UKIP - The Future - Volume 4
Discussion
DJRC said:
Damn it! Thats what you bloody get for trying to be poncy. I had high fallutin down first, then I thought Id spell it "posh" as I was referring to you, added the g as per Her Maj's language and sodding auto-type correct when and changed the bloody word on me!
Anyway this chap, what do we reckon? More of a moron or more of an imbecile? Which way do we think he swings the most?
Oscar Holderer would be spinning.Anyway this chap, what do we reckon? More of a moron or more of an imbecile? Which way do we think he swings the most?
Oscar would have had a heart attack long ago if he spent a day on our office and seen what we had done to his industry 
What I didn't say on that thread (because it turned into a standard ph t
t-fest) is I've actually worked in his office! Ottob. is a bit like a living working Brooklands if you take time to look around and actually look where you are.
What I didn't say on that thread (because it turned into a standard ph t
t-fest) is I've actually worked in his office! Ottob. is a bit like a living working Brooklands if you take time to look around and actually look where you are. Mrr T said:
4v6 said:
As for carswell, he's entitled to spout off what he likes but it don't make him right just coz you think you sense a bit of internal conflict.
Farage made a completely valid point, the use of hiv ( screw your sensitivities) as an example was just as valid as if he'd used foreign pregnancies landing here for medical treatment , but nobbers like yourself focus on one thing only : " he's attacking hiv sufferers!" That's your battle cry wilful ignorance of the argument combined with malevolent intent to derail objective discussion and get back control to keep things the way you want them.
It's an old trick, just like shouting "racist"" as you point and gesticulate to divert attention but as with that also it can't alter the fact that Farage was accurate in what he said at the core of his point, which was as you well know, this isn't an International health service, it's for the sole use of those who pay into it.
Obviously you disagree as is your right but it'll not make you any less wrong when the final analysis is all done and dusted.
Now be a good boy and evaporate.
I can imagine you red faced bashing the keys as you typed the above.Farage made a completely valid point, the use of hiv ( screw your sensitivities) as an example was just as valid as if he'd used foreign pregnancies landing here for medical treatment , but nobbers like yourself focus on one thing only : " he's attacking hiv sufferers!" That's your battle cry wilful ignorance of the argument combined with malevolent intent to derail objective discussion and get back control to keep things the way you want them.
It's an old trick, just like shouting "racist"" as you point and gesticulate to divert attention but as with that also it can't alter the fact that Farage was accurate in what he said at the core of his point, which was as you well know, this isn't an International health service, it's for the sole use of those who pay into it.
Obviously you disagree as is your right but it'll not make you any less wrong when the final analysis is all done and dusted.
Now be a good boy and evaporate.
Calm down its only a car forum.
The problem with Farage's comments was not about racism but about the fact he had no evidence to support what he said. Lots of kippers on here keep saying this is a major problem but the fact is there is no evidence its a problem. If your in a political TV debate its a good idea for the great leader to stick to facts not make thing up.
I am calm, was almost horizontal when i typed that yesterday...
No the problem is backwards types homing in on a particular angle to divert attention, rather than dealing with the crux of the argument which Farage quite rightly illuminated.
Which was at its most basic level; " Whose health service is this? Is it for the world to use? Or the people who pay into it? Ie the british."
Thats the crux, the HIV comments purely an example of the kinds of misuse of our services by foreigners, you know what an example is?
So forget about the HIV aspect its not important, the example IS.
HTH.
4v6 said:
Mrr T said:
4v6 said:
As for carswell, he's entitled to spout off what he likes but it don't make him right just coz you think you sense a bit of internal conflict.
Farage made a completely valid point, the use of hiv ( screw your sensitivities) as an example was just as valid as if he'd used foreign pregnancies landing here for medical treatment , but nobbers like yourself focus on one thing only : " he's attacking hiv sufferers!" That's your battle cry wilful ignorance of the argument combined with malevolent intent to derail objective discussion and get back control to keep things the way you want them.
It's an old trick, just like shouting "racist"" as you point and gesticulate to divert attention but as with that also it can't alter the fact that Farage was accurate in what he said at the core of his point, which was as you well know, this isn't an International health service, it's for the sole use of those who pay into it.
Obviously you disagree as is your right but it'll not make you any less wrong when the final analysis is all done and dusted.
Now be a good boy and evaporate.
I can imagine you red faced bashing the keys as you typed the above.Farage made a completely valid point, the use of hiv ( screw your sensitivities) as an example was just as valid as if he'd used foreign pregnancies landing here for medical treatment , but nobbers like yourself focus on one thing only : " he's attacking hiv sufferers!" That's your battle cry wilful ignorance of the argument combined with malevolent intent to derail objective discussion and get back control to keep things the way you want them.
