Snap General Election?

[Fastdruid]

MrBrightSi said:

The NHS has been on a steady spiral downhill through different political parties in power. It's not a political problem, it's mismanagement, greed and some sort of feeling that it is an untouchable institution beyond reform or efficiency measures.

It is that...but also costs increase year on year above inflation.

Just throwing money at it will not work. It role has changed massively from its' inception and at some point regardless of who is in power it will become too expensive. At what point do we say "enough is enough"? We need to have a grown up talk about what we want from the NHS and how we are going to fund it but while it is such a hot potato no one is prepared to look at it.

It is the third rail of British politics, touch it and die.

[FiF]

Derek Smith said:

FiF said:

Snopes has investigated that and determined that association is false. Godwin's law invoked.


http://www.snopes.com/snowflake-nazi-term-holocaus...

I'm not sure what you are suggesting here. If people think the term, which says more about the person mumbling it on forums that those it is directed at, has a connection to the death camps then suggesting that there is no evidence to support it is not relevant.

Not me suggesting anything, a poster took objection to a term because he claimed it had connection to death camps. It has no such connection, so his attempt at a counter smear by association is unfounded. That was all.

If he is still offended by the term, then that's for him to give another reason why, seeing as his first attempt has been proven to be twaddle, plus the person using it to suggest why they used it. Don't know why you're having difficulty, unless it's just an attempt to start something.

Other posters have given fairly good descriptions of what they, and I too, regard as the meaning of the term, ie folks who go into some degree of meltdown when a little heat applied. Plenty of evidence of that about. HTH.

[Henners]

JawKnee said:

techiedave said:

The NHS did not work better.

It did. Labour are the only party who can be trusted with the NHS.

Do you think Labour can be trusted to run the NHS in a sustainable manner...

[AstonZagato]

Fastdruid said:

It is that...but also costs increase year on year above inflation.

Just throwing money at it will not work. It role has changed massively from its' inception and at some point regardless of who is in power it will become too expensive. At what point do we say "enough is enough"? We need to have a grown up talk about what we want from the NHS and how we are going to fund it but while it is such a hot potato no one is prepared to look at it.

It is the third rail of British politics, touch it and die.

Indeed. When the NHS was founded in 1948, the life expectancy for men was 66, and for women, 71. Today those figures are 79 and 83. There is a lot that can and does go wrong in those extra 12/13 years.

The treatment in '48 for a heart attack was aspirin. If you were alive in the morning, then it was a success. Babies born at 28 weeks were sure to die. Now we can do so much more and it is all expensive cutting-edge stuff.

Sadly, the Tories can't touch the system. It is a sacred cow. I think it needs to be depoliticised somehow (I don't know that this i.e. even possible). Possibly put it into a trust - like the BBC. Have decisions made by people who are not elected and can take a dispassionate view of what our taxes can and should be paying for and what they shouldn't.

I'd also make private medical insurance tax deductible and encourage trusts to have private wards to take in those patients' cash. I'd also give everyone who left hospital a bill. If people knew what it cost they'd be far more appreciative. We could also ensure that those who aren't entitled to the NHS pay up.

[BigMon]

sidicks said:

Eddie Strohacker said:

Deary me.

Same posters making the same claims, despite all the evidence and prior discussion having explained why the claims are flawed.

The same posters refusing to answer basic questions which would reveal those flaws.

Repeat over and over again.

Edited by sidicks on Saturday 22 April 07:47

Do you not agree it's disingenuous to disparage others for using insults before then dishing out insults yourself?

There is no intellectual high ground for you to take in this situation.

Edited by BigMon on Saturday 22 April 14:51

[Likes Fast Cars]

BigMon said:

sidicks said:

Eddie Strohacker said:

Deary me.

Same posters making the same claims, despite all the evidence and prior discussion having explained why the claims are flawed.

The same posters refusing to answer basic questions which would reveal those flaws.

Repeat over and over again.

Edited by sidicks on Saturday 22 April 07:47

Do you not agree it's disingenuous to disparage others for using insults before then dishing out insults yourself?

There is no intellectual high ground for you to take in this situation.

Edited by BigMon on Saturday 22 April 14:51

Bugger the intellectual high ground - this is PH!

As serious as some of the topics are we shouldn't get too carried away with insults, insults about insults, and who said what about whom and why. After all we're all grown-ups aren't we?

