Politics

[Guest]

14 hours ago, bwfcfan5 said:

You just said nobody would ever sell the NHS. Then when pointed out they already were you defended it.

I have no issue with people who agree with the creeping privatisation. It’s a good discussion, it’s people who act all angry when people point out it’s happening and pretend it’s not.

FWIW I don’t think there is anything wrong with very limited services going to private tender. But there are huge issues as this increases. Quality. Accountability. Monitoring and control to name but a few. The more fragmented the NHS becomes the more difficult it is to provide a coherent service.

One only need look at the trains to see why this isn’t a good idea necessarily. Secondly the issue of cost - over a long term period it will cost more to outsource many services than it will to keep in house. The reason for doing so is not business case or evidence driven. 

Trains are better than under public ownership, though

[Casino]

While im a big fan of the manc london line, you really are taking the piss over local trains

Utter shite and i only use em on saturdays

The thing we got on last saturday from bolton to manc would fit in well on life on mars

Grim

Then sheff to lincoln, train built for 120 ish had 300 plus on

Dogshit, northern powerhouse

[mickbrown]

10 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

Trains are better than under public ownership, though

Really?

Pretty sure the state owned European ones piss all over the cattletrucks we have

[Escobarp]

6 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

Really?

Pretty sure the state owned European ones piss all over the cattletrucks we have

But he’s talking about UK trains I would imagine. Our rail system is never going to be commensurate with the European rail systems. Not without tens of billions of investment which isn’t going to happen

I deal with a very large  rail maintenance company in the UK who are subcontracted to work for network rail. The amount budgeted for repair and upkeep of the network is pitiful. 

[bwfcfan5]

18 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

Trains are better than under public ownership, though

Ha. That’s a good laugh. Seriously.

And some lines that are profitable are good. Yes. Ones that aren’t. Routes that aren’t...you only need to have spent a few years going from Bolton to Manchester by train during rush hour. There have been periods where it’s third fecking world stuff.

And that’s the issue with privatising more and more NHS services. Gradually the cream will be picked and what doesn’t do so well profit wise will be left to ruin. The long term expensive stuff will be ignored for the short term low effort high reward. That is inevitable. And why I am opposed to it.

[Guest]

55 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

Really?

Pretty sure the state owned European ones piss all over the cattletrucks we have

Our current trains are better than they used to be under British Rail. Not good enough, mind.

And, from my experience, not as good as some other parts of the world.

[bwfcfan5]

24 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

Our current trains are better than they used to be under British Rail. Not good enough, mind.

And, from my experience, not as good as some other parts of the world.

Some are as good or better. Others way way worse than used to be.

[mickbrown]

26 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

Our current trains are better than they used to be under British Rail. Not good enough, mind.

And, from my experience, not as good as some other parts of the world.

For enough.

Some of the trains are the same bleeders they had under BR. 

[deane koontz]

1 hour ago, Casino said:

While im a big fan of the manc london line, you really are taking the piss over local trains

Utter shite and i only use em on saturdays

The thing we got on last saturday from bolton to manc would fit in well on life on mars

Grim

Then sheff to lincoln, train built for 120 ish had 300 plus on

Dogshit, northern powerhouse

 

 

They really are fucking shocking. But they continue to get away get away with it

[Guest]

There's an index

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Europe

 

[bolty58]

On 01/11/2019 at 20:53, boltondiver said:

Many Leave Labour voters just wont vote Conservative 

they will vote Brexit Party

Its a risk either way, but I think the best chance is to play the election out and then together they’ll have a majority 

But, everything is speculation 

I think this is good speculation though. Conservatives the biggest party then, hopefully, an agreement with what I hope will be a number of TBP MP's to form government.

[bolty58]

On 02/11/2019 at 06:17, Sweep said:

You forgot to say the other hilarious ones that people like Bolty love....

Michel Barmier

Jean Claude Drunker

 

I do suspect people who say this shit also say "Crippled Alice" and "Wet Spam"

 

There's no one like me cuntybollocks.

[Mounts Kipper]

Well said Mr Hopson, no doubting his comments aimed right in between the eyes of Corbyn and McDonnell. 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50282333

[Guest]

Will Labour be “respecting the result of the referendum “ in their manifesto?

[bwfcfan5]

52 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Well said Mr Hopson, no doubting his comments aimed right in between the eyes of Corbyn and McDonnell. 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50282333

On the radio he referenced government spending promises as an example explaining how inspite of the rhetoric they only cover short term management of existing demand.

 

[Mounts Kipper]

6 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

On the radio he referenced government spending promises as an example explaining how inspite of the rhetoric they only cover short term management of existing demand.

 

Sadly no one other than disciples of tweedle dee and dum believes that the NHS is up for sale, it won’t work and will not prevent a labour disaster at the GE. 

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

On the radio he referenced government spending promises as an example explaining how inspite of the rhetoric they only cover short term management of existing demand.

