Is Britain Broken? Page 8

  • Page

    of 10 First / Last

  • johnlenham 25 Feb 2010 14:50:14 4,000 posts
    Seen 12 months ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Smuggo wrote:
    I really don't get how people can spend 100 on booze in a weekend. I find 6 pints is pretty much my limit, but then I try not to go to pubs on the weekend as they're full of the kind of cunts who may well spend 100 getting pissed up.

    Well you could spend 100 in a top London club which charges 20 for two bottles of beer but yeah 100 in drink is a fuckload in most places, 40 single and mixers in fact and thats on Saturday which is usually more expensive!

  • Dougs 25 Feb 2010 14:52:02 68,464 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    100 in a weekend is easy - that's only 50 a night, which is easy, esp with food added in. 100 a day didn't used to be uncommon either, when I went out on all day sessions
  • mcmonkeyplc 25 Feb 2010 14:55:33 39,467 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Smuggo wrote:

    Of course some people don't want to read it, and would rather buy Heat/The Sun/The Mail, but what can you do?

    Anthrax?

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • Dougs 25 Feb 2010 14:56:47 68,464 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    See, on a sesh, it's never a few pints. Not saying I do that every time I go out, but if I'm out for longer than 3 hours, then I have a very empty wallet indeed.
  • SlackMaster 25 Feb 2010 14:57:58 3,134 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Retroid wrote:
    SlackMaster wrote:
    We seriously can't be living with another labour government for another term. Schools are broken, the benefits system is broken and there is too much anti-social behaviour. Personally when I retire, I don't want to be living in this country.
    Because everything which existed during the Tory years was ripped out and torn up when Labour came into power, and everything since then has nothing whatsoever to do with policy which already existed.

    /Picard

    This seriously is a very pro labour board this one... people can have a difference of opinion you know.

    Don't read the daily mail either. But you know Labour has been in power for over a decade and the NHS is still struggling etc etc... more than enough time to turn things around IMO.
  • chopsen 25 Feb 2010 15:03:50 16,126 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    SlackMaster wrote:
    Don't read the daily mail either. But you know Labour has been in power for over a decade and the NHS is still struggling etc etc... more than enough time to turn things around IMO.

    If you're going to mention one thing that the tories did well and that labour fucked up, the NHS is not one of them.

    Try again.
  • figgis 25 Feb 2010 15:04:33 7,376 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    SlackMaster wrote:
    Retroid wrote:
    SlackMaster wrote:
    We seriously can't be living with another labour government for another term. Schools are broken, the benefits system is broken and there is too much anti-social behaviour. Personally when I retire, I don't want to be living in this country.
    Because everything which existed during the Tory years was ripped out and torn up when Labour came into power, and everything since then has nothing whatsoever to do with policy which already existed.

    /Picard

    This seriously is a very pro labour board this one... people can have a difference of opinion you know.

    Don't read the daily mail either. But you know Labour has been in power for over a decade and the NHS is still struggling etc etc... more than enough time to turn things around IMO.

    You've either forgotten how bad the NHS was under the Tories or are too young to remember. Crime rates were much higher too.

    I'm all for change but anyone thinking Cameron will be some kind of dynamic force will be severely disappointed. He's Blair MK 2 in a blue tie.
  • mcmonkeyplc 25 Feb 2010 15:06:33 39,467 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    /popcorn.

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • TheSaint 25 Feb 2010 15:09:07 14,622 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Pre '97 you had quite a wait to get into hospital but at least they were clean when you got there.

    This is much better now but was appalling for a good five or more years.
  • johnlenham 25 Feb 2010 15:11:56 4,000 posts
    Seen 12 months ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Dougs wrote:
    100 in a weekend is easy - that's only 50 a night, which is easy, esp with food added in. 100 a day didn't used to be uncommon either, when I went out on all day sessions

    /stealth piss head

  • johnlenham 25 Feb 2010 15:11:56 4,000 posts
    Seen 12 months ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Post deleted
  • Dougs 25 Feb 2010 15:12:47 68,464 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Not much stealth about it imo
  • Retroid Moderator 25 Feb 2010 15:13:55 45,025 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    SlackMaster wrote:
    This seriously is a very pro labour board this one... people can have a difference of opinion you know.

    Don't read the daily mail either. But you know Labour has been in power for over a decade and the NHS is still struggling etc etc... more than enough time to turn things around IMO.
    I've never voted Labour either but I trust them with things more than the Tories, based on both past experience and how they've been in opposition and what they're saying lately.

    You didn't say how things were better or how it would be better under Tory policy, either.
  • chopsen 25 Feb 2010 15:23:38 16,126 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Smuggo wrote:
    Well, they both fucked up.

    Labour doubled the NHS budget without any actual plan for how they would spend the money. Needless to say it didn't result in the NHS being twice as good.

    Oh aye, they both fucked up massively. Just in different ways :)

    Labour's spending has in particular been a bit of a disaster. There was actually a plan behind it all at one point when they commissioned the Wanless report, which had some proposals to reform the NHS and advised increased spending to achieve it. Labour kept to the spending bit and ignored the proposals bit. Wanless popped up a few years later (backed by the Kings Fund this time) and totally disowned the reforms what the govt did following his report, iirc.

    When you include the money they've pissed up the wall on IT reforms which achieved fuck, it's shocking.

