Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
There seems to be an obsession with immigration, as if it's the cause of all our problems.
Not only will brexit only deal with immigration from the EU, it most likely won't.
Immigration is something of a problem there is no doubt, but is neither the root cause nor the biggest current cause of apparent misery.
Maybe if we considered the REAL reasons everything is worse than it used to or should be:
Police stations closing in most small towns, education in turmoil, only 140,000 hospital beds in the UK as opposed to 350,000 in 1980, AUSTERITY, selling everything to big corporations, the biggest divide between Rich and Poor EVER, no help from banks and so much more......
These things are not because of immigration, they are because of bad government.
I'm not saying there's an easy solution, nor even a party who would fix it. What is for sure though is the career politicians we've had for the last 40 years care not a jot for US, the people they're supposed to work for.
What is also for sure, all the "doing the right thing", "making tough choices", "all in it together", applies to US and NEVER to the politicians who say it.
The Press get to make a nice living from politics, politicians make a nice living/pension/other income from politics, they will do and say anything to keep it that way.
They have their own rules (expenses for everything, smoking allowed in THEIR (subsidised) bars, large pay rises - (the only ones in the public sector) and they nearly all lie and get caught out doing so, lies which would get you and me fired from any other job.
Now we're supposed to hold them in some sort of high esteem while they make even more from us. Not the immigrants, the politicians and those who live off them.
OK - onslaught replies below please........
Not only will brexit only deal with immigration from the EU, it most likely won't.
Immigration is something of a problem there is no doubt, but is neither the root cause nor the biggest current cause of apparent misery.
Maybe if we considered the REAL reasons everything is worse than it used to or should be:
Police stations closing in most small towns, education in turmoil, only 140,000 hospital beds in the UK as opposed to 350,000 in 1980, AUSTERITY, selling everything to big corporations, the biggest divide between Rich and Poor EVER, no help from banks and so much more......
These things are not because of immigration, they are because of bad government.
I'm not saying there's an easy solution, nor even a party who would fix it. What is for sure though is the career politicians we've had for the last 40 years care not a jot for US, the people they're supposed to work for.
What is also for sure, all the "doing the right thing", "making tough choices", "all in it together", applies to US and NEVER to the politicians who say it.
The Press get to make a nice living from politics, politicians make a nice living/pension/other income from politics, they will do and say anything to keep it that way.
They have their own rules (expenses for everything, smoking allowed in THEIR (subsidised) bars, large pay rises - (the only ones in the public sector) and they nearly all lie and get caught out doing so, lies which would get you and me fired from any other job.
Now we're supposed to hold them in some sort of high esteem while they make even more from us. Not the immigrants, the politicians and those who live off them.
OK - onslaught replies below please........
Show More
envy is a kind of insanity chaser.
I merely asked are people like studyform the reason Britain is turning into such a complete ********
I don`t know.
I merely asked are people like studyform the reason Britain is turning into such a complete ********
I don`t know.
lfc like i have said many times nothing weill effect me no matter who is in power
I have a way i do things and it won't change by who is sitting in Number 10
I feel for the youngsters leaving School etc as they wont even make £7 an hour for doing horrible jobs
YEAR 25 AND OVER 21 TO 24 18 TO 20 UNDER 18 APPRENTICE
2017 £7.50 £7.05 £5.60 £4.05 £3.50
Good luck to everyone who has kids leaving School as they will not be leaving home until at least 50 on those wages and the house prices.
Like i say Lfc put anyone in power it won't effect me but i think of ours also not just me
I have a way i do things and it won't change by who is sitting in Number 10
I feel for the youngsters leaving School etc as they wont even make £7 an hour for doing horrible jobs
YEAR 25 AND OVER 21 TO 24 18 TO 20 UNDER 18 APPRENTICE
2017 £7.50 £7.05 £5.60 £4.05 £3.50
Good luck to everyone who has kids leaving School as they will not be leaving home until at least 50 on those wages and the house prices.
Like i say Lfc put anyone in power it won't effect me but i think of ours also not just me
40 hour apprentice get's £140
Travel could be what £15-£20 a week
Food at work another £15-£20 a week
Digs if parents take them £15-£20 on that wage maybe i don't know.Hopefully FREE BOARD
If they smoke they are cabbaged already
Friday pint after work lads errrr na i got things on you know.Looks in pocket has bus fare and enough for a case of Skol Lagers
Travel could be what £15-£20 a week
Food at work another £15-£20 a week
Digs if parents take them £15-£20 on that wage maybe i don't know.Hopefully FREE BOARD
If they smoke they are cabbaged already
Friday pint after work lads errrr na i got things on you know.Looks in pocket has bus fare and enough for a case of Skol Lagers
that's how it is, a complete shambles who would deny that?
but I have a feeling study might be a leftist and might have a certain way of looking at these problems..which don't solve them but make them worse and have caused them, imo
but I have a feeling study might be a leftist and might have a certain way of looking at these problems..which don't solve them but make them worse and have caused them, imo
140,000 hospital beds in the UK as opposed to 350,000 in 1980
An interesting opening post, Studyform and I would agree with much of it.
I would be interested to know where the figures for hospital beds highlighted above came from and what they include as I suspect it's not a fair comparison.
In 1980, hospitals had geriatric wards, even geriatric hospitals, (my wife worked in one), where the elderly spent their final weeks and months, sometimes years. This function has now been largely passed to the private sector where the beds still exist in nursing homes providing palliative care. Perhaps a better comparison might be the number and complexity of operations carried out today compared with 1980.
An interesting opening post, Studyform and I would agree with much of it.
I would be interested to know where the figures for hospital beds highlighted above came from and what they include as I suspect it's not a fair comparison.
In 1980, hospitals had geriatric wards, even geriatric hospitals, (my wife worked in one), where the elderly spent their final weeks and months, sometimes years. This function has now been largely passed to the private sector where the beds still exist in nursing homes providing palliative care. Perhaps a better comparison might be the number and complexity of operations carried out today compared with 1980.
