A Question for Tory Supporters

Herzlos

I agree that mental health services is woefully underfunded, but I'd put that down to Tory governments woefully under funding the NHS and councils under the guise of austerity.

Some of the waiting lists are ludicrous and costing lives.

BikingBud

Arklight wrote: »

If you want to champion Tory voting I wouldn't do so on economic grounds. They are a disaster.

And I suppose the labour perspective is that we can spend it all with no comeback and disappear, a la Liam Byrne:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/may/17/liam-byrne-note-successor

A vast sum of taxpayers hard earned frivolously wasted by a Labour government. And they were the champagne socialists. Extremely prudent!

Just imagine the havoc and chaos that CC will bring about:eek:

Thrugelmir

Cakeguts wrote: »

A lot of rough sleepers are due to the NHS not doing its job properly.

Have you considered that the increasing demands on the NHS are unsustainable. Communities have to do their bit too. Not simply expect somebody else to find a solution.

benbay001

Arklight wrote: »

And you're celebrating the fact that under the Tories homelessness has only tripled

Im saying 4700 people homeless in a country of 70 millions really doesn't bother me in the slightest.

Arklight wrote: »

But people aren't getting richer. Average "real" wages are lower now than they were 10 years ago

But more people are earning that average wage? How is that anything but positive?

Arklight

benbay001 wrote: »

Im saying 4700 people homeless in a country of 70 millions really doesn't bother me in the slightest.





But more people are earning that average wage? How is that anything but positive?

I'm not sure that's mathematically possible. Do you mean the mode? Would be interested in a source as I've never managed to find a reliable source for this.

Zuzel

benbay001 wrote: »

But more people are earning that average wage? How is that anything but positive?

Especially when less people are paying tax too as the allowance rises.

Cakeguts

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Have you considered that the increasing demands on the NHS are unsustainable. Communities have to do their bit too. Not simply expect somebody else to find a solution.

That is absolutely fine. What we will do is give all cancer patients medication with terrible side effects that means that they can't continue with their normal lives because the medication makes them feel sleepy, causes weight gain and gives them involuntary movements and we will give them this to make them "feel better." They can get the medication from their doctors on prescription. However on no account if they have a relapse with they be admitted to hospital. If they can make it to their doctor they will get some help there if there is any. If they can't hold down a job while they are taking this medication there won't be any housing available for them so if they have nowhere to live they can sleep on the streets.

Sailtheworld

Cakeguts wrote: »

That is absolutely fine. What we will do is give all cancer patients medication with terrible side effects that means that they can't continue with their normal lives because the medication makes them feel sleepy, causes weight gain and gives them involuntary movements and we will give them this to make them "feel better." They can get the medication from their doctors on prescription. However on no account if they have a relapse with they be admitted to hospital. If they can make it to their doctor they will get some help there if there is any. If they can't hold down a job while they are taking this medication there won't be any housing available for them so if they have nowhere to live they can sleep on the streets.

Or we could pop round to an elderly neighbour, check they're OK, have a 5 minute chat and see if they want anything picking up from the shops.

I don't think even Thrug is suggesting that the local community should take over the medication of cancer patients to save the NHS money.

Doozergirl

I'm alright Jack.

Is what it boils down to. A totally lack of empathy or seeing how many pay checks you are away from disaster when it happens.

I've had a lot of questions answered by this thread.

4700 rough sleepers isn't a lot when you don't look one of them in the eye and they're not a human being. Like the single mother, like the impoverished child.

I can appreciate the amazing life that I've been handed and understand that I'm still closer to poverty than I am to my own multi-millionaire friends.

benbay001

Arklight wrote: »

I'm not sure that's mathematically possible. Do you mean the mode? Would be interested in a source as I've never managed to find a reliable source for this.

If more people are working, yet the average wage doesn't drop, then more people are earning the average. Surely?