Wednesday, 28 December 2011

NHS Disappearing Under Tories

Not for nothing are the Conservative Party known as the nasty party and as expected, they are living up to their reputation of hacking away at everything good and then selling it off to their friends.
Remember the pre-election pledge that the NHS was safe in their hands, Cameron even used his disabled son as proof that the NHS would be safe in his hands, well that was 19 months ago and their pledge immedialty fell by the wayside as the Government forced tens of billions of NHS cuts which closed hospitals, made nurses redundant and closed support facilities.
A recent Guardian poll shows that 79% of Health Professionals state that NHS cuts have had a detrimental affect on patient care and many see this as a taste of things to come as the NHS gets run down, sliced and diced and then the most financially profitable bits privatised just like the Prison Health Contract.
This was once supplied by the NHS, then its £53m contract was awarded to Care UK, a private health company who it later emerged had made a £200,000 donation to the Tories before the election, including £21,000 to Health Secretary Andrew Lansley, the very man in charge of awarding the Prison Health contracts.
Now Mr Lansley's latest wheeze is to let the NHS raise up to 49% of their money from private work, meaning even longer waiting times as those who have paid for their operations take priority in the allocation of beds.
A two-tier system with those who can afford to pay being given priority over those less well off but nobody can pretend to be surprised that the Tories are back to their bad old ways of privatising everything and using the cover of austerity measures to achieve it. They even tried selling off the forests a while back until a public backlash forced them to rethink the strategy.
The National Health Service was always the big one and Cameron and his buddies were always going to find a way to cut off the good bits and sell it off to their pals and donors.
Just hope that public outrage forces the Conservatives on another U-Turn but that's unlikely as this is the holy grail of Tory ideology, an American style health system where your ability to pay decides the treatment, if any, that you receive.
Any ring-fencing has been around the banks and not the NHS, Cameron even jeopardised our future in Europe to avoid any regulation of them, which should be enough to go on for any sane voter at the next election.

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

if they are nasty, and they got 50% of the vote or more, does that mean that 50% of Brits are nasty?

the American health system provides treatment to the poor. you need to stop reading the political crap you see and do some real research...

q

Anonymous said...

Texas Counties: The Mainstays
Counties have a fundamental responsibility under state law to provide health care to their indigent. Counties can fulfill this responsibility in one of three basic ways—create a hospital district, run a public hospital, or operate a county indigent health care program...

The act defined indigent in terms of income and assets. More specifically, the act made counties responsible, at a minimum, for providing health care to people whose incomes were less than a certain dollar amount per month and who owned few or no assets (for example, a car). This dollar amount, or “eligibility standard,” has varied over the years, but currently is set in law at 25 percent of Federal Poverty Level on January 1, 2002.

... the Texas legislature completely overhauled and updated it to reflect the many changes in the world of health care over the past 14 years. H.B. 1398 gives counties more flexibility, greater accountability, and new financial incentives to provide health care to the medically indigent, to the tune of $40 million in state funds over the 2000 to 2001 period...

Q

david g said...

Lucy, you are so lucky to have Q on your forum. It seems as if it's his life's ambition to hold up the twin evils that are capitalism and America as being next to godliness.

He is relentless in this purpose and can spout facts and figures ad nauseum to whitewash the true reality.

Regarding the NHS, we all know that Conservative Governments across the world exist purely to advantage Big Business and screw the workers.

Of course, with what is coming in 2012, there mightn't be any workers soon! And the ultra-rich may have to retreat to their castles.

Anonymous said...

Wrong again David. I’m a greedy bastard, like you. I want the world to be the way I want it, like you. You want to undo capitalism and America for YOUR purposes – you selfish bastard. They are good for me so I defend them, because I’m a selfish bastard too. I spout facts because they serve my purpose, like you. And yes you are nauseating too.

The “true reality” is a very revealing statement. It says David knows “the true reality” due to his magnificent greatness and the rest of us need his brilliant light to inform us. Kind of god like are you? Which god? The god of hate and jealousy?

Some “true realities”:
- almost all humans are driven by fear and jealousy
- they make frequent emotional decisions, in some cases continuously
- emotional decisions are rarely good decisions
- they see others with jealous eyes
- some see they can change their life and work in the system (me)
- some see life as unfair, sulk, and try to use government to take from others (you)

Have you read Eric Hoffer’s “True Believer”? You should because you are doing a poor job of implementing the method he describes. By the way, it was effectively used by Hitler, Mussilini, Ayatolla Khomeini, and other great jealous leaders of jealous mobs.

Lucy said...

Q - if the American health system provides treatment to the poor, how can we explain the statement from the Institute of Medicine that 'A lack of health insurance causes roughly 18,000 unnecessary deaths every year in the United States'.