Foinavon 19 Apr 17 14:39 Joined: 11 Oct 00 | Topic/replies: 6,283 | Blogger: Foinavon's blog
140,000 hospital beds in the UK as opposed to 350,000 in 1980
Like you say people died more on Hospitals back then as they got all hooked up and couldn't move
Now people get sent home with bags of pills and die at home around the family
140,000 hospital beds in the UK as opposed to 350,000 in 1980
Like you say people died more on Hospitals back then as they got all hooked up and couldn't move
Now people get sent home with bags of pills and die at home around the family
3 out 4 my Grandparents died at home and one in a nursing home so the bed was there
No one died in pain either
No one died in pain either
"No one died in pain either" Well so you get told but no long term suffering pain
Anecdotal experience will vary widely, the chaser, but many more elderly were catered for in hospital back then rather than in nursing homes. Patients recovering from operations are, as you mentioned, often sent home earlier today.
The dying do seem to suffer a lot though and are kept alive for longer than necessary in some cases, but that's the law.
The dying do seem to suffer a lot though and are kept alive for longer than necessary in some cases, but that's the law.
In early 2000s i was in Hospital for a small operation due to an infection in a tooth that the dentist fecked up and i left it unattended as it wasn't sore or that until one day my mouth had ballooned out.I was in for the day/night op the next Morning or maybe even the 2nd Morning.Then they kept me in for 2-3 more nights when i could have just gone home i suppose but they wanted to keep an eye on me.I can't remember them checking on me much i was smoking outside with my drip on a wheel thing and that only time they said you got blood in your tube for the drip you need to lift it higher 
I could have been at home like they sent people home now
I could have been at home like they sent people home now
My grandfathers didn't live to 80 but both grandmothers were over 90. A long time ago now.
Velasquez, I watched a bit of that film (Michael Rimmer) before work this morning, it's very good.
"No A&E's, or cottage hospitals closed or sold as business premises, GP's closing their books, NHS Direct sending everyone to A&E which can't cope, far too many managers, centralised Ambulances, overburdened paramedics, people expected to ask their local chemist!!!!"...
I saw this start first hand on a large scale in the 1980s, the steady dismantling of the tried and trusted practises, reductions across the board in medical staff, only to be replaced by 'managers interested only in their budgets and their career paths.
Countless psychiatric care hospitals closed and sold off to developers to construct lucrative private housing projects. replaced by the ludicrous the cuddly sounding 'Care in the community scheme/scam'. Cottage hospitals had all but gone by this time.
"Staff (and we all will have seen this) spend virtually their whole shift looking at computer screens and not at patients".....
The dehumanisation of care has reduced us to digits on a monitor fronting algorithmic, budget and target controlled care models, a one fits all approach which flies in the face of not only the Hippocratic Oath, but also Good practice and forward looking proactive care which is the least expensive option in the longer term anyway. Short termism practised on the sick for bottom line targets, by couldn't care less 'managers;
Too many to list her, but start with Stafford and explore all other 'Trusts in an direction up and down the country in the preceding years.
I saw this start first hand on a large scale in the 1980s, the steady dismantling of the tried and trusted practises, reductions across the board in medical staff, only to be replaced by 'managers interested only in their budgets and their career paths.
Countless psychiatric care hospitals closed and sold off to developers to construct lucrative private housing projects. replaced by the ludicrous the cuddly sounding 'Care in the community scheme/scam'. Cottage hospitals had all but gone by this time.
"Staff (and we all will have seen this) spend virtually their whole shift looking at computer screens and not at patients".....
The dehumanisation of care has reduced us to digits on a monitor fronting algorithmic, budget and target controlled care models, a one fits all approach which flies in the face of not only the Hippocratic Oath, but also Good practice and forward looking proactive care which is the least expensive option in the longer term anyway. Short termism practised on the sick for bottom line targets, by couldn't care less 'managers;
Too many to list her, but start with Stafford and explore all other 'Trusts in an direction up and down the country in the preceding years.
Just to add the constant enormously expensive tinkering by successive governments, in a quest for a quick fix back door privatisation via firstly APMS and more recently the Health and Social Care Act of 2012, IE, Clinical commissioning, below is a is copied from a much longer article..
clinical commissioning is a complex activity requiring, for example, legal knowledge, expertise in running contracts and on-going monitoring of contracts, as well as back office support such as IT, human resources and financial services. Most GPs don’t have the time or skills to carry out all the work of commissioning. So, while CCGs will retain legal accountability for this work, many of the functions of commissioning have already been taken over by Commissioning Support Units (CSUs)...who stepped in to the void created by the abolishment of NHS Primary Care Trusts allowing PRIVATE INSURANCE COMPANIES!! professional contract negotiator/deal closers to take over, the role they had previously 'shared' (reah right) Capita, Serco and Atos among the first snouts in the through.
It's afar too deliberately complicated process of erosion to put on here. Maybe a more knowledgeable eloquent, forumite could elucidate.
clinical commissioning is a complex activity requiring, for example, legal knowledge, expertise in running contracts and on-going monitoring of contracts, as well as back office support such as IT, human resources and financial services. Most GPs don’t have the time or skills to carry out all the work of commissioning. So, while CCGs will retain legal accountability for this work, many of the functions of commissioning have already been taken over by Commissioning Support Units (CSUs)...who stepped in to the void created by the abolishment of NHS Primary Care Trusts allowing PRIVATE INSURANCE COMPANIES!! professional contract negotiator/deal closers to take over, the role they had previously 'shared' (reah right) Capita, Serco and Atos among the first snouts in the through.
It's afar too deliberately complicated process of erosion to put on here. Maybe a more knowledgeable eloquent, forumite could elucidate.
This bit is not copied PRIVATE INSURANCE COMPANIES!! professional contract negotiator/deal closers to take over, the role they had previously 'shared' (reah right) Capita, Serco and Atos among the first snouts in the through.
It's afar too deliberately complicated process of erosion to put on here. Maybe a more knowledgeable eloquent, forumite could elucidate.
PRIVATE INSURANCE COMPANIES!! professional contract negotiator/deal closers to take over, the role they had previously 'shared' (reah right) Capita, Serco and Atos among the first snouts in the through.It's afar too deliberately complicated process of erosion to put on here. Maybe a more knowledgeable eloquent, forumite could elucidate.
I have loads of ideas to help fix the NHS. It isn't as difficult, imo, as the politicians would have us believe.
There are too many vested interests to undertake many easy fixes.
Things which come to mind are:
*Not giving contracts to other companies, thus saving jobs (which are usually the 'cuts' then made).
*Negotiating better with Pharmaceutical companies. As the biggest buyer in the UK, possibly one of the biggest in the world, better deals can surely be made. Because it's trusts they are all smaller buying centres for services, machinery, dressings as well as drugs.
