You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I can’t see the relevance of this to your question/my reply about which countries have privatized their trains?
Well if we are going with this sort of tedious shit. Then you failed to answer.
However since you have shown yourself repeatedly incapable of a sensible discussion (eg your failure to do anything but shout Laffer curve) I wont waste any more time on you.
it’s the UKIP hype phantom all over again.
A lot more profitable for Farage though.
where there is a proposal to confiscate 10% of mid to large companies shares?
Not in the UK, that’s for sure.
Well it looks like the brexit party is falling apart at the seams
Their PPC for St. Ives, was drafted into Falmouth after that one decided against standing against the Tories so as not to split the vote, he's now been announced as the PPC for Bristol South!?
https://twitter.com/Wayne_BayIey/status/1194020457772658690
Predictable resposnses
Most European countries have all their natural monopolies under state control in some form. so nationalising them only brings us back to a similar position to most.
On the share ownership thing? Again we lag far behind in workers owning part of buisnesses so a radical step is needed to bring us into a similar position to most european countries. ie back to the centre
Hard left would be nationalising without compensation. Centrist is buying back or waiting until the franchise expires and not renewing
Hard left is a planned economy, centrist is a mixed economy, hard right is unfettered markets
As for the idea I am so far left - utter ludicrous ad shows two things. The very poor understanding of what left wing means and the blinkered far right attitudes some of you have
A lot more profitable for Farage though.
Well of course.. He's never been interested in politics, just money. Look at his attendance record as an MEP.
Maybe that reality is now starting to dawn on his flock.
I bet they're shocked to their very cores to discover that Nigel wasn't being entirely honest with them, has put his own interests before everything and everyone else, has taken the money and the peerage, sold them all down the river and run off to count his money in the pub.
I know I certainly was
/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-expressandstar-mna.s3.amazonaws.com/public/32C4A4IXJVDFHCOOFDL2H2HMXI.jpg)
Cheers!
Hard left would be nationalising without compensation. Centrist is buying back or waiting until the franchise expires and not renewing
In terms of trains, just don't renew franchises when the terms expire. Trains are an absolute disaster in the UK.
From a consumer perspective it's rediculous to have to ponder what sort of ticket to buy, and consider split ticketing and catch a particular train from a particular company etc.
You should just be able to buy a ticket from A to B, and that's that.
Trains are an absolute disaster in the UK
They are in parts yes. But those of us who are old enough to remember British Rail, and are prepared to take their rose tinted glasses off, will remember it was even worse back then.
Outofbreath - we've done this to death as you will remember. No-one says anything about 'confiscating' except you and presumably other anti-Corbynites.
I think I'm becoming somewhat besotted with Angela Rayner. I'm now convinced she'll be the first female labour PM, either taking over from Corbyn if he wins or at the next election if he loses. It'll be quite a story too, an ex-nurse, teenage single mum who left school at 16 to PM.
"But the star turn was Rayner, who talked about the importance of adult education in her own life, after she left school at 16 to look after her son. Under Labour’s policy, she said, “whether you left school with no GCSEs or 10, your ability to pay or your willingness to take on debt will not determine whether you get the education you need”.
She skewered politicians’ habit of parroting the idea that vocational qualifications are as important as academic ones, or that the UK can simply copy Germany.
And she had another nice line that “poverty is not just about being penniless, it is about being powerless”, because workers often don’t have the opportunity to train."
I reckon Farage will also back down in a week or so and announce they will not field candidates in Tory/labour marginals, on condition that Boris goes full crash out/hard Brexit
And that’s labour well and truly ****ed!
You mean in Labour marginals.
I don't think so in all cases - at all. In fact that puts us back to 2017 really.
(And if your scenaorio plays out then it's up to remainers to step up and Vote Labour. Which there is loads of right?
Am I missing something? all the polls are suggesting a lower % of the vote for the tories than in 2017. so how does this translate into a huge majority for the tories?
What am I missing?
A lower % of the vote for Labour.