It's an old trick, just like shouting "racist"" as you point and gesticulate to divert attention but as with that also it can't alter the fact that Farage was accurate in what he said at the core of his point, which was as you well know, this isn't an International health service, it's for the sole use of those who pay into it.
Obviously you disagree as is your right but it'll not make you any less wrong when the final analysis is all done and dusted.
Now be a good boy and evaporate.
Calm down its only a car forum.
The problem with Farage's comments was not about racism but about the fact he had no evidence to support what he said. Lots of kippers on here keep saying this is a major problem but the fact is there is no evidence its a problem. If your in a political TV debate its a good idea for the great leader to stick to facts not make thing up.
I am calm, was almost horizontal when i typed that yesterday...
No the problem is backwards types homing in on a particular angle to divert attention, rather than dealing with the crux of the argument which Farage quite rightly illuminated.
Which was at its most basic level; " Whose health service is this? Is it for the world to use? Or the people who pay into it? Ie the british."
Thats the crux, the HIV comments purely an example of the kinds of misuse of our services by foreigners, you know what an example is?
So forget about the HIV aspect its not important, the example IS.
HTH.
Have had to use NHS services for myself and a relative in the past two months. Excellent service all aspects and no signs it is in terminal decline as various scaremongers would have some of us believe. Obviously there are problems and it would appear these are being investigated and addressed by the new Government. I wish them well in their efforts.
MGJohn said:
Stop wasting your time with the likes of those in denial. They believe that no evidence means none is there to be revealed or produced. It is there. In the NHS waiting room this morning got talking to two recently retired NHS nurses. This very subject came up. Both confirmed that it is indeed a real issue with impact on NHS funding.
Have had to use NHS services for myself and a relative in the past two months. Excellent service all aspects and no signs it is in terminal decline as various scaremongers would have some of us believe. Obviously there are problems and it would appear these are being investigated and addressed by the new Government. I wish them well in their efforts.
To be fair, though, if a politician makes a strong claim, they should provide evidence to back it up. Saying the evidence will be found later is irrelevant, whether true or not.Have had to use NHS services for myself and a relative in the past two months. Excellent service all aspects and no signs it is in terminal decline as various scaremongers would have some of us believe. Obviously there are problems and it would appear these are being investigated and addressed by the new Government. I wish them well in their efforts.
Scuffers said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
that was not evidence at all, that's the problem.As I said at the time, there are no accurate figures, but the ones you linked to are very easily proven to be total fiction.
There are loads of organisations quoting all kinds of numbers, just about all of them fail any basic sanity test.
Mrr T said:
So you agree there is no evidence to support the great leaders comments about health tourism in the TV debate?
No I don't and I think your constant inability to see the wood from the tree's is a symptom of your incessant strawman argument style.the simple facts are that there are no hard numbers oh health tourism, the raw data collection is simply not there.
That said, there are clearly some corners of this that are relatively easy to identify, ie. HIV treatment.
the reason it's easy to see is the overall numbers of patients are relatively low (in NHS terms), and the data collection is somewhat more targeted (it's not like you can mix it in with other A&E traffic etc)
Now, depending on who's numbers you use, there are between 6-7,000 new cases presented to the NHS every year (HIV + Aids).
this is where it get's harder, as the stats don't tell you how many are immigrants, only what their country of birth was - not the same thing.
the estimate is some 35-40% (these are very much the low end of the scale figures) of new presentations are immigrants, so that gives you a range from 2,100-2,800 PA.
Taking the lower number here, based on the average cost of HIV antiretrovirals being some £23,000 PA (and remember this is an average of all patients, and does not include any time costs to the NHS), that gives you some £48-64M PA additional costs every year cumulatively.
add that up year on year, and you're talking huge numbers, then add in the costs of staffing costs associated with these patients and your easily into well over £1Bn just with the last 10 years worth (based on the lowest figures of current presentations).
now, you compare this with the so called 'facts' of the total health tourism bill being only ~£1.4Bn PA, then it's pretty damn obvious to anybody with half a brain, that the £1.4Bn is laughly wrong when the cumulative effect of the last 10 years just in HIV patients can pretty much account for that much.
Scuffers said:
Mrr T said:
So you agree there is no evidence to support the great leaders comments about health tourism in the TV debate?
the simple facts are that there are no hard numbers oh health tourism, the raw data collection is simply not there.blah blah
the stats don't tell you how many are immigrants
blah blah
AW111 said:
MGJohn said:
Stop wasting your time with the likes of those in denial. They believe that no evidence means none is there to be revealed or produced. It is there. In the NHS waiting room this morning got talking to two recently retired NHS nurses. This very subject came up. Both confirmed that it is indeed a real issue with impact on NHS funding.