*Employing more doctors and sacking most of the managers.
*Not having WH Smith and Costa Coffee etc etc having franchises (and ripping patients and visitors off) but owning all outlets and keeping all profits for the NHS, without ripping its customers off. They already own the land.
*Same for vending machines.
*Keeping and running all their own car parks. Charges could be reduced and It would cost a lot less than the masses made by the outsourced companies running them now.
*Less centralisation and more local services, it is not good for anyone to have large hospitals an hour from where people live for LOADS of obvious reasons.
*Proper control on Consultant's fees/wages and hours of work. Some of them take the slash.
*No allowing Doctors and Dentists to train at OUR expense then quitting to do private work, any who do should pay it all back.
And many others which I'm sure we could think of.
There are too many vested interests to undertake many easy fixes.
Things which come to mind are:
*Not giving contracts to other companies, thus saving jobs (which are usually the 'cuts' then made).
*Negotiating better with Pharmaceutical companies. As the biggest buyer in the UK, possibly one of the biggest in the world, better deals can surely be made. Because it's trusts they are all smaller buying centres for services, machinery, dressings as well as drugs.
*Employing more doctors and sacking most of the managers.
*Not having WH Smith and Costa Coffee etc etc having franchises (and ripping patients and visitors off) but owning all outlets and keeping all profits for the NHS, without ripping its customers off. They already own the land.
*Same for vending machines.
*Keeping and running all their own car parks. Charges could be reduced and It would cost a lot less than the masses made by the outsourced companies running them now.
*Less centralisation and more local services, it is not good for anyone to have large hospitals an hour from where people live for LOADS of obvious reasons.
*Proper control on Consultant's fees/wages and hours of work. Some of them take the slash.
*No allowing Doctors and Dentists to train at OUR expense then quitting to do private work, any who do should pay it all back.
And many others which I'm sure we could think of.
western civilisation got rich by stealing assets from other parts of the world (the US is a country of white Europeans who stole the land from the natives, we had the Empire as did France, Germany, etc). now the brown peoples want the good life too.
boxingthefox.
I completely agree with all you've written. GP's are suffering too, they can now only do one of 2 things.....
Give out pills and/or refer you to hospital. The time then taken depends on geography.
They rarely make home visits, seldom do proper examinations - and in most cases a 10 minute appointment is very strictly enforced and hard to get.
the whole thing is in trouble.
I wonder..... Do the MPs and Politicians responsible for the NHS, REALLY use it, or do we pay for their private healthcare?
I honestly don't know the answer to this.
I completely agree with all you've written. GP's are suffering too, they can now only do one of 2 things.....
Give out pills and/or refer you to hospital. The time then taken depends on geography.
They rarely make home visits, seldom do proper examinations - and in most cases a 10 minute appointment is very strictly enforced and hard to get.
the whole thing is in trouble.
I wonder..... Do the MPs and Politicians responsible for the NHS, REALLY use it, or do we pay for their private healthcare?
I honestly don't know the answer to this.
knee operations are a huge scam. a ninety year old goes to his GP with a sore knee - gets referred on. The surgeon says "oh yes I can do that!" - the old guy has his surgery then finds he's no better off because he's too old to recover and rehabilitate properly. However the surgeons's bank balance looks very healthy
Well well here we go, the NHS is losing 2 billion a year to health tourism and study is worried about the cost of coffee in his vending machine.. you see this is the kind of nonsense we have to face.
This is the 4th time you've written some silliness aimed at me lfc.
If only you actually understood ANY of what I wrote,... Shall I spell it out for you?
Try reading it again.
OK.
Not the cost of my coffee, the fact that the PROFIT made on COFFEE in an NHS HOSPITAL SHOULD GO TO THE NHS and not to COSTA!!!!!!!
The vending machines sell a 50p chocolate bar or bag of crisps for £1 and that is a RIP-OFF, the profit made then goes to the vending machine company that has the space renting deal with the relevant NHS trust. Therefore the only winner is the vending machine operator, who need not exist in an NHS establishment.
If only you actually understood ANY of what I wrote,... Shall I spell it out for you?
Try reading it again.
OK.
Not the cost of my coffee, the fact that the PROFIT made on COFFEE in an NHS HOSPITAL SHOULD GO TO THE NHS and not to COSTA!!!!!!!
The vending machines sell a 50p chocolate bar or bag of crisps for £1 and that is a RIP-OFF, the profit made then goes to the vending machine company that has the space renting deal with the relevant NHS trust. Therefore the only winner is the vending machine operator, who need not exist in an NHS establishment.
Yes and if you looked carefully I didn't disagree with any of that.
However I suggest that you might have thought that something should be done about other countries and people from all corners of the world stealing billions of pounds , and the time involved , from our health service.'
Then w might consider what to do and where to buy our coffee
However I suggest that you might have thought that something should be done about other countries and people from all corners of the world stealing billions of pounds , and the time involved , from our health service.'
Then w might consider what to do and where to buy our coffee
https://fullfact.org/health/health-tourism-whats-cost/
Try reading this instead of the Mail.
Try reading this instead of the Mail.
I read the government report , and yes the figures are most likely greater than in that report.
Now I know you don't want to believe it, and that is why I suggested that maybe the government is not to blame for the mess this country is facing, but people like yourself...di you think that might be possible ?
Now I know you don't want to believe it, and that is why I suggested that maybe the government is not to blame for the mess this country is facing, but people like yourself...di you think that might be possible ?
Also I didn't give the complete list of EVERYTHING to do with the NHS, just - as I said - some ideas to fix it that, imo, politicians wouldn't like.
No I don't.
I don't make the rules and laws, the government do.
If you think the government isn't responsible for anything that's wrong in this country, you are beyond naïve and they must be ineffective for not making it right.
No I don't.
I don't make the rules and laws, the government do.
If you think the government isn't responsible for anything that's wrong in this country, you are beyond naïve and they must be ineffective for not making it right.
Did you watch the programme by the BBC just recently, documentary on the health service.
Which almost as an aside showed hundreds of thousands of pounds being lost to people coming to Britain to use the NHS..this was in the space of a few programmes. and by the BBC!
Which almost as an aside showed hundreds of thousands of pounds being lost to people coming to Britain to use the NHS..this was in the space of a few programmes. and by the BBC!