That and the Tory vote dropping in some areas, and rising in others. Some of those areas where it is down, it has to drop a lot for seats to be lost (thanks Lord Farage for helping with that), but in some target areas they don’t need that large a local swing to win seats.
Remember, this is hundreds of individual elections, yet we, and the press, try to reduce it to national polls and swings… which doesn’t really work.
Am I missing something? all the polls are suggesting a lower % of the vote for the tories than in 2017. so how does this translate into a huge majority for the tories?
What am I missing?
You're not. I think it's the gulf between the two currently that has people twitching.
And the incorrect assumption yesterday that BXP being stood down in already 2017 Tory seats led to a majority. This wasn't interpreted correctly in my opinion. I knee-jerked too.
If anything we move back to a 2017 scenario more cleanly with the Left/Leave possibly struggling to vote for Tory. Or being split between Tory and BXP. All depends on those marginals and what BXP do next I guess.
No predictions from me yet!
but in some target areas they don’t need that large a local swing to win seats.
Not being awkward but which ones? For instance here in Bassetlaw we've got a 5000 maj with Labour. We have BXP and a CON candidate - do you not think the leave vote will be split across those two leaving a stronger Labour majority? I'm torn. Not sure yet.
Same in neighbouring Mansfield but that changed to Tory in 2017. Add in BXP and it splits the leave vote.
But those of us who are old enough to remember British Rail, and are prepared to take their rose tinted glasses off, will remember it was even worse back then.
That trains were worse 30years ago should not be a surprise should it? After being run down by Thatcher.
where there is a proposal to confiscate 10% of mid to large companies shares?
Not in the UK, that’s for sure.
So you've missed Labour's proposal to put 10% of the shares all companies with more than 250 workers into the ownership of the workers?
That trains were worse 30years ago should not be a surprise should it? After being run down by Thatcher.
That, and technology and it being thirty years ago.
Lots of confusing information about majorities.
It's FPTP. The tories need circa 321 seats for a majority.
The tories will probably and up with more seats than Labour, but it will only be about 290-300 in my uneducated opinion.
That's not enough to form a government, it's a hung parliament.
That’s not enough to form a government, it’s a hung parliament.
It's not enough to form a government on your own. You can have coalitions and minority governments.
Same in neighbouring Mansfield but that changed to Tory in 2017. Add in BXP and it splits the leave vote.
If it turned Tory in 2017 then presumably Farage isn't fielding a candidate there?
So you’ve missed Labour’s proposal to put 10% of the shares all companies with more than 250 workers into the ownership of the workers?
Nope, but I haven't seen the proposal to confiscate them which is what some people are terrified of. It simply says 'transfer ownership' in all those links which will likely result in companies having to buy them back. This means that investors e.g. our pension funds will not be dispossessed, which is what many people including Outofbreath are worried about.
As for the idea I am so far left – utter ludicrous ad shows two things. The very poor understanding of what left wing means and the blinkered far right attitudes some of you have
I felt it might be pointless trying to engage sensibly with you. I was right.
In what way am I far left? go on please tell me 'cos all my lefty friends disagree.
Politically I consider myself to be a dark green
It's fortunate that Wayne Bayley still has his original cult to fall back on in these troubled times.
If it turned Tory in 2017 then presumably Farage isn’t fielding a candidate there?
Ah - good point. Might have independent candidate trouble.
^^^Gowrie: what does this mean?
That, and technology and it being thirty years ago.
And the cost of keeping all those branch lines open so people could, you know, travel without a car (not that i disagree, the service was still bad).
It’s not enough to form a government on your own. You can have coalitions and minority governments.
Indeed. Who are the tories going to be able to get on board? Ten more DUP? The brexit party wants a stone cold suicidal brexit, unlikely.
An informal coalition between libs, lab, green, SNP is the way to go.
I'm not aware that a coalition has to be as draconian as the Liberal Democrats /tory coalition where they were basically forced to vote in line with tory policy, which as we all know was a disaster.
The big question is, is corbyns Labour prepared to work with other parties (not tories or Bxp).
That's the sticking point. The Labour Party need to get off thier high horse and start being cooperative.
Might have independent candidate trouble.