I make the assumption that the lack of health insurance is because of cost which backs up my statement that the American style health system is one where your ability to pay decides the treatment, if any, that you receive.

Cheezy said...

Q: "if they are nasty, and they got 50% of the vote or more, does that mean that 50% of Brits are nasty?"

Well, I know you were probably being slightly flippant there mate, but let’s examine this statement. In actual fact, the Tories received only 36.1% of votes cast. With voter turnout at 65.1% of eligible voters, this amounted to 10,726,614 votes that the Tories received. Out of a total population of 62,218,761, that means that 17.24% of people in the UK voted for the Tories... So this means 17.24% of Brits are ‘nasty’? Well, to be honest, it doesn’t even mean that. Why? It’s because David Cameron specifically campaigned on keeping the NHS intact, in all of its fundamentals. He realised that the Tories had managed to lose the 2005 general election (against perhaps the most unpopular and mistrusted Prime Minister in the nation’s history) in large part because the country didn’t trust them on the NHS. Michael Howard wouldn’t promise cross-his-heart-hope-to-die that he wouldn’t dismantle the thing. Cameron, on the other hand, pretty much did promise this. Therefore, the NHS wasn’t an issue in the 2010 election like it was in the preceding one. After all, Labour and the Lib-Dems had this same public face on the health service. So that’s the three major parties all supporting the NHS (on election day). In fact, I don’t know of any of the minor parties whose stance involved privatizing the NHS. I stand to be corrected but I’d guess that none had this policy. Ergo: The number of people who cast a vote for privatising the NHS... (and are therefore deemed ‘nasty’)... is negligible.

(However I reckon more than 50% of people in (well, probably) the world (not just Britain), are actually ‘nasty’, as measured by the more important criteria of getting in my face and pissing me off)...

In the real world, very few people vote for the policies we end up with. We call this thing (that we use in the west) a ‘democracy’ but is it really what we think it is? And would we be any better off if ‘the people’ did have more of a say? I guess that’s a different question for another day... (FWIW, I think government by citizen’s initiated referenda tends to be pretty pants too).

David: Just the usual sloganeering and total lack of content... doesn’t exactly beg for a response...

Lucy: I know that a comparative analysis between countries often seems, on the face of it, to be a good idea, but lately I’ve been finding the one we’ve been indulging in regarding our various healthcare systems to be generating more heat than light. For a start, the cultural and economic environments being compared frequently make comparisons quite misleading... plus, the last time it blew up we were treated to the bizarre spectacle of Sarah Palin totally misrepresenting the system here (remember “death panels”?) ...followed by Stephen Hawking (among many others) riding to the rescue of the good old NHS! Bit of an intellectual mismatch I know, but apart from that, I don’t think anybody really learned anything. I can think of thousands of reasons why our free-for-all health service is worth preserving on its own merits without needing to mention America or anywhere else for that matter. I’m sure there are a lot of intricacies about it that we don’t appreciate, which is what I think Q is driving at... And I’d prefer it if the States had their own debate about healthcare reform without telling fibs about us too.

Falling on a bruise said...

You are right Cheezy about comparing our Health Systems, my dig at the US system was for the health insurance part which i read continually comes down to no insurance, no treatment as per the Institute of Medicine statement.

Anonymous said...

Cheezy - well said

Lucy,

Like I said, do some research. Going to one or two sources that substantiate your view is not research (I have to tell you this since you were/are a journalist and they don’t know the meaning of research). Hundreds of sources talk about the failings of the US health system. Did you dig to see what is behind their agenda? Hell no. You only do that when you want to attack the other side. Did you pull any sources that counter your view to see if the other side has some substance? Hell no. Almost all of the sources I found by doing a search have an agenda that serves their purpose (if the patients or future patients gain from it that is nice too). That agenda tends to promote: “free” health care, oh and by the way doctors will still become millionaire, paid for by tax payers. In all scenarios the doctors get rich. Yeah, talk about your 1%...

The data (which according to David is meaningless) I provided wasn't from some damn op ed. It was pulled directly from a recap of Texas law – a recap of facts – not opinion. Mind you it only addressed what the state does (and Texas is one of the less generous states when providing “free” services – hence we have lower taxes), not the feds, not locals, and not charities (in the US, universities and churches provide incredible facilities. Check out the medical facilities in San Antonio. You will find the Methodist, Baptist, and Santa Rosa medical centers, as well as, the UT Health Science center). Houston and Dallas have more than San Antonio or Austin. Ooops, did I mention all the military facilities like the veteran’s hospital in Kerrville, Texas or Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio, or the world wide global leader in burn care at Brooks medical center?