If you want to quote what I say, could you do me the courtesy of not taking just a snippet out of context?
I didn't see it, no, but 0.3% (largest estimate) of NHS cost wouldn't be much of an overall saving would it?
It might well be an addition to my list of NHS fixes though, eh?
I didn't see it, no, but 0.3% (largest estimate) of NHS cost wouldn't be much of an overall saving would it?
It might well be an addition to my list of NHS fixes though, eh?
"I wonder..... Do the MPs and Politicians responsible for the NHS, REALLY use it, or do we pay for their private healthcare?
I honestly don't know the answer to this".
Neither do I SF, I do know we could fill pages on this subject about the tangled mess that is the NHS, it's too valuable a campaigning tool for politicians to override party positions and actually work for some sort of cohesively agreed structured long term planning..............I can always dream.
I honestly don't know the answer to this".
Neither do I SF, I do know we could fill pages on this subject about the tangled mess that is the NHS, it's too valuable a campaigning tool for politicians to override party positions and actually work for some sort of cohesively agreed structured long term planning..............I can always dream.
It is billions of pounds, and the time and care used, and the doctors and nurses and technical staff and the hospital beds and everything that it takes to provide and train these medics and the cost of building the hospitals and maintaining the emergency services. The entire infrastructure has to be built and maintained and paid for .
But don't worry its only a few billion pounds here and there.
But don't worry its only a few billion pounds here and there.
Apparently it ISN'T billions of pounds.... Once again, you didn't read it, did you?
SF...."If you want to quote what I say, could you do me the courtesy of not taking just a snippet out of context?"
I have to confess that I also have been guilty of that lately, for which I apologize, no excuses I was just tired and cranky and utterly failed to put my views across in the proper manner, Sorry.
I am actually knackered now so won't stay om much longer. The fact that you are talking to me shows that you are not one to bear a grudge if the respondent is putting a point fairly and without puerile name calling whether in agreement with you or not, fair play to you.
I have to confess that I also have been guilty of that lately, for which I apologize, no excuses I was just tired and cranky and utterly failed to put my views across in the proper manner, Sorry.
I am actually knackered now so won't stay om much longer. The fact that you are talking to me shows that you are not one to bear a grudge if the respondent is putting a point fairly and without puerile name calling whether in agreement with you or not, fair play to you.
It's already built, btw and the (probably unneccesary) rebuilding is very costly. They've already bought (and closed down most of) the beds.
Not at all, boxingthefox.
We are, for once singing off the same hymn sheet on this.
Not hard imo, all it's about is common sense.
We are, for once singing off the same hymn sheet on this.
Not hard imo, all it's about is common sense.
*No allowing Doctors and Dentists to train at OUR expense then quitting to do private work, any who do should pay it all back.
And many others which I'm sure we could think of.
Last but not least
And many others which I'm sure we could think of.
Last but not least
I can assure you study the government report best estimate, is 2 billion a year, now that is likely that i he greater because the NHS staff, doctors and nurses and managers and politicians gave a vested interest in not letting the British people know the true extent if the scam of what is going on
Now the evidence is there, they didn't even try to cover it up in that BBC documentary .
In a few weeks of programmes hundreds of thousands of pounds were lost to health tourism
That us just a small example if the vast problem ..you are determined that it is something that can be dismissed as propaganda. Very well nothing can change with that mindset
In a few weeks of programmes hundreds of thousands of pounds were lost to health tourism
That us just a small example if the vast problem ..you are determined that it is something that can be dismissed as propaganda. Very well nothing can change with that mindset
I don't know where you get the last part of your statement there lfc, NHS staff etc have NO vested interest in understating it.
The estimate includes expats coming home for treatment from abroad, holidaymakers who have an accident, and more.
It also doesn't include money charged for treatment subsequent to that treatment.
I haven't dismissed or denied there's a cost. Just not included it in a list.
If you think stopping "health tourism" would cure the NHS.... You're wrong.
The estimate includes expats coming home for treatment from abroad, holidaymakers who have an accident, and more.
It also doesn't include money charged for treatment subsequent to that treatment.
I haven't dismissed or denied there's a cost. Just not included it in a list.
If you think stopping "health tourism" would cure the NHS.... You're wrong.
https://fullfact.org/health/health-tourism-savings-wont-plug-hole-nhs-funding/
The NHS staff are running a business , their jobs and wages depend on that business, the greater the numbers the greater the staff numbers, the greater the staff numbered the greater chance of promotion , the greater chance of keeping your job etc ,that is how it works.
That is their interest from managers to doctors to nurses to technical and clerical staff right through the entire system
You will not get the truth from then as to what is happening
That is their interest from managers to doctors to nurses to technical and clerical staff right through the entire system
You will not get the truth from then as to what is happening
No. It isn't a business, has never been a business, and shouldn't be a business, but is being turned into one by successive governments - the point of this entire thread!
Businesses depend on profit. Public services, (Police, NHS, Education, government) are NOT business.
Businesses depend on profit. Public services, (Police, NHS, Education, government) are NOT business.
I don't think you understand what is happening in the NHS. The doctors and managers and staff on all levels are complicate in running a business , they don't care where the money comes from , and they are happy to work for the NHS or privately or as us more often the case both.
lfc1971, It is propaganda, in the sense that it is designed to polarise our opinions, for example if we stopped giving 'Foreign aid to just 2 countries, Pakistan, and india, we would have had 559 million to spend on the NHS, Why did pick those 2 countries, well, just for starters, they're in the 'nuclear club', but It's not that simple.
Our total spend of £12.1 billion is roughly four or five times one estimate for the shortfall in social care funding; but from another perspective, it’s a bit less per household than one estimate for the food we throw away. it gets very complicated, who you help and why. And should Supermarkets promote BOGOF offers that we neither need nor want and just waste.
I'm not trying to be funny but the excesses, and wastefulness of our society is as feckless as our (politically media driven) aim to deflect the blame to others.
Not long ago the target was benefit scroungers, who accounted (IF memory serves me well) for 1 1/2% of the total benefit spend. They were of course breaking the law, but the media would have us believe 'It's all their fault and More recently the Pensioner (Living too long) burden, not the government, as to why the country is in trouble and therefor we had austerity. Nothing to do with the giant 'Ponzi scheme' run by the banking institutions!!
Just a few examples. I'm offski GL guys.