Let's hope so. TBH, the electorate seems so befuddled that an independent standing for anything similar sounding would probably get a hatful of votes. Anyone got a spare couple of grand?
As for the idea I am so far left – utter ludicrous ad shows two things. The very poor understanding of what left wing means and the blinkered far right attitudes some of you have
How old are you?
Do you remember the 70's ?
It’s not enough to form a government on your own. You can have coalitions and minority governments.
In theory yes.
In practice nobody is going to do *any* kind of deal with the Torys without a second ref and the Torys will not agree to that. I can't see how the Torys could function as a minority government trying to get Brexit through.
So does that mean Labour would have to take the responsibility on? I'm not sure that The Libdems or SNP would be keen on propping up a fiscally incontinent Labour party.
We might see a government that exists long enough to hold a second ref and for no other purpose. We might see more chaos.
Like everyone else I see no evidence for this 90 seat Tory majority and all the pollsters I've heard interviewed say the seat count literally can't be predicted.
confiscate them which is what some people are terrified of. It simply says ‘transfer ownership’ in all those links which will likely result in companies having to buy them back.
A company being forced to buy back 10pc shares and give them to someone else *is* confiscation. There is simply no slight of hand by which you can take 10pc of something without paying and the existing owner of that thing doesn't have either 10pc less of it or 10pc less value.
The big question is, is corbyns Labour prepared to work with other parties
He refuses to form a coalition with the majority of his own MP's, so I'm guessing not.
To be fair to grandad, everyone else has been pretty belligerent in slagging everyone else off and saying they won't work with them. Any coalition would be a fraught, fractious affair that probably wouldn't last five minutes.
Its a horrible thought but its looking to me like we could be having an election every 6 months for the foreseeable future, while the country remains frozen in this horrible limbo and slowly eats itself
The Labour Party need to get off thier high horse and start being cooperative.
The flaw there is
Green Party doesnt really count.
SNP have made it clear they will work to some extent but it will be focussed on the aim of a referendum.
Libdems have made it clear they will not work with Corbyn and will want him replaced with someone more acceptable to them.
Cant think why Labour leadership arent thanking her for that.
Thing is when you search "corbyn refuses coalition with libdems" you get loads of Jo Swinson refusing coalition with Labour.
Yeah, let’s ignore all the work Watson did with Swinson and others to try and sort some way of working together to beat the Conservative Brexit Party at an upcoming election. The way he was treated (by people inside Labour not outside it) when he tried was quite telling, no?
https://www.google.com/search?q=watson%20swinson
steve - I'm 58 and yes I remember the 70s. dunno whats that got to do with the ludicous assertion I am some sort of hard lefty. 70s labour were not after all
Traits of a hard left position
an elimination of all private capital, compulsory nationalisation without compensation. That sort of thing.
Look at some of the real hard left groups like Scottish socialist party, SWP, RCP. those sort of folk
Point to a sinle post I have made that supports a hard left position? Where is Ernie when you need him - hes a proper lefty! I'm just a wishy washy pale pink liberal in his eyes 🙂
Swinson set demands she must have known that labour could not possibly agree to. No party would or could.
Its as much her fault as anyone
SNP didn't set the same demands - that Corbyn had to go.
Yeah, let’s ignore all the work Watson did with Swinson and others to try and sort some way of working together to beat the Conservative Brexit Party at this election.
The work which ended with a demand that Corbyn should be kicked out and replaced with someone more ideologically suited to the orange book lib dems?
Cant imagine why that didnt get all round cheers.
I do love the Libdems bollox to brexit but first lets get rid of Corbyn.
its looking to me like we could be having an election every 6 months for the foreseeable future,
This.
The rise of the smaller parties means its very difficult for anyone to get a decent majority these days. (And any government with less than a ~25 seat majority is really a lame duck government who can't do any of the unpopular things governments have to do.) Major's majority of 19 was considered completely inadequate at the time. Over the last 10 years 19 is the norm or even on the high side!
Swinson has to say that though. She's mainly contesting affluent seats in the South East where they think Corbyn will requisition their Audi's and mke them drive Trabants, nationalise their Bridge Clubs and force them to declare their allegiance to Dianne Abbott every morning before trooping off to work at the salt mines*
So she has to say that she won't entertain a Corbyn coalition as not to do so would be electoral suicide
*and to be fair, they're probably right
I agree. But to say the collapse of a anti tory coalition is all Corbyns fault is bollox. would any labour leader offer to stand down in that situation?
The reasoning for Swinson saying she won't work with Corbyn has some logic, but then you can't really then blame Labour for not rushing to join an alliance with them after that.
The flaw there is
Green Party doesnt really count.
SNP have made it clear they will work to some extent but it will be focussed on the aim of a referendum.
Libdems have made it clear they will not work with Corbyn and will want him replaced with someone more acceptable to them.
Cant think why Labour leadership arent thanking her for that
Dare I say? A coalition of.....chaos??
Of course, all that 'we won't ever work with them' rhetoric will be right out of the window about 3 seconds after the hung parliament result comes in. Thats when the real horse trading starts
If Labour need support from both a unionist party and a party wanting an independence referendum, yes it would get messy.
The wise thing would be to stick to the promise to have an EU referendum sorted within 6 months, and then have another general election before 2020 is out.
Any hung parliament is likely to result in another general election within a few years anyway.
And that’s probably the best case scenario at the moment, sadly.
The wise thing would be to stick to the promise to have an EU referendum sorted within 6 months, and then have another general election before 2020 is out.
That promise was for a government of national unity not an elected minority government. So there is no sticking to it. It is expired.
A good play would be to get in some electoral reform.
So there is no sticking to it.
I thought Labour had promised an EU referendum within 6 months if they are in government after the election?
I thought Labour had promised an EU referendum within 6 months if they are in government after the election?
Ah sorry I misread it.
I am failing to see though why you think they should then immediately call a GE? What do you see as in it for them?
The children need to learn how to share thier toys.
Parliament is log jammed precisely because certain factions of all parties are refusing to do thier jobs and attempting to grab supreme power.
I suppose one good thing has come of this so far, parliament is functioning as it should by stopping anything too crazy. But the result is paralysis until they start working with each other rather than against each other.
To be honest I'm quite happy with the situation as it stands, where the amount of damage any one party can do is severely curtailed. Its actually been quite funny watching 'World King' Joris Bohnsons impotent rage at his inability to actually do anything
The worst thing that can happen IMHO is anyone getting an overall majority. Nobody in UK politics could be trusted with one, on account of the fact that they're all mental! Luckily there seems to be a vanishingly small chance of that happening
I've decided I'll vote for any party that doesn't have candidates:
kissing babies
pulling pints
drawing pictures with young kids in a school
walking around a hospital talking to patients
None of the above has anything to do with competency as a PM, surely no one views such things other than with a large dose of cynicism but then they keep doing it so presumably some data being farmed from somewhere indicates it works
Oh and to the working class guy on the BBC News this morning who felt the Westminster elite were robbing him (and his working class peers) of their Brexit decision - maybe take 5 seconds to have a think about who in Westminster is supporting Brexit and maybe, just maybe realise it's not going to be in the interests of the working class and won't fix austerity or give you more job opportunities.
steve – I’m 58 and yes I remember the 70s. dunno whats that got to do with the ludicous assertion I am some sort of hard lefty. 70s labour were not after all
You seem to see nationalisation as some panacea ... my own memories of the 70's are it was far from ideal, so far from ideal it had many Labour voters become Tory's.
they should then immediately call a GE?
Oh, that was if they were dependant on both a unionist and an independence party. That kind of cooperation could get a referendum bill through parliament for an EU referendum, but not a Scottish one, so would probably have a short shelf life, and Labour would want to go back to the people and try and get a majority after we have either left the EU or binned Brexit, wouldn’t they?
I thought Labour had promised an EU referendum within 6 months if they are in government after the election?
Doesn't mean much though without saying HOW and the mechanics.
Problem is we currently have 3.5 options ... (if you count Boris' option as something other than just a worse option than May's) and we potentially have another Labour option...
Quite honestly (much as I'd like it) I don't see how there can be a United Kingdom (emphasis on united) unless the No Deal is put on the table and how any deal/revoke would be put to a referendum that wouldn't return the least worst compromise. (Some sort of crappy deal)
but most importantly I don't see any remotely fair campaigning and facts being possible with social media which I believe is what led us into this in the first place.
Perhaps 6mo might be long enough to actually start to think HOW we prevent lies being published and 90% of voters preferring their FB feed to actually reading a policy, manifesto or some actual factual source???
Anyway, recent polls show both main parties getting rising support as we head towards the election. Will that change to Labour continuing to rise and the Tories falling? Cross everything…
All labour need to do to win this election is remind everyone just how funny it was seeing the look on Theresa Mays face when she lost her majority - like Dot Cotton licking piss of a thistle - and ask them to picture how funny it would be if Mr 'Can-do' smug, born-to-rule Johnson managed to lose this election. Picture the look on his smarmy, self-satisfied face. Then picture Dominic Cummmings going mental in number 10
Guaranteed landslide victory!
That's how bad politics in this country has become, we're looking back on May's catastrophe and it's almost looking like the halcyon days.
Now what do we have? Mr organic potato head vs Mr Russian potato head.
ask them to picture how funny it would be if Mr ‘Can-do’ smug, born-to-rule Johnson managed to lose this election.
They are trying that, with a bit of “I was not born to rule” stuff from Corbyn. Might be too subtle though… perhaps a compilation video of Johnson looking lost and beaten.
Labour have made a firm commitment to a referendum in 6 months with whatever deal is on the table then v remain
Beside all the noise..
I just don't understand why anyone would for Conservatives unless they are really really rich, and really really selfish.
I just don’t understand why anyone would for Conservatives unless they are really really rich, and really really selfish.
Indeed - but Nye Bevin pointed out long ago that this is the Tories' remarkable ability - to convince people to vote for them despite it being against their own interests.
You seem to see nationalisation as some panacea … my own memories of the 70’s are it was far from ideal, so far from ideal it had many Labour voters become Tory’s
.
The round of nationalisation done in the 70's was to protect the jobs of failed free market companies. Of course the tories even then were much better at marketing and blamed the rescue attempt rather than the actual cause, poor business practises and greed.
Now look at the industries labour are saying could be nationalised, and ask are they actually operational without government subsidy, and if no, then the answer is clear that the current situation is a fraud, that taxpayers are subsidising shareholders of failed corporations, and that nationalisation is the only way to get value for the billions of subsidies being leached by those companies.
And Frankly privatisation of the energy and public transport has been an environmental disaster. The only way we can meet future environmental plans is to have an organised energy and transport systems that are based on the countries needs and not on shareholder profits.
tjagain
Member
Am I missing something? all the polls are suggesting a lower % of the vote for the tories than in 2017. so how does this translate into a huge majority for the tories?
FPTP being ****ed. You know that...
2017, May got 42.4% of the vote and Corbyn got 40.0%, which translated into 317 and 262 seats- 48.7% and 40.3% of seats respectively.
2015, Cameron got 36.9% and Miliband got 30.4%, translating into 330 and 232 seats- 50.7% and 35.7% respectively.
2010, Cameron got 36.1% and Brown got 29%, translating into 306 and 258- 47.1% and 39.6%.
1/3 = 1/2 except when it = 1/3d, 40% = 40% except when it equals 50%, a minority is a majority and ignorance is strength. Why would, or even how could, 2019 be any different? 36% gets a majority for Cameron, 40% gets a minority for Corbyn, Miliband gets more votes but less seats than Brown, Corbyn gets more votes than Cameron managed in either election and gets almost the same number of seats as Brown got with far less voter share, Cameron gains less than a % of the votes and gains 24 seats... It's all barking mad. Oh yeah and let's not even mention UKIP and the SNP, you need to have a degree in unmaths for that to make sense.
So why shouldn't 38% of votes get you a strong majority if you're Johnson when 42.4% doesn't if you're May? And why shouldn't 28% of votes if you're Corbyn get you 186 seats when it gets Brown 258?
It's easy to look at the polls and forecasts and think they don't make sense but if they did make sense, they'd be wrong.
Votes don't equal MPs 😉
Ta Northwind - I was just looking at tory totals and thinking it was less than May so no majority
This election more than any other there are going to be regional effects so UK wide polls are going to be hard to apply
I still do not see the tories making the 30 odd gains they are going to need for even a slender majority
espcially as the polls seem to show tory support dropping ad labour rising
DrJ
Indeed – but Nye Bevin pointed out long ago that this is the Tories’ remarkable ability – to convince people to vote for them despite it being against their own interests.
The issue has been that what Bevin created has grown beyond sustainability.
On one hand the NHS haemorrhages cash as a matter of policy whilst on the other it's remit for free at the point of need (or what need means) has been continually widened whilst on the 3rd hand the population demographics have shifted considerably from post war Britain.
Put simply, I think many of us value the NHS and would pay more but it seems like diminishing returns unless the processes are fixed.
What I mean by that in a deliberate over-simplification is if I pay more then most of what I pay more NHS procurement will simply insist they their preferred suppliers pay more, some 50 yr old will get another round of IVF but the person needing the hip replacement will still be in the same queue.
This makes it an easy target for every Tory government time after time.
Best case scenario..
Tories get more seats than Labour, but not a majority.
Then what..? Labour still don't have position..
Apart from we pay far less for the NHS than most comparable systems. Even with the tories stupid " market" reforms in England is still a very efficient system
On the whole we pay far less for expensive stuff than fr example the US ( which is why the US want to make us pay more)
No 50 year old gets IVF on the NHS
Get rid of the stupid fake market and save 10% immediately
The round of nationalisation done in the 70’s was to protect the jobs of failed free market companies. Of course the tories even then were much better at marketing and blamed the rescue attempt rather than the actual cause, poor business practises and greed.
More accurately they were to protect jobs in failed industries....
Now look at the industries labour are saying could be nationalised, and ask are they actually operational without government subsidy, and if no, then the answer is clear that the current situation is a fraud, that taxpayers are subsidising shareholders of failed corporations, and that nationalisation is the only way to get value for the billions of subsidies being leached by those companies.
Lets look at the railway's? Back in BR day's I got a train in a dire emergency... the cheapest ticket was practically extortion and then when I went to get a buffet I got a environmentally friendly paper bag saying how much more efficient trains were than cars, buses and planes...
It struck me as ironic.. that the most expensive by far way to travel is "the most efficient"
A couple of years ago I was on a train overhearing a conversation by what seemed to be a load of BT execs... the part I remember was them complaining they were in a freemarket now and how they were competitive and having to provide value (I almost burst my sides laughing at that)
And Frankly privatisation of the energy and public transport has been an environmental disaster. The only way we can meet future environmental plans is to have an organised energy and transport systems that are based on the countries needs and not on shareholder profits.
Yet other European countries manage... France has had environmentally energy to spare with it's nuclear program. Somehow the Peage gets repaired etc.
So what are you proposing? Bring back the NCB? ( 😉 ) {I'm just making a point}
It's interesting that as a nationalised industry the NCB systematically destroyed plans to prevent being sued for subsidence where a private company would be held to (some) account.
all that said .....
I'm not against nationalisation of key infrastructure but going back to...
blamed the rescue attempt rather than the actual cause, poor business practises
The underlying problems are poor business practices... simply nationalising poor business practices will not improive them automatically.
The rise of the smaller parties means its very difficult for anyone to get a decent majority these days.
Good, perhaps the penny will eventually drop regarding coalition and pragmatism.
Poll trackers give averages over say 14 days. However this in a fast moving campaign can be pretty laggy, a lot has happened over the last fortnight. The latest poll from yesterday has 39/31% Con/Lab which is a bit closer than previously. It looks like BXP and LD are giving up support to Lab/Con - maybe Lab are picking up LD voters? If so, that could translate to seat gains since LD actually have some. How many Lab/LD marginals are held by LD?
On one hand the NHS haemorrhages cash as a matter of policy
Does it? My understanding was that it operates pretty efficiently.
Back in BR day’s I got a train in a dire emergency… the cheapest ticket was practically extortion
Whereas now it is extortion.
that the most expensive by far way to travel is “the most efficient”
Because, especially under the tories, it was actively undermined whilst other forms were subsidised.
Yet other European countries manage
You then go on to use France whose electricity industry is pretty much all government controlled.
The underlying problems are poor business practices
True. It is amazing how some of those problem industries once foreign owned and rid of the British managers do far better. Embarrassing though.
Apart from we pay far less for the NHS than most comparable systems. Even with the tories stupid ” market” reforms in England is still a very efficient system
On the whole we pay far less for expensive stuff than fr example the US ( which is why the US want to make us pay more)
Holding the US up as an example is not exactly a good start. According to the link later ...
This is the result of long term underfunding and political decision making by this and past
governments. The UK population is taxed less than most European countries.
The point I was making is there are 3 separate vectors ...and this makes it an easy target for each Tory government.
The NHS was the best health system in the world. This is no longer true. The UK lags behind most European Countries in treatment outcomes. The UK is 21 st out of 25 in breast cancer
survival, 20 th out of 23 rd for bowel cancer survival, and 19 th out of 31 in stroke survival. Most Eastern European countries do better than us. These figures come from the Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
The UK has fewer Doctors and Nurses/1000population than Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy,
the Czech Republic, and less than half the number of hospital beds/1000population than
France or Germany. The OECD reports that staff in UK hospitals are ‘rushed and without
time to care leaving them focussed on processes rather than patients’
True. It is amazing how some of those problem industries once foreign owned and rid of the British managers do far better. Embarrassing though.
To be fair this is Europe wide ... most or many ex nationalised industries seem to be better outside their original geography where they have thrown away the old process and started from scratch.
Holding the US up as an example is not exactly a good start
Considering our private sector tends to look more towards the US than towards Europe its normally a good plan in predicting what might happen.
When looking at this argument costs are rising and NHS will become unaffordable the thing that springs to mind is will this be solved by the private sector. How will, for example, compulsory insurance, solve this rising cost issue? What is it offering us to solve the problem. Or is it really just saying sod those who cant pay we cant save them all.
For the rest of your quotes. The takeaway here is our governments have a)underinvested and b)when they did bother investing wasted a lot of it. Thats not an argument for privatisation but better government.
Plus a lot of people are racist to some degree. They may not openly admit it but when given some options that appeal to their inner racist they like them. The options are made up and not based on fact of course but that is where the stupidity comes in and they just believe it.
Better known as populism.
Totally this.
I am hearing a lot about friends of friends and family members of people who are not frothing at the mouth, street fighting racists in the Classic image.
They tend more to be people whose lives aren’t working out as they want them to (generally due to circumstances that are now beyond their control, but weren’t in the past). Instinctively they find it easier to blame someone else than have a look in the mirror where most of the reasons lay.
Too many cars cramming into the town in the morning? It is due to Asians as they never walk anywhere and have eight cars to one family.
Job opportunities not there even though you have never really knuckled down either at school or later and did boring shit like professional qualifications? Positive discrimination is to blame. ‘They’ favour everyone but ‘real’ English people.
The media in this country is very very good at manipulating these people.
When Rees Mogg sounds off about Grenfell it is not a mistake. A lot of the people he is trying to court have an underlying feeling that the residents of Grenfell largely ‘should not be in this country anyway’.
These are the times we live in. This country is in managed decline. It makes it very easy to prey on people who think the world owes them a living.
For the rest of your quotes. The takeaway here is our governments have a)underinvested and b)when they did bother investing wasted a lot of it. Thats not an argument for privatisation but better government.
I'm most certainly not for privatisation of the NHS .... the problem is practically binary.
The Tory's under invest but Labour then invests but wastes a lot...
The Tory's will NEVER invest in the NHS ... so that leaves Labour actually trying to rationalise and invest more wisely however this is not something they are comfortable with saying.