"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Ballysmate wrote:The NHS is struggling this winter as it does every year and will in future regardless of who is in power.
20 years ago, Labour said there were 24 hrs to save the NHS
10 years ago, patients died needlessly in hospitals and were even drinking water from flower vases.
Andy Burnham was SoS Health at the time and resisted calls for any enquiry. He will no doubt be voted mayor for Manchester in May.
But lets shout "Tory cuts! "
yep all good with the NHS, move on nothing to see :roll:
http://news.sky.com/story/large-number- ... s-10729764
https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... celled-nhs
but wtf do experts know eh?
How would you feel Bally if your cancer op was cancelled? i'm under going some tests following your thread on Prostrate cancer, its stressful enough without operations being cancelled isnt it?
btw your post was the reason i went to see my GP, so at last a useful tory !
cheers though. 0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
OK, here we go.Lookyhere wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:What do you mean by 'all of our CT is going up'? Then explain what you mean by a general tax rise rather than a PC lottery.
If you want to turn it into a tax debate, be my guest
Council (or income) tax rises to pay for social care and this is acknowledged to lead to issues with poorer areas raising less money, also only householders (income taxpayers) are paying for this extra care instead of the ALL working people, is this fair???? in addition, all of this extra cash raised will be spent on high min wage and not on more staff and more beds in care homes, increases in min wage are not something councils are in anyway responsible for.
IF tax rises are needed to pay for social care (which is surely a national issue, rather than a local one?) why not do this via income tax/NI rises?
its not a tax debate and certainly shouldnt be a political one but the Tories are running the country and therefore are accountable.
Councils provide a lot of the social care so funding through council tax has its logic. However if you change the words as above it still looks unfair. (Don't understand your minimum wage point btw?).
As for the effect of raising income tax, here is HMRC's own study on the impact of the outgoing act of New Labour, raising the top income tax rate from 40% to 50% - basically sod all when looking at NHS funding. So why would it be any different this time?
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130129110402/http:/www.hmrc.gov.uk/budget2012/excheq-income-tax-2042.pdf
And you still need to explain CT
Private companies have to pay min wage, which means they ll be charging councils more for the social care they provide, councils rarely have their own care or nursing homes - the money raised by Council Tax raises will not cover the increase in fee's councils will be forced to pay.
wealthier areas will collect more and poorer areas less of this 6% rise over the next 3 years, coupled with poorer areas have more people with less assets to pay for their own care - 23k rule, so they are doubly hit.
do you understand now?0 -
CT = corporate tax?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0
-
This is very simple fellas.
1. Make it look like it's not viable.
2. Privatise it.
Bear in mind that many things have to give post Brexit. Pre-Brexit it was a Tory choice, post-Brexit everything has to be cut to the bone and more or we'll go under.0 -
I wonder what Richard Branson's thoughts are on the subject.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Joelsim wrote:This is very simple fellas.
1. Make it look like it's not viable.
2. Privatise it.
Bear in mind that many things have to give post Brexit. Pre-Brexit it was a Tory choice, post-Brexit everything has to be cut to the bone and more or we'll go under.
More commissioning groups are using private companies to review GP referrals, some 4% of all referrals are now being rejected.... not for med reasons but for admin ones.
a sort of ATOS for all of us, good news is that as this position grows, more and more medical staff can leave the NHS and work in the private sector doing this sort of thing, for more money and less stress, win win !!!
0 -
Joelsim wrote:This is very simple fellas.
1. Make it look like it's not viable.
2. Privatise it.
Bear in mind that many things have to give post Brexit. Pre-Brexit it was a Tory choice, post-Brexit everything has to be cut to the bone and more or we'll go under.
Oh, come on, it's not like the Secretary of State for Health has previously co-authored a book calling for the privatisation of the NHS, is it... oh, wait a minute, that's exactly what he did.
Anyway, for those of you saying the NHS is a bottomless pit, we're still spending less than the OECD average on health. :roll:0 -
finchy wrote:Joelsim wrote:This is very simple fellas.
1. Make it look like it's not viable.
2. Privatise it.
Bear in mind that many things have to give post Brexit. Pre-Brexit it was a Tory choice, post-Brexit everything has to be cut to the bone and more or we'll go under.
Oh, come on, it's not like the Secretary of State for Health has previously co-authored a book calling for the privatisation of the NHS, is it... oh, wait a minute, that's exactly what he did.
Anyway, for those of you saying the NHS is a bottomless pit, we're still spending less than the OECD average on health. :roll:
It's a bit of a dumb argument anyway...
Everything can be better funded, schools, hospitals, police, the canal and river trust, our roads, the railways.