I think that is how we all need to look at it.

[Vaud]

AstonZagato said:

Indeed. When the NHS was founded in 1948, the life expectancy for men was 66, and for women, 71. Today those figures are 79 and 83. There is a lot that can and does go wrong in those extra 12/13 years.

The treatment in '48 for a heart attack was aspirin. If you were alive in the morning, then it was a success. Babies born at 28 weeks were sure to die. Now we can do so much more and it is all expensive cutting-edge stuff.

Sadly, the Tories can't touch the system. It is a sacred cow. I think it needs to be depoliticised somehow (I don't know that this i.e. even possible). Possibly put it into a trust - like the BBC. Have decisions made by people who are not elected and can take a dispassionate view of what our taxes can and should be paying for and what they shouldn't.

I'd also make private medical insurance tax deductible and encourage trusts to have private wards to take in those patients' cash. I'd also give everyone who left hospital a bill. If people knew what it cost they'd be far more appreciative. We could also ensure that those who aren't entitled to the NHS pay up.

It is the 3rd rail and highly emotive for any party.

It is unsustainable. People are living longer. Complex treatments cost a lot. Ill people are not rational. Demand is near infinite.

Spending more is the easy option when it needs systemic review; the new "NHS" would take 15 years to evolve to (?), which is a tough sell.

[Eddie Strohacker]

Likes Fast Cars said:

Bugger the intellectual high ground - this is PH!

As serious as some of the topics are we shouldn't get too carried away with insults, insults about insults, and who said what about whom and why. After all we're all grown-ups aren't we?

I think that is how we all need to look at it.

If you like, I''l take the view that anyone who criticises the standard of debate & in the very next post calls someone an idiot, irrespective of whether they subjectively are or not has shot themselves in the foot. Hilariously.

[AstonZagato]

JawKnee said:

techiedave said:

The NHS did not work better.

It did. Labour are the only party who can be trusted with the NHS.

For once, I'm going to agree (albeit partially) with Jawknee here. It did work better under Labour.

However, Labour will mess it up just as much as - if not more than - the Conservatives.

The Tories introduced the local commissioning of services. This is a clusterfk of titanic proportions. People who couldn't organise a panic on a doomed submarine commissioning hugely expensive services without the information required to make an informed decision. It was never going to work out well. It was an un-needed reform at exactly the wrong moment when the NHS was just getting to grips with the last reforms from the Labour government (that destabilised it badly). It was starting to function a little better (although overly focused on waiting time initiatives and Brown's target obsession). Andrew Lansley deserves much of the blame for demanding another change - Cameron should have stopped him.

So, in one small sense, it did perform better under Labour (at certain moments after it stopped rocking from the shocks Labour had inflicted).

However, Labour came up with the idiocy that is PFI and that is arguably a bigger millstone around the NHS's poor neck.

Labour will, if ever in power again, also crater the economy. With a less prosperous economy, we will not be able to afford the NHS we have, let alone a better one. If you want to throw money at the problem (which isn't the whole solution), then you'd be better off voting Conservative because there is more chance that the Tories will keep the economy growing fast enough to make that possible.

Funnily enough, Labour is more likely to capitulate on the NHS than the Tories, IMHO. Tories can't go there (the "third rail of British politics" as someone here said). Labour can do exactly that - and have history here, introducing sensible reforms like commissions private health care firms to carry out certain services.

Jawknee's simplistic "Labour good, Tory bad" completely misses the point.

[Likes Fast Cars]

Eddie Strohacker said:

Likes Fast Cars said:

Bugger the intellectual high ground - this is PH!

As serious as some of the topics are we shouldn't get too carried away with insults, insults about insults, and who said what about whom and why. After all we're all grown-ups aren't we?

I think that is how we all need to look at it.

If you like, I''l take the view that anyone who criticises the standard of debate & in the very next post calls someone an idiot, irrespective of whether they subjectively are or not has shot themselves in the foot. Hilariously.

We need to appoint some H&S officers and first-aiders to handle the casualties of foot shooting.

[BigMon]

I'm sure JawKnee is just on the wind up to be honest, and is doing a marvellous job judging by the amount of bites he's getting.

I'd like to ask him, as a previous Labour voter myself, why I should vote for Corbyn when my perception of him is as a 'protest politician' at best with policies that seem rooted in the 70's?

I also think Diane Abbott is a vile piece of work.