    But....under tories the wheels really were falling off. It was a national embarrassment, tbh. The comparison's of nations differing health care services commission by WHO in 2000(ish) was a disgrace, putting use behind pretty much every other developed country. This report often gets brought up as NHSlol fodder by right wing private health care enthusiasts.

    In terms of waiting times, clinical governance, cancer treatment, efficiency and evidence based treatment, we're a lot better off now than we were late 80s/mid 90s imho. Even if it does feel just as crap. But that's health care - it will always be crap because there is a bottomless demand.


    tl;dr
  • Retroid Moderator 25 Feb 2010 15:23:57 45,025 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    hiddenranbir wrote:
    Retroid wrote:
    IMO the only decent news coverage on UK TV is Channel 4 news, Newsnight and Newswipe.

    ITV, C5, Sky, etc. are regularly shite. BBC News Channel isn't much better.


    Aren't TV license news providers capable of being under greater scrutiny by us?
    That'd only be the BBC's output then, wouldn't it? A lot of the BBC's coverage is decent if not actually Quite Good. Just not so much the too-general rolling news.
  • chopsen 25 Feb 2010 15:29:47 16,126 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    [place-holder for Godwin post]
  • Dougs 25 Feb 2010 15:30:04 68,464 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    hiddenranbir wrote:
    I prefer Tory at a local, small time level. Since they are all about small governship innit.

    I trust them for North Herts, not for United Kingdom.

    They're a shambles at my council. Ridiculous amounts of waste and worse, pure indecision.
  • TheSaint 25 Feb 2010 15:30:42 14,622 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    hiddenranbir wrote:
    I prefer Tory at a local, small time level. Since they are all about small governship innit.

    I trust them for North Herts, not for United Kingdom.

    Living in Herts you don't have much choice but to like the Tories unless you live in Watford or Stevenage.

  • TheSaint 25 Feb 2010 15:32:20 14,622 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Smuggo wrote:
    I've often thought scaling back the NHS and deliberately fucking it up might actually solve a lot of problems.

    One of the biggest problems we face as a nation is our ageing population. The reason it's ageing is people are living longer than they ever have before. As a result, pensions and elderly care have become massively unaffordable.

    If the NHS were actually less efficient, and people stopped living so long, we might actually be better off.

    Of course it's controversial and politically unpalatable, but it is a solution to a problem.

    Smuggo would vote for Harold Shipman then.
  • Retroid Moderator 25 Feb 2010 15:33:17 45,025 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Chopsen wrote:
    [place-holder for Godwin post]
    WORSE THAN KITLER
  • chopsen 25 Feb 2010 15:34:14 16,126 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    \o/
  • President_Weasel 25 Feb 2010 15:45:54 9,454 posts
    Seen 32 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Smuggo wrote:
    Chopsen wrote:
    Smuggo wrote:
    Well, they both fucked up.

    Labour doubled the NHS budget without any actual plan for how they would spend the money. Needless to say it didn't result in the NHS being twice as good.

    Oh aye, they both fucked up massively. Just in different ways :)

    Labour's spending has in particular been a bit of a disaster. There was actually a plan behind it all at one point when they commissioned the Wanless report, which had some proposals to reform the NHS and advised increased spending to achieve it. Labour kept to the spending bit and ignored the proposals bit. Wanless popped up a few years later (backed by the Kings Fund this time) and totally disowned the reforms what the govt did following his report, iirc.

    When you include the money they've pissed up the wall on IT reforms which achieved fuck, it's shocking.

    But....under tories the wheels really were falling off. It was a national embarrassment, tbh. The comparison's of nations differing health care services commission by WHO in 2000(ish) was a disgrace, putting use behind pretty much every other developed country. This report often gets brought up as NHSlol fodder by right wing private health care enthusiasts.

    In terms of waiting times, clinical governance, cancer treatment, efficiency and evidence based treatment, we're a lot better off now than we were late 80s/mid 90s imho. Even if it does feel just as crap. But that's health care - it will always be crap because there is a bottomless demand.


    tl;dr

    I've often thought scaling back the NHS and deliberately fucking it up might actually solve a lot of problems.

    One of the biggest problems we face as a nation is our ageing population. The reason it's ageing is people are living longer than they ever have before. As a result, pensions and elderly care have become massively unaffordable.

    If the NHS were actually less efficient, and people stopped living so long, we might actually be better off.

    Of course it's controversial and politically unpalatable, but it is a solution to a problem.

    Or we could bite the bullet and properly fund pensions. It's not like the money just disappears, the oldies will spend it on food and clothes and heating, with a bit left over for tartan slippers and worthers originals. It'll go back into the economy again, in other words - unless they buy lots of stuff from abroad, but luckily a high proportion of pensioners are reassuringly racist.
  • presh 25 Feb 2010 15:47:05 1,221 posts
    Seen 1 year ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    It really is depressing how unlikeable both main parties are, isn't it?

    Neither will come out with actual policies, and night after night after night they are on telly giving non-answers and evading simple questions.

    Really, they are both as bad as each other. But having grown up through Thatcherism, I will never, ever vote Tory. The only reason they have a chance of winning this election is that there are too many people who either didn't experience it, or who have forgotten what it was like and just want to vote for a party that'll make house prices rise again.
  • Page

    of 10 First / Last

Log in or register to reply