I'll grant you that our system is very complex, but people can get good health care, and they don’t have to pay for it themselves. Maybe that is one reason so many people from Central and South America make their way here (which is hard to understand, they must not have read David’s blog. Well, why would they it just has data which is meaningless. No wait. David doesn’t use data. David is a very confusing person – no actually he is very confused person.).

The system here is dominated by doctors (for the most part tyrannical, pompous bastards while at work though nice enough when I play sports or poker with them) with their ridiculous hypocritical oath. The oath used to mean they would do anything to keep people alive. It has become they will do any procedure to make money under the guise of saving lives. Do you know anybody that hasn’t or won’t die? The question is, how much of your money will the doctors get before you die? A sure fire way to insure they get more is to use law to impose a transfer of wealth from tax payers to doctors. Why imagine that…

q

Anonymous said...

Lucy,

rich people get the health care they want, when they want it, with little or no hassel whether they use insurance or not. their taxes also provide health care for the people that can't buy health care or health insurance. their wealth also allows them to get stuff that even insurance doesn't pay for but they are usually paying to be a lab rat...

poor people that can't afford insurance have to take whatever doctor is available and have longer wait times in exchange for no payment. sometimes they get special stuff for free by becoming lab rats...

people like me that can afford insurance get more choices for your doctor (though you usually have to be in the "network") and have less wait time. We to can become lab rats in certain circumtances...

q

Anonymous said...

oh yeah,

my taxes also provide "poor" people with health care...

q

david g said...

"...my taxes also provide "poor" people with health care..."

Gee, Q, could you send Lucy a recent photograph of yourself, the kind of photograph I could put a lit candle in front of?

You must be earning a huge amount of money for your taxes to provide the "poor" with health care.

Capitalism has obviously been kind to you. Winners are grinners, eh?

Do you recall the 'rich man' parable? It must be a worry!

Anonymous said...

David,

I don't want you to worship me. I just want you to keep your childish thoughts about life to yourself and your confused flock.

I have no idea what you think is a huge amount of money. The "poor" in America are rich compared to 90% of the nations in the world, but yes I pay my share of taxes every year so the "poor" can have health care without paying for it.

I understand capitalism well enough to have the life style I want to have. Are you saying you were a failure in capitalism. The thoughts you share indicate you might be one of those people that can't work with others? One of those people that wants to be the boss but can't do anything of value?

Ah the "rich man parable". No worries mate. Do you recall the parable about the ass? You must be able to relate...

q

q

david g said...

To put your mind (such as it is) at ease, Q, let me assure you once and for all that I won't worship you.

Let me ask you a few questions given you are such a proud American:

1. What do you think about your nation trying to achieve full spectrum global domination? Do you approve of it?

2. What do you think about your nation claiming to be 'exceptional' and 'The greatest nation in the History of the World' and 'A Beacon on a Hill'. Are you embarrassed by these ridiculous claims? Where do these grand delusions come from? Do most Americans believe this nonsense?

3. Do you think there is close similarity between your nation today and that of Germany in the late 1930s?

4. Why did you sign your name twice? Do you have a split personality?

Happy New Year!

Anonymous said...

To put your mind (such as it is) at ease, Q, let me assure you once and for all that I won't worship you.
OH, I NEVER THOUGHT YOU WOULD, BUT YOU WERE ACTING LIKE AN ASS SO I TREATED YOU LIKE ONE.

Let me ask you a few questions given you are such a proud American:

1. What do you think about your nation trying to achieve full spectrum global domination? Do you approve of it?
THIS IS YOUR VIEW. THERE IS NOTHING FOR ME TO RESPOND TOO. IF WE WERE DOING AS YOU SAY, I WOULD NOT APPROVE OF THE “IDEAL”. ALSO, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO ACHIEVE “FULL SPECTRUM GLOBAL DOMINATION”. WE CAN’T EVEN CONTROL OUR BORDER WITH MEXICO.

2. What do you think about your nation claiming to be 'exceptional' and 'The greatest nation in the History of the World' and 'A Beacon on a Hill'.
OUR NATION DOESN’T CLAIM THIS - MANY PEOPLE IN OUR NATION DO, IN EFFORT TO MANIPULATE THE PEOPLE OF OTHER NATIONS. I DON’T CARE ABOUT SUCH DRIVEL. IF NATIONS COULD MAKE CLAIMS, THE USA IS ONE OF A DOZEN NATIONS THAT COULD DEFEND SUCH A CLAIM. THOUGH, I COULD ARGUE AGAINST SUCH A CLAIM AS WELL.

Are you embarrassed by these ridiculous claims?
NO, I DON’T CARE ABOUT THEM. WHAT WOULD YOU DO FOR PERSONAL MOTIVATION IF YOU DIDN’T HAVE THE USA TO HATE? WOULD YOU EVEN GET OUT OF BED?