Our total spend of £12.1 billion is roughly four or five times one estimate for the shortfall in social care funding; but from another perspective, it’s a bit less per household than one estimate for the food we throw away. it gets very complicated, who you help and why. And should Supermarkets promote BOGOF offers that we neither need nor want and just waste.
I'm not trying to be funny but the excesses, and wastefulness of our society is as feckless as our (politically media driven) aim to deflect the blame to others.
Not long ago the target was benefit scroungers, who accounted (IF memory serves me well) for 1 1/2% of the total benefit spend. They were of course breaking the law, but the media would have us believe 'It's all their fault and More recently the Pensioner (Living too long) burden, not the government, as to why the country is in trouble and therefor we had austerity. Nothing to do with the giant 'Ponzi scheme' run by the banking institutions!!
Just a few examples. I'm offski GL guys.
Bill Gates on my TV this morning telling us we should continue with our current 'Overseas aid contributions/giveaways. Really!, Pakistan is a Nuclear power, they sold the technology to Iran, then NK ffs. they play whatever political hand suits them on an hourly/daily basis.
To say they are a 'Slippery customer' is to do an injustice to the cliche.
To say they are a 'Slippery customer' is to do an injustice to the cliche.
How many Billions has it cost Pakistan and India to build and maintain this capability, aside from the untold millions the Kashmir conflict has cost and continues to cost. All this while we send aid to feed their starving people. We are told sent a combined £559 million to them last year, is that the real figure, is there a more deserving case, We have 'food banks' in this country for people who have 'fallen through the net', am I missing something here????
Sorry I digressed, but it's all money out of taxpayers contributions.
Austerity is the biggest illusion that the media created. If you look at Government spending over the last few years you will find it has never existed.
The 'bailed out banks continue to play with the monopoly money without giving even a nod to helping small business.
Continue to put your 'wet signature on loan/mortgage applications, and the BoE will create 'new money' on which you will pay interest for the rest of your natural.
Continue to put your 'wet signature on loan/mortgage applications, and the BoE will create 'new money' on which you will pay interest for the rest of your natural.
Good thread.
Procurement within the public sector is a huge problem. As is the awarding of contracts to massive companies like Mitie who fleece us rotten.
As for housing, successive govts LOVE to build. It keeps the job market going, not just for those in construction but maintenance and improvements thereafter.
They have welcomed mass immigration to increase demand on housing so they can build more. Demand always exceeds supply and so the house market exploded. 1 bed flats for £200k here in Sussex.. It's a disaster.
Corbyn can go on about lower rents but HE wants unlimited immigration! Immigrants have higher birth rates and we are all living longer. It's madness! Rents can NEVER tumble unless Govt buys up vast amounts of houses and rents them back to us at half price. i.e. proper socialism. Would it work? I've no idea..
Procurement within the public sector is a huge problem. As is the awarding of contracts to massive companies like Mitie who fleece us rotten.
As for housing, successive govts LOVE to build. It keeps the job market going, not just for those in construction but maintenance and improvements thereafter.
They have welcomed mass immigration to increase demand on housing so they can build more. Demand always exceeds supply and so the house market exploded. 1 bed flats for £200k here in Sussex.. It's a disaster.
Corbyn can go on about lower rents but HE wants unlimited immigration! Immigrants have higher birth rates and we are all living longer. It's madness! Rents can NEVER tumble unless Govt buys up vast amounts of houses and rents them back to us at half price. i.e. proper socialism. Would it work? I've no idea..
Apr 20, 2017 -- 2:57PM, Dotchinite wrote:
Austerity is the biggest illusion that the media created. If you look at Government spending over the last few years you will find it has never existed.
I'm think you'll find it wasn't a media invention:
The government actually CALLED it an austerity programme.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_government_austerity_programme
Worse than that, roughly around the time of PM and Chancellor resignation....
https://www.ft.com/content/9db2d1e8-002a-11e7-8d8e-a5e3738f9ae4
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/austerity-government-policy-conservatives-poor-food-banks-inequality-un-a7110066.html
The obscenity of Food Banks in today's Britain.
The 'march' of economic inequality in the UK is remorseless............."We are all in this together" said the Eaton boy while the other Eaton boys grinned slyly. while texting their brokers.
The 'march' of economic inequality in the UK is remorseless............."We are all in this together" said the Eaton boy while the other Eaton boys grinned slyly. while texting their brokers.
Same here in Rural(ish) Essex...injera,
I moved south after a few years in the north, then the midlands...
Rent for a 3 bed semi, £1100 or more a month, (was 1/2 that in west mids), and is double that in London.
It's become ridiculous.
The average wage includes the mega earners. I'm not sure what the average wage would be if you took out the top 1% and then did an average. I'm guessing about £20K a year maybe £25K? That means Rent, council tax, utilities = more than salary.
So, such luxuries as food and clothes, or even a car! become impossible.
My accountant mate always says that the sign of everything picking up, or improving economy, is lots of building going on.
It always looks promising then there's a lull again. Various reasons including; red tape, objections to every planning application, banks not lending (as usual) to property developers, awkward councils.
As you say, it isn't just the building, it's the knock-on business, the new infrastructure to support the new houses.... just a moving economy.
I moved south after a few years in the north, then the midlands...
Rent for a 3 bed semi, £1100 or more a month, (was 1/2 that in west mids), and is double that in London.
It's become ridiculous.
The average wage includes the mega earners. I'm not sure what the average wage would be if you took out the top 1% and then did an average. I'm guessing about £20K a year maybe £25K? That means Rent, council tax, utilities = more than salary.
So, such luxuries as food and clothes, or even a car! become impossible.
My accountant mate always says that the sign of everything picking up, or improving economy, is lots of building going on.
It always looks promising then there's a lull again. Various reasons including; red tape, objections to every planning application, banks not lending (as usual) to property developers, awkward councils.
As you say, it isn't just the building, it's the knock-on business, the new infrastructure to support the new houses.... just a moving economy.
Interesting. Just mentioned on TV.
More people rent from private landlords than from councils and housing associations combined!!!!
Could this be an issue?
I think so.
More people rent from private landlords than from councils and housing associations combined!!!!
Could this be an issue?
I think so.
National debt doubled under Cameron. I think it's now £1.5 trillion.
Austerity? No way. We live way beyond our means.
Study - yes, it's scary. How will the next generation cope? Thousands in debt after being sold the university lie, then faced with mortgages 5-6 times their salary....