Have had to use NHS services for myself and a relative in the past two months. Excellent service all aspects and no signs it is in terminal decline as various scaremongers would have some of us believe. Obviously there are problems and it would appear these are being investigated and addressed by the new Government. I wish them well in their efforts.
To be fair, though, if a politician makes a strong claim, they should provide evidence to back it up. Saying the evidence will be found later is irrelevant, whether true or not.Have had to use NHS services for myself and a relative in the past two months. Excellent service all aspects and no signs it is in terminal decline as various scaremongers would have some of us believe. Obviously there are problems and it would appear these are being investigated and addressed by the new Government. I wish them well in their efforts.
Perhaps the only way to satisfy those in denial would be to set up a long, expensive and extensive enquiry. Nice little earners for some all at taxpayers expense of course. Just what is needed.
TKF said:
One of the most bizarre arguements I've seen on this thread. And that's saying something.
this is why people like me CBA with you.you're not prepared to have a rational discussion, soon as one presents itself, you resort to childish crap.
You clearly have no ability to reason let alone understand some basic principals, so what's the point?
Goodbye, CBA to waste any more time on you.
Scuffers said:
TKF said:
One of the most bizarre arguements I've seen on this thread. And that's saying something.
this is why people like me CBA with you.you're not prepared to have a rational discussion, soon as one presents itself, you resort to childish crap.
You clearly have no ability to reason let alone understand some basic principals, so what's the point?
Goodbye, CBA to waste any more time on you.
You've been pulled up on it by a number of people so go back into insult mode. Ah well.
Scuffers said:
No I don't and I think your constant inability to see the wood from the tree's is a symptom of your incessant strawman argument style.
the simple facts are that there are no hard numbers oh health tourism, the raw data collection is simply not there.
That said, there are clearly some corners of this that are relatively easy to identify, ie. HIV treatment.
the reason it's easy to see is the overall numbers of patients are relatively low (in NHS terms), and the data collection is somewhat more targeted (it's not like you can mix it in with other A&E traffic etc)
Now, depending on who's numbers you use, there are between 6-7,000 new cases presented to the NHS every year (HIV + Aids).
this is where it get's harder, as the stats don't tell you how many are immigrants, only what their country of birth was - not the same thing.
the estimate is some 35-40% (these are very much the low end of the scale figures) of new presentations are immigrants, so that gives you a range from 2,100-2,800 PA.
Taking the lower number here, based on the average cost of HIV antiretrovirals being some £23,000 PA (and remember this is an average of all patients, and does not include any time costs to the NHS), that gives you some £48-64M PA additional costs every year cumulatively.
add that up year on year, and you're talking huge numbers, then add in the costs of staffing costs associated with these patients and your easily into well over £1Bn just with the last 10 years worth (based on the lowest figures of current presentations).
now, you compare this with the so called 'facts' of the total health tourism bill being only ~£1.4Bn PA, then it's pretty damn obvious to anybody with half a brain, that the £1.4Bn is laughly wrong when the cumulative effect of the last 10 years just in HIV patients can pretty much account for that much.
Forgive me if it has already been asked, but how can you stop this health tourism? as I see it anybody can come here for a holiday and then get sick and I sincerely hope we have not turned into the sort of people that will send a nurse to somebodies bedside to tell them we have decided to let them die due to a location on their birth certificate and that no further help is available, and if we do turn into such people I will live the rest of my life in shame.the simple facts are that there are no hard numbers oh health tourism, the raw data collection is simply not there.
That said, there are clearly some corners of this that are relatively easy to identify, ie. HIV treatment.
the reason it's easy to see is the overall numbers of patients are relatively low (in NHS terms), and the data collection is somewhat more targeted (it's not like you can mix it in with other A&E traffic etc)
Now, depending on who's numbers you use, there are between 6-7,000 new cases presented to the NHS every year (HIV + Aids).
this is where it get's harder, as the stats don't tell you how many are immigrants, only what their country of birth was - not the same thing.
the estimate is some 35-40% (these are very much the low end of the scale figures) of new presentations are immigrants, so that gives you a range from 2,100-2,800 PA.
Taking the lower number here, based on the average cost of HIV antiretrovirals being some £23,000 PA (and remember this is an average of all patients, and does not include any time costs to the NHS), that gives you some £48-64M PA additional costs every year cumulatively.
add that up year on year, and you're talking huge numbers, then add in the costs of staffing costs associated with these patients and your easily into well over £1Bn just with the last 10 years worth (based on the lowest figures of current presentations).
now, you compare this with the so called 'facts' of the total health tourism bill being only ~£1.4Bn PA, then it's pretty damn obvious to anybody with half a brain, that the £1.4Bn is laughly wrong when the cumulative effect of the last 10 years just in HIV patients can pretty much account for that much.