 

He didn’t quite say that, did he?

[kent_white]

4 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Sadly no one other than disciples of tweedle dee and dum believes that the NHS is up for sale, it won’t work and will not prevent a labour disaster at the GE. 

The NHS currently spends about 7% of its budget on private services. That's an extremely conservative estimate. It increases up to roughly 25% if you include primary care. It's happening and it's happening by increments.

Obviously they're not going to suddenly announce they are 'selling the NHS'. 

[bwfcfan5]

11 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Sadly no one other than disciples of tweedle dee and dum believes that the NHS is up for sale, it won’t work and will not prevent a labour disaster at the GE. 

I've already explained how it is actually now slowly being sold off. I suspect you don't really care. But whatever... 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, kent_white said:

The NHS currently spends about 7% of its budget on private services. That's an extremely conservative estimate. It increases up to roughly 25% if you include primary care. It's happening and it's happening by increments.

Obviously they're not going to suddenly announce they are 'selling the NHS'. 

Serious question; does it matter?

If services can be improved, does it matter who delivers and if they make a profit, then    is that a bad thing?

[Mounts Kipper]

9 minutes ago, kent_white said:

The NHS currently spends about 7% of its budget on private services. That's an extremely conservative estimate. It increases up to roughly 25% if you include primary care. It's happening and it's happening by increments.

Obviously they're not going to suddenly announce they are 'selling the NHS'. 

Precisely, the government of the day have a call to make on how our money is best used so that we get best value for money, any government who ran on a manifesto to sell off the NHS would never get elected.

The cry from labour that the Tories are going to sell off the NHS is a cynical and desperate attempt from a morally and politically bankrupt Labour Party to turn around the inevitable disastrous GE result

the Labour Party has been ruined by Corbyn, McDonnell and momentum and labour voters all over the midlands and North are about to deliver their verdict. 

Edited November 4, 2019 by Mounts Kipper

[Mounts Kipper]

4 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

I've already explained how it is actually now slowly being sold off. I suspect you don't really care. But whatever... 

I do care,  I just disagree that it’ll ever happen. Furthermore you are only in this because your blinded by bullshit spouted by Jeremy, and he most likely does not believe what he says, but it’s his only hope of ever getting elected, only the gullible swallow it.

[bwfcfan5]

1 minute ago, boltondiver said:

Serious question; does it matter?

If services can be improved, does it matter who delivers and if they make a profit, then    is that a bad thing?

It matters because once you become profit driven - as we see elsewhere - in a service where there is no competition beyond winning the franchise - it becomes disastrous if profit levels can't be maintained. 

The issue with the NHS is simple - an internal market that offers limited access to the private sector for some competition is a good thing to maintain some efficiencies and also - where the NHS can't offer a service level as high as a private provider allow them to offer said service.

However, it needs very careful control. For example lets say you outsource all of your knee replacements. And overtime the demand goes up which pressures the budget which means profit starts to come down. If that is NHS provided the profit or margins are irrelevant. The service is maintained. However, if not then suddenly you see people being "rejected" for ops when previously they wouldn't have been - or worse you see standards of the ops slipping. Because a private provider cannot allow themselves to lose money. And there isn't the "competition" aspect of a patient being able to rock up down the road. And the trains example works well here - northern rail a widely failing franchise for years and years - have only recently come under government scrutiny. They operate less profitable routes and have cut corners to do so to make money. The service has been abysmal. Do we want that happening with vital services people rely on to stay alive or have a reasonable quality of life?

 

[kent_white]

Just now, boltondiver said:

Serious question; does it matter?

If services can be improved, does it matter who delivers and if they make a profit, then    is that a bad thing?

Yes - because the same things always happen. It starts off well, with great energy and gusto. Then over time, the service gets poorer and poorer as the inevitable need to earn more and more money for the contract gets demanded. Then the NHS have to start picking up the slack which costs even more money, time and stress for the staff and patients. And eventually it ends up coming back under the auspices of the NHS after years of fannying about.

In Bolton we outsourced patient transport to Arriva. It was an absolute disaster. What used to be a fairly straight forward service turned into a shambles. They were failing year on year. 

Eventually Arriva were fined for cooking the books and charging the NHS for services they hadn't provided.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/arriva-ambulance-bonus-payback-mps-10377387

It's not just in Bolton either.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-34474299

[bwfcfan5]

1 minute ago, Mounts Kipper said:

I do care,  I just disagree that it’ll ever happen. Furthermore you are only in this because your blinded by bullshit spouted by Jeremy, and he most likely does not believe what he says, but it’s his only hope of ever getting elected, only the gullible swallow it.

Please don't judge everyone by your own standards. I've been discussing these things before you'd even heard of Jeremy Corbyn. Some of us actually take time to understand complex issues. We aren't all led by the Daily Mail headlines you know.