Very tempted to move north, perhaps Yorkshire. 3-4 bed houses for 200k!! That's our plan...the so called north south divide is in the north's favour but that's politically incorrect to say that...
My own take on it is that people will rent more and come retirement the brown stuff will hit the fan. At present many homeowners are funding their care but in future (with fewer homeowners) I don't see that happening and the state will be burdened beyond belief...
Austerity? No way. We live way beyond our means.
Study - yes, it's scary. How will the next generation cope? Thousands in debt after being sold the university lie, then faced with mortgages 5-6 times their salary....
Very tempted to move north, perhaps Yorkshire. 3-4 bed houses for 200k!! That's our plan...the so called north south divide is in the north's favour but that's politically incorrect to say that...
My own take on it is that people will rent more and come retirement the brown stuff will hit the fan. At present many homeowners are funding their care but in future (with fewer homeowners) I don't see that happening and the state will be burdened beyond belief...
Injera 20 Apr 17 16:48
Rents can NEVER tumble unless Govt buys up vast amounts of houses and rents them back to us at half price. i.e. proper socialism. Would it work? I've no idea..
You nearly had the solution, Injera.
The answer is for the government to give you a house.
Think about it. Bloggs Jnr, aged 25 or over, wishes to set up home on his own or with someone else. Unfortunately, young Bloggsie hasn't got the cash. The government says, never mind, not to worry, pick out a reasonable place and we'll buy it for you. Assuming Bloggsie has a job or a good excuse for not having one (such as further education, vocational training, disability or bad job market) Bloggsie selects a vacant property at the lower end of the local price scale.
The government buys it and Bloggsie gets the keys. However, he doesn't get the deeds. He has to rent the place for 25 years first. The rent will be set by a local council assessor. After 25 years, Mr Bloggs, now aged 50 or over, gets the deeds to his house. We're assuming, of course, that he's been a model tenant.
Arrangements can be made to move up or down the housing ladder and between towns according to Bloggs' changing needs during his tenancy but he does eventually own a house. It isn't an impossible dream, it isn't even a socialist dream. It's been tried and tested in some countries where both mortgages and socialism are frowned upon.
Britain gives away millions of homes, that's the problem.
As long as they continue to give away millions of houses and flats for nothing property prices will not fall.
The prices won`t fall because although they are being give away, someone has to pay for them.
now if they were not being given away they would find market value.
Gallivanter, Mrs Thatcher did something similar although the houses weren't given away, they were sold for a nominal sum below market value to the sitting tenants. Greatly frowned upon by our left-leaning brothers.
NO they don't lfc..... You have made a couple of nonsense statements.
Millions of houses for nothing?!?!?
Where do you get your information?
They have reached market value, that's the problem. The market is all demand and not enough supply. The desperation to have a roof means landlords can charge what they like.
Before the right to buy, a majority of people lived in council accommodation.
As far as I can tell and remember, it seemed to work OKish
Millions of houses for nothing?!?!?
Where do you get your information?
They have reached market value, that's the problem. The market is all demand and not enough supply. The desperation to have a roof means landlords can charge what they like.
Before the right to buy, a majority of people lived in council accommodation.
As far as I can tell and remember, it seemed to work OKish
They were, foinavon, mostly housing stock that wouldn't have been sellable unless to those already living in them.
Anyone merely looking to buy a house in say, 1982, wouldn't generally have looked on a council estate, the only way to sell them, to raise short-term cash for councils was cheaply.
The banning of councils replacing housing stock sold as "right to buy" has meant a shortage of houses to rent.
Anyone merely looking to buy a house in say, 1982, wouldn't generally have looked on a council estate, the only way to sell them, to raise short-term cash for councils was cheaply.
The banning of councils replacing housing stock sold as "right to buy" has meant a shortage of houses to rent.
well there are people who don`t work, there are people working receiving housing benefit, and other issues such as immigration with many people living in a single property and not paying anything except to the landlord increasing rental values and property prices
the cost to the taxpayer for housing benefit alone is somewhere between 4 and 6 billion.
This is money that goes maintains the price of rents and houses and flats at an artificially high price
the cost to the taxpayer for housing benefit alone is somewhere between 4 and 6 billion.
This is money that goes maintains the price of rents and houses and flats at an artificially high price
The council houses should have been replaced but weren't by any of the governments after Thatcher's. I was in Hounslow at the weekend and noticed ex-council houses for sale at £450K 
are we allowed to mention single mothers living in 4 bedroom houses and receiving the equivalent of what would amount to a salary before tax of about £70,000?
probably not.
probably not.
you see someone is paying for these houses, and if is spread over the entire country and paid for by the country and not the individual that creates the high property and rental values
council housing was originally affordable housing for the working man.
that was all.
that was all.
now if you have a working man, and you have a single mother living in a property and receiving benefits to the equivalent of a £70,000 job, before tax in fairness.
how will that work?
I don't know.
how will that work?
I don't know.
if you have a single working woman looking to buy or rent a property where she works, how will that work?
I don't know.
I don't know.
don't give foreigners a penny unless there's something in it for us
hope this helps
hope this helps
The system I was commending is not unknown in some parts East of Suez where mortgages cannot be had. It can be compared to a mortgage purchase or to council house renting but it avoids some of the pitfalls inherent in both.
Boggsie doesn't need to come up with a deposit, therefore avoids the problem of paying high rent while trying to save. When he does choose his house, he isn't limited to buying an overpriced house or to buying a house in a slum because his "rent" is assessed as fair. Even though he is paying an affordable "rent", he isn't confined to a sink council estate. Within reason, he can live where he wants.
When the only purchaser of most privately-owned houses is the government, the prices tend to be low. That gets rid of the overpriced junk on the market today. Boggs and Mrs Boggs will one day own their own house then will eventually pass on to Paradise, leaving the house to all the little Boggsies who will immediately sell it -- to the government. And they'll sell it at whatever price the government offers.
All profits in the scheme go to the Boggs family, whose parents paid for part of the house, or to the government, which paid for the other part. Nobody loses, except perhaps rack-renting landlords who should be dragged round town behind wetfarting camels. IMHO, of course.
Told you that Studyform was the cleverest. You ought to listen to him.