Ultimately, most of us want an NHS of a certain standard, and that costs a lot of money, either we can pay that through taxation, or not have that standard of NHS. Calling it a bottomless pit, when ultimately much of the money, is money being spent of saving people's lives, is a great choice of words!You live and learn. At any rate, you live0 -
there is a lack of response here from the more right leaning forum members, is this because they feel uncomfortable with the current governments policies and beliefs on the NHS ????0
-
...or we could always do what most countries, including all of the European social-democratic leaning ones, do - have a mixed system of social care and health insurance.Jez mon wrote:Ultimately, most of us want an NHS of a certain standard, and that costs a lot of money, either we can pay that through taxation, or not have that standard of NHS. Calling it a bottomless pit, when ultimately much of the money, is money being spent of saving people's lives, is a great choice of words!
The hard truth is that no amount of money is "enough" - however much money you make available there will be ways to spend it, and you would still be able to point to unmet "needs". Rationing is a fact of life in healthcare and moving the threshold doesn't change that.0 -
Pross wrote:The NHS in Wales is run by Labour out of the assembly, it faces all the same problems. It's too big an animal trying to do too much but it also appears to be massively inefficient. Whilst I certainly don't want it privatised I do think it could do with learning from management of successful, lean businesses so that the money is spent wisely.
I was going to say something along the lines of this. I know there are massive problems outside of their control but to what extent do we think that poor management plays a part in this crisis? I don't know the answer but ss soon as you mention anything about management and business people cry 'the NHS is not a business', it's not, but good management is a largely transferable skill. Just because it's objectives aren't purely financial doesn't mean it can't be managed properly.0 -
finchy wrote:Joelsim wrote:This is very simple fellas.
1. Make it look like it's not viable.
2. Privatise it.
Bear in mind that many things have to give post Brexit. Pre-Brexit it was a Tory choice, post-Brexit everything has to be cut to the bone and more or we'll go under.
Oh, come on, it's not like the Secretary of State for Health has previously co-authored a book calling for the privatisation of the NHS, is it... oh, wait a minute, that's exactly what he did.
Anyway, for those of you saying the NHS is a bottomless pit, we're still spending less than the OECD average on health. :roll:
What year is that for? And on what basis? For 2015, the OECD statistics say we spend more than the OECD average in both % of GDP terms and purchasing power parity.
Much less than the USA though, for what it's worth, and I don't think their system is one to aspire to.0 -
KingstonGraham wrote:finchy wrote:Joelsim wrote:This is very simple fellas.
1. Make it look like it's not viable.
2. Privatise it.
Bear in mind that many things have to give post Brexit. Pre-Brexit it was a Tory choice, post-Brexit everything has to be cut to the bone and more or we'll go under.
Oh, come on, it's not like the Secretary of State for Health has previously co-authored a book calling for the privatisation of the NHS, is it... oh, wait a minute, that's exactly what he did.
Anyway, for those of you saying the NHS is a bottomless pit, we're still spending less than the OECD average on health. :roll:
What year is that for? And on what basis? For 2015, the OECD statistics say we spend more than the OECD average in both % of GDP terms and purchasing power parity.
Much less than the USA though, for what it's worth, and I don't think their system is one to aspire to.
Yep, you're right, I was confusing the OECD with western Europe, silly me. :oops:
The OECD average, however, is dragged down by countries like Slovakia and Hungary, and having used the health systems in both of those places, I can promise you that it's really not much to boast about.0 -
Coopster the 1st wrote:Lookyhere wrote:Blair/Brown poured billions into the NHS
Who was it that created overpriced and off balance PFI contracts?
These also have a huge negative effect on the UK finances
All Blair/Brown did was pass what they were spending onto future governments
A drop in the ocean, relatively
Oh - and the NHS needed (and still needs) capital investment - which is expensive, regardless of how it's funded
It's just a hill. Get over it.0 -
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that like many (most?) huge, centrally-organised/funded Governmental bodies, the NHS is fantastically inefficient and wastes money on a colossal scale. My sister used to work for local NHS procurement, one of my friends is a District Nurse and some of the stories I've heard about overcharging for simple things like consumables, and the blatant waste in the system beggar belief. No private organisation could afford to be as wasteful as many Government departments, they would swiftly be out of business.
As raked over in here in many ways, there's no one-dimensional solution to the issue the NHS faces, but there are lots of smaller things that if tackled effectively could at least halt what feels like a downward spiral.
I'm absolutely no lover of Hunt-with-a-C but the abuse he got for suggesting that up to 30% of patients who present to A&E have no real need to be there is symptomatic of a wider cultural problem exacerbated by things like restricted out of hours services and a society that has developed a 'me-first' sense of 'entitlement' for everything.
If you've been unfortunate enough to have to accompany a relative to A&E with a genuine emergency (or indeed have been carted in yourself - and I have on both counts), the number of people waiting to be seen with a sore throat, a nasty paper cut or an itchy eye is staggering."Get a bicycle. You won't regret it if you live"
Mark Twain0
