Save the NHS!

[steve-h]

Pay NI, never call on the NHS but contribute to society, or pay medical insurance, never call on it but line the pockets of the insurance company?

Paying into private businesses contributes to society. That company will employ people. Having the government create jobs is all well and good, but to do it they take money OUT of the economy to do it - money that would have otherwise been spent IN the economy. All they're doing is messing with capitalism, which promotes a huge lack of choice, personal liberty and stunts change and growth.

 

[Woden]

The state shouldn't have services. Let capitalism do its thing.

Why should you have your money taken by force and given to something you don't even use... or for that matter, something you do use. Free markets would fill these gaps, we do not need government filling them.

This, a thousend times this.

What the UK needs is:

• A return to the times of kids working in factories before there 13.
• Poorhouses. Not the lavish 18th/19th century goverment run ones of course, as the state can't afford it.
• Total lack of healthcare for those that can't afford it. Which is most people as no company wants to pay what we now see as a minimum wage.
• Basic hygiene? Screw that, sewers are a luxury the poor can't afford. TB dyssentry et al are just natures way of boosting the immune system.
• Backstreet abortions, never a better system than that.
• No need for state schools, they will all be in the factories anyway.
• Fire brigade? Don't make me laugh. All fires are 100% preventable, controlable and predictable.
• Police? Military? If you cant afford the Likes of Blackwater Security, you have nothing worth protecting.

Pure capitalism failed, will always fail. Its very nature, the very idea of it is flawed. A 100% free market is impossible.
It would be a failure on a par with 100% socialism.

 

[estebanrey]

The state shouldn't have services. Let capitalism do its thing.

Why should you have your money taken by force and given to something you don't even use... or for that matter, something you do use. Free markets would fill these gaps, we do not need government filling them.

Ha ha so naive, so you'd really want to have to sort out your own waste disposal services, have to find a street lighting contractor, provide all your own social services etc etc.

There was actually an experiment done on a BBC programme where a whole street were given back a month's worth of paid taxes in exchange for a complete public service blackout on their road. At first they were glad of have the money, but after a couple of weeks when they realised just how far they had to make that extra money stretch to cover the basic services they used to enjoy for it, they soon had a new appreciation of the tax system.

 

[steve-h]

A return to the times of kids working in factories before there 13.

Where 13?

Total lack of healthcare for those that can't afford it.

For the people who wouldn't be catered for, such as the homeless, charities would have to fill the gap, yes. Kind of like now, only without the threat of prison should you not pay.

Which is most people as no company wants to pay what we now see as a minimum wage.

Why have people on the dole, getting £50 a week when they could be working 40 hours at £2 an hour as let's say, a cleaner, instead of having businesses not employ anybody at all because of the high minimum wage?

Don't ignore competition either, companies compete for skilled workers and this system promotes climbing the ladder way more than a system where you're not in work at all.

Backstreet abortions, never a better system than that.

Free market would do it's thing, but there is a point where you need charity. Clearly (right?) the majority of people care about this. Charity is a thing in a capitalist system, you know?

No need for state schools, they will all be in the factories anyway.

Do you think people would support factories that employed children? Strong hope for humanity you have.

You're right, there isn't a need for state schools, they're awful. Competition is good for growth and improvement.

Fire brigade? Don't make me laugh. All fires are 100% preventable, controlable and predictable.

No government, no fire brigade?

Police? Military? If you cant afford the Likes of Blackwater Security, you have nothing worth protecting.

If people want a service, the market will provide it as there's money to be made. Do you think blackwater will be the only ones offering protection? Or perhaps you think a ton of services will start up, offering protection at the same, unaffordable price that blackwater does... That sounds like a good business model.

 

[steve-h]

so you'd really want to have to sort out your own waste disposal services

Oh god, that would be unbearable! Think of the time it would take you look up a rubbish disposal service! I can't handle this, government please take care of me!

sThere was actually an experiment done on a BBC programme where a whole street were given back a month's worth of paid taxes in exchange for a complete public service blackout on their road. At first they were glad of have the money, but after a couple of weeks when they realised just how far they had to make that extra money stretch to cover the basic services they used to enjoy for it, they soon had a new appreciation of the tax system.

Oh well if a government run documentary says everyone would blow up without a government controlling who gets your money then I guess it's true.

 

[Woden]

Where 13?

Why tackle the point I raised when you can simply attack my grammar? You know *exactly* what I mean.

For the people who wouldn't be catered for, such as the homeless, charities would have to fill the gap, yes. Kind of like now, only without the threat of prison should you not pay.

Charities exist to pick up the peices of capitalism failures. Why isn't the free market ensuring there are no failures like this?

Why have people on the dole, getting £50 a week when they could be working 40 hours at £2 an hour as let's say, a cleaner, instead of having businesses not employ anybody at all because of the high minimum wage?