Boggsie doesn't need to come up with a deposit, therefore avoids the problem of paying high rent while trying to save. When he does choose his house, he isn't limited to buying an overpriced house or to buying a house in a slum because his "rent" is assessed as fair. Even though he is paying an affordable "rent", he isn't confined to a sink council estate. Within reason, he can live where he wants.
When the only purchaser of most privately-owned houses is the government, the prices tend to be low. That gets rid of the overpriced junk on the market today. Boggs and Mrs Boggs will one day own their own house then will eventually pass on to Paradise, leaving the house to all the little Boggsies who will immediately sell it -- to the government. And they'll sell it at whatever price the government offers.
All profits in the scheme go to the Boggs family, whose parents paid for part of the house, or to the government, which paid for the other part. Nobody loses, except perhaps rack-renting landlords who should be dragged round town behind wetfarting camels. IMHO, of course.
Told you that Studyform was the cleverest. You ought to listen to him.
The whole point of this thread, lfc, was to show how politicians REALLY are.
As boxingthefox says, it's Divide and Rule.
With the help of the media, advertisers and others with a vested interest, they (all of them for years), just feed us information to distract us from the useless work they do for US while supposedly working for US. If you don't "read between the lines", you will end up blaming they want you to blame.
The stuff you mention, whilst an issue, possibly contributes towards the general state of things.
But.... costs a hell of a lot less than big company tax avoidance, money given to banks, or the contracts given to G4S or Capita.
The 100's of millions saved by ATOS was spent on ATOS (a French company, btw).
As boxingthefox says, it's Divide and Rule.
With the help of the media, advertisers and others with a vested interest, they (all of them for years), just feed us information to distract us from the useless work they do for US while supposedly working for US. If you don't "read between the lines", you will end up blaming they want you to blame.
The stuff you mention, whilst an issue, possibly contributes towards the general state of things.
But.... costs a hell of a lot less than big company tax avoidance, money given to banks, or the contracts given to G4S or Capita.
The 100's of millions saved by ATOS was spent on ATOS (a French company, btw).
That is a good idea, Gallivanter.
It's VERY interesting to note that a LARGE number of MPs are also private landlords..... perhaps in a fairer world, this wouldn't be allowed and then they might consider the plight of the tenant instead of themselves.
It's VERY interesting to note that a LARGE number of MPs are also private landlords..... perhaps in a fairer world, this wouldn't be allowed and then they might consider the plight of the tenant instead of themselves.
.
Exactly SF. how many greased palms involved in the G4S contracts. Athos and Capita Also involved Themselves in the recent NHS history, what a surprise.
If the government holds the houses, if the government determines the price , if the government determines who you can sell it to, and for how much, and who here's and receives this money etc then be very sure that before long the government will tell you how to behave, it will tell you who to pray to, it will tell you what to think , and you will be less than human.
I would rather live on the streets in a country like Britain or America than live in such a place
Poverty doesn't worry me.
Poverty doesn't worry me.
lfc1971, where the above schemes exist, the government does not own all the houses. Far from it. It doesn't even prevent private landlords from operating, why should it? It merely rents out houses, just like the British government does via local authorities.
By being able to compete fairly in the "rental" market where money cannot be lent at interest, it allows every level of society the right to buy. We hear a lot about the right to buy houses in Britain but that's the same as the right to buy Rolls Royces.
Not everyone really has those rights, do they?
By being able to compete fairly in the "rental" market where money cannot be lent at interest, it allows every level of society the right to buy. We hear a lot about the right to buy houses in Britain but that's the same as the right to buy Rolls Royces.
Not everyone really has those rights, do they?
It is simple, the housing market should not be regulated by the government . Because with that comes the evils that we see in these countries.
The housing market is regulated by the people within that country. The society itself must be self regulating. and this can only happen if the society is seperate from the government and lives apart from government influence.
This can only happen when it is the people of the country change the government when they want, and not the situation we have now where the government changes the population ..through immigration and other means
The housing market is regulated by the people within that country. The society itself must be self regulating. and this can only happen if the society is seperate from the government and lives apart from government influence.
This can only happen when it is the people of the country change the government when they want, and not the situation we have now where the government changes the population ..through immigration and other means
The government isn't regulating the housing market here and it's in great shape, isn't it?
Yes, and as I have alluded to the reason I might as well spell it out.
When there is an unlimited supply of people the government and corporates have the power
When people are easy to come by they are not respected, they are despised
When there is an unlimited supply of people the government and corporates have the power
When people are easy to come by they are not respected, they are despised
I always thought outsourcing as a strange idea.
If the cuts could be made to make things more cost effective, then just make them!
If a company takes over, let's take rubbish disposal as an example, then that company needs to make money.
So, and I'm sure people can remember this, 8 blokes on a dust-cart, clearing dustbins thoroughly and efficiently every week, becomes 2 men and a driver collecting some of the rubbish (which we now have to sort for them), every fortnight, if we put it in bags which to we are limited in number.
If not take it to the local (mostly privately owned) tip, limit 3 visits a month where I am.
So..... 5 men out of work (now on the dole?) Much rubbish not taken, massive rise in fly-tipping, use of Black Plastic Bags (very green in the age of recycling, which incidentally a big waste of fresh water). Spread of smells and rats and unhygienic situations.
All because someone powerful's friend (or husband) is in ownership of a big rubbish disposal company.
It hasn't saved the general public any money, the money just goes to someone other than the council and that someone wants to keep some of it.
And, surely 8 men can do a better job then 3!
I don't know if this is a good example, but similar almost certainly applies to nearly everything that was sold
Most efficiencies and cuts are in man-power and wages. Whether or not it's American economics I'm not sure, but wages are seen as an evil, a cost to keep trimmed. In the older more successful (if it isn't rose-tinted glasses) times, workers had a value. They just had to produce more than they cost, and for a couple of decades at least, were paid fairly. Or maybe, once again it was about supply and demand.
If the cuts could be made to make things more cost effective, then just make them!
If a company takes over, let's take rubbish disposal as an example, then that company needs to make money.
So, and I'm sure people can remember this, 8 blokes on a dust-cart, clearing dustbins thoroughly and efficiently every week, becomes 2 men and a driver collecting some of the rubbish (which we now have to sort for them), every fortnight, if we put it in bags which to we are limited in number.
If not take it to the local (mostly privately owned) tip, limit 3 visits a month where I am.
So..... 5 men out of work (now on the dole?) Much rubbish not taken, massive rise in fly-tipping, use of Black Plastic Bags (very green in the age of recycling, which incidentally a big waste of fresh water). Spread of smells and rats and unhygienic situations.
