Forum menu
They are ideologically straight-jacketed into a private good/public bad mind-set that completely refuses to countenance any alternative, no matter what the actual evidence suggests
'idealogical zealoutry' is not defeated by dogmatic posturing.
Well, after taking credit for it, yeah I think he would. What politician wouldn't?
I think it's very naive to imagine there is anything other than free-market dogma (to borrow your phrase) driving these reforms.
Reforms which they have absolutely no mandate for, and promised they wouldn't do.
[i]I think it's very naive to imagine there is anything other than free-market dogma (to borrow your phrase) driving these reforms. [/i]
I'm under no illusion that they'll always lean to a free-market solution to this kind of thing. Those on the left will generally always lean to a state solution.
Neither is necessarily right or wrong, it's dependant on the situation, application and implementation. Personally, I'm uneasy free-market thinking in health provision.
socialised healthcare
First heard this used by an american
I dont get why free healthcare from govt is socialised
Do we have socilaised roads or education or tax collection or just helathcare?
Americans are interesting they firmly believe state education is necessary to enable you to take part in democracy as an informed citizen with equal opportunity to live the american dream
they are quite happy for you to be ill whilst doing this as if this has no impact
I fail to understand why the provision of healthcare, like eduction and police and defence is not seen as one of the primary roles of a govt in helping it citizemns live better lives. Who wants to be ill or have no helathcare for their loved ones?
As for the private sector the introduction of profit is clearly removing resources from the NHS. It is "efficient" because it drives down pay and terms and conditions- obviously not for the"risk takers" and job creators at the top they get shit loads more because that is the market apparetnly and its just ace [ it is if you control the reources it is not if you deliver them]
IMHO there is no place for profit in certain sectors as it is about quality rather than profit. A profit making companies primary goal and responsibility is to its shreholders and npot the wider good of all.
IMHO there is no place for profit in certain sectors as it is about quality rather than profit.
But where do you draw the line with the NHS?
Pharma companies? are they allowed to make a profit from the drugs they sell to the NHS?
computer software companies? hardware companies?
medical equipment manufacturers?
the companies who make ambulances?
what about the ones who make uniforms and blankets and beds and floor polish and cotton wool and food and bandages and plasters and hand sanitiser - ad infinitum?
all these people are 'profit making' NHS suppliers - do you think that the quality would be higher and costs would be lower if these services were all taken in house?
Should Kimberley Clark be nationalised on the basis that they are making millions of pounds profit every year from the NHS? or is it true that some things are just better sourced through private sector manufacturers/suppliers with a specialist background, even if they do take a profit in the process?
There's an idea. A nationalised pharmaceutical manufacturer, that steps in and manufactures not-for-profit when patents run out.
Communist!!!
[img] 
[/img]
Good point DD
Tell you what - we could expand the idea, hows about we make people on benefits work there manufacturing them 'forced labour' style?
and we could get them doing the cleaning in hospitals as well!
better than making them work at Poundland and Tesco, and subsidising private sector profits, isn't it?
No room for profit in the NHS, that includes all the staff. Like the cleaners they should do it for the minimum wage and the knowledge that they are making people well again.
This idea that companies can make a profit and individuals can have more than there basic needs is disgusting.
[i]No room for profit in the NHS, that includes all the staff. Like the cleaners they should do it for the minimum wage and the knowledge that they are making people well again.
This idea that companies can make a profit and individuals can have more than there basic needs is disgusting. [/i]
Okay. Good.
What's it like on your planet?
Yes we should indeed let the unemployed take away jobs from other folk by working for free 😕
Can we not just do what america does and start incarcerating more folk and get them to do it?- Yee ha to the free market etc
all these people are 'profit making' NHS suppliers - do you think that the quality would be higher and costs would be lower if these services were all taken in house?
Bit of a loaded question eh you want BOTH higher quality and lower costs to be better how about same quality lower prices ?
Would you like to suggest that if these companies stopped making a profit they would cost more?
Seems obvious profit is an additional cost passed on to the purchaser - NHS in this case
No room for profit in the NHS, that includes all the staff. Like the cleaners they should do it for the minimum wage and the knowledge that they are making people well again.
This idea that companies can make a profit and individuals can have more than there basic needs is disgusting.
and how exactly do you determine what an individuals basic needs are?
if a nurse chooses to have more kids than another nurse, say a nurse doing a more highly specialised job with higher risks.... you're basically saying the nurse with more kids should get paid more because she has more basic needs?!
No room for profit in the NHS, that includes all the staff. Like the cleaners they should do it for the minimum wage and the knowledge that they are making people well again.
This idea that companies can make a profit and individuals can have more than there basic needs is disgusting.
What do you do for a living?
Socialised doesn't mean socialist per se. It means run on a social rather than market norm. Driven buy a buy in to a common good as opposed to profit. And I, personally, definitely don't see it as a negative thing, we do generally have socialised public services, albeit with a constant psh towards increasing marketisation.
One problem with this is the introduction of market drivers into a socialised system is that you burn the benefits of co-operation and common good very quickly and it is very hard to get back. If the efficiency delivered by the market doesn't exceed this lost then it all becomes worse and nay impossible to retrieve.
... and US healthcare is a disaster, it's hugely inefficient and expensive, and only delivers better quality at the top end.
why you all feeding the troll?
They say silly things to get a reaction and lo you all do
Have a word with yourself [ and ignore the obvious denial coming]
[i](it's the equivalent of needing 4 new tyres on the car, having the budget for only 3, and being told to replace the spare too...)[/i]
........................with one hand and only using a spoon.
Hunt's on BBC News now..........................[b]RAAAAAAAGE![/b]
Take ourselves back 60 odd years and ask yourself what the STW forum of its day was alive with??
NHS? national insurance to pay for health? over my dead body! it'll never take off! This Bevan blokes a right twunt!
Its unusual for Hunt to actually make an appearance. Dave obviously gave him the NHS brief then added "And for Christs sake, stay away from any camera's, and keep your mouth shut!"
At least when he was culture secretary his buffoonery couldn't do that much damage
How come him and CMD between them dont have a single wrinkle or worry line after years in politics?????
Must get me some of that nivea face cream stuff........
How come him and CMD between them dont have a single wrinkle or worry line after years in politics?????
Because they have no morals/souls? 🙂 😐
How come him and CMD between them dont have a single wrinkle or worry line after years in politics?????
You'll find the answer to that and many similar questions [url= http://www.davidicke.com/ ]here[/url]
[quote=toxicsoks said](it's the equivalent of needing 4 new tyres on the car, having the budget for only 3, and being told to replace the spare too...)
........................with one hand and only using a spoon.
While sitting on yer @rse, smoking a fag, chatting to yer mates.
Hunt needs to be careful with his language. A key issue from Mid.Staffs is how the "target culture" & muddle-headed top-down re-organisations of the NHS took management's eye off the ball (e.g. their efforts to become a Foundation Trust) - to the extent that they ignored warnings from the shopfloor about the likely consequences.
Hunt, of course, speaks for a Government embarking on, er, a massive, muddle-headed top-down re-organisation of the NHS (the one they said they wouldn't do...). Forget political platitudes about "competition" - I'm willing to bet that the pressure on acute care will ramp up even more.
toxicsoks said » (it's the equivalent of needing 4 new tyres on the car, having the budget for only 3, and being told to replace the spare too...)
........................with one hand and only using a spoon.
While sitting on yer @rse, smoking a fag, chatting to yer mates.
Then driving off with only 3 of the wheels fitted because you were busy chatting to your mates about what an excellent job you'd done of outsourcing the work to the cheapest tyre place you could find.