The UK General Politics Thread Page 52

  • Page

    of 503 First / Last

  • Deleted user 18 October 2012 13:50:20
    Just like banks and top bosses?
  • chopsen 18 Oct 2012 14:15:25 16,937 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    In theory, that's how the NHS works now, and how that is supposed to find efficiencies. In theory...
  • Psychotext 18 Oct 2012 14:39:34 56,998 posts
    Seen 12 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Funny thing is, as bad as the NHS is supposed to be, it's actually far more efficient than the private healthcare systems in a lot of countries.
  • chopsen 18 Oct 2012 15:00:04 16,937 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Going on a tangent here of my own making, but the problem with calling the NHS underfunded is that it's difficult to define adequate funding. Whereas providing electricity to every home is quite a clearly defined target, even defining "health" is difficult. It is a constantly shifting bar, and probably a limitless demand. You could throw money at it, but how that money is used and for what, and proving the benefit is a non-trivial task.
  • chopsen 18 Oct 2012 15:27:51 16,937 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Yup, still woolly! And 1-3 does pretty much describe what it does atm, so the funding it tickety-boo by your criteria :). The devil is in the detail. Even what constitutes an emergency is often not entirely consensual between service provider and service user. If you look at something like heart attacks. Quite straight-forward, you'd think, but he way they get dealt with now is massively different to how the NHS was set up to deal with them about 10 years ago. Labour pissed up a lot of money against the wall on the NHS, but (whisper it) they got some things right.

    Waiting times, I predict, are going to go to cock over the next couple of years I expect, incidentally.

    The 4th is...interesting because the standard of private insurance in this country is a bit crap, because they know the NHS will pick up the pieces. Anything vaguely likely to be chronic or kill you will not be covered on most policies, and same with emergency care. Health care is a leading cause of personal bankruptcy in the USA, and I don't think that really is something we should welcome.

    There is talk about introducing personal budgets for health care (i.e. you have so much money from the state to "buy" healthcare with), but really I have no idea how that is going to work.
  • chopsen 18 Oct 2012 16:27:15 16,937 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Having *compulsory* privatised health vs socialised health could probably be no different. Controlling the costs is the issue. There's a clear political agenda to do that in socialised health (tax dollars at work, etc), but it's less well defined in privately funded systems I think.

    The problem with the USA isn't so much that it is largely private insurance funded, but there's no cap on the costs and spending. So they've spiralled out of control over the last 50-60 years or whatever. In the 50s and 60s it was cheap enough to insure a regular family that it could be offered as part of an employment package. This became less affordable as healthcare costs spiralled. This really damaged companies that originally offered lifetime medical insurance for employees, such as was seen in the car manufacturing business. Also, insurance companies had to maintain affordability to be competative, so they offer package which don't cover things comprehensively, which means people sometimes find that they aren't covered, thereby losing their assets to pay for their health.

    There is, I think, an entirely reasonable socialist viewpoint that says that health-care can be privately insured, but it still needs state control to make sure that costs are controlled for the greater good. This is not something that happens when the market it left to its own devices, as above. Ultimately there is only so much GDP floating around in a country that you can divert to health care, and if you do that by compulsory private or public funding, either *can* be made to work for the greater good.

    All the above imho, of course.

    Edited by Chopsen at 16:32:27 18-10-2012
  • Tom_Servo 19 Oct 2012 17:06:50 18,082 posts
    Seen 4 months ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Chancellor George Osborne forced to pay 160 upgrade on train to London Euston after travelling in First Class on a Standard ticket

    :D
  • spamdangled 19 Oct 2012 17:20:47 27,900 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    It's being reported that he refused to move as well, and it was only after the intervention of the train manager that they agreed to pay the extra money. On a Virgin train, to boot.

    If that's true, then Labour are going to be all over it after the whole Mitchell thing.

    Edited by darkmorgado at 17:28:45 19-10-2012
  • Deleted user 19 October 2012 17:26:48
    I think of you as a pleb.
  • Tom_Servo 19 Oct 2012 17:28:41 18,082 posts
    Seen 4 months ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    I don't really care, TBH. Just sounds like something from The Thick of It.
  • spamdangled 19 Oct 2012 17:29:29 27,900 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    I wonder if the magic words "do you know who I am?" were uttered.
  • chopsen 19 Oct 2012 17:37:16 16,937 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    At an estimated personal wealth of 4m, I doubt many fucks were given.
  • disusedgenius 19 Oct 2012 18:02:40 6,039 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20008342

    According to ITV News, Mr Osborne had no direct communication with Virgin Trains staff - and an officer from the Metropolitian Police, who was escorting the chancellor, told the train manager in advance that Mr Osborne did not have the correct ticket.

    Once on the train, the manager told the officer Mr Osborne would have to pay an upgrade fare, a request which Mr Osborne's aide initially refused, according to Virgin Trains.

    But after being asking for a second time, the aide agreed that the extra 160 would be paid.

    Sounds annoyingly underwhelming. :(
  • DaM 19 Oct 2012 18:29:38 14,008 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Mitchell's resigned!
  • X201 19 Oct 2012 18:35:52 16,388 posts
    Seen 14 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Yet again its the cover-up and the denials rather than the actual incident.

    Do any of them study political history before going into politics?
  • spamdangled 19 Oct 2012 18:46:48 27,900 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Took him long enough.
  • Deleted user 19 October 2012 18:47:40
    For such a pathetic thing.
  • MrDigital 19 Oct 2012 19:15:54 1,881 posts
    Seen 3 days ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Most people are plebs in the derogatory sense, too bad for him he is a privileged Tory :D Imagine John Prescott said this, it would blow over in the blink of an eye :)
  • LetsGo 19 Oct 2012 19:22:28 6,282 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I don't even think it was because he was a privileged Tory, it was because he thought he was better than the rest of us.

    But I guess that goes hand in hand...
  • MrDigital 19 Oct 2012 19:23:46 1,881 posts
    Seen 3 days ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    It really was to do with that. You're right that the main sentiment was one of superiority, but that was massively amplified by the privileged Tory card.
  • askew 19 Oct 2012 19:27:18 13,346 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Osbourne will just claim that 160 back in expenses.

    What's the fucking point.
  • LetsGo 19 Oct 2012 19:27:56 6,282 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I'm sure if John Prescott said; "know your f'ing place" to a policeman, he would be in exactly the same boat IMO.
  • spamdangled 19 Oct 2012 19:38:01 27,900 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    LetsGo wrote:
    I'm sure if John Prescott said; "know your f'ing place" to a policeman, he would be in exactly the same boat IMO.
    Oh I don't know, he pretty much laughed it off when he punched a member of the public in the face.
  • LetsGo 19 Oct 2012 19:40:24 6,282 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    darkmorgado wrote:
    LetsGo wrote:
    I'm sure if John Prescott said; "know your f'ing place" to a policeman, he would be in exactly the same boat IMO.
    Oh I don't know, he pretty much laughed it off when he punched a member of the public in the face.
    He got away with it because someone chucked an egg over him...
  • Page

    of 503 First / Last

Log in or register to reply