Don't ignore competition either, companies compete for skilled workers and this system promotes climbing the ladder way more than a system where you're not in work at all.

This is working so very well for the average worker in China too. Suicide rates there are tiny over there.

Free market would do it's thing, but there is a point where you need charity. Clearly (right?) the majority of people care about this. Charity is a thing in a capitalist system, you know?

Charity is the oposite of capitalism. Why should you give your hard earned cash to some poor layabout?

Do you think people would support factories that employed children? Strong hope for humanity you have.

One word. India. Half the stuff in your house is probably made in a factory staffed by kids. Child labour is very well supported by the west.

You're right, there isn't a need for state schools, they're awful. Competition is good for growth and improvement.

Back to a system where the rich ensure their position by relegating the poor to a poor education. Great idea. Who needs social mobility.
Your school wasn't great obviously, did they not teach British history? Do you know what the country was like before the welfare state? Thats right, a utopia

No government, no fire brigade?

Its a service. Why should I pay for it just because your house is on fire?

If people want a service, the market will provide it as there's money to be made. Do you think blackwater will be the only ones offering protection? Or perhaps you think a ton of services will start up, offering protection at the same, unaffordable price that blackwater does... That sounds like a good business model.

There is no money to be made as you have half the nation on £2 an hour.

Pure capitalism and the reliance on a 100% free market *requires* exploitation of the poor. There is no other way of doing it. Were all doing it right now, exploiting the poor of other nations paying them a pittance, often not enough to keep them sane let alone healthy, to sustain our way of life.

 

[joxang]

It's long been recognised by pretty much every rational government in the world that complete privatisation simply doesn't work. Don't know why so many people still go on about it? Similar sort of thinking to pure Marxists tbh.

A system fully driven by money is driven by profit, and will always be taken advantage of by people who cheat.

Systems managed nationally are generally driven by service, and limited by money. This benefits people who are vulnerable in the first system for whatever reason.

You need a balance of both to be successful. Like you find in pretty much every developed country in the world. It's an unbelievably basic concept, and as a result it's the the balance between privatisation and nationalisation that is discussed by experts. If you think that a country can be driven by having 95% of one, then that's a pretty extreme, and tbf, a pretty stupid point of view. And saying pfffftt...charities will take up the slack shows a total lack of empathy and understanding for anyone sitting below you in the earnings ladder - but I guess that is the sort of mindset that typifies that sort of extremist.

Pure capitalism failed, will always fail. Its very nature, the very idea of it is flawed. A 100% free market is impossible.
It would be a failure on a par with 100% socialism.

^Edited to add that quote, exactly this.

 

[steve-h]

Why tackle the point I raised when you can simply attack my grammar? You know *exactly* what I mean.

Because I answered it in my reply anyway.

Charities exist to pick up the peices of capitalism failures. Why isn't the free market ensuring there are no failures like this?

Do you understand the idea between a free market?

This is working so very well for the average worker in China too. Suicide rates there are tiny over there.

China seems like a free country who don't tolerate government.

Charity is the oposite of capitalism. Why should you give your hard earned cash to some poor layabout?

Why would I give my cash to a layabout in a capitalist system? Right now, I literally do not have a choice if I want to avoid a prison sentence...

However, for people who genuinely need it, people will give gladly.

Do you really think government taking your money at the threat of a prison sentence is charity? Really?

Back to a system where the rich ensure their position by relegating the poor to a poor education. Great idea. Who needs social mobility.

You're describing exactly what happens now

Its a service. Why should I pay for it just because your house is on fire?

Hey, that's my line...

There is no money to be made as you have half the nation on £2 an hour.

Opposed to having half the nation on benefits

One word. India. Half the stuff in your house is probably made in a factory staffed by kids. Child labour is very well supported by the west.

Pure capitalism and the reliance on a 100% free market *requires* exploitation of the poor. There is no other way of doing it. Were all doing it right now, exploiting the poor of other nations paying them a pittance, often not enough to keep them sane let alone healthy, to sustain our way of life.

and why are businesses outsourcing?

 

[Agent_Smith357]

This thread is now comedy gold with steve-h's posting.

 

[steve-h]

This thread is now comedy gold with steve-h's posting.

Your sig is comedy gold. Read the FAQ. But seriously, feel free to say why.

 

[scorza]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/sep/16/health-firms-nhs

As predicted, the privatisation of the NHS has started with the vultures circling over the choicest cuts.

Private health firms can expect to win business worth around £20bn from the NHS in the next few years by taking over GP surgeries and setting up new community health clinics, according to a report written for profit-making companies keen to expand their role in the health service.

The "£20bn opportunity ahead for the private sector" in the NHS as a result of coalition policies and pressure on public finances is set out in a briefing on the private sector's potential future role by Catalyst, corporate finance advisers who specialise in healthcare.

