Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 22 minutes ago, Buce said: Every so often you appear to be trying to adapt a more reasoned approach to your posting, but then you quickly revert to type. You just can't help yourself. Neither can you chap. Pot Kettle black etc. I've never called anyone thick or scum or mentally disabled though like you good liberal self. You just cant help yourself from having a go can you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Ulike Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 17 minutes ago, Strokes said: I thought we wanted all the old people to die, so we can overturn brexit? Weirdly, a good point. With the NHS in crisis, not enough housing, and as you say, all the old farts wanted us to go back in time to 1966, why o why do we want people to live longer than 80 years? That’s a good innings. I'd take that. I’d be in favour of a Logan’s Run style ‘harvesting’ of all the doddery old folks when they lose it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 4 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said: Weirdly, a good point. With the NHS in crisis, not enough housing, and as you say, all the old farts wanted us to go back in time to 1966, why o why do we want people to live longer than 80 years? That’s a good innings. I'd take that. I’d be in favour of a Logan’s Run style ‘harvesting’ of all the doddery old folks when they lose it. Yeah, if only we had more Harold Shipmans of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 1 hour ago, Fox Ulike said: The fairly obvious solution here is that it's the Government who should be paying. The cladding complies with Building Regulations. So the freeholder is under no obligation to replace it. So if these buildings are now not safe because of the cladding - then the liability lies with the party who published and enforced the Building Regulations in the first place. ie the UK Government. Unfortunately, the Government can't own up to this because it would involve admitting responsibility for the deaths at Grenfell.. Not a bad point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 1 hour ago, Foxin_mad said: I think to an extent you are correct in terms that certain areas should not be used for Political point scoring. Health, Education and Emergency services are definitely some of those key areas. There should be a cross party discussion at all times on these important matters at least, parties shouldn't be able to use it for cheap point scoring. For example the NHS doesn't need more money it needs serious reform to ensure it delivers services for the modern world we live in. This needs sensible debate from all sides. The problem is if the Tories suggest reform, Labour instantly start the 'SAVE OUR NHS' nonsense, at the moment we are not tackling the real issues, we have a mixture of more money privatisation and poor decision making that is the cause of the issues. I predict that we could throw pretty much unlimited amounts at the NHS at the current time and it would not fix the problems there would still be a rising crisis, we have a rising and aging population a trend set to continue. Interesting the worst performing areas of the NHS is in Wales controlled by a Labour administration so before they start preaching perhaps they should get their own house in order. I'm yet to be convinced on unionised nationalised energy, transport and infrastructure but I perhaps need to research this in other countries more. Certainly looking at what we had in the 1970s it is certainly not something we would want to go back to, British Gas were slow with long waiting times, the local electrical boards were mostly terrible and slow to react, British Rail was absolute garbage and worldwide joke and you had to wait 3 months for a phone line from BT. My personal experience of the public sector is bad managers, I have now worked in 4 separate institutions and in all of them there are bad managers. There are also some absolutely fantastic managers and great people working there I will add but often the people at the top are dinosaurs with poor vision. I think maybe this is perhaps a national problem when you look at our political leaders! The other thing I'd add is that it isn't political point scoring to disagree about how to run public services. It does annoy me when every time labour talk about an issue the Tories moan about playing politics. It's precisely what the opposition are meant to do - challenge and oppose bad ideas. Clue is in the title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Foxin_mad said: Well France had/is having a massive crisis this year with Health care also with all the strains of Flu. You could also argue that the EU average is ALSO not enough. What is enough? Who knows? I don't think there is a limit to what we could spend on healthcare with all the advancements in care, technology and drugs. There were still massive problems with the NHS under Blair, it wasn't perfect I remember sitting in A&E a couple of times for about a whole day, yes the targets they set and publish were met but since 1997 our population increased by nearly 10 million people a mixture of immigration and people living longer. New Hospitals were built which now simply do not have enough space to fit the numbers of people in, you have to question who did the planning and analysis that allowed a hospital to be built between 2007 and 2012 that now simply does