Where do these grand delusions come from?
I THINK GLOBAL POLITICS. WE CALL OUT ABUSES BY THE RUSSIANS, THEY CALL OUT ABUSES BY US. DITTO CHINA, IRAN. EACH IS POSTERING FOR VARIOUS REASONS WITH INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL POLICITAL CONSEQUENCES.

Do most Americans believe this nonsense?
MOST DO NOT GIVE IT ANY THOUGHT IN MY OPINION. BUT, IF ASKED MOST PROBABLY FEEL GOOD ABOUT BEING AN AMERICAN ESPECIALLY WHEN COMPARED TO CUBA, VENEZUELA, RUSSIA, CHINA, IRAN, MEXICO, GREECE, ETC. I HAVE A VERY HIGH OPINION OF CANADA, NEW ZEALAND, AUSTRALIA, UK, FRANCE, GERMANY, ITALY, AND A FEW OTHER SMALLER NATIONS AND THE PEOPLE I KNOW DO AS WELL.

3. Do you think there is close similarity between your nation today and that of Germany in the late 1930s?
WELL, I DON’T KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN BY CLOSE, BUT NOT REALLY. WELL, THERE IS THIS ONE THING… OBAMA IS HALF GERMAN, OH AND OUR ECONOMY SUCKS, BUT NOT BECAUSE OF VERSAILLES TREATY. WE AREN’T INVADING OUR NEIGHBORS AND THEY ARE EASY PREY. WE GOT OUT OF THE COUNTRY WE INVADED. WE HAVEN’T IMPRISONED OUR FEDERAL JUDGES – YET. THEY DIDN’T HAVE 2,500 MARINES IN AUSTRALIA LIKE WE DO.

4. Why did you sign your name twice? Do you have a split personality?
WOW. YOU REALLY ARE A DICK. I PUT A COMMENT IN THE LITTLE BLOG WINDOW, BUT WAS DISSATISSFIED WITH IT, SO I COPIED IT TO WORD TO EDIT. SEEMS I DIDN’T GET THE Q WHEN I COPIED, SO DURING THE EDIT I ADDED Q. THEN I PASTED IT BACK INTO THE LITTLE BLOG WINDOW WHICH STILL HAD THE ORIGINAL Q. I DIDN’T REALIZE MY MISTAKE UNTIL AFTER I HAD SUBMITTED THE COMMENT.

EVEN IF I BELIEVED ANY OF THE SHIT YOU SUPPORT I WOULDN’T FOLLOW YOU BECAUSE YOU ACT LIKE A DICK ALL THE TIME.

Q

david g said...

I thought Americans thought it rude to use capital letters. It's equal to shouting, isn't it?

That you don't know that your country is trying to achieve global military domination suggests that the level of ignorance and brain-deadness in the USA is very, very high!

Why do you think your nation spends so much on arms, Q, more than most other nations of the world combined? Do you think they want to play tiddlywinks?



Your comment about signing twice also suggest that Americans have no sense of humor but everyone knows that.

Thanks anyway for the unintended revelations. I trust you enjoyed New Year.

Cheezy said...

Q - I think your thoughtful responses were more than David's wanky facetious 'questions' deserved. As expected, he didn't address a single one of them. I'm still waiting for an apology/explanation of his attempted 'correction' of my grammar the other day. I'll have a long wait, I think. He's Mr Shit'n'Run. I'd be prepared to bet that trolling like this is what he has instead of a sex life. Anyway, happy new year to one and all... including the indoctrinated ones who want full spectrum domination of the globe. And David, I wish you a speedy recovery!

Anonymous said...

Cheezy, Happy New Year

- - -

David,

YOU SHOULD STOP WASTING YOUR TIME TRYING TO THINK. I used upper case to make it easier for readers to separate my responses from your questions. That is all.

A day or two ago you attacked me for "spouting" facts (third comment above from Y O U). Now, you want to use facts - who has the split personality?

SO, YOU CONSIDER SHITTY COMMENTS TO BE HUMOR? ok. got it. if you make a shitty comment or personal attack it is a joke! The only excuse i have for not recognizing this earlier is that it is hard to tell when a psycho is joking (shitty comment - AKA a joke - get it...).

q

david g said...

"Argue not with foul-mouthed fools, frauds and fanatics. Seek instead intelligent, better informed, more courteous companions."

Anonymous said...

are you kidding. after all the shit you talk now you pull this righteous shit... you are a dick. a two faced, psycho, moronic, left-wing-nazi dick.

q

Cheezy said...

It's a shame that Blogger doesn't have a 'Like' button, isn't it?

Nail on head, Q!