Scuffers said:
TKF said:
One of the most bizarre arguements I've seen on this thread. And that's saying something.
this is why people like me CBA with you.you're not prepared to have a rational discussion, soon as one presents itself, you resort to childish crap.
You clearly have no ability to reason let alone understand some basic principals, so what's the point?
Goodbye, CBA to waste any more time on you.
You think you have the key to all knowledge because you just know stuff without the need of anything to support that and that everyone else is just inferior because they don't have your god-like vision.
Meanwhile everyone else thinks that you are just thick. Its a shame you have no self awareness as you would have a nicer life if you realised it and you would be less frightened of the world if your tabloid eyes didn't view it with such paranoia.
NoNeed said:
orgive me if it has already been asked, but how can you stop this health tourism? as I see it anybody can come here for a holiday and then get sick and I sincerely hope we have not turned into the sort of people that will send a nurse to somebodies bedside to tell them we have decided to let them die due to a location on their birth certificate and that no further help is available, and if we do turn into such people I will live the rest of my life in shame.
I doubt many people coming to the UK for a couple of weeks holiday contract HIV and get diagnosed while they are here.steveT350C said:
NoNeed said:
orgive me if it has already been asked, but how can you stop this health tourism? as I see it anybody can come here for a holiday and then get sick and I sincerely hope we have not turned into the sort of people that will send a nurse to somebodies bedside to tell them we have decided to let them die due to a location on their birth certificate and that no further help is available, and if we do turn into such people I will live the rest of my life in shame.
I doubt many people coming to the UK for a couple of weeks holiday contract HIV and get diagnosed while they are here.k off and die.Scuffers said:
Mrr T said:
So you agree there is no evidence to support the great leaders comments about health tourism in the TV debate?
No I don't and I think your constant inability to see the wood from the tree's is a symptom of your incessant strawman argument style.the simple facts are that there are no hard numbers oh health tourism, the raw data collection is simply not there.
That said, there are clearly some corners of this that are relatively easy to identify, ie. HIV treatment.
the reason it's easy to see is the overall numbers of patients are relatively low (in NHS terms), and the data collection is somewhat more targeted (it's not like you can mix it in with other A&E traffic etc)
Now, depending on who's numbers you use, there are between 6-7,000 new cases presented to the NHS every year (HIV + Aids).
this is where it get's harder, as the stats don't tell you how many are immigrants, only what their country of birth was - not the same thing.
the estimate is some 35-40% (these are very much the low end of the scale figures) of new presentations are immigrants, so that gives you a range from 2,100-2,800 PA.
Taking the lower number here, based on the average cost of HIV antiretrovirals being some £23,000 PA (and remember this is an average of all patients, and does not include any time costs to the NHS), that gives you some £48-64M PA additional costs every year cumulatively.
add that up year on year, and you're talking huge numbers, then add in the costs of staffing costs associated with these patients and your easily into well over £1Bn just with the last 10 years worth (based on the lowest figures of current presentations).
now, you compare this with the so called 'facts' of the total health tourism bill being only ~£1.4Bn PA, then it's pretty damn obvious to anybody with half a brain, that the £1.4Bn is laughly wrong when the cumulative effect of the last 10 years just in HIV patients can pretty much account for that much.
An interesting fact the figures you are working on are on diagnosis.
However, look at this Government document showing the number of people living with HIV in the UK:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
This shows the number of black Africans HIV living in the UK is 8,100 men and 16,400 women. We have no idea if some or any of these are immigrants. But even using your figure and 40% are immigrants, and again we have no idea if some or any immigrated to get treatment so are health tourists, we get a total cost to the NHS of £230M.
NoNeed said:
orgive me if it has already been asked, but how can you stop this health tourism? as I see it anybody can come here for a holiday and then get sick and I sincerely hope we have not turned into the sort of people that will send a nurse to somebodies bedside to tell them we have decided to let them die due to a location on their birth certificate and that no further help is available, and if we do turn into such people I will live the rest of my life in shame.
What like the rest of the world ? Get Ill in America and the first thing they require is your travel insurance or your credit card, it even applies to some European countries, could we not make a stipulation of visiting the UK having travel insurance ?PRTVR said:
NoNeed said:
orgive me if it has already been asked, but how can you stop this health tourism? as I see it anybody can come here for a holiday and then get sick and I sincerely hope we have not turned into the sort of people that will send a nurse to somebodies bedside to tell them we have decided to let them die due to a location on their birth certificate and that no further help is available, and if we do turn into such people I will live the rest of my life in shame.
What like the rest of the world ? Get Ill in America and the first thing they require is your travel insurance or your credit card, it even applies to some European countries, could we not make a stipulation of visiting the UK having travel insurance ?Nice.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff