Maybe the breweries, pub chains and supermarkets could fund portacabins, where drunks could be assessed and treated, freeing up A&E for more deserving cases. I dunno, it's a tough one.
I honestly think in the long run we'll treat alcohol like tobacco, and future generations will wonder what the hell we were thinking.
Tobacco has been with us since the 16th century introduced by native americans, alcohol is used since history began, it will be much more difficult. Perhaps we can say that any substance that alters the state of mind is dangerous and immoral, but if marijuana is legalized then why are all the other substances including tobacco and alcohol not accepted. It's when you make exceptions, that create problems.
if the NHS is the main issue now in the media then labour have peaked too soon as the economy will become the main focus in the next 4 months. if we have Grexit or eurogeddon II then this will focus voters minds too on the economy. If the battle becomes the economy then the tories will be most seats
Come the Spring, today's crisis will be lost in noise.
As I believe I have mentioned, my new (ish) GF is a CPSO (sort of policewoman), from a seriously poor White Working Class south east London background. We're talking council estates, gang murders, rape epidemics, drug dealers in the stairwell.
She's great fun, if sometimes abrasive, and very smart, and given her backstory and her job she probably knows more about lived British life than most people on this site (certainly me) and almost anyone in Westminster. I wish I could sit her in front of every PPC in 2015, so she could speak her mind.
ANYWAY, the relevance of this is that she is - in despair, and very shyly - voting UKIP. Her family migrated to UKIP years ago, from Labour or did-not-vote, but hitherto she has been resolutely Lib Dem. But now she perceives no party that will look after her or her own, or deal with the problems that she sees every day, and remembers from her past.
It's stories like hers that persuade me that 1. UKIP is here to stay (unless the Tories find a way to take back Thatcher's children) and 2. UKIP could do even better than the polls show.
Bettors beware, cav empt, etc.
I'm not surprised, people who's daily lives mingle with society's problems tend to respond that way. Voting patters are mostly explained by a few factors like age, education, background, wealth, social environment, and family tradition. With her story as described above she would either have veered far to the left or far to the right , but her job has probably made the difference towards UKIP.
This is psephologically significant.
No it isn't . It is like conducting an opinion poll on a sample size of 1 and making all sorts of interpretations on the result .
The whole "NHS in ENGLAND is in crisis" based upon latest A&E numbers really is a crock of s##t. 92 instead of 95 people are seen in 4hrs. It is hardly waiting 18 months for to get a routine op or 100's dying from lack of water on a ward.
And Wales have been failing this artificial target by miles for ages, never seen the likes of the BBC camped out in A&E departments in Cardiff or Swansea for 24hrs telling us its the end of the world as we know it for the Labour run NHS.
NHS isn't in crisis. It is under a lot of pressure, due to a whole host of factors, some slow burners, some more recent, some seasonal. The way they are going on, you would think you will never ever get seen again at a hospital and that there are 1000's of people dying in the waiting rooms.
Get a grip FFS, under a whole lot of pressure yes, crisis like our NHS is some sort of 3rd world basket case, no.
And the media always will find somebody who had to wait ages. I remember waiting for 10hrs with my partner to get seen, under Labour....But I don't blame them for that. I bet the media aren't interested in that last week, I booked online to see my GP the next day, saw him, told me needed an X-Ray, went to hospital as a walk-in and seen in 10 mins.
if the NHS is the main issue now in the media then labour have peaked too soon as the economy will become the main focus in the next 4 months. if we have Grexit or eurogeddon II then this will focus voters minds too on the economy. If the battle becomes the economy then the tories will be most seats
I think troubles in Europe would boost UKIP not the Tories. If it's a domestic economic problem the Tories might get the blame as they are the government for 5 years and their posters are all about how a wonderful job they did with the economy.
BBC News (UK) (@BBCNews) 06/01/2015 22:22 Wednesday's Daily Mail: "A&E crisis worst for ten years" pic.twitter.com/5F3ZmmcZ8k #BBCPapers #tomorrowspaperstoday via @suttonnick
Ten years ago we were seven years into a Labour government, with the horrors of Staffordshire still to come.
As I believe I have mentioned, my new (ish) GF is a CPSO (sort of policewoman), from a seriously poor White Working Class south east London background. We're talking council estates, gang murders, rape epidemics, drug dealers in the stairwell.
She's great fun, if sometimes abrasive, and very smart, and given her backstory and her job she probably knows more about lived British life than most people on this site (certainly me) and almost anyone in Westminster. I wish I could sit her in front of every PPC in 2015, so she could speak her mind.
ANYWAY, the relevance of this is that she is - in despair, and very shyly - voting UKIP. Her family migrated to UKIP years ago, from Labour or did-not-vote, but hitherto she has been resolutely Lib Dem. But now she perceives no party that will look after her or her own, or deal with the problems that she sees every day, and remembers from her past.
It's stories like hers that persuade me that 1. UKIP is here to stay (unless the Tories find a way to take back Thatcher's children) and 2. UKIP could do even better than the polls show.
Bettors beware, cav empt, etc.
I'm not surprised, people who's daily lives mingle with society's problems tend to respond that way. Voting patters are mostly explained by a few factors like age, education, background, wealth, social environment, and family tradition. With her story as described above she would either have veered far to the left or far to the right , but her job has probably made the difference towards UKIP.
This is psephologically significant.
No it isn't . It is like conducting an opinion poll on a sample size of 1 and making all sorts of interpretations on the result .
Shall we discuss Greek GDP growth in 2013, which you expected to be MORE than UK GDP growth in the same year? Even to the extent that you bet with me thereupon?
I love you dearly, Mark, but you have the IQ of a mid-sized mollusc.
Shall we have one of your typical SeanT hyperbolic reactions to anything that happens . A pin drops in Kilburn High St and you hysterically post that an earthquake is happening and London will be razed to the ground .
Maybe the breweries, pub chains and supermarkets could fund portacabins, where drunks could be assessed and treated, freeing up A&E for more deserving cases. I dunno, it's a tough one.
I honestly think in the long run we'll treat alcohol like tobacco, and future generations will wonder what the hell we were thinking.
Its the boozy forty and fifty somethings that you need to watch out for! Being gloriously drunk is one way of making life in Britain palatable. Drunks and colds and sprains are all part of ED work (I was once assaulted by a patient for pointing out that his month old rash was neither accident or emergency). But the main reason the EDs are backed up are sick frail elderly people with complec multiple chronic diseases. It is not an easy problem to fix.
But more seriously on NickP's suggestion: I remember a drunk being booted out of ED in the eighties for being obnoxious and pissing up an inside wall. Two hours later he was found unconscious in the car park. It was an intracranial haemorrhage on top of a few pints.
2. Labour can't win this election just on the NHS. IMO.
3. What would happen if London decided it wanted to become independent of the rest of the UK?
4. Boy George Strikes Again.
5. Very few Prime Ministers have been "ideological" and the British tend to prefer practical leaders over ideological one's. The Blessed Margaret was very much a "one off" in that regard and only happened because things were so terrible in the 1970's.
6. Swingback Baby!
7. Looking good for Team Blue.
8. My prediction remains what it's always been (except when I wobbled in 2011 and 2012 and 2013 and 2014...) Con win most votes, seats and national share of the vote. Hung Parliament, Con largest party. Probable Con/Lib or Con minority government.
9. If support for Con and Lab doesn't pick in the next 2-3 years I think we could see one of those once a century "realignment's"
10. I'm sure they are...
11. Ed who?
12. Labour has to keep their luvvie friends happy.
13. Could be worse. He could have been mistaken for El Gord...
14. NO!
15. The truth is out there!
16. This is what Prince Charles has always warned about.
Burnham's stunt call for a summit shows how little Labour have got to say about the realities of the NHS.
There is no crisis - that is just media spin. More and more people are being seen and treated. Yes, occasionally demand will outstrip supply - but the whole point of triage is to make sure those in greatest need are seen first. And that is how is should be.
The best the BBC could come up with this morning is a man who presented at A&E and was treated within an hour - and his complaint was that it was very noisy where he was waiting until he was admitted to a ward. Really awful I am sure.
No-one can afford to run a healthcare system that has doctors and nurses waiting around just in case someone pops in feeling a bit under the weather. Patients will just have to be patient if there is someone in greater need of care and attention.
For those who are following potential Republican candidates, New Jersey governor Chris Christie was in owner Jerry Jones' box at the Detroit - Dallas game on Sunday. He was wearing his 'lucky' orange sweater, which he does every time he attends Dallas games, and has done about 5 this season. Christie is a life long Cowboys fan, a fact which pisses off many in New Jersey, where there are 2 NFL teams, the Giants and Jets, and also the Eagles literally across the river from NJ.
When asked, Jerry replied that Christie is 'part of our mojo' and it was inconceivable that the governor would not be at the Dallas game at Green Bay on Sunday.
Christie's travelling and expenses are paid for by Jerry Jones. This is specifically legal under NJ law, which explains much about NJ corruption.
The game will be the first time Dallas has been to Green Bay for a playoff game since the Ice Bowl of 1967.
I was lucky enough to spend time with Bart Starr recently, the Green Bay qb at the Ice Bowl, and asked him about it. He somehow realized I was a Cowboys fan and poked me playfully in the stomach.
Jerry is also a director of a company, owned 50-50 by the Cowboys and the New York Yankees, which recently signed a deal for food and concessions at the top of 1 World Trade Center, a building owned by the Port Authority of NY and NJ. The company - no surprise - also does food and concessions at Jerry World and Yankee Stadium.
The Port Authority is controlled by Christie and NY governor Cuomo.
The whole "NHS in ENGLAND is in crisis" based upon latest A&E numbers really is a crock of s##t. 92 instead of 95 people are seen in 4hrs. It is hardly waiting 18 months for to get a routine op or 100's dying from lack of water on a ward.
.
And who says there were hundreds dying on the ward? Certainly not the Francis Report. More media spin I'm afraid. Elective surgery is being cancelled all over the surgery at the moment it will not take long for waiting lists to mount up.
The mansion tax was fine for Labour until Jim Murphy (rather unhelpfully, ahem) framed it as a clever new tax on England, especially south east England and London, specifically designed to pay for Scottish nurses out of English purses.
This is calamitous for Labour nationwide.
I begin to wonder if Scotland will lose Labour the next election. Not just by the decimation of Scottish Labour seats, but by the annoying of all English voters to try and buy off the Scots electorate.
How many people outside Scotland know who is Jim Murphy ?
In my opinion, that's because all the NHS rows up til now have been about restructurings and technical abstract things which went over people's heads (I never really got my head around what exactly the government's reforms were actually doing, and I probably spent more time trying to find out than most people did). But stories (and images) of people waiting ages to get treated is something much more tangible.
The whole "NHS in ENGLAND is in crisis" based upon latest A&E numbers really is a crock of s##t. 92 instead of 95 people are seen in 4hrs. It is hardly waiting 18 months for to get a routine op or 100's dying from lack of water on a ward.
.
And who says there were hundreds dying on the ward? Certainly not the Francis Report. More media spin I'm afraid. Elective surgery is being cancelled all over the surgery at the moment it will not take long for waiting lists to mount up.
Don't put words in my mouth.....I never said anything about Stafford hospital.
I've already admitted you can't determine whether or not some one is "deserving" in A&E, but we certainly ought to do more to discourage excessive drinking in the first place, and regulate alcohol more. In the long term we might shift attitudes and behaviour towards alcohol as we have with tobacco. As you point out young people are more sober than their parents and grandparents were.
Of course maybe we'll all end up living too long, and the NHS will collapse due to the cost of treating all the oldies with their chronic diseases who didn't die prematurely due to their excessive consumption of toxic substances.
As I believe I have mentioned, my new (ish) GF is a CPSO (sort of policewoman), from a seriously poor White Working Class south east London background. We're talking council estates, gang murders, rape epidemics, drug dealers in the stairwell.
She's great fun, if sometimes abrasive, and very smart, and given her backstory and her job she probably knows more about lived British life than most people on this site (certainly me) and almost anyone in Westminster. I wish I could sit her in front of every PPC in 2015, so she could speak her mind.
ANYWAY, the relevance of this is that she is - in despair, and very shyly - voting UKIP. Her family migrated to UKIP years ago, from Labour or did-not-vote, but hitherto she has been resolutely Lib Dem. But now she perceives no party that will look after her or her own, or deal with the problems that she sees every day, and remembers from her past.
It's stories like hers that persuade me that 1. UKIP is here to stay (unless the Tories find a way to take back Thatcher's children) and 2. UKIP could do even better than the polls show.
Bettors beware, cav empt, etc.
I'm not surprised, people who's daily lives mingle with society's problems tend to respond that way. Voting patters are mostly explained by a few factors like age, education, background, wealth, social environment, and family tradition. With her story as described above she would either have veered far to the left or far to the right , but her job has probably made the difference towards UKIP.
This is psephologically significant.
No it isn't . It is like conducting an opinion poll on a sample size of 1 and making all sorts of interpretations on the result .
Shall we discuss Greek GDP growth in 2013, which you expected to be MORE than UK GDP growth in the same year? Even to the extent that you bet with me thereupon?
I love you dearly, Mark, but you have the IQ of a mid-sized mollusc.
Shall we have one of your typical SeanT hyperbolic reactions to anything that happens . A pin drops in Kilburn High St and you hysterically post that an earthquake is happening and London will be razed to the ground .
Greek GDP growth 2013: -3.9% UK GDP growth 2013: +1.7%
And you actually BET on that not happening. With REAL money.
CHORTLE.
Yes OK I was a bit premature , note that GreeK GDP growth matched the UK in Q3 2014 and may well exceed it in Q4 .
The whole "NHS in ENGLAND is in crisis" based upon latest A&E numbers really is a crock of s##t. 92 instead of 95 people are seen in 4hrs. It is hardly waiting 18 months for to get a routine op or 100's dying from lack of water on a ward.
And Wales have been failing this artificial target by miles for ages, never seen the likes of the BBC camped out in A&E departments in Cardiff or Swansea for 24hrs telling us its the end of the world as we know it for the Labour run NHS.
NHS isn't in crisis. It is under a lot of pressure, due to a whole host of factors, some slow burners, some more recent, some seasonal. The way they are going on, you would think you will never ever get seen again at a hospital and that there are 1000's of people dying in the waiting rooms.
Get a grip FFS, under a whole lot of pressure yes, crisis like our NHS is some sort of 3rd world basket case, no.
And the media always will find somebody who had to wait ages. I remember waiting for 10hrs with my partner to get seen, under Labour....But I don't blame them for that. I bet the media aren't interested in that last week, I booked online to see my GP the next day, saw him, told me needed an X-Ray, went to hospital as a walk-in and seen in 10 mins.
It does not matter if it is #### or not. The public believe it is.
Antifrank. Excellent piece on Scotland. Pleasing to see you have revised your opinion on Edinburgh South and also Aberdeen South which I think will be more comfortable than a knife edge
As I believe I have mentioned, my new (ish) GF is a CPSO (sort of policewoman), from a seriously poor White Working Class south east London background. We're talking council estates, gang murders, rape epidemics, drug dealers in the stairwell.
She's great fun, if sometimes abrasive, and very smart, and given her backstory and her job she probably knows more about lived British life than most people on this site (certainly me) and almost anyone in Westminster. I wish I could sit her in front of every PPC in 2015, so she could speak her mind.
ANYWAY, the relevance of this is that she is - in despair, and very shyly - voting UKIP. Her family migrated to UKIP years ago, from Labour or did-not-vote, but hitherto she has been resolutely Lib Dem. But now she perceives no party that will look after her or her own, or deal with the problems that she sees every day, and remembers from her past.
It's stories like hers that persuade me that 1. UKIP is here to stay (unless the Tories find a way to take back Thatcher's children) and 2. UKIP could do even better than the polls show.
Bettors beware, cav empt, etc.
I'm not surprised, people who's daily lives mingle with society's problems tend to respond that way. Voting patters are mostly explained by a few factors like age, education, background, wealth, social environment, and family tradition. With her story as described above she would either have veered far to the left or far to the right , but her job has probably made the difference towards UKIP.
This is psephologically significant.
No it isn't . It is like conducting an opinion poll on a sample size of 1 and making all sorts of interpretations on the result .
Shall we discuss Greek GDP growth in 2013, which you expected to be MORE than UK GDP growth in the same year? Even to the extent that you bet with me thereupon?
I love you dearly, Mark, but you have the IQ of a mid-sized mollusc.
So the great Conservative success story of 2010 - 2014 has come to comparing ourselves with ................Greece ?
In my opinion, that's because all the NHS rows up til now have been about restructurings and technical abstract things which went over people's heads (I never really got my head around what exactly the government's reforms were actually doing, and I probably spent more time trying to find out than most people did). But stories (and images) of people waiting ages to get treated is something much more tangible.
Desperate people drinking water from flower vases.
The whole "NHS in ENGLAND is in crisis" based upon latest A&E numbers really is a crock of s##t. 92 instead of 95 people are seen in 4hrs. It is hardly waiting 18 months for to get a routine op or 100's dying from lack of water on a ward.
.
And who says there were hundreds dying on the ward? Certainly not the Francis Report. More media spin I'm afraid. Elective surgery is being cancelled all over the surgery at the moment it will not take long for waiting lists to mount up.
Don't put words in my mouth.....I never said anything about Stafford hospital.
You said hundreds were dying on the ward. Go on then, tell us all the authority for this quote of yours.
I'm quite willing to listen to Foxandsox, Chris A, BJO, TFS and others who are - or have been - at the sharp end of hospitals and the emergency services about what is going on. And I'm also willing to accept that the way that the Tories and, before them, Labour - with PFI and GPs contracts - have acted has not helped matters and may have made matters worse.
Similarly, this may well be smart politics from Labour. We'll see.
But my position is this: I - and my children and partner - have had more than our fair share of medical attention and misfortune and since Thatcher the care - regardless of which government has been in power - has been fine. Over that time there have been no end of scare stories but, honestly, none of the changes have made any difference to me, as far as I can see.
The only time the NHS has made a difference was in the 1970's under a Labour government. Junior doctors went on strike - over pay - and, as a result, my father's operation was postponed. By the time he got it, the cancer - which could have been caught earlier - had spread and was terminal. The NHS killed my beloved father. He died in January 1979 - the infamous "winter of discontent".
I have heard more times than I care to from Labour party members and supporters how uncaring the Tories are, how Thatcher introduced selfishness, how they care more, how they will protect the NHS, blah, blah and, I'm afraid, since that bleak day I have never believed a word of it. Selfishness did not start with Thatcher. Those junior doctors who went on strike over pay behaved selfishly - however justified they may have felt. My father died - prematurely - because of them. And Labour can hug the NHS to its bosom as much as it likes and congratulate itself on how much it cares. And it's all so much phoney phooey.
This may be an anecdote - though to me and mine - it is a heartfelt one. But it trumps any amount of synthetic outrage from Burnham or anyone else.
What matters is what works. And in the 1970's under Labour the NHS failed me. Labour have no right to claim the NHS for themselves. And if they want to do that then they have to claim responsibility for all the things that go wrong in it too.
@Sun_Politics: YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Tories and Labour tied, Lib Dems still in fifth: CON 33%, LAB 33%, LD 7%, UKIP 13%, GRN 8%
UKIP down again.
Key issue is lack of TV coverage. In all the arguments yesterday over the economy one thing went unnoticed - no mention of UKIP at all anywhere.
TV companies are sending a very powerful subliminal message - if UKIP aren't mentioned the average voter will think they don't matter / don't have a chance - and they will therefore lose support.
Also clear they have not been given improved status - BBC Daily Politics had Gillan, Jowell and Ming all programme - then Nuttall was introduced 5 mins from the end of a 60 mins programme and got to say about two sentences.
This is absolutely key - forget policies, forget everything else, if they aren't seen they have no chance of maintaining current poll rating.
I'm quite willing to listen to Foxandsox, Chris A, BJO, TFS and others who are - or have been - at the sharp end of hospitals and the emergency services about what is going on. And I'm also willing to accept that the way that the Tories and, before them, Labour - with PFI and GPs contracts - has not helped matters and may have made matters worse.
Similarly, this may well be smart politics from Labour. We'll see.
But my position is this: I - and my children and partner - have had more than our fair share of medical attention and misfortune and since Thatcher the care - regardless of which government has been in power - has been fine. Over that time there have been no end of scare stories but, honestly, none of the changes have made any difference to me, as far as I can see.
The only time the NHS has made a difference was in the 1970's under a Labour government. Junior doctors went on strike - over pay - and, as a result, my father's operation was postponed. By the time he got it, the cancer - which could have been caught earlier - had spread and was terminal. The NHS killed my beloved father. He died in January 1979 - the infamous "winter of discontent".
I have heard more times than I care to from Labour party members and supporters how uncaring the Tories are, how Thatcher introduced selfishness, how they care more, how they will protect the NHS, blah, blah and, I'm afraid, since that bleak day I have never believed a word of it. Selfishness did not start with Thatcher. Those junior doctors who went on strike over pay behaved selfishly - however justified they may have felt. My father died - prematurely - because of them. And Labour can hug the NHS to its bosom as much as it likes and congratulate itself on how much it cares. And it's all so much phoney phooey.
This may be an anecdote - though to me and mine - it is a heartfelt one. But it trumps any amount of synthetic outrage from Burnham or anyone else.
What matters is what works. And in the 1970's under Labour the NHS failed me. Labour have no right to claim the NHS for themselves. And if they want to do that then they have to claim responsibility for all the things that go wrong in it too.
Burnham's stunt call for a summit shows how little Labour have got to say about the realities of the NHS.
There is no crisis - that is just media spin. More and more people are being seen and treated. Yes, occasionally demand will outstrip supply - but the whole point of triage is to make sure those in greatest need are seen first. And that is how is should be.
The best the BBC could come up with this morning is a man who presented at A&E and was treated within an hour - and his complaint was that it was very noisy where he was waiting until he was admitted to a ward. Really awful I am sure.
No-one can afford to run a healthcare system that has doctors and nurses waiting around just in case someone pops in feeling a bit under the weather. Patients will just have to be patient if there is someone in greater need of care and attention.
Actually, I worked for a while in an A/E in New Zealand 25 years ago., where the percapita GDP is much the same as ours and A/E services were free and walk in. There was never more than a two hour wait and average was more like 20 minutes. There were times where we had proper teaching and training as a result, rather than constantly running from one meltdown to another. I learnt a lot there, and I can see why many British Trainees stay out there.
If you want British doctors to want to train in Emergency Medicine (and it is exciting and interesting) then there has to be security (we had a veryformidable doorman), shifts that work with family life, good training in both practical and theoretical issues and a supportive rather than coercive environment. It is not about money, or about coercing the unwilling to work there, but you try to convince the DoH to provide that sort of training environment. Much the same goes for General Practice.
The whole "NHS in ENGLAND is in crisis" based upon latest A&E numbers really is a crock of s##t. 92 instead of 95 people are seen in 4hrs. It is hardly waiting 18 months for to get a routine op or 100's dying from lack of water on a ward.
.
And who says there were hundreds dying on the ward? Certainly not the Francis Report. More media spin I'm afraid. Elective surgery is being cancelled all over the surgery at the moment it will not take long for waiting lists to mount up.
Don't put words in my mouth.....I never said anything about Stafford hospital.
You said hundreds were dying on the ward. Go on then, tell us all the authority for this quote of yours.
No I did not...Read carefully.....
"It is hardly waiting 18 months for to get a routine op or 100's dying from lack of water on a ward."
That is not suggesting it is happening OR HAS EVER happened. Hope you read your medical note more carefully! It was a bit of hyperbole on my part to say, a handful of people waiting more than 4hrs at A&E (who we don't know how serious their condition is, probably not that serious), is not a crisis. It is a crisis when people aren't giving necessary treatment and care in a reasonable length of time. Nowhere did I state that these things ever happened on that scale, rather just saying it would be a real crisis if they did.
The whole "NHS in ENGLAND is in crisis" based upon latest A&E numbers really is a crock of s##t. 92 instead of 95 people are seen in 4hrs. It is hardly waiting 18 months for to get a routine op or 100's dying from lack of water on a ward.
And Wales have been failing this artificial target by miles for ages, never seen the likes of the BBC camped out in A&E departments in Cardiff or Swansea for 24hrs telling us its the end of the world as we know it for the Labour run NHS.
NHS isn't in crisis. It is under a lot of pressure, due to a whole host of factors, some slow burners, some more recent, some seasonal. The way they are going on, you would think you will never ever get seen again at a hospital and that there are 1000's of people dying in the waiting rooms.
Get a grip FFS, under a whole lot of pressure yes, crisis like our NHS is some sort of 3rd world basket case, no.
And the media always will find somebody who had to wait ages. I remember waiting for 10hrs with my partner to get seen, under Labour....But I don't blame them for that. I bet the media aren't interested in that last week, I booked online to see my GP the next day, saw him, told me needed an X-Ray, went to hospital as a walk-in and seen in 10 mins.
It does not matter if it is #### or not. The public believe it is.
More than likely. Well done Labour and the BBC hype machine. Same with the nonsense of the "privatized" NHS.
I'm quite willing to listen to Foxandsox, Chris A, BJO, TFS and others who are - or have been - at the sharp end of hospitals and the emergency services about what is going on. And I'm also willing to accept that the way that the Tories and, before them, Labour - with PFI and GPs contracts - has not helped matters and may have made matters worse.
Similarly, this may well be smart politics from Labour. We'll see.
But my position is this: I - and my children and partner - have had more than our fair share of medical attention and misfortune and since Thatcher the care - regardless of which government has been in power - has been fine. Over that time there have been no end of scare stories but, honestly, none of the changes have made any difference to me, as far as I can see.
The only time the NHS has made a difference was in the 1970's under a Labour government. Junior doctors went on strike - over pay - and, as a result, my father's operation was postponed. By the time he got it, the cancer - which could have been caught earlier - had spread and was terminal. The NHS killed my beloved father. He died in January 1979 - the infamous "winter of discontent".
I have heard more times than I care to from Labour party members and supporters how uncaring the Tories are, how Thatcher introduced selfishness, how they care more, how they will protect the NHS, blah, blah and, I'm afraid, since that bleak day I have never believed a word of it. Selfishness did not start with Thatcher. Those junior doctors who went on strike over pay behaved selfishly - however justified they may have felt. My father died - prematurely - because of them. And Labour can hug the NHS to its bosom as much as it likes and congratulate itself on how much it cares. And it's all so much phoney phooey.
This may be an anecdote - though to me and mine - it is a heartfelt one. But it trumps any amount of synthetic outrage from Burnham or anyone else.
What matters is what works. And in the 1970's under Labour the NHS failed me. Labour have no right to claim the NHS for themselves. And if they want to do that then they have to claim responsibility for all the things that go wrong in it too.
Top post.
I agree with that.
I've witnessed first rate medical care administered to family members which couldn't be faulted, though being in an ambulance on blue lights at high speed isn't something I'd recommend. I've also sat waiting my turn in the same A&E unit. In the grand scheme of things a few hours hanging around seems a small price to pay.
It all seems to work, regardless of how bad politicians with vested interests would like one to believe things might be.
Well 2015 has opened with quite a bang as far as the markets are concerned. Crude oil sitting at $48 as we speak - which is a key support area from the $8/$9 lows in 1999 through the $32 low in December 2008. Whilst I expect $48 to offer short term support, I think long term we're headed down towards the December 2008 lows, and even longer term below that. This is DEFLATION in action, and oil is just the first market to succumb to it.
From where I'm looking, it seems we're due a 5 month consolidation in the US stockmarket, more severe correction in European markets, given the capital flow is inexorably into the US at the current time. US Dollar strength really beginning to assert itself as I said it would, and the current move is just a prelude to a much greater move higher into 2017 in my opinion, both GBPUSD and EURUSD heading below parity, its going to be quite a ride!
So, more importantly for PB'ers, what is this going to mean for the election? Firstly, I think it will bring the economy more to the forefront - Tory positive. But how severe are the renewed spasms in the Eurozone going to be? I think the price the market will extract from this will be full blown QE. Until the big bang date of 1st October this year (top in the global bond market), I don't see anyone including Greece exiting the Eurozone just yet. In true euro fashion they'll concoct something together that will hold the confidence of the market together. It's after the start of October when the fireworks will really begin to fly, and lay waste to any of the spending promises made by UK politicians in the coming 4 months. And for the Tories to prosper against a more uncertain economic backdrop short term, they'll need the market attention to be on the Eurozone and away from the UK. I think they'll get away with that short term, never mind GBPUSD plummeting, its the EURGBP exchange rate that most of the electorate notice short term for their European holiday bookings for the summer, which remains anchored around the 0.78/0.79 level, relatively good for UK holidaymakers, as well as the benefits from the oil price collapse (Aberdeen excepted).
If UKIP play their cards right, then they should be able to make some capital from the ongoing Greek farce, but that's a big if at the moment given the silly distractions that are plaguing their central message at the moment.
As for Labour, blathering on about the NHS carries its own risks as others have alluded to below on this thread. And the more their opponents can bring to the attention of the general electorate their own shambolic record in Wales, the better for them. John Snow went like a knife through butter with Burnham tonight over 83% 4 hour A&E target met in Wales, against 92% in England. Why the heck does anyone believe that Labour is remotely credible on the NHS!
NoM is the time the tectonic plates shift with new parties formed and merged.
It has happened to the Liberals a number of times in the last century, but this time it may well be someone else. My party seems much more united (albeit depleted) than it has for a couple of years. Curious!
I expect us to take a beating in May, followed by a new rebirth.
It is time for Dave to show his true leadership qualities. Tomorrow he should stand up and shout "There is co crisis, now stop winging you bloody plebs!" Or at least that's what the "Right" on here seem to be suggesting?
I have not experienced the NHS for a decade, but it was ancient. When I moved from Harrogate to 5 miles outside, I had to change doctors.
Every time I got a prescription, they would literally fill out a piece of paper that I would hand carry to the drug store.
My daughter fell and damaged her knee. After the operation the result was so bad that we had to go private to get it done properly.
My observation would be that the institution itself is inflexible, change resistant and obsolete. I have no doubt that the vast majority of folks there are decent hard working people, like anywhere else.
My observation would be that the institution itself is inflexible, change resistant and obsolete. I have no doubt that the vast majority of folks there are decent hard working people, like anywhere else.
Anybody who saw the Gerry Robinson documentary from a few years back would concur.
A guy with a proven track record of turning around organizations (and a former Labour supporter), was blocked at every turn to implement a little flexibility and the most minor changes.
And unlike the nonsense pseudo-doc these days ala "Undercover Boss", this was a serious BBC documentary following his attempts to calmly and sensibly try and improve a failing hospital. This is what he said about his experience...
"until we start taking the management of these complex organisations seriously, in the way that management is taken seriously in commercial organisations, frankly we’re just going to be chipping away at the edges of the problem in the NHS.... I think what the NHS needs to learn is that actually you don’t solve problems by throwing money at it, and not every problem actually needs money to solve it. That’s the first lesson. Secondly, to get out of their heads the idea that things have to take three years to do and get into the idea that there is a series of objectives that we need to do now, and that we’ve got months, not years to do it. Those two things, I think, would have the biggest single impact on the way that the Health Service is managed."
Seems Labour's pre-Christmas uptick was a Santallucination. Didn't happen. IGNORE.
Truth is, Labour are still on their gentle decline from 45 to about 29-31 come the GE, and the Tories are still slowly - very very very slowly - rising from their nadir of 20-something to maybe top out at 34 in May. Result: Tory NOM.... perhaps...
Cautiosly agree with that at the moment Sean, but still see the Tories up against a brick wall of 300 max, and probably quite a bit below that, even if everything works out for them. Anything where Tories + LD isn't a majority risks a second general election 6 months up the line in later 2015. A second 2015 GE in October would be fun! BBC and ITV to use the same studios in that event, like they did in 1974?!!
If the Tories polled around 32/33, losing 4-5% of their vote, I suspect they would outperform UNS, given it seems that a lot of their lost support is in their southern heartlands to UKIP, which shouldn't impact on their seat totals too much. The Ashcroft polls in the key Tory Labour marginals seem to be indicating a swing around 3-4% to Labour on current polling - that should concern Labour given the overall impression of a 1-2% Labour lead, which implies a 5% swing on UNS - the Tory to UKIP swing in the southern heartlands I think largely explains this.
It is time for Dave to show his true leadership qualities. Tomorrow he should stand up and shout "There is co crisis, now stop winging you bloody plebs!"
Correct, although I wouldn't recommend that exact phraseology.
I appreciate that Labour have been very disappointed so far this winter - no 'flu epidemic, no unusual increase in deaths, fewer than normal reports of wards in chaos or terminally ill old biddies being turfed out of their beds - so it's not surprising that they've fallen back on to finding one negative performance statistic out of hundreds, and that relating to time targets, not health or medical outcomes. Par for the course, but, if we're trading such statistics, Wales is a little off-message, isn't it?
My observation would be that the institution itself is inflexible, change resistant and obsolete. I have no doubt that the vast majority of folks there are decent hard working people, like anywhere else.
Anybody who saw the Gerry Robinson documentary from a few years back would concur.
A guy with a proven track record of turning around organizations (and a former Labour supporter), was blocked at every turn to implement a little flexibility and the most minor changes.
And unlike the nonsense pseudo-doc these days ala "Undercover Boss", this was a serious BBC documentary following his attempts to calmly and sensibly try and improve a failing hospital.
I have not experienced the NHS for a decade, but it was ancient. When I moved from Harrogate to 5 miles outside, I had to change doctors.
Every time I got a prescription, they would literally fill out a piece of paper that I would hand carry to the drug store.
My daughter fell and damaged her knee. After the operation the result was so bad that we had to go private to get it done properly.
My observation would be that the institution itself is inflexible, change resistant and obsolete. I have no doubt that the vast majority of folks there are decent hard working people, like anywhere else.
I am not a fan.
ITU and emergency care has been good, but as for general care? The French system makes the NHS look third world.
My observation would be that the institution itself is inflexible, change resistant and obsolete. I have no doubt that the vast majority of folks there are decent hard working people, like anywhere else.
Anybody who saw the Gerry Robinson documentary from a few years back would concur.
A guy with a proven track record of turning around organizations (and a former Labour supporter), was blocked at every turn to implement a little flexibility and the most minor changes.
And unlike the nonsense pseudo-doc these days ala "Undercover Boss", this was a serious BBC documentary following his attempts to calmly and sensibly try and improve a failing hospital.
The ideal would be to have private hospitals with contracts with the NHS. The result would be the same, or better, and probably cheaper. The government doesn't need to be running hospitals. They're no better at that than they are at most things.
Somebody mentioned going to the hospital for an x-ray. Here there are imaging companies all over the place, and 24/7 emergency medical centers - doc in a box - all mainly set up by hospitals. Going to hospital just for an x-ray is nuts.
It's a great little money earner, but I doubt many UK hospitals do it.
@Richard_Nabavi I am very glad that fire plague and pestilence hasn't been visited upon these shores. If it had, we really would be in deep sh*t. (literally if it is norovirus)
It is time for Dave to show his true leadership qualities. Tomorrow he should stand up and shout "There is co crisis, now stop winging you bloody plebs!"
Correct, although I wouldn't recommend that exact phraseology.
I appreciate that Labour have been very disappointed so far this winter - no 'flu epidemic, no unusual increase in deaths, fewer than normal reports of wards in chaos or terminally ill old biddies being turfed out of their beds - so it's not surprising that they've fallen back on to finding one negative performance statistic out of hundreds, and that relating to time targets, not health or medical outcomes. Par for the course, but, if we're trading such statistics, Wales is a little off-message, isn't it?
Absolutely Mr Nabavi. Anyone would be struggling with the NHS right now - look at the demographics of the country - more than 1 million more over 65's compared to 10 years ago. Little wonder demand for health care is sky rocketing. Where Labour have a point is over the lack of funding of community care through local government, which is piling the demand onto A&E. I know of friends in their mid-30's that have left the NHS and found alternative careers - what a waste of all that training in the first place. The budget spent on short term contractors / locums and the like has to be seen to be believed in some health authorities. And whilst I agree with UKIP's Australian points immigration system policy, what would happen to the NHS if they restricted current net migration to around 30,000 to 50,000 as Farage likes to say? With 4 out of every 5 staff recruited into the NHS from overseas, they'd face a major recruitment headache with net migration down to around 40,000 per year. The general population should reflect that you can't have your cake and eat it as regards to net migration. Either the existing population is prepared to get out there and work to do the less well paid jobs going in the labour market like a lot of NHS staff are, or you need to meet the staffing shortfall through higher immigration....choices, choices........
The ideal would be to have private hospitals with contracts with the NHS. The result would be the same, or better, and probably cheaper. The government doesn't need to be running hospitals. They're no better at that than they are at most things..
Indeed so, and of course the saner politicians even in Labour understand that. That's why Labour promised in their last manifesto to allow patients to use private providers, why the use of private providers increased so much under the last government, and why Andy Burnham, before he metamorphosed into a cynical or (even worse) ideological Nationalised Industry Fanatic, set in motion the tendering by private producers to run Hinchingbrooke Hospital.
I have not experienced the NHS for a decade, but it was ancient. When I moved from Harrogate to 5 miles outside, I had to change doctors.
Every time I got a prescription, they would literally fill out a piece of paper that I would hand carry to the drug store.
My daughter fell and damaged her knee. After the operation the result was so bad that we had to go private to get it done properly.
My observation would be that the institution itself is inflexible, change resistant and obsolete. I have no doubt that the vast majority of folks there are decent hard working people, like anywhere else.
I am not a fan.
Yes, you've mentioned it before, but I'm not sure your experience is typical of today's service, even strained as it is. The prescription issue has been basically solved (for repeats just go to your chemist when it's due). Most people seem satisfied with the care (the grumbles are 95% about waiting times and administrative issues). You do still have the "local doctor" issue - supposedly so he can rush round and treat you at home if needed, probably more in reality to maintain an even spread of GPs (though for dentists it doesn't apply - my NHS dentist is halfway across London, but he was recommended and he's good so I don't mind).
Overall it seems to me medically as good as the other countries I've lived in, though scruffier. The rationing issue that Fox and Chris are discussing is present in one form or another in every health system - NICE, until partially nerfed by the current government, was a good shot at rationalising it.
wow - airborne porkers: I've just seen Mayor Bill de Blasio say something nice about the 2 cops who got shot yesterday. Maybe he's learned from his terrible statements up till now, but I doubt it.
In other news Al Sharpton is firing up his anti-cop protests again. He owes $4.5 million in back taxes
It is time for Dave to show his true leadership qualities. Tomorrow he should stand up and shout "There is co crisis, now stop winging you bloody plebs!"
Correct, although I wouldn't recommend that exact phraseology.
I appreciate that Labour have been very disappointed so far this winter - no 'flu epidemic, no unusual increase in deaths, fewer than normal reports of wards in chaos or terminally ill old biddies being turfed out of their beds - so it's not surprising that they've fallen back on to finding one negative performance statistic out of hundreds, and that relating to time targets, not health or medical outcomes. Par for the course, but, if we're trading such statistics, Wales is a little off-message, isn't it?
Quite right! Who gives a flying fig that someone with a sprained ankle had to hang around A&E for an extra ten minutes. If anything this will encourage health tourism - 'The Brits must have one helluva health system if this is all they've got to complain about'. Irresponsible and preposterous cant!
My observation would be that the institution itself is inflexible, change resistant and obsolete. I have no doubt that the vast majority of folks there are decent hard working people, like anywhere else.
Anybody who saw the Gerry Robinson documentary from a few years back would concur.
A guy with a proven track record of turning around organizations (and a former Labour supporter), was blocked at every turn to implement a little flexibility and the most minor changes.
And unlike the nonsense pseudo-doc these days ala "Undercover Boss", this was a serious BBC documentary following his attempts to calmly and sensibly try and improve a failing hospital. This is what he said about his experience...
"until we start taking the management of these complex organisations seriously, in the way that management is taken seriously in commercial organisations, frankly we’re just going to be chipping away at the edges of the problem in the NHS.... I think what the NHS needs to learn is that actually you don’t solve problems by throwing money at it, and not every problem actually needs money to solve it. That’s the first lesson. Secondly, to get out of their heads the idea that things have to take three years to do and get into the idea that there is a series of objectives that we need to do now, and that we’ve got months, not years to do it. Those two things, I think, would have the biggest single impact on the way that the Health Service is managed."
I whole heartedly agree.
One personal example where I'm hacked off with what the public sector delivers is HMRC and self assessment. In some areas the form is designed to be downright confusing. If you're carrying forward a loss on a particular area of taxation from a previous tax year then anyone with a comprehension of good form design would ensure that the following years tax return would contain the brought forward figure in that tax return automatically. But no, you have to look the previous carried forward figure from the previous tax year return, and input it in the present tax year manually. Some of the more cynical amongst us would think that it's deliberate, in making it harder to gain tax relief on any losses carried forward from previous tax years rather than any design oversight!
I have not experienced the NHS for a decade, but it was ancient. When I moved from Harrogate to 5 miles outside, I had to change doctors.
Every time I got a prescription, they would literally fill out a piece of paper that I would hand carry to the drug store.
My daughter fell and damaged her knee. After the operation the result was so bad that we had to go private to get it done properly.
My observation would be that the institution itself is inflexible, change resistant and obsolete. I have no doubt that the vast majority of folks there are decent hard working people, like anywhere else.
I am not a fan.
Yes, you've mentioned it before, but I'm not sure your experience is typical of today's service, even strained as it is. The prescription issue has been basically solved (for repeats just go to your chemist when it's due). Most people seem satisfied with the care (the grumbles are 95% about waiting times and administrative issues). You do still have the "local doctor" issue - supposedly so he can rush round and treat you at home if needed, probably more in reality to maintain an even spread of GPs (though for dentists it doesn't apply - my NHS dentist is halfway across London, but he was recommended and he's good so I don't mind).
Overall it seems to me medically as good as the other countries I've lived in, though scruffier. The rationing issue that Fox and Chris are discussing is present in one form or another in every health system - NICE, until partially nerfed by the current government, was a good shot at rationalising it.
IMO, one huge thing that would make a massive difference, and the current government have been very poor on. Online booking of GP, and ability to also book a GP in multiple locations.
Everywhere these days I can book online for something, from a tyre change to my gym class. Instead, a huge percentage of GP surgeries do not have online booking systems. That is just mind blowing to me. The technology for online booking is out there, it is now very cheap and easy to implement a white label solution.
I believe the current government set a target for the percentage of GP who should have this in 2010, and they are nowhere near that.
Lots of people are still doing the 8am ring shuffle, and it must be hugely inefficient for both the patient and the GP.
I have not experienced the NHS for a decade, but it was ancient. When I moved from Harrogate to 5 miles outside, I had to change doctors.
Every time I got a prescription, they would literally fill out a piece of paper that I would hand carry to the drug store.
My daughter fell and damaged her knee. After the operation the result was so bad that we had to go private to get it done properly.
My observation would be that the institution itself is inflexible, change resistant and obsolete. I have no doubt that the vast majority of folks there are decent hard working people, like anywhere else.
I am not a fan.
Yes, you've mentioned it before, but I'm not sure your experience is typical of today's service, even strained as it is. The prescription issue has been basically solved (for repeats just go to your chemist when it's due). Most people seem satisfied with the care (the grumbles are 95% about waiting times and administrative issues). You do still have the "local doctor" issue - supposedly so he can rush round and treat you at home if needed, probably more in reality to maintain an even spread of GPs (though for dentists it doesn't apply - my NHS dentist is halfway across London, but he was recommended and he's good so I don't mind).
Overall it seems to me medically as good as the other countries I've lived in, though scruffier. The rationing issue that Fox and Chris are discussing is present in one form or another in every health system - NICE, until partially nerfed by the current government, was a good shot at rationalising it.
Things aren't really as bad as some of your colleagues would like us to believe then.
Sunil And as we enter the election buildup all square, and with Labour also likely to lose seats to the SNP everything to play for. Whether those UKIP or Green voters return to the Tories or Labour will also be a factor
I'll be climbing Kilimanjaro in late February - it'll make a pleasant fortnight getting away from the unedifying GE campaign at this rate! As part of the climb, I'm raising money for the UK charity Action against Hunger, that works in around 45 countries worldwide to prevent famine amongst people much less fortunate than ourselves: http://www.actionagainsthunger.org.uk/who-we-are/our-organisation?gclid=CKOint_HgMMCFZLLtAodlUIAIw Have set up a Just Giving page in my real life name. If anyone on PB would like to support me in this cause, then feel free to contact OGH / site admin and I'll be happy for them to give you my personal email address.
These declarations of "MAJOR INCIDENTS" at A & E departments are proving to be really annoying. I get the feeling what they're really about is a massive attention-seeking exercise.
One of my relatives has a wife that works in an Essex hospital.
I was talking to her just before Christmas and she was telling me what A and E was like; predictably chaotic with pre Christmas drunks.
I was astonished to find that after a complete rebuild at a cost of over £200 million and a trebling on annual NHS expenditure that the service was pretty much the same as before though.
What kind of advert is that for more money for the NHS?
We also live in a world blighted by the cult of managerialism and "key performance indicators" etc, and most people who are familiar with this widespread silliness have grown to regard it as cobblers, so when someone starts blathering on about 95% inside 18 weeks a lot of people have enough sense to dismiss it as meaningless nonsense, because they experience this kind of "performance management" within their own working lives.
The public already know what they think of the NHS, and have for ages, so the current campaign to construct a crisis won't actually change much.
I am contemplating a bet on UKIP seats at the next GE being 3-4. Hills are offering 7/1.
I see Nick P and Richard Nabavi are around. Would welcome your views or any other PBers as to whether this looks like value?
Think there is still better value elsewhere continuing to back SNP in individual constituencies in the central belt. Antifrank's article on the Glasgow seats a few days ago was an absolute masterclass.
Too many unknown unknown's with UKIP even 4 months out. SNP Labour die is cast and feels far more bettable to me, but only my two penneth!
@Sun_Politics: YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Tories and Labour tied, Lib Dems still in fifth: CON 33%, LAB 33%, LD 7%, UKIP 13%, GRN 8%
Must be an outlier! Must be!
There hasn't been a tied poll since 21st Dec (Populus) and there hasn't been a tied YouGov since 17th Dec!
Haven't kept up with things but are YouGov one of the pollsters now prompting for UKIP? If so, then it's a disappointing UKIP number, but hardly a surprise given their recent travails over unnecessary distractions.
The ideal would be to have private hospitals with contracts with the NHS. The result would be the same, or better, and probably cheaper. The government doesn't need to be running hospitals. They're no better at that than they are at most things..
Indeed so, and of course the saner politicians even in Labour understand that. That's why Labour promised in their last manifesto to allow patients to use private providers, why the use of private providers increased so much under the last government, and why Andy Burnham, before he metamorphosed into a cynical or (even worse) ideological Nationalised Industry Fanatic, set in motion the tendering by private producers to run Hinchingbrooke Hospital.
That works quite well for some elective care (apart from the private hospitals doing no training of junior doctors, so being a parasites of training hospitals), but the tariffs paid for emergency admissions do not cover the costs. Either you need to increase the funding paid for emergency admissions, which is set at present at 30% of costs over 2009 numbers of admissions, or you have hospitals that need the elective profitable work to keep the emergency work going. Burnham now seems to favour the latter.
Private companies very rarely bid for emergency work, because they know it loses money. The few private out of hours services either run at a loss or have very thin cover. A single GP covering the whole of Cornwall for example:
The tariffs are skewed to making provision of Radiology services like TimB suggests equally non viable. I was recently in negotiations with some very business savvy GPs wanting to set up some new community services that required MRI scanning. We canvassed bids from a number of private companies and hospitals, but none could function at the nationally set national tariff. The only one left that was willing was a major hospital in the city, which defeated the purpose of our new scheme.
So in essence the choice is threefold: either you increase the funding to make emergency work financially sustainable (either by increased tariff or co payment, with the money coming from reduced elective activity), you require hospitals to cross subsidise loss making services with profitable ones (ala Burnham 2015 version) or you allow emergency units to deterioate to Cinderella services (the current situation).
The average annual deductible this year for Obamacare is $3k for individuals and $6k for families. By contrast my family deductible is $250.
The good news is that men are insured for free contraceptive pills and mammograms.
It's just a dreadful law, and people are sucked in by the subsidized premium, and only when they need care do they find out how costly it is, and how small the Obamacare networks are.
Obamacare provides insurance but limited access to care
I am contemplating a bet on UKIP seats at the next GE being 3-4. Hills are offering 7/1.
I see Nick P and Richard Nabavi are around. Would welcome your views or any other PBers as to whether this looks like value?
Think there is still better value elsewhere continuing to back SNP in individual constituencies in the central belt. Antifrank's article on the Glasgow seats a few days ago was an absolute masterclass.
Too many unknown unknown's with UKIP even 4 months out. SNP Labour die is cast and feels far more bettable to me, but only my two penneth!
Thanks hunchman. I'm very tempted by the UKIP bet I've mentioned but I will hold fire for now in the hope of gleaning a few more views.
Overall it seems to me medically as good as the other countries I've lived in, though scruffier. The rationing issue that Fox and Chris are discussing is present in one form or another in every health system - NICE, until partially nerfed by the current government, was a good shot at rationalising it.
People, especially those wedded to the ideology of health service provision (in either direction), overthink the health care industry. Just like any other business, it is a matter of supply & demand. Whenever there is an excess of demand over supply, you will see rationing. This is either in the form of increasing prices to reduce the demand back down, or increasing waiting times/lists, or simply saying that you will not meet the demand (either arbitrarily or through some kind of quasi-scientific mechanism like QALYs and EBM).
The trouble with the way the British public perceive healthcare is that they've been taught to assume that any manifestation of imbalance between supply and demand is anathema and should be solved by increasing supply while still maintaining universal/"free" healthcare. Unfortunately for them, the reality is that the costs associated with actually doing so would be truly astronomical, which is why no country in the world, including Britain, does this (as you rightly say).
It's electoral suicide to say this, so we muddle on regardless. It's not a dreadful healthcare system; it simply has weak points, like every other. No party can actually solve them, without creating other weak points. Britain, since the creation of the NHS, has simply opted to choose its main weak point to be rationing via delay (rather than rationing by cost), with a mild dosing of rationing by eliminating certain kinds provision altogether via EBM. There are of course huge efficiencies that could be made, but nearly all the big ones require truly massive upfront capital investment which no party can fund, or have tried and failed (IT being the prime example of a real chokepoint in the NHS vs other big logistics operations like DHL/FedEx; and yes, managing a patient's care pathway through the system is actually very similar to managing a parcel delivery, once you take the easy medical bit out).
In my opinion, a better balance could be struck by creating & increasing co-payments at various pressure points, to manage demand e.g. small charges for GP appointments and attendances at A&E. That could reduce the frivolous attendances for things like wanting antibiotics for colds, or getting yourself so drunk you can't walk, etc, etc. Of course, it may also apply pressure on the genuinely ill but poor, but as I said earlier, you have to choose what balance of weak points you accept; you can't erase them.
The fuss over the NHS is more about political gimmickry than anything that can actually be easily solved, even if we didn't still have a significant deficit issue and a volatile global economy.
A lot of cold weather around the Northern Hemisphere at the moment - http://iceagenow.info/ - of course no mention of the snow in Cyprus, wider Middle East including Saudi advising their citizens to wrap up warm(!), US polar vortex and on and on. Doesn't quite fit what's actually happening on the ground around the world with the utter nonsense and climate fraud manipulation of the Met Office claiming that 2014 was the warmest year on record for the UK. If they're so sure then why don't they allow everyone and I mean EVERYONE to audit their data independently? Oh no can't do that! And when they're using less and less weather stations, and the ones they use change - for example now using Gatwick airport instead of Reigate (the latter lies in a frost hollow and produces consistently lower temperatures!) then it really is a dogs dinner and comparing apples with oranges and producing meaningless garbage. Its time to put an end to this gargantuan climate fraud that they are perpetuating. And they're up to similar tricks in the US as well:
In Canada for the official temperature record they just use 1 weather station up in the arctic archipelago, and in New Zealand they use more weather stations from the north island now compared to the south island. How representative is that?!! And they claim this is objective science, it's total and utter deluded RUBBISH.
These declarations of "MAJOR INCIDENTS" at A & E departments are proving to be really annoying. I get the feeling what they're really about is a massive attention-seeking exercise.
Quite. A 747 interacting with the ground at speed is a major incident. A 4 hour wait in A & E with toothache, isn't.
UKIP draws its strength from three different demographics:
1. We want a change. All the politicians are the same. It's the LibLabCon. The 'change'/'new kind of politics' vote that the LibDems used to get has gone to UKIP.
2. The WWC vote that feels patronised by Labour, and wonders why the party that was supposed to be looking after their interests, has been the one that has been keenest on mass immigration.
3. Former Conservative voters who feel that Cameron's social liberalism is not their cup of tea.
We have a mixture of 1s, 2s and 3s on this board. The 1s - in the long run - will be the ones who will be most disappointed (as they have been by the LibDems). Because governing means messy compromises and because most things are out of politicians hands.
I agree, historically the NHS has managed to ration demand by waiting and other non financial barriers. In many ways these are as unfair as financial barriers. When the non-financal barrier becomes too much then people either give up or pay to go privately.
I would rather see overt and publically debated rationing (and discussion of co-payments/Speedy Boarding) than the current hidden rationing and pretence.
Deflation is the process where prices are falling, and therefore people put off purchases to take advantage of the fact that prices will be lower in the future... thus causing the economy to continue to slow, and further falls in the price level.
Lower oil prices do not cause consumers to defer spending on computers, or clothes, or meals out, or furniture, or bottles of wine. On the contrary, spending on these things is likely to be boosted by a dimunition in the 'Saudi Tax'. Furthermore, as poorer people spend proportionately more of their income on petrol (and gas), it substantially increase disposable incomes of those that need the money most.
At current oil prices, disposable income for the median UK family increases by about 3%.
In a way it's reassuring that such intelligent people (supposedly?) are just as credulous as the rest of us when it comes to believing what we want to happen will happen just because we want it to.
and because most things are out of politicians hands.
In my more idle moments, I like to think that Marx's old saw has become very outdated. Religion isn't the opium of the masses now; democracy is. Or rather, faith in any larger-than-life construct. We've just swapped Government in for God.
You really couldn't come up with a better way of limiting the impact of societal discontent than creating a representative democracy (esp. within a constitutional monarchy). It gives just enough of an illusion of control to keep most people either quietly happy or quietly unhappy. The happy or unhappy bit is almost always down to factors that have very, very little to do with government. The quietly bit is what democracy excels in achieving. The more totalitarian regimes around the world are really missing a trick; it's a much more frightening prospect to lose power completely and probably be killed in the process, than to be out of power for four or five years, but still relatively comfortably off in between....
What was the response of the German authorities to thousands of people marching yesterday?
To switch off the lights.
"In Cologne, much of the city centre was plunged into darkness as lights were switched off at major buildings and bridges across the Rhine, according to the news agency DPA. "."
Deflation is the process where prices are falling, and therefore people put off purchases to take advantage of the fact that prices will be lower in the future... thus causing the economy to continue to slow, and further falls in the price level.
Lower oil prices do not cause consumers to defer spending on computers, or clothes, or meals out, or furniture, or bottles of wine. On the contrary, spending on these things is likely to be boosted by a dimunition in the 'Saudi Tax'. Furthermore, as poorer people spend proportionately more of their income on petrol (and gas), it substantially increase disposable incomes of those that need the money most.
At current oil prices, disposable income for the median UK family increases by about 3%.
Gasoline prices here have dropped 50% in the last 6 months - I filled up today for $1.98 a gallon. In some states with lower gas taxes it's even cheaper.
Heating gas is also down, and also I can refill my bbq propane tank for less than $10, instead of the usual $14-15.
A lot of cold weather around the Northern Hemisphere at the moment - http://iceagenow.info/ - of course no mention of the snow in Cyprus, wider Middle East including Saudi advising their citizens to wrap up warm(!), US polar vortex and on and on. Doesn't quite fit what's actually happening on the ground around the world with the utter nonsense and climate fraud manipulation of the Met Office claiming that 2014 was the warmest year on record for the UK. If they're so sure then why don't they allow everyone and I mean EVERYONE to audit their data independently? Oh no can't do that! And when they're using less and less weather stations, and the ones they use change - for example now using Gatwick airport instead of Reigate (the latter lies in a frost hollow and produces consistently lower temperatures!) then it really is a dogs dinner and comparing apples with oranges and producing meaningless garbage. Its time to put an end to this gargantuan climate fraud that they are perpetuating. And they're up to similar tricks in the US as well:
In Canada for the official temperature record they just use 1 weather station up in the arctic archipelago, and in New Zealand they use more weather stations from the north island now compared to the south island. How representative is that?!! And they claim this is objective science, it's total and utter deluded RUBBISH.
Good night all.
2014 was the warmest year ever recorded in the UK (records dating back to 1910).
Moreover, 2014 was also the warmest CET (records going back 300 or so years).
Been speaking with many mets around the World and anthropogenic forcing on the climate is a real worry.
Of course in the alternative universe of hunchman, black is white, cold is warm etc etc. There really are some loons on here...
Deflation is the process where prices are falling, and therefore people put off purchases to take advantage of the fact that prices will be lower in the future... thus causing the economy to continue to slow, and further falls in the price level.
Lower oil prices do not cause consumers to defer spending on computers, or clothes, or meals out, or furniture, or bottles of wine. On the contrary, spending on these things is likely to be boosted by a dimunition in the 'Saudi Tax'. Furthermore, as poorer people spend proportionately more of their income on petrol (and gas), it substantially increase disposable incomes of those that need the money most.
At current oil prices, disposable income for the median UK family increases by about 3%.
Gasoline prices here have dropped 50% in the last 6 months - I filled up today for $1.98 a gallon. In some states with lower gas taxes it's even cheaper.
Heating gas is also down, and also I can refill my bbq propane tank for less than $10, instead of the usual $14-15.
Over the last 40 years, there has been a fabulous correlation between periods when oil was expensive, and low economic growth, and vice-versa. So, the 1970s and 2000s had expensive energy and weak growth, while the 1980s and 1990s had cheap energy and strong growth. If we are going into a multi-year period of oil below $60, it will be terrific for energy consuming countries.
I agree, historically the NHS has managed to ration demand by waiting and other non financial barriers. In many ways these are as unfair as financial barriers. When the non-financal barrier becomes too much then people either give up or pay to go privately.
I would rather see overt and publically debated rationing (and discussion of co-payments/Speedy Boarding) than the current hidden rationing and pretence.
100% agreed. You could also bill more widely for hotel style extras, like better food, upgraded/luxury rooms, serving a glass of wine to those well enough to have it, etc, etc. None of this would affect clinical care to those not paying it, but it would subsidise their care somewhat.
I think if you polled most doctors - especially doctors who actually understand the mechanics of health service provision rather than just deliverers (i.e. if you asked partner GPs, CCG representatives, doctors who are clinical/medical directors, etc, etc) - you'd get large numbers broadly agreeing with this position (though perhaps not one or two of the more detailed suggestions above!)
But if a politician says this to the public, you can guarantee the media headlines the next day will be "They're selling off our NHS!" or "It's NHS Privatisation!!". The public would support it, if there were to be a calm discussion about the matter, but there wouldn't be. And if I can get party political for just a moment, it would definitely be the Labour party screaming the loudest, preventing such a positive change from being mooted.
Deflation is the process where prices are falling, and therefore people put off purchases to take advantage of the fact that prices will be lower in the future... thus causing the economy to continue to slow, and further falls in the price level.
Lower oil prices do not cause consumers to defer spending on computers, or clothes, or meals out, or furniture, or bottles of wine. On the contrary, spending on these things is likely to be boosted by a dimunition in the 'Saudi Tax'. Furthermore, as poorer people spend proportionately more of their income on petrol (and gas), it substantially increase disposable incomes of those that need the money most.
At current oil prices, disposable income for the median UK family increases by about 3%.
Gasoline prices here have dropped 50% in the last 6 months - I filled up today for $1.98 a gallon. In some states with lower gas taxes it's even cheaper.
Heating gas is also down, and also I can refill my bbq propane tank for less than $10, instead of the usual $14-15.
Over the last 40 years, there has been a fabulous correlation between periods when oil was expensive, and low economic growth, and vice-versa. So, the 1970s and 2000s had expensive energy and weak growth, while the 1980s and 1990s had cheap energy and strong growth. If we are going into a multi-year period of oil below $60, it will be terrific for energy consuming countries.
At current prices - $47.65 for WTI and Brent at $52,05, many production fields are simply uneconomic, particularly secondary and tertiary production. I suspect that includes the North Sea. At some point production at these sites will be suspended and the reduced supply will equate more to the reduced demand, thus correcting the decline, at least to some extent.
On the good side, sales of SUVs and pick up trucks are soaring and they are higher profit items for the auto manufacturers
I agree, historically the NHS has managed to ration demand by waiting and other non financial barriers. In many ways these are as unfair as financial barriers. When the non-financal barrier becomes too much then people either give up or pay to go privately.
I would rather see overt and publically debated rationing (and discussion of co-payments/Speedy Boarding) than the current hidden rationing and pretence.
100% agreed. You could also bill more widely for hotel style extras, like better food, upgraded/luxury rooms, serving a glass of wine to those well enough to have it, etc, etc. None of this would affect clinical care to those not paying it, but it would subsidise their care somewhat.
I think if you polled most doctors - especially doctors who actually understand the mechanics of health service provision rather than just deliverers (i.e. if you asked partner GPs, CCG representatives, doctors who are clinical/medical directors, etc, etc) - you'd get large numbers broadly agreeing with this position (though perhaps not one or two of the more detailed suggestions above!)
But if a politician says this to the public, you can guarantee the media headlines the next day will be "They're selling off our NHS!" or "It's NHS Privatisation!!". The public would support it, if there were to be a calm discussion about the matter, but there wouldn't be. And if I can get party political for just a moment, it would definitely be the Labour party screaming the loudest, preventing such a positive change from being mooted.
Anybody remember Patient Line, where you could pay for your own phone and tv console. Flawed though it was and obviously mobiles / tablets has long since overtaken it, I don't remember Labour coming under attack for "selling off / privatisating the NHS", rather the discussion was the cost of the service too high. And ultimately, the market / patient decided on that, yes it was.
In other essential economic news, "the hardest ticket to get in sports", a 4 day ticket to The Masters Tournament, has increased from last year's $250 to $325. When I first went the 4 day pass was $100, though as I was on the scoring committee I didn't have to pay.
The price of food at the concession stand has increased too - a nice fresh pimento cheese sandwich and a big cup of Coke will now cost you $6. In my day it was $2.
In other essential economic news, "the hardest ticket to get in sports", a 4 day ticket to The Masters Tournament, has increased from last year's $250 to $325. When I first went the 4 day pass was $100, though as I was on the scoring committee I didn't have to pay.
The price of food at the concession stand has increased too - a nice fresh pimento cheese sandwich and a big cup of Coke will now cost you $6. In my day it was $2.
I thought there were basically no public ticket sales for the Masters? I thought they went to patrons etc, with a very limited number available via a ballot (a recent addition).
I always wondered then where all the resales you see on stubhub etc come from, at their massive prices, of $1000's. Are they all patrons reselling them? Are the tickets not named?
In other essential economic news, "the hardest ticket to get in sports", a 4 day ticket to The Masters Tournament, has increased from last year's $250 to $325. When I first went the 4 day pass was $100, though as I was on the scoring committee I didn't have to pay.
The price of food at the concession stand has increased too - a nice fresh pimento cheese sandwich and a big cup of Coke will now cost you $6. In my day it was $2.
I thought there were basically no public ticket sales for the Masters? I thought they went to patrons etc, with a very limited number available via a ballot (a recent addition).
I always wondered then where all the resales you see on stubhub etc come from, at their massive prices, of $1000's. Are they all patrons reselling them? Are the tickets not named?
The waiting list closed decades ago - basically it is patrons only. There is a ballot for practice rounds.
Every badge is individually numbered, but in a way that you can't work out how many passes are sold. The National doesn't reveal attendance. I do know first hand of someone borrowing a patron's badge and being unruly on the course. The guy was ejected and the badge holder told he was no longer a badge holder.
Regarding sales on stubhub etc I am sure that the club follows sales online very carefully, as they are very protective, and you are not supposed to resell them.
As an example, when a developer wanted to erect an apartment block on land he had bought n Berckmans Road, which runs alongside the second and 4th holes, which meant the occupants could see over the fence onto the course, the club gave an interest free loan to the city of Augusta to buy all the land and turn it into a parking lot. Augusta is a company town, and the company is Augusta National Golf Club.
The Masters is a tournament put on and run by a private golf club.
If there is a golf club in Heaven, it will not be as simply gorgeous as Augusta National. It is a lovely place to be at.
In other essential economic news, "the hardest ticket to get in sports", a 4 day ticket to The Masters Tournament, has increased from last year's $250 to $325. When I first went the 4 day pass was $100, though as I was on the scoring committee I didn't have to pay.
The price of food at the concession stand has increased too - a nice fresh pimento cheese sandwich and a big cup of Coke will now cost you $6. In my day it was $2.
I thought there were basically no public ticket sales for the Masters? I thought they went to patrons etc, with a very limited number available via a ballot (a recent addition).
I always wondered then where all the resales you see on stubhub etc come from, at their massive prices, of $1000's. Are they all patrons reselling them? Are the tickets not named?
The waiting list closed decades ago - basically it is patrons only. There is a ballot for practice rounds.
Every badge is individually numbered, but in a way that you can't work out how many passes are sold. The National doesn't reveal attendance. I do know first hand of someone borrowing a patron's badge and being unruly on the course. The guy was ejected and the badge holder told he was no longer a badge holder.
Regarding sales on stubhub etc I am sure that the club follows sales online very carefully, as they are very protective, and you are not supposed to resell them.
As an example, when a developer wanted erect an apartment block on land he had bought n Berckmans Road, which runs alongside the second and 4th holes, which meant the occupants could see over the fence onto the course, the club gave an interest free loan to the city of Augusta to buy all the land and turn it into a parking lot. Augusta is a company town, and the company is Augusta National Golf Club.
The Masters is a tournament put on and run by a private golf club.
Given the passes are numbered, rather than in the name of the patron, I presume those that are resold via stubhub etc (and are genuine), still get you in i.e there aren't any checks of ID vs number on the pass?
It seems the amount of open reselling that goes on these days is quite large. It doesn't seem that hard to get a pass if you are willing to pay the big bucks, with some resellers appearing to even offer perks like access to houses on the edge of the course, where you will get free food and refreshments thrown in for the massive premium you have paid on the pass.
And some words in that article that should have some relevance in the UK:
Instead, they persist in our mass delusion: that there is some magic pot of money in the health-care system, which can be painlessly tapped to provide universal coverage without dislocating any of the generous arrangements that insured people currently enjoy. Just as there are no leprechauns, there is no free money at the end of the rainbow; there are patients demanding services, and health-care workers making comfortable livings, who have built their financial lives around the expectation that those incomes will continue. Until we shed this delusion, you can expect a lot of ranting and raving about the hard truths of the real world.
The waiting list closed decades ago - basically it is patrons only. There is a ballot for practice rounds.
Every badge is individually numbered, but in a way that you can't work out how many passes are sold. The National doesn't reveal attendance. I do know first hand of someone borrowing a patron's badge and being unruly on the course. The guy was ejected and the badge holder told he was no longer a badge holder.
Regarding sales on stubhub etc I am sure that the club follows sales online very carefully, as they are very protective, and you are not supposed to resell them.
As an example, when a developer wanted erect an apartment block on land he had bought n Berckmans Road, which runs alongside the second and 4th holes, which meant the occupants could see over the fence onto the course, the club gave an interest free loan to the city of Augusta to buy all the land and turn it into a parking lot. Augusta is a company town, and the company is Augusta National Golf Club.
The Masters is a tournament put on and run by a private golf club.
Given the passes are numbered, rather than in the name of the patron, I presume those that are resold via stubhub etc (and are genuine), still get you in i.e there aren't any checks of ID vs number on the pass?
It seems the amount of open reselling that goes on these days is quite large. It doesn't seem that hard to get a pass if you are willing to pay the big bucks, with some resellers appearing to even offer perks like access to houses on the edge of the course, where you will get free food and refreshments thrown in for the massive premium you have paid on the pass.
We lived (in the late 80s) in a gated subdivision around a golf course - not THE golf course! - and if you wanted to rent out your house for Masters Week, they would come round the week before and stick a green flag with a number in your front yard. Then the friday before Masters Week (which always corresponded with school holidays) somebody would turn up on your doorstep and hand you a wad of cash, $1000 for the week, and $2000 if you agree to be the so-called 'party house'. The party house was kept until Tuesday so it could be thoroughly cleaned. In those days it was Cadillac and Travelers doing the entertaining.
I don't have much contact with the club these days, but the club secretary was our neighbor so we knew what was going on.
I am told that the passes are scanned when you enter the grounds. There is no attempt to check identity - it is common for patrons to lend their tickets to their friends, particularly on thursday and friday. Unless you can see the badge number on stubhub the club would have no way of tracking them.
Comments
Perhaps we can say that any substance that alters the state of mind is dangerous and immoral, but if marijuana is legalized then why are all the other substances including tobacco and alcohol not accepted.
It's when you make exceptions, that create problems.
And Wales have been failing this artificial target by miles for ages, never seen the likes of the BBC camped out in A&E departments in Cardiff or Swansea for 24hrs telling us its the end of the world as we know it for the Labour run NHS.
NHS isn't in crisis. It is under a lot of pressure, due to a whole host of factors, some slow burners, some more recent, some seasonal. The way they are going on, you would think you will never ever get seen again at a hospital and that there are 1000's of people dying in the waiting rooms.
Get a grip FFS, under a whole lot of pressure yes, crisis like our NHS is some sort of 3rd world basket case, no.
And the media always will find somebody who had to wait ages. I remember waiting for 10hrs with my partner to get seen, under Labour....But I don't blame them for that. I bet the media aren't interested in that last week, I booked online to see my GP the next day, saw him, told me needed an X-Ray, went to hospital as a walk-in and seen in 10 mins.
If it's a domestic economic problem the Tories might get the blame as they are the government for 5 years and their posters are all about how a wonderful job they did with the economy.
Just saying.
When did those records begin Nigel?
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/youth-today-boring-polite-and-very-fearful/15807#.VKxhxclFDqA
Its the boozy forty and fifty somethings that you need to watch out for! Being gloriously drunk is one way of making life in Britain palatable. Drunks and colds and sprains are all part of ED work (I was once assaulted by a patient for pointing out that his month old rash was neither accident or emergency). But the main reason the EDs are backed up are sick frail elderly people with complec multiple chronic diseases. It is not an easy problem to fix.
But more seriously on NickP's suggestion: I remember a drunk being booted out of ED in the eighties for being obnoxious and pissing up an inside wall. Two hours later he was found unconscious in the car park. It was an intracranial haemorrhage on top of a few pints.
Being drunk is not a bar to serious illness.
2. Labour can't win this election just on the NHS. IMO.
3. What would happen if London decided it wanted to become independent of the rest of the UK?
4. Boy George Strikes Again.
5. Very few Prime Ministers have been "ideological" and the British tend to prefer practical leaders over ideological one's. The Blessed Margaret was very much a "one off" in that regard and only happened because things were so terrible in the 1970's.
6. Swingback Baby!
7. Looking good for Team Blue.
8. My prediction remains what it's always been (except when I wobbled in 2011 and 2012 and 2013 and 2014...) Con win most votes, seats and national share of the vote. Hung Parliament, Con largest party. Probable Con/Lib or Con minority government.
9. If support for Con and Lab doesn't pick in the next 2-3 years I think we could see one of those once a century "realignment's"
10. I'm sure they are...
11. Ed who?
12. Labour has to keep their luvvie friends happy.
13. Could be worse. He could have been mistaken for El Gord...
14. NO!
15. The truth is out there!
16. This is what Prince Charles has always warned about.
17. Oooooooooo...
18. Ditto.
There is no crisis - that is just media spin. More and more people are being seen and treated. Yes, occasionally demand will outstrip supply - but the whole point of triage is to make sure those in greatest need are seen first. And that is how is should be.
The best the BBC could come up with this morning is a man who presented at A&E and was treated within an hour - and his complaint was that it was very noisy where he was waiting until he was admitted to a ward. Really awful I am sure.
No-one can afford to run a healthcare system that has doctors and nurses waiting around just in case someone pops in feeling a bit under the weather. Patients will just have to be patient if there is someone in greater need of care and attention.
'Mansion tax wot dun it'
A big thank you to Abbott,Jowell & Lammy.
The focus for clinicians has to be to treat those in greatest need first. Not to meet some target.
Wait times should not be excessive - but the quality of a hospital is the care that it gives not their ability to meet a pointless target.
When asked, Jerry replied that Christie is 'part of our mojo' and it was inconceivable that the governor would not be at the Dallas game at Green Bay on Sunday.
Christie's travelling and expenses are paid for by Jerry Jones. This is specifically legal under NJ law, which explains much about NJ corruption.
The game will be the first time Dallas has been to Green Bay for a playoff game since the Ice Bowl of 1967.
I was lucky enough to spend time with Bart Starr recently, the Green Bay qb at the Ice Bowl, and asked him about it. He somehow realized I was a Cowboys fan and poked me playfully in the stomach.
Jerry is also a director of a company, owned 50-50 by the Cowboys and the New York Yankees, which recently signed a deal for food and concessions at the top of 1 World Trade Center, a building owned by the Port Authority of NY and NJ. The company - no surprise - also does food and concessions at Jerry World and Yankee Stadium.
The Port Authority is controlled by Christie and NY governor Cuomo.
Of course maybe we'll all end up living too long, and the NHS will collapse due to the cost of treating all the oldies with their chronic diseases who didn't die prematurely due to their excessive consumption of toxic substances.
That's the benchmark.
They are being fed a line that it is. And it doesn't match with personal experience in over 90% of cases.
People know when they are being told what to believe.
You mean it is a conspiracy?
(just asking like?)
Similarly, this may well be smart politics from Labour. We'll see.
But my position is this: I - and my children and partner - have had more than our fair share of medical attention and misfortune and since Thatcher the care - regardless of which government has been in power - has been fine. Over that time there have been no end of scare stories but, honestly, none of the changes have made any difference to me, as far as I can see.
The only time the NHS has made a difference was in the 1970's under a Labour government. Junior doctors went on strike - over pay - and, as a result, my father's operation was postponed. By the time he got it, the cancer - which could have been caught earlier - had spread and was terminal. The NHS killed my beloved father. He died in January 1979 - the infamous "winter of discontent".
I have heard more times than I care to from Labour party members and supporters how uncaring the Tories are, how Thatcher introduced selfishness, how they care more, how they will protect the NHS, blah, blah and, I'm afraid, since that bleak day I have never believed a word of it. Selfishness did not start with Thatcher. Those junior doctors who went on strike over pay behaved selfishly - however justified they may have felt. My father died - prematurely - because of them. And Labour can hug the NHS to its bosom as much as it likes and congratulate itself on how much it cares. And it's all so much phoney phooey.
This may be an anecdote - though to me and mine - it is a heartfelt one. But it trumps any amount of synthetic outrage from Burnham or anyone else.
What matters is what works. And in the 1970's under Labour the NHS failed me. Labour have no right to claim the NHS for themselves. And if they want to do that then they have to claim responsibility for all the things that go wrong in it too.
Key issue is lack of TV coverage. In all the arguments yesterday over the economy one thing went unnoticed - no mention of UKIP at all anywhere.
TV companies are sending a very powerful subliminal message - if UKIP aren't mentioned the average voter will think they don't matter / don't have a chance - and they will therefore lose support.
Also clear they have not been given improved status - BBC Daily Politics had Gillan, Jowell and Ming all programme - then Nuttall was introduced 5 mins from the end of a 60 mins programme and got to say about two sentences.
This is absolutely key - forget policies, forget everything else, if they aren't seen they have no chance of maintaining current poll rating.
If you want British doctors to want to train in Emergency Medicine (and it is exciting and interesting) then there has to be security (we had a veryformidable doorman), shifts that work with family life, good training in both practical and theoretical issues and a supportive rather than coercive environment. It is not about money, or about coercing the unwilling to work there, but you try to convince the DoH to provide that sort of training environment. Much the same goes for General Practice.
"It is hardly waiting 18 months for to get a routine op or 100's dying from lack of water on a ward."
That is not suggesting it is happening OR HAS EVER happened. Hope you read your medical note more carefully! It was a bit of hyperbole on my part to say, a handful of people waiting more than 4hrs at A&E (who we don't know how serious their condition is, probably not that serious), is not a crisis. It is a crisis when people aren't giving necessary treatment and care in a reasonable length of time. Nowhere did I state that these things ever happened on that scale, rather just saying it would be a real crisis if they did.
I've witnessed first rate medical care administered to family members which couldn't be faulted, though being in an ambulance on blue lights at high speed isn't something I'd recommend. I've also sat waiting my turn in the same A&E unit. In the grand scheme of things a few hours hanging around seems a small price to pay.
It all seems to work, regardless of how bad politicians with vested interests would like one to believe things might be.
Well 2015 has opened with quite a bang as far as the markets are concerned. Crude oil sitting at $48 as we speak - which is a key support area from the $8/$9 lows in 1999 through the $32 low in December 2008. Whilst I expect $48 to offer short term support, I think long term we're headed down towards the December 2008 lows, and even longer term below that. This is DEFLATION in action, and oil is just the first market to succumb to it.
From where I'm looking, it seems we're due a 5 month consolidation in the US stockmarket, more severe correction in European markets, given the capital flow is inexorably into the US at the current time. US Dollar strength really beginning to assert itself as I said it would, and the current move is just a prelude to a much greater move higher into 2017 in my opinion, both GBPUSD and EURUSD heading below parity, its going to be quite a ride!
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2015/01/06/can-the-dow-correct-for-up-to-5-months/
So, more importantly for PB'ers, what is this going to mean for the election? Firstly, I think it will bring the economy more to the forefront - Tory positive. But how severe are the renewed spasms in the Eurozone going to be? I think the price the market will extract from this will be full blown QE. Until the big bang date of 1st October this year (top in the global bond market), I don't see anyone including Greece exiting the Eurozone just yet. In true euro fashion they'll concoct something together that will hold the confidence of the market together. It's after the start of October when the fireworks will really begin to fly, and lay waste to any of the spending promises made by UK politicians in the coming 4 months. And for the Tories to prosper against a more uncertain economic backdrop short term, they'll need the market attention to be on the Eurozone and away from the UK. I think they'll get away with that short term, never mind GBPUSD plummeting, its the EURGBP exchange rate that most of the electorate notice short term for their European holiday bookings for the summer, which remains anchored around the 0.78/0.79 level, relatively good for UK holidaymakers, as well as the benefits from the oil price collapse (Aberdeen excepted).
If UKIP play their cards right, then they should be able to make some capital from the ongoing Greek farce, but that's a big if at the moment given the silly distractions that are plaguing their central message at the moment.
As for Labour, blathering on about the NHS carries its own risks as others have alluded to below on this thread. And the more their opponents can bring to the attention of the general electorate their own shambolic record in Wales, the better for them. John Snow went like a knife through butter with Burnham tonight over 83% 4 hour A&E target met in Wales, against 92% in England. Why the heck does anyone believe that Labour is remotely credible on the NHS!
NoM is the time the tectonic plates shift with new parties formed and merged.
It has happened to the Liberals a number of times in the last century, but this time it may well be someone else. My party seems much more united (albeit depleted) than it has for a couple of years. Curious!
I expect us to take a beating in May, followed by a new rebirth.
Tomorrow he should stand up and shout "There is co crisis, now stop winging you bloody plebs!"
Or at least that's what the "Right" on here seem to be suggesting?
Every time I got a prescription, they would literally fill out a piece of paper that I would hand carry to the drug store.
My daughter fell and damaged her knee. After the operation the result was so bad that we had to go private to get it done properly.
My observation would be that the institution itself is inflexible, change resistant and obsolete. I have no doubt that the vast majority of folks there are decent hard working people, like anywhere else.
I am not a fan.
A guy with a proven track record of turning around organizations (and a former Labour supporter), was blocked at every turn to implement a little flexibility and the most minor changes.
And unlike the nonsense pseudo-doc these days ala "Undercover Boss", this was a serious BBC documentary following his attempts to calmly and sensibly try and improve a failing hospital. This is what he said about his experience...
"until we start taking the management of these complex organisations seriously, in the way that management is taken seriously in commercial organisations, frankly we’re just going to be chipping away at the edges of the problem in the NHS.... I think what the NHS needs to learn is that actually you don’t solve problems by throwing money at it, and not every problem actually needs money to solve it. That’s the first lesson. Secondly, to get out of their heads the idea that things have to take three years to do and get into the idea that there is a series of objectives that we need to do now, and that we’ve got months, not years to do it. Those two things, I think, would have the biggest single impact on the way that the Health Service is managed."
If the Tories polled around 32/33, losing 4-5% of their vote, I suspect they would outperform UNS, given it seems that a lot of their lost support is in their southern heartlands to UKIP, which shouldn't impact on their seat totals too much. The Ashcroft polls in the key Tory Labour marginals seem to be indicating a swing around 3-4% to Labour on current polling - that should concern Labour given the overall impression of a 1-2% Labour lead, which implies a 5% swing on UNS - the Tory to UKIP swing in the southern heartlands I think largely explains this.
I appreciate that Labour have been very disappointed so far this winter - no 'flu epidemic, no unusual increase in deaths, fewer than normal reports of wards in chaos or terminally ill old biddies being turfed out of their beds - so it's not surprising that they've fallen back on to finding one negative performance statistic out of hundreds, and that relating to time targets, not health or medical outcomes. Par for the course, but, if we're trading such statistics, Wales is a little off-message, isn't it?
Somebody mentioned going to the hospital for an x-ray. Here there are imaging companies all over the place, and 24/7 emergency medical centers - doc in a box - all mainly set up by hospitals. Going to hospital just for an x-ray is nuts.
It's a great little money earner, but I doubt many UK hospitals do it.
I am very glad that fire plague and pestilence hasn't been visited upon these shores.
If it had, we really would be in deep sh*t.
(literally if it is norovirus)
Overall it seems to me medically as good as the other countries I've lived in, though scruffier. The rationing issue that Fox and Chris are discussing is present in one form or another in every health system - NICE, until partially nerfed by the current government, was a good shot at rationalising it.
In other news Al Sharpton is firing up his anti-cop protests again. He owes $4.5 million in back taxes
One personal example where I'm hacked off with what the public sector delivers is HMRC and self assessment. In some areas the form is designed to be downright confusing. If you're carrying forward a loss on a particular area of taxation from a previous tax year then anyone with a comprehension of good form design would ensure that the following years tax return would contain the brought forward figure in that tax return automatically. But no, you have to look the previous carried forward figure from the previous tax year return, and input it in the present tax year manually. Some of the more cynical amongst us would think that it's deliberate, in making it harder to gain tax relief on any losses carried forward from previous tax years rather than any design oversight!
Everywhere these days I can book online for something, from a tyre change to my gym class. Instead, a huge percentage of GP surgeries do not have online booking systems. That is just mind blowing to me. The technology for online booking is out there, it is now very cheap and easy to implement a white label solution.
I believe the current government set a target for the percentage of GP who should have this in 2010, and they are nowhere near that.
Lots of people are still doing the 8am ring shuffle, and it must be hugely inefficient for both the patient and the GP.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/11328874/Poor-people-who-shop-at-Tesco-are-more-likely-to-drop-litter-author-David-Sedaris-says.html
I see Nick P and Richard Nabavi are around. Would welcome your views or any other PBers as to whether this looks like value?
There hasn't been a tied poll since 21st Dec (Populus) and there hasn't been a tied YouGov since 17th Dec!
Obamacare chickens come home to roost at Harvard -
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-01-05/whining-harvard-professors-discover-obamacare
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/06/liberal-democrats-yet-select-candidates-half-seats-general-election
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/06/conservatives-may-general-election-goldman-sachs-us-investment-bank-tory-victory
Thanks for your help in advance.
Hunchman.
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/harvard-professors-advising-obama-in.html
What utter hypocrisy from the academics that helped designed it! I ask you!
One of my relatives has a wife that works in an Essex hospital.
I was talking to her just before Christmas and she was telling me what A and E was like; predictably chaotic with pre Christmas drunks.
I was astonished to find that after a complete rebuild at a cost of over £200 million and a trebling on annual NHS expenditure that the service was pretty much the same as before though.
What kind of advert is that for more money for the NHS?
We also live in a world blighted by the cult of managerialism and "key performance indicators" etc, and most people who are familiar with this widespread silliness have grown to regard it as cobblers, so when someone starts blathering on about 95% inside 18 weeks a lot of people have enough sense to dismiss it as meaningless nonsense, because they experience this kind of "performance management" within their own working lives.
The public already know what they think of the NHS, and have for ages, so the current campaign to construct a crisis won't actually change much.
Too many unknown unknown's with UKIP even 4 months out. SNP Labour die is cast and feels far more bettable to me, but only my two penneth!
Private companies very rarely bid for emergency work, because they know it loses money. The few private out of hours services either run at a loss or have very thin cover. A single GP covering the whole of Cornwall for example:
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-25362545
The tariffs are skewed to making provision of Radiology services like TimB suggests equally non viable. I was recently in negotiations with some very business savvy GPs wanting to set up some new community services that required MRI scanning. We canvassed bids from a number of private companies and hospitals, but none could function at the nationally set national tariff. The only one left that was willing was a major hospital in the city, which defeated the purpose of our new scheme.
So in essence the choice is threefold: either you increase the funding to make emergency work financially sustainable (either by increased tariff or co payment, with the money coming from reduced elective activity), you require hospitals to cross subsidise loss making services with profitable ones (ala Burnham 2015 version) or you allow emergency units to deterioate to Cinderella services (the current situation).
The good news is that men are insured for free contraceptive pills and mammograms.
It's just a dreadful law, and people are sucked in by the subsidized premium, and only when they need care do they find out how costly it is, and how small the Obamacare networks are.
Obamacare provides insurance but limited access to care
The trouble with the way the British public perceive healthcare is that they've been taught to assume that any manifestation of imbalance between supply and demand is anathema and should be solved by increasing supply while still maintaining universal/"free" healthcare. Unfortunately for them, the reality is that the costs associated with actually doing so would be truly astronomical, which is why no country in the world, including Britain, does this (as you rightly say).
It's electoral suicide to say this, so we muddle on regardless. It's not a dreadful healthcare system; it simply has weak points, like every other. No party can actually solve them, without creating other weak points. Britain, since the creation of the NHS, has simply opted to choose its main weak point to be rationing via delay (rather than rationing by cost), with a mild dosing of rationing by eliminating certain kinds provision altogether via EBM. There are of course huge efficiencies that could be made, but nearly all the big ones require truly massive upfront capital investment which no party can fund, or have tried and failed (IT being the prime example of a real chokepoint in the NHS vs other big logistics operations like DHL/FedEx; and yes, managing a patient's care pathway through the system is actually very similar to managing a parcel delivery, once you take the easy medical bit out).
In my opinion, a better balance could be struck by creating & increasing co-payments at various pressure points, to manage demand e.g. small charges for GP appointments and attendances at A&E. That could reduce the frivolous attendances for things like wanting antibiotics for colds, or getting yourself so drunk you can't walk, etc, etc. Of course, it may also apply pressure on the genuinely ill but poor, but as I said earlier, you have to choose what balance of weak points you accept; you can't erase them.
The fuss over the NHS is more about political gimmickry than anything that can actually be easily solved, even if we didn't still have a significant deficit issue and a volatile global economy.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/01/05/ncdc-breaks-their-own-record-for-data-tampering-in-2014/
In Canada for the official temperature record they just use 1 weather station up in the arctic archipelago, and in New Zealand they use more weather stations from the north island now compared to the south island. How representative is that?!! And they claim this is objective science, it's total and utter deluded RUBBISH.
Good night all.
UKIP draws its strength from three different demographics:
1. We want a change. All the politicians are the same. It's the LibLabCon. The 'change'/'new kind of politics' vote that the LibDems used to get has gone to UKIP.
2. The WWC vote that feels patronised by Labour, and wonders why the party that was supposed to be looking after their interests, has been the one that has been keenest on mass immigration.
3. Former Conservative voters who feel that Cameron's social liberalism is not their cup of tea.
We have a mixture of 1s, 2s and 3s on this board. The 1s - in the long run - will be the ones who will be most disappointed (as they have been by the LibDems). Because governing means messy compromises and because most things are out of politicians hands.
I agree, historically the NHS has managed to ration demand by waiting and other non financial barriers. In many ways these are as unfair as financial barriers. When the non-financal barrier becomes too much then people either give up or pay to go privately.
I would rather see overt and publically debated rationing (and discussion of co-payments/Speedy Boarding) than the current hidden rationing and pretence.
They have accommodated me to the princely sum of £3.57. Potential winnings restricted to £25.
Unbelievable. Except it isn't.
A low oil price is not deflation.
Deflation is the process where prices are falling, and therefore people put off purchases to take advantage of the fact that prices will be lower in the future... thus causing the economy to continue to slow, and further falls in the price level.
Lower oil prices do not cause consumers to defer spending on computers, or clothes, or meals out, or furniture, or bottles of wine. On the contrary, spending on these things is likely to be boosted by a dimunition in the 'Saudi Tax'. Furthermore, as poorer people spend proportionately more of their income on petrol (and gas), it substantially increase disposable incomes of those that need the money most.
At current oil prices, disposable income for the median UK family increases by about 3%.
You really couldn't come up with a better way of limiting the impact of societal discontent than creating a representative democracy (esp. within a constitutional monarchy). It gives just enough of an illusion of control to keep most people either quietly happy or quietly unhappy. The happy or unhappy bit is almost always down to factors that have very, very little to do with government. The quietly bit is what democracy excels in achieving. The more totalitarian regimes around the world are really missing a trick; it's a much more frightening prospect to lose power completely and probably be killed in the process, than to be out of power for four or five years, but still relatively comfortably off in between....
To switch off the lights.
"In Cologne, much of the city centre was plunged into darkness as lights were switched off at major buildings and bridges across the Rhine, according to the news agency DPA. "."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30685842
Heating gas is also down, and also I can refill my bbq propane tank for less than $10, instead of the usual $14-15.
Moreover, 2014 was also the warmest CET (records going back 300 or so years).
Been speaking with many mets around the World and anthropogenic forcing on the climate is a real worry.
Of course in the alternative universe of hunchman, black is white, cold is warm etc etc. There really are some loons on here...
I think if you polled most doctors - especially doctors who actually understand the mechanics of health service provision rather than just deliverers (i.e. if you asked partner GPs, CCG representatives, doctors who are clinical/medical directors, etc, etc) - you'd get large numbers broadly agreeing with this position (though perhaps not one or two of the more detailed suggestions above!)
But if a politician says this to the public, you can guarantee the media headlines the next day will be "They're selling off our NHS!" or "It's NHS Privatisation!!". The public would support it, if there were to be a calm discussion about the matter, but there wouldn't be. And if I can get party political for just a moment, it would definitely be the Labour party screaming the loudest, preventing such a positive change from being mooted.
On the good side, sales of SUVs and pick up trucks are soaring and they are higher profit items for the auto manufacturers
The price of food at the concession stand has increased too - a nice fresh pimento cheese sandwich and a big cup of Coke will now cost you $6. In my day it was $2.
I always wondered then where all the resales you see on stubhub etc come from, at their massive prices, of $1000's. Are they all patrons reselling them? Are the tickets not named?
Every badge is individually numbered, but in a way that you can't work out how many passes are sold. The National doesn't reveal attendance. I do know first hand of someone borrowing a patron's badge and being unruly on the course. The guy was ejected and the badge holder told he was no longer a badge holder.
Regarding sales on stubhub etc I am sure that the club follows sales online very carefully, as they are very protective, and you are not supposed to resell them.
As an example, when a developer wanted to erect an apartment block on land he had bought n Berckmans Road, which runs alongside the second and 4th holes, which meant the occupants could see over the fence onto the course, the club gave an interest free loan to the city of Augusta to buy all the land and turn it into a parking lot. Augusta is a company town, and the company is Augusta National Golf Club.
The Masters is a tournament put on and run by a private golf club.
If there is a golf club in Heaven, it will not be as simply gorgeous as Augusta National. It is a lovely place to be at.
It seems the amount of open reselling that goes on these days is quite large. It doesn't seem that hard to get a pass if you are willing to pay the big bucks, with some resellers appearing to even offer perks like access to houses on the edge of the course, where you will get free food and refreshments thrown in for the massive premium you have paid on the pass.
https://www.theice.com/products/219/Brent-Crude-Futures/data
I don't have much contact with the club these days, but the club secretary was our neighbor so we knew what was going on.
I am told that the passes are scanned when you enter the grounds. There is no attempt to check identity - it is common for patrons to lend their tickets to their friends, particularly on thursday and friday. Unless you can see the badge number on stubhub the club would have no way of tracking them.