Axe falls on NHS services

Generali

carolt wrote: »

I think we both know why I get into arguments with posters nitpicking over choice of words and that it has nothing to do with the choice of words but a way of trying to avoid discussing the content, where that involves house prices falling (which in my case it frequently does).

Again, I suspect your innate dislike for my political views may have clouded your head on this; I agree my language was not 100% clear, but I think the meaning in context was not terribly hard to ascertain.

Re the 'had to share', obviously I'd love 5 star facilities as well as great medical care, but accept that it is not the duty of the public purse to provide that.

My head isn't clouded by my disagreeing with you.

If you have the NHS you have 2 star facilities for free or 5 star facilities at enormous cost. Few others can afford anything in the middle mostly because the state spends 50% of UK output.

If you have a part paid system most get 3 star facilities for very little or for nothing (depending on why they're using the system). The majority get 4 star and a few get 5 star at enormous cost.

I don't see why pretty much everyone getting the same low quality of facility is better than a few getting slightly better and most getting vastly better.

There's a story of the son of a Lord visiting Bolshevik Moscow. He was criticised for his 'bourgeois' clothing to which he replied, "I support you so you can dress like me not so I have to dress like you".

I find it odd that many people seem to think it better that most people get something that is quite poor rather than the poor getting something better than that and the majority doing even better.

RenovationMan

carolt wrote: »

Re the 'had to share', obviously I'd love 5 star facilities as well as great medical care, but accept that it is not the duty of the public purse to provide that.

An excellent comment that really gets to the heart of how I, and obviously many others feel about the NHS. We'd rather the budget was spent on providing heath care for everyone regardless of their finances, rather than a hotel service for the wealthy. We're not wearing 'hair shirts', we simply accept that there is a finite budget and prefer it to be spent on health care, not luxuries.

I quite like being in a shared ward. It's boring being in hospital and I've enjoyed good banter in the past with others in the ward. The last time I went in for a minor procedure, we all watched Jeremy Kyle on the ward TV set and had a great time. It was my first time watching that show and I became addicted for a while.

carolt

Generali wrote: »

My head isn't clouded by my disagreeing with you.

If you have the NHS you have 2 star facilities for free or 5 star facilities at enormous cost. Few others can afford anything in the middle mostly because the state spends 50% of UK output.

If you have a part paid system most get 3 star facilities for very little or for nothing (depending on why they're using the system). The majority get 4 star and a few get 5 star at enormous cost.

I don't see why pretty much everyone getting the same low quality of facility is better than a few getting slightly better and most getting vastly better.

There's a story of the son of a Lord visiting Bolshevik Moscow. He was criticised for his 'bourgeois' clothing to which he replied, "I support you so you can dress like me not so I have to dress like you".

I find it odd that many people seem to think it better that most people get something that is quite poor rather than the poor getting something better than that and the majority doing even better.

Can you explain that line?

Why if we paid less upfront would we all get better service than now?

That's the bit I don't get. If you can explain that you might convert me yet.

Generali

RenovationMan wrote: »

An excellent comment that really gets to the heart of how I, and obviously many others feel about the NHS. We'd rather the budget was spent on providing heath care for everyone regardless of their finances, rather than a hotel service for the wealthy.

I quite like being in a shared ward. It's boring being in hospital and I've enjoyed good banter in the past with others in the ward. The last time I went in for a minor procedure, we all watched Jeremy Kyle on the ward TV set and had a great time. It was my first time watching that show and I became addicted for a while.

The NHS is clearly what you want.

Personally it's one of the things I won't miss from the UK but it's not my problem any more.

A._Badger

carolt wrote: »

No, I'm afraid I don't remember post office telephones - before I was born, I assume?



I don't object to the profit motive in an ideological sense - if I thought it worked, I'd support it.

I am just aware that, for example, trains are far more expensive and less efficient than before they were privatised. For example.

Not unless you are very young (which, of course, you may well be). BT was privatised in 1984. Prior to that, the UK had a Soviet-style
supply-driven system of legendary wastefulness, providing little in the way of service.

And, I'm afraid, you have also been misled about the railways. British Rail was an abomination. Your point about high prices is fair enough and it is generally accepted that Major's government got rail privatisation completely wrong. But reincarnating the money pit that was BR ('efficiency? what's that?') would be an absolute disaster.

Would you really want a rail system dominated by Bob Crow and his like?

FTBFun

I actually reckon our rail system is pretty decent, although perhaps a little pricey.

I've travelled around Germany using rail, and despite the claims of German efficiency, every train was late. This was in the old West Germany so one can't blame the infrastructure.

mardatha

The NHS stopped people suffering & dying, and watching their babies and wee children doing the same, for many many people !! - It has got to be better than any paying system! -That is Victorian and taking a backwards step . Read AJ Cronin for godsake - that isnt pure fiction, it's based on real life .
We need a revamped NHS, yes. The problem isn't just the NHS, it's the amount of people it has to cope with. Although up here we have far less people and thus less waiting time. But you cannot introduce a new paying system for health at the same time thousands of people are losing their jobs. I wish you had more compassion & humanity in this board. It isnt "them council tenants" v "us rich city office types".. It's "us, the people " trying to live and feed our families . Stop reading the Financial Times and start reading history!

A._Badger

FTBFun wrote: »

I actually reckon our rail system is pretty decent, although perhaps a little pricey.

I've travelled around Germany using rail, and despite the claims of German efficiency, every train was late. This was in the old West Germany so one can't blame the infrastructure.

I agree. In fact our rail sytem is much improved, though it is absurdly expensive.

StevieJ

carolt wrote: »

Off topic, but it is funny that, isn't it?

I have a lot of respect for Gen and indeed my dad who usually votes Tory, and posters like Nick Mason, who is a Tory councillor. Yet it's odd how politics can divide us. Gen strangely often comes across as more partisan than Nick does, even though Nick does it for a living.

And although I'd call myself left-wing, I definitely have views that would be regarded as extremely out of favour with the Labour party, old or new (I'm a big fan of grammar schools, for example).

I think thinking outside the political straitjacket can be a good exercise for all of us.

Nick has eyes for higher places, watch out Davey boy

http://www.nickmason.org.uk/?p=285

StevieJ

A._Badger wrote: »

I agree. In fact our rail sytem is much improved, though it is absurdly expensive.

I do miss the three course dinner you could get on BR with a nice bottle of wine, sure did break that Euston Manchester journey up. Last time I used Virgin trains (first class) it was mid winter with no heating and aircraft food, cost = hundreds, I don't know what it is like now because I have not been near since