not have enough space for the local population, no closed wards just not enough space! Surely someone must have modelled this? made predictions? My argument is Western countries in general probably need to review their healthcare needs and requirements due to massively changing demographics and changing needs of individuals. I do not personally think more money solves anything. There are inefficiencies in the NHS that are wasting billions, lets tackle this first. For instance prescriptions, free prescriptions, deals with pharmaceutical companies for branded drugs over no brands, there are many issues that can be looked at I have been there and seen them. Perhaps we should look at bringing drug development back under an NHS umbrella as it is scandalous we are paying thousands for branded cancer drugs (and others) to save lives. Social care is a major issue, there are people in hospital that shouldn't be in hospital maybe its cheaper to pay for those to be looked after elsewhere. Again little investment or planning on this was made under the last government either. My point is there are a huge range of discussions that can be had. I am not saying that more money at some point wont help but what I am saying is that more money at the current time wont help if we don't reform. We need a proper plan and at present no one is offering that. We cant just say we going to invest 8 Billion more, on what? Not one party has a proper detailed plan and they should. It needs cross party action if it is ever to be 'saved'. Of course it will never happen. It will continue to be run as it is, governments putting in endless supplies of money. In its current state no matter how much money you put in it will collapse eventually. Didn't expect you to advocate nationalised medicine research. Since the advent of ccgs there has been a huge amount of work done on reducing prescription costs. Not sure whether you are aware of these efforts? One of the biggest scandals is the cost of minor estates work but that is often because of outsourcing. Imo you give the clinical professionals the money they say they need NOW to save lives, then go away and plan how to reduce costs. You don't risk lives whilst you're planning. Edited 19 January 2018 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 10 minutes ago, toddybad said: Didn't expect you to advocate nationalised medicine research. Since the advent of ccgs there has been a huge amount of work done on reducing prescription costs. Not sure whether you are aware of these efforts? One of the biggest scandals is the cost of minor estates work but that is often because of outsourcing. Imo you give the clinical professionals the money they say they need NOW to save lives, then go away and plan how to reduce costs. You don't risk lives whilst you're planning. I am open to discussing anything but it has to work and be sustainable. I do wonder why the cost of life saving drugs is so high and why pharmaceutical companies are so profitable. So presumably the Tories have done a good thing with switching to CCGS in 2012? I agree work has been done, there is still more to do, lots more. For instance having rich parents claiming £8.60 for a bottle of Calpol when you can buy the supermarket equivalent for £1.50 is scandalous, even actual Calpol is less than £8.60. There are many questions surround free health care for the wealthy too, do they need it to be free and should it be free, the same for all services. There are lots of areas to be considered. Again if minor estates work is costing more outsourced than running it in house it should be taken back in house absolutely I would agree. The whole argument for outsourcing is that it 'saves money'. If it costs more it must be stopped. In the business world it very rarely works either for a number of reasons for instance the company I work for now outsourced much of its production to the far east, due to quality and shipping delays it annoyed customers so it is now bringing it back. I once worked for a Telecoms company that shifted its tech support jobs to India but there were communication difficulties which lost customers so they brought them back. I haven't personally seen clinical professionals saying they need more money. Hospital managers need to make sure that the money is being delivered to the correct areas, that's their jobs. Pre the public sector boom 1997 to 2008, hospitals didn't need so many managers and community outreach co-ordinators etc. yet operated perfectly adequately so I question why they need so many now. IMO it is/was bad political decisions that have led to the Public sector being very management bloated, they have reduced staff but its often the frontline staff that take the hit. I worked in a college where senior staff had the option of all taking a 5% cut or making redundancies on the frontline, you can guess which option they took as a collective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 33 minutes ago, toddybad said: The other thing I'd add is that it isn't political point scoring to disagree about how to run public services. It does annoy me when every time labour talk about an issue the Tories moan about playing politics. It's precisely what the opposition are meant to do - challenge and oppose bad ideas. Clue is in the title. But surely public services should be run for the good of the country. Not so a particular party can please a particular group of people whichever side. On key national issues I would rather a frank debate be had. What services do we need as a nation? What services are key? How are we going to pay for them? What quality of service do we want? Now either we ALL have to accept we need to pay a lot more for better services or we accept lesser services at a lower cost. The public need to decide on a lot more tax or a lot less service. What we need to stop is saying we are going to save it, spend billions, fix it, spend billions when really nothing changes it didn't really change between 1997 and 2010 and it wouldn't change with Labour now despite the rhetoric. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 10 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: But surely public services should be run for the good of the country. Not so a particular party can please a particular group of people whichever side. On key national issues I would rather a frank debate be had. What services do we need as a nation? What services are key? How are we going to pay for them? What quality of service do we want? Now either we ALL have to accept we need to pay a lot more for better services or we accept lesser services at a lower cost. The public need to decide on a lot more tax or a lot less service. What we need to stop is saying we are going to save it, spend billions, fix it, spend billions when really nothing changes it didn't really change between 1997 and 2010 and it wouldn't change with Labour now despite the rhetoric. Where I'd agree is that debate should be had, open and honestly, about the fact that good public services requires higher taxation. I think labour is more honest about this although the ifs would suggest more than just the highest earners need to pay more. Fine, just say that. I think the Tories are entirely untruthful about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 Jeremy Hunt making himself look ridiculous. The red bits show you the level of difficulties faced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 35 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: I am open to discussing anything but it has to work and be sustainable. I do wonder why the cost of life saving drugs is so high and why pharmaceutical companies are so profitable. So presumably the Tories have done a good thing with switching to CCGS in 2012? I agree work has been done, there is still more to do, lots more. For instance having rich parents claiming £8.60 for a bottle of Calpol when you can buy the supermarket equivalent for £1.50 is scandalous, even actual Calpol is less than £8.60. There are many questions surround free health care for the wealthy too, do they need it to be free and should it be free, the same for all services. There are lots of areas to be considered. Again if minor estates work is costing more outsourced than running it in house it should be taken back in house absolutely I would agree. The whole argument for outsourcing is that it 'saves money'. If it costs more it must be stopped. In the business world it very rarely works either for a number of reasons for instance the company I work for now outsourced much of its production to the far east, due to quality and shipping delays it annoyed customers so it is now bringing it back. I once worked for a Telecoms company that shifted its tech support jobs to India but there were communication difficulties which lost customers so they brought them back. I haven't personally seen clinical professionals saying they need more money. Hospital managers need to make sure that the money is being delivered to the correct areas, that's their jobs. Pre the public sector boom 1997 to 2008, hospitals didn't need so many managers and community outreach co-ordinators etc. yet operated perfectly adequately so I question why they need so many now. IMO it is/was bad political decisions that have led to the Public sector being very management bloated, they have reduced staff but its often the frontline staff that take the hit. I worked in a college where senior staff had the option of all taking a 5% cut or making redundancies on the frontline, you can guess which option they took as a collective. Ccgs were ridiculous hence the fact that are all clustering back into mini pcts. But the underlying work on cutting expenditure in meds management at a local level is good. The two things aren't mutually exclusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 16 minutes ago, toddybad said: Where I'd agree is that debate should be had, open and honestly, about the fact that good public services requires higher taxation. I think labour is more honest about this although the ifs would suggest more than just the highest earners need to pay more. Fine, just say that. I think the Tories are entirely untruthful about it. I'm not going to get into a round robin about it but Labour are definitely not truthful about it, they are not about anything which is my main problem with them. They lie and go for sound bite and vote winners all the time, little of their policy has sound financial credibility which is the biggest issue I have with them. Some Tories have openly said serious reform is needed yet this automatically gets jumped upon by the SAVE OUR NHS bandwagon which isn't helpful in enabling an honest discussion. Politics in this country is a mess that's is all we can glean from this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 4 hours ago, Buce said: Don’t kid yourself that the beeb doesn’t have an agenda. Every single day it publishes some completely unnewsworthy article about the royals. Yesterday it was Harry and Megan visit castle, today it’s all about William having a new fvcking hairstyle. The BBC is the vanguard of the Establishment’s propaganda machine. Practically every news site has a "lighter side" section, filled with inane shit like that. Hardly says anything about the beeb. The beeb has it's own problems, particularly around how its interpreted impartiality and unbiased coverage as equal time regardless of merit (particularly in coverage of scientific stories), but what lifted was doing was advocating throwing the baby with the bathwater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Ulike Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, Buce said: Don’t kid yourself that the beeb doesn’t have an agenda. Every single day it publishes some completely unnewsworthy article about the royals. Yesterday it was Harry and Megan visit castle, today it’s all about William having a new fvcking hairstyle. The BBC is the vanguard of the Establishment’s propaganda machine. I think you’re looking at this the wrong way. There’s no such thing as unbiased news, and you’re making a mistake thinking that you can somehow find the ‘true’ news. The BBC doesn’t have an agenda. It has values. These are things like openness, tolerance, diversity etc. So, the way they report the news is going to be coloured by those underlying values. So, for example, when 100 migrants drown trying to cross the Mediterranean, the BBC report this as a tragedy because they believe in the sanctity of all human life, and that Britain should help those people. If you share those values then you think that the BBC is reporting this ‘tragedy’ accurately. However, if you believe that Britain should protect its wealth and that migrants bring crime and social unrest, then you’ll think that whilst it’s sad for those involved, it's not a ‘tragedy’ because Britain is probably better off. So when you hear the BBC report you’ll think it’s biased. Edited 19 January 2018 by Fox Ulike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 47 minutes ago, The Doctor said: Practically every news site has a "lighter side" section, filled with inane shit like that. Hardly says anything about the beeb. The beeb has it's own problems, particularly around how its interpreted impartiality and unbiased coverage as equal time regardless of merit (particularly in coverage of scientific stories), but what lifted was doing was advocating throwing the baby with the bathwater. Pretty much this. The Beeb annoys me with how often it hears from the views of some anti-vaxxer flat-Earther David Avocado Wolfe type when it comes to their scientific reporting, but if that's the price to pay for a service that gets flak from the left and right and is therefore by definition not far away from the centre...then so be it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpe's Fox Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 Looks like poor Ben Bradley is going a bit mental. Refusing to speak to anyone about being a eugenicist now. Still at least if he resigns he can take is own advice and get a vasectomy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogstanley Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 5 hours ago, toddybad said: Jeremy Hunt making himself look ridiculous. The red bits show you the level of difficulties faced. Love the way that not only is he incapable of understanding a simple spreadsheet but classes it as a "really clever use of technology". Can tell it has been decades since he has done a days work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogstanley Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 (edited) You turn if you want to. Government backs down after realising spending a fortune in legal fees to continue their sustained attack on disabled people under the pretence of austerity while they spunk billions on keeping their greasy decrepit fingers on power might not actually be a very good idea. Well done, aren’t you amazing. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42745616 Edited 19 January 2018 by Rogstanley 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lifted*fox Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lifted*fox Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl the Llama Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 It's about time we had some actual pigeon facts in the pigeon and dove thread instead of just pictures. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bovril Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 https://www.bbcgoodfood.com/recipes/pigeon-pies-bramble-gravy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lifted*fox Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 14 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said: It's about time we had some actual pigeon facts in the pigeon and dove thread instead of just pictures. contribute whatever pigeon and dove content you want mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 19 January 2018 Share Posted 19 January 2018 21 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said: It's about time we had some actual pigeon facts in the pigeon and dove thread instead of just pictures. Facts? In this thread? I’m out of here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts