Precautions in case of a Labour win

Thrugelmir

fred246 wrote: »

(OK some people will always pay because they think it means better).

How people spend their own money comes down to their personal choice. Rarely is it made from a political viewpoint.

mgdavid

fred246 wrote: »

The Tories gave up on waiting list times because they want people to pay privately. With no waiting list there is no advantage in going private (unless you want a salmon sandwich after your op). So the Tories always create a big gap between private and state funded and labour always close the gap. It's exactly the same with education. State schools are in real poverty while private ones should be reasonably well funded. If the state ones are really good people won't pay for private education (OK some people will always pay because they think it means better).

If the above is based on your personal experience then I deduce you are living in the wrong part of the country. I cannot recognise the picture you paint for my locality, where the NHS and state schools are superb.
If the above is not from your own experience then I can only think that you are making stuff up, or are simply lapping up 'project fear' without any critical analysis.

SonOf

Ok @sonof you're saying the NHS is completely safe under Johnson's goverment.and they definitely haven't met with any of Trump's staff??

The NHS has severe issues that need resolving. It is a money pit that is inefficient. So, it does need reform. However, it is also highly political to make changes. Neither Labour or Conservative have made proper attempts to solve the issues.

I suspect Johnson will not be any different to what has gone before.

Tories outnumber Labour voters on this site, probably about 100/1, give the Corbyn bashing a rest.

I think you will find you are incorrect. However, being a Labour supporter and being a Corbyn supporter are two different things. I think most people in this particular section are generally level headed and without bias and can see good and bad on both sides. They may well support one side or the other at elections but you will generally see stronger debate in this section than some others. Hence why blatent bias is usually called out.

fred246

mgdavid wrote: »

If the above is based on your personal experience then I deduce you are living in the wrong part of the country. I cannot recognise the picture you paint for my locality, where the NHS and state schools are superb.
If the above is not from your own experience then I can only think that you are making stuff up, or are simply lapping up 'project fear' without any critical analysis.

It's just basic politics. Labour want to abolish private healthcare and education and nationalize everything. The Tories want to abolish nationalized industries and privatize everything. There's nothing new there.

Zanderman

zagfles wrote: »

It's predictable, all polls show the public trust Labour more with the NHS and the Tories more with the economy, so Labour always scaremonger about the NHS being "sold off" or "dismantled" at election time, remember the "10 days to save the NHS" etc in recent elections?

Fact is the NHS has been under Tory governments more than Labour and is better funded now than ever, only a couple of years ago it won an award as the best public health service in the world.

I'm not even voting Tory, I just don't like the disingenuous propaganda designed to appeal to the gullible.

Define 'better funded'. You mean it has more money than previously? So what? Does it have enough money?

Clearly it doesn't, as cuts are being made in hospitals, departments close and waiting lists still get longer. I'll trust the tories on the NHS if they fund it enough. But not if they don't - and they never have.

It's no good saying, as politicians do, that they've increased funding. It needs to be sufficiently funded to do the jobs it needs to do. That's a completely different measure.

And you say you don't like disingenuous propaganda?!

Malthusian

Deleted_User wrote: »

Confiscation of company shares and many other wonderful ideas were McDonnell’s to start with.

Making him the perfect man to kick his wonderful ideas into the long grass to avoid FTSE 100 companies upping sticks en masse, wrecking the economy and investment and guaranteeing the loss of his ministerial car in five years.

When McDonnell sets up an independent commission to conduct a full review into how we can increase the common man's stake in the economy with full cost benefit analysis of a wide ranging list of options with input from all key stakeholders, you couldn't possibly accuse of him of kicking the revolution into the long grass. After all, it was all his idea.

If Labour wins the election under McDonnell they'll do a Syriza. If they won an election under Milne they'd do a Venezuela. The second however is not plausible. Labour winning an election indicates that McDonnell won the internal party battle and controls Corbyn's strings. If Milne wins control Labour will be too busy fighting itself to win an election or get its manifesto through Parliament. Kremlinology for Dummies is available from all good bookshops.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

How people spend their own money comes down to their personal choice. Rarely is it made from a political viewpoint.

There is no better illustration than the dozens of Labour MPs who educate their children privately.

I believe Diane Abbott calls it smashing privilege from the inside.

Malthusian

Zanderman wrote: »

Define 'better funded'. You mean it has more money than previously? So what? Does it have enough money?

The NHS never has enough money and never will. Nor does any organisation that attempts to provide a high-quality service to everyone for free. Increase funding and while waiting lists may reduce in the short term, in the long term demand increases until equilibrium crisis is restored.

This is exactly what happened under Blair/Brown, exactly what happened when Cameron ringfenced NHS spending in the hope that the UK populace would forgive austerity if he sacrificed enough money on the altar of the national religion, and exactly what will happen in the future. Forever and ever, amen.

And you say you don't like disingenuous propaganda?!

Designing a service to exist in permanent crisis and then blaming one political tribe for it being in crisis is as disingenuous as propaganda gets.

Johnnyboy11

I think proprerty is at real risk of a Labour Government. Illiquid and immoveable, a sitting duck for a Garden Tax, or hikes in Council Tax or Stamp Duty. Then there's the BTL crowd, and their tennants' rights...

fred246

I think people suffer just because they don't know what is going on. I was hearing the other day about a man who needed a knee replacement and was in great pain. He had seen the surgeon and kept waiting for his date. It was now nearly two years. He had never thought of going private. Just trusted the NHS. Labour had strict waiting list times so this would never happen. The Tories just quietly abandoned them. Some people know the Tories are in and they are supposed to pay privately. Some people just don't understand the system.

sheslookinhot

Whatever happens, it would be worth it to remove the self serving tories, bumbling Boris the buffoon and have a fairer society for all.