There is a "significant opportunity for the private sector in primary and secondary care," says the Catalyst report. "The introduction of GP commissioning and interest in healthcare models offering alternatives to hospital care will require a higher proportion of services to be delivered by the private sector. The markets for these services are estimated to be worth around £20bn."

Remember, the "markets for these services" is friends, family and yourself suffering from illness or injury. If your pain and suffering doesn't represent a profit, why should these guys give a damn?

 

[Hatter The Mad]

Has the NHS died yet?

 

[scorza]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21269910

Does Lewisham show the future of the NHS?

 

[piggeh]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21269910

Does Lewisham show the future of the NHS?

The CCGs do have a combined pot to commission all their contracts from, so if one of their hospitals is loss making others will find the pot isn't bottomless and it may impact on them. First hand experience of that over the past few days - it makes it difficult to try and get the money you need when you have others in the same area losing millions that need to be funded. However, it shouldn't be an endless pot anyway, that's partly why it's a mess in the first place (and it's not a total mess, just financially).

 

[Dolph]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21269910

Does Lewisham show the future of the NHS?

No, Lewisham shows the past of the NHS, wasteful, not at all patient focused and treated as some sort of sacred cow at the expense of actual results.

The problem with a state run provider is that it's far too subject to political interference, even the chief of the NHS thinks so...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jan/24/nhs-politics-closures

I find it most telling which side of the debate you fall on...

 

[aln]

No, Lewisham shows the past of the NHS, wasteful, not at all patient focused and treated as some sort of sacred cow at the expense of actual results.

The problem with a state run provider is that it's far too subject to political interference, even the chief of the NHS thinks so...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jan/24/nhs-politics-closures

I find it most telling which side of the debate you fall on...

Aren't all the most efficant health services in the world state controlled in some way? Do you want to live in a country where if you can't afford your health care, you're as good as dead?

 

[Dolph]

Aren't all the most efficant health services in the world state controlled in some way? Do you want to live in a country where if you can't afford your health care, you're as good as dead?

All the systems with the best outcomes overall are public access/private provision systems like that the government want to move us towards.

Our current system of public monopoly provision most certainly does not put us in the best healthcare outcomes category, and I have certainly never advocated a system that doesn't include some form of public access guarantee of the like that doesn't exist in systems such as the US one. I've advocated copying the best systems of Europe, but as usual people seem to prefer to argue against what they think I advocate, rather than what I do.

 

[Extra77]

Here we go, IT staff outsourced to 2e2 and the company goes into administration. Good example of privatisation of essential services to keep hospitals, GP surgeries etc running smoothly !

http://www.ehi.co.uk/news/EHI/8346/2e2-in-administration

 

[anything I don't mind]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/lifestyle/health/stafford-hospital--sick-excuse-1647014

Great article apart from when the author goes in to cognitive disorder mode and tries to blame corporate profit seeking for the problem. I have been saying it for years how there is no individual responsibility in the public sector and how that it protects its own. This is a great example of that even when committing serious crimes. NHS pays out £200 million in negligence payments every year but individual responsibility is relatively insignificant. When I went to the hospital for a operation I also had to fight to get medication and was offered morphine by what looked like a female north west african drug dealer. But i refused as just wanted standard pain pills. This was after they said i couldn't have any because i just had a general anesthetic and here they are wanting to give me morphine because i was moaning. They also refused to change my blood stained dressing even when it was irritating and i had stopped bleeding. In the end i got up and asked the fat nurse eating cereal and on facebook if she was on lunch, she said no, so i asked her again to change my dressing and she said i would have to wait for someone else to do it, so i asked for the dressing so i could do it myself. Then is when i heard a murmur from a few patient rooms. This was at south end on sea hospital, I would not recommend that place, unless you want to get treated like a piece of crap.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-21357635

More than 100 soon to be "under investigation" whether that will mean just blaming "corporate profit motive" and "corporate self interest" in some sort of episode of cognitive dissonance i can't say for sure, but most likely will be the result.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/stafford-hospital-scandal-more-than-100-1648044

Here we go, IT staff outsourced to 2e2 and the company goes into administration. Good example of privatisation of essential services to keep hospitals, GP surgeries etc running smoothly !

http://www.ehi.co.uk/news/EHI/8346/2...administration

Well the nhs IT is a good example of government waste and corruption. Trying to blame NHS it on a private company that went bust is a bit of a stretch. But at this point i would not privatise the nhs because the public sector workers will just turn against the nhs completely and destroy it, in order to blame the private sector for the disaster of the nhs. That way they can continue with the no negligence, high pension, loads of slacking off time and time off, cushy public sector jobs like one big party.

 

[scorza]

Channel 4 news reporting that last minute changes to the NHS bill force competitive tendering of *all* NHS services i.e. privatisation.