All because someone powerful's friend (or husband) is in ownership of a big rubbish disposal company.
It hasn't saved the general public any money, the money just goes to someone other than the council and that someone wants to keep some of it.
And, surely 8 men can do a better job then 3!
I don't know if this is a good example, but similar almost certainly applies to nearly everything that was sold
Most efficiencies and cuts are in man-power and wages. Whether or not it's American economics I'm not sure, but wages are seen as an evil, a cost to keep trimmed. In the older more successful (if it isn't rose-tinted glasses) times, workers had a value. They just had to produce more than they cost, and for a couple of decades at least, were paid fairly. Or maybe, once again it was about supply and demand.
To survive, people need five things: Food, clothing, shelter, medical attention and protection. A government that does not provide those basic needs through regulation is failing to govern.
There is no need to turn the people into slaves to provide the necessities. However, it's difficult to argue against the government regulating the above and not protesting when it tells you which side of the road to drive on.
Still, lfc1971, I don't think we're really very far apart after all.
There is no need to turn the people into slaves to provide the necessities. However, it's difficult to argue against the government regulating the above and not protesting when it tells you which side of the road to drive on.
Still, lfc1971, I don't think we're really very far apart after all.
lfc
When people are cheap, hungry or in desperation they are despised.... and used, by the governments and big corporations who have the money.
When the distribution of wealth is as disproportionate as now (or as 150 years ago - when there were less people about and no foreigners and no welfare state) then those with money will use those without. Then expect them to be grateful.
When people are cheap, hungry or in desperation they are despised.... and used, by the governments and big corporations who have the money.
When the distribution of wealth is as disproportionate as now (or as 150 years ago - when there were less people about and no foreigners and no welfare state) then those with money will use those without. Then expect them to be grateful.
GN, lfc.
Studyform, Marx spoke of the "surplus value of labour" which he saw as a bad thing. That surplus value isn't such a bad thing unless, like Marxists, you think it rightfully belongs to the government. In such cases, the government always becomes those who govern instead of those who are governed.
The old G.U.M. shops of soviet Moscow can now be found in E.U. Brusssels. You have to be related to someone who governs to get in them.
It might be that as globalism fails (Brexit is just the beginning) the surplus value, or most of it, will be returned to those who produced it. Just like it was in the good ole days!
Studyform, Marx spoke of the "surplus value of labour" which he saw as a bad thing. That surplus value isn't such a bad thing unless, like Marxists, you think it rightfully belongs to the government. In such cases, the government always becomes those who govern instead of those who are governed.
The old G.U.M. shops of soviet Moscow can now be found in E.U. Brusssels. You have to be related to someone who governs to get in them.
It might be that as globalism fails (Brexit is just the beginning) the surplus value, or most of it, will be returned to those who produced it. Just like it was in the good ole days!
It beggars belief that G4S should be allowed to run any prisons, let alone 6, Oakwood has been an utter disaster with to many inexperienced staff, target figures massaged, and lies being told.
But everything is ok now according to, John McLaughlin, G4S director for HMP Oakwood, “Opening a prison is a complex process and our experience and these figures show that it takes time to develop the experience of staff, fully embed the prison regime and establish links with local partner agencies.
“Oakwood has come through a difficult period since it opened but the prison, staff and regime have matured.
Really!! try putting Experienced well paid staff in at the start, that might have helped. Even the OLympics fiasco (bailed out by volunteers) has not halted or even slowed this greedy juggernaut
But everything is ok now according to, John McLaughlin, G4S director for HMP Oakwood, “Opening a prison is a complex process and our experience and these figures show that it takes time to develop the experience of staff, fully embed the prison regime and establish links with local partner agencies.
“Oakwood has come through a difficult period since it opened but the prison, staff and regime have matured.
Really!! try putting Experienced well paid staff in at the start, that might have helped. Even the OLympics fiasco (bailed out by volunteers) has not halted or even slowed this greedy juggernaut
Great thread, keep it going SF/guys, i'm off GN and GL.
GN & GL to you, Fox.
If you don't like G4S, I wonder what you would think of what happens where I idle my summer months away. The Volunteer Program of the Arizona Department of Corrections might just have a place for you.
If that doesn't suit, how would you like to be a Reserve Deputy Sheriff? You get a big hat and a gun and the right to chaw tobaccy.
If you don't like G4S, I wonder what you would think of what happens where I idle my summer months away. The Volunteer Program of the Arizona Department of Corrections might just have a place for you.
If that doesn't suit, how would you like to be a Reserve Deputy Sheriff? You get a big hat and a gun and the right to chaw tobaccy.
I honestly don't know much about Marxism and I haven't read anything on the subject.
From what you say, it makes sense though.
[Didn't the Russian oligarchs merely get pre-advised about what was going to be sold off, btw? (since you mention G U M)]
It's why communism cannot work. Someone has to be in charge so by definition cannot be equal. Which I guess it what you just said.
Added to which there are so many levels of being in charge. Further added to which is the natural human quality of greed. There will always be someone ready to help a buddy out especially if it means better money or conditions for themselves.
I have often thought about the old state run shops in communist countries (iirc there were called corecom shops in Bulgaria for example) effectively they become one big company and buy and sell everything to the population. I imagine, if it was run fairly and I have no idea if it was or not, then goods should be cheaper because a level of profit is removed.
Move over to a capitalist state like the UK and think Tesco.
From what you say, it makes sense though.
[Didn't the Russian oligarchs merely get pre-advised about what was going to be sold off, btw? (since you mention G U M)]
It's why communism cannot work. Someone has to be in charge so by definition cannot be equal. Which I guess it what you just said.
Added to which there are so many levels of being in charge. Further added to which is the natural human quality of greed. There will always be someone ready to help a buddy out especially if it means better money or conditions for themselves.
I have often thought about the old state run shops in communist countries (iirc there were called corecom shops in Bulgaria for example) effectively they become one big company and buy and sell everything to the population. I imagine, if it was run fairly and I have no idea if it was or not, then goods should be cheaper because a level of profit is removed.
Move over to a capitalist state like the UK and think Tesco.
Goodnight, Study.
I will now go and annoy the readers of the Daily Mail until my eyes droop.
I will now go and annoy the readers of the Daily Mail until my eyes droop.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539