Discussion in 'Just Talk' started by Devil's Advocate, Nov 2, 2017.
Thanks for proving my point.
Sadly JoT hasn't put forward his ideas,, That's because he simply doesn't have any.
I don't have any ideologies re the NHS.(I also don't have any illusions of it getting an extra £350 million a week either) What I would change (if I had the power) would be to drop the degree qualification for nurses and make it similar to an apprenticeship, but with no age limits (as there are with apprenticeships) This would attract more people into nursing as they'd be paid whilst they learn, instead of racking up student loan debts and struggling to make ends meet whilst studying (and also having to work 40+hours on a ward during the week for no pay, then working bank shifts Saturday and Sunday to pay debt/rent/buy food, etc) At least that would be a start and even if implemented immediately would take at least 3 yrs to see an increase in nurses, although I'm sure we'd see an increase in the uptake of courses to study nursing straight away.
Thank you for accepting it.
We know, and you know, that that is just 'stuff'.
Why do you say 'stuff', JJ? Who are you trying to kid?
And winkie emotis rarely work as a get out clause.
I don't know if that is a practicable solution or not, but at least it sounds like a good idea.
So, you think the NHS should treat people from all over the world, free of charge? and you think that would be sustainable. I can only assume
you want to see the NHS crumble.
If you would only back up what you are claiming - without resorting to the discredited Daily Phail - and tell us all just how much the NHS is 'losing' to foreign AIDS patients, fertility treatment etc, then we might actually listen to you.
Right now, it simply serves to show you in an appalling - but not unexpected - light.
You white, British-born, 'fertile'* MAN, you.
* Imagination, at least...
Here you go DA.
But, back to my point, are you actually saying that you believe the NHS should treat people from all over the world free of charge.
Are you really saying that unlimited funding should be provided for fertility treatments and gender re-assignments whilst our care system for the elderly is in crisis, is that what you are really saying?
Anyhoo, I've always thought of the NHS as being an insurance-based health system.
You know - one based on the ability to pay. You pay in on a monthly basis, and you get out what you need. A bit like 'insurance'. For health.
You know, unlike the insurance-based systems that the multimillionaire Banks, Gove et al are after. Which is essentially a poll tax on health. Can't pay? Then fluff you.
And, as someone quite firmly in the 'middle' - neither rich nor poor - I am equally happy for it to continue like that, supporting the weakest in our society whilst expecting the richest to pay a roughly equal proportion more. As Ali-G asked, is that why it's called welfare? 'Cos it's well fair...
Rather than "It can't be done - so stuff those worse off than me", why not have a look at how the Swedes do it? You know, by putting more money in, and getting a hell of a lot more out.
The society that appeals to you, Fills, is certainly not one that appeals to me.
And it's the exact same thinking that drove your Brexit vote.
Not so fast, sonny.
Tell us all - we are waiting - that 'health tourists' are causing damage of any significance to the NHS.
Go on. And then we might get 'back to your point'. Wait! That was your point.
That link you provided - which seems to be a legitimately unbiased source, so well done you and keep on using it, please, and READ it a bit more - states that health tourism costs us between "£110 million and £280 million a year."
Easily more than covered by just one week's supposed refund from the EU...
Give us a percentage of the NHS budget, will you? So we can put your moan in to perspective.
Man, you do begrudge other folk, don't you?
No, hence my statement regarding care for the elderly, which could be better funded if we dispensed with health tourism, and 'unnecessary' operations.
They're two places above us in the Euro health consumer index, doesn't sound like they're getting "a hell of a lot more out" than we are, possible marginally more.
Whilst 'health tourism' is not 'good' in terms of adding to the financial burden on our system, it's hardly the killer point you were hoping to make, is it? I mean, it makes f-all difference in practice. And, if we are a wealthy enough country to cope with it - as we should be - doesn't it give you a good feeling? No? Ah...
Ditto everything else.
And less of the pretence that you are concerned about the elderly - at least not until you are one of them yourself...
If you really gave a damn, you wouldn't point the UK down an almost certain road to huge financial pain, led by a bunch of rabid right-wingers who barely give a DAMN about folks like us. You twit. You dishonest twit.
So, cut the carp.
And check out Sweden again - if you really give a damn.
If you really wanted to help the NHS, then strong economic growth - with these lovely immigrants helping us as they do now - coupled with fair funding would go a long way.
Blah blah blah blah BREXIT blah blah blah blah TRUMP blah blah blah blah blah BREXIT blah blah blah blah TRUMP
For Gods sake man at least come up with the pretence of an argument rather than just spouting 'stuff'.
Another of my personal views on saving money for the NHS.. Motorists involved in a car accident are charged for treatment by the NHS, be it anything from a simple x ray, to ambulance charges and drugs used during treatment...Now then,,,,, These drunkards clogging up A&E on Friday, Saturday and Sunday nights, should be charged the same prices motorists are charged, for their treatment. Imagine some drunkard being charged a few hundred quid because they got absolutely smashed , tripped/ stumbled over and broke their leg/ arm/ head, needed stitches etc, or simply needed stomach pumping to save them from a fatal alcohol overdose? I'm sure they'd think twice about getting in the same state the following weekend/ bank holiday etc. Our A&E dept is full to bursting on weekend nights, (usually well before chucking out time too) These drunken sots take up valuable space, time and resources. Increase the need for security and /or police presence.
The 'shame' card is the only thing they know, it's how they operate with those they disagree with. The truth of the matter is equally as simplistic in that they've built a wall around themselves made from political correctness and moral high groundness.
That's the first thing they did and they have become their own jailers.
Truth means nothing to them, it's all about image.
Nah DA, there's a bit of a difference between "insurance" and "National Insurance." Insurance is something you pay each month, for a policy that is supposed to protect you against accidents whether in the home, out on the road, or even in a plane. Thing is, you never know how good your insurance is until you make a claim on it.. National insurance , on the other hand, is nothing but a tax, levied on your wages and only gives you access to (apparently) second rate health care, and a **** pension. I'd question this idea that the NHS provides "second rate" health care, but there again, I'm ever so slightly biased. (can't say yet about the pension as the government keep moving the goal posts)
You're killing us by even assuming that Filly stated it was a 'killer point' when he said nothing of the sort.
Do you get all tingly inside when you see a shoplifter bolting past security at, tesco with his jacket stuffed with I'll gotten gains?
They can afford the loss, it's absolutely miniscule in comparison to their annual profits. A half dozen sirloin steaks getting out the door without payment is nothing for a supermarket chain. Why even bother having security and cctv?
Just think of the extra warmth you could spread in people if more fraudulent thieves got away with it.
Heyyyy, people spend more when they're feeling good about themselves, these marketing experts have missed a trick here.
I think you'll find it's shame and argument.
Filly's recent scurrilous attempt at blaming 'health tourists' being hoisted by his own link's petard.
Yes, he ought to be ashamed. Because he was taken apart by argument. (And it's delicious that he provided the evidence for it).
So, carry on, Longs et Filly, trying the "OH! He's going for 'shame' now! fnurrrrrr..."
No-one believes you.
Separate names with a comma.