By the right wing standards of N, P & E I'm probably a tofu-knitting , sandal-wearing leftie but there is no way on this mortal earth I would ever vote for a party lead by Corbyn and his merry band of numpties.

[Likes Fast Cars]

AstonZagato said:

JawKnee said:

techiedave said:

The NHS did not work better.

It did. Labour are the only party who can be trusted with the NHS.

For once, I'm going to agree (albeit partially) with Jawknee here. It did work better under Labour.

However, Labour will mess it up just as much as - if not more than - the Conservatives.

The Tories introduced the local commissioning of services. This is a clusterfk of titanic proportions. People who couldn't organise a panic on a doomed submarine commissioning hugely expensive services without the information required to make an informed decision. It was never going to work out well. It was an un-needed reform at exactly the wrong moment when the NHS was just getting to grips with the last reforms from the Labour government (that destabilised it badly). It was starting to function a little better (although overly focused on waiting time initiatives and Brown's target obsession). Andrew Lansley deserves much of the blame for demanding another change - Cameron should have stopped him.

So, in one small sense, it did perform better under Labour (at certain moments after it stopped rocking from the shocks Labour had inflicted).

However, Labour came up with the idiocy that is PFI and that is arguably a bigger millstone around the NHS's poor neck.

Labour will, if ever in power again, also crater the economy. With a less prosperous economy, we will not be able to afford the NHS we have, let alone a better one. If you want to throw money at the problem (which isn't the whole solution), then you'd be better off voting Conservative because there is more chance that the Tories will keep the economy growing fast enough to make that possible.

Funnily enough, Labour is more likely to capitulate on the NHS than the Tories, IMHO. Tories can't go there (the "third rail of British politics" as someone here said). Labour can do exactly that - and have history here, introducing sensible reforms like commissions private health care firms to carry out certain services.

Jawknee's simplistic "Labour good, Tory bad" completely misses the point.

Let me be controversial here ..... should the NHS be completely root-to-branch reformed? Should all options be put on the table? Governments aren't good at managing things (generally speaking).

The SNP have screwed it up in Scotland, someone said Wales isn't exactly great.....

[anonymous-user]

Likes Fast Cars said:

Let me be controversial here ..... should the NHS be completely root-to-branch reformed? Should all options be put on the table? Governments aren't good at managing things (generally speaking).

The SNP have screwed it up in Scotland, someone said Wales isn't exactly great.....

There should at least be an honest and open review of the NHS. Every organisation that's ever succeeded long term has gone through reviews and reorganisations in order for it to be fit for purpose.

The NHS should be no different BUT for many it is a sacred cow that cannot/should not be criticised or thought of as anything but an end-to-end public service.

[essayer]

[Henners]

The Green drop is interesting.

Labour and UKIP not so surprising.

[Don]

The Toryrag have an interesting story about Andrew Fisher, Corbyn's manifesto writing chap.

It's an assassination piece of course but he does seem to be very, very hard left.

Not going to go down well with a Centrist nation like the UK.

Can't see their manifesto being terribly popular...

[Likes Fast Cars]

Hey all you lot on here saying you're going to vote Lib Dum this time, look what you've all done. They're up in the opinion polls!

[turbobloke]

Likes Fast Cars said:

Hey all you lot on here saying you're going to vote Lib Dum this time, look what you've all done. They're up in the opinion polls!

They're back abpve single figures, lordy lordy such dizzy heights! Tim Who will be chuffed before he's stuffed.

[Henners]

turbobloke said:

Likes Fast Cars said:

Hey all you lot on here saying you're going to vote Lib Dum this time, look what you've all done. They're up in the opinion polls!

They're back abpve single figures, lordy lordy such dizzy heights! Tim Who will be chuffed before he's stuffed.

Careful, the might need more than a Volkswagen Caravelle to move their MPs around at this rate.

eta

[Vaud]

turbobloke said:

Likes Fast Cars said:

Hey all you lot on here saying you're going to vote Lib Dum this time, look what you've all done. They're up in the opinion polls!

They're back abpve single figures, lordy lordy such dizzy heights! Tim Who will be chuffed before he's stuffed.

I'd like to see the Lib Dems succeed; 20+ seats would be good for parliamentary democracy. They tend to be pragmatic and less held by dogma (in my perception) than Labour.

They also run town level councils quite well as they don't tend to be grandstanding for a national position.