Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Good Friday PB Nighthawks cafe

2

Comments

  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,844
    nunu2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    nunu2 said:

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1248715245486518272/photo/1

    "However, it is understood that Britons will be asked to consider whether social interactions - such as going to an office or visiting relatives - are necessary as part of a plan to live with the virus for many months, or even years. It is hoped that a plan to encourage social distancing to become voluntary will help a second wave emerging."

    Insane.

    Yeah I for one will not be complying if they try to force us to do this for months. We cannot allow ourselves to sleep walk into a police state.
    Then like other european countries they will no doubt put in jail sentences for non compliance
    Which defeats the purpose of social distancing, our jails are packed!
    By refusing to comply you are implicitly giving consent to being exposed
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    edited April 2020
    Floater said:

    News from Sweden (Karolinska)

    80 plus - no intensive care

    60 plus and "significant failure in 1 or more organ systems - no intensive care

    Plus plenty of rumblings that they might need to change course re social distancing

    Where we could be now if like Sweden we had persisted with herd immunity
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195

    Floater said:

    News from Sweden (Karolinska)

    80 plus - no intensive care

    60 plus and "significant failure in 1 or more organ systems - no intensive care

    Plus plenty of rumblings that they might need to change course re social distancing

    Are you saying that is the policy? Oldies don't get ICU?
    according to a leaked document from the hospital at Karolinska

    I'm not surprised, there have been similar stories out of other countries suffering stress in the system
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,688
    TimT said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    I'm guessing simply throwing money at it won't miraculously make it better.
    Why would spending more money on it not make it better?
    Because the NHS is a bottomless pit when it comes to money.
    That's just meaningless - you could say the same about any organisation. In general, the more you spend on a health system, the better it becomes. The only obvious exception is the US.
    Surely, with any system, where at least one aspect of it is finite, the more you put in of other resources, at some point you don't just get diminishing returns, you get paralysis.
    My wife's operating room yesterday had its first non-COVID COVID-caused death. A patient with a stomach ulcer he did not go to see the doctor about until too late because of COVID - perforated his stomach and pancreas, died of blood loss in the operating room.

    There will be a growing number of non-COVID COVID-caused medical deaths the longer the lock down goes on.
    Yep. Our Did Not Attend rate for Non-Covid cases is about 50%. People are shitscared of dying of it.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259
    nunu2 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    nunu2 said:

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1248715245486518272/photo/1

    "However, it is understood that Britons will be asked to consider whether social interactions - such as going to an office or visiting relatives - are necessary as part of a plan to live with the virus for many months, or even years. It is hoped that a plan to encourage social distancing to become voluntary will help a second wave emerging."

    Insane.

    Yeah I for one will not be complying if they try to force us to do this for months. We cannot allow ourselves to sleep walk into a police state.
    You'll be sleep walking into prison then. :wink:
    I'll do the same. They can't arrest everyone.
    Exactly. There are millions like us. And you say they can't arrest everyone, theres not enough room in the jails ......

    People are happy to do this for while, but not if they think their politicians are taking the piss and using this as an excuse to take away freedoms, which some police forces epecially seem all too keen to do.
    It's not even that. Most people will simply not be able to do it. Many are struggling after two or three weeks!!! The mental health implications are off the scale. Never mind the economic collapse of epic proportions.

    Someone needs to get a grip on the messaging from the modellers.


  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,343

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1248715245486518272/photo/1

    "However, it is understood that Britons will be asked to consider whether social interactions - such as going to an office or visiting relatives - are necessary as part of a plan to live with the virus for many months, or even years. It is hoped that a plan to encourage social distancing to become voluntary will help a second wave emerging."

    Insane.

    As we've discussed, some things like working from home look like becoming more common for office workers. And I suppose most of us will feel wary of visiring elderly and vulnerable relatives. So if the disease hasn't nbeen rorally pushed to the margins, I think it *will* change behaviour significantly, whether the Government pushes it or not..

    That said, if we're now reaching the point where pressures on hospitals are flattening out, the extreme scenarios where you get left untreated as there are no beds seem not to be happening.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,590
    Interested tidbit in NYT story re: congressional GOP efforts to get Trumpsky to nix his daily briefings and STFU.

    Story said that informed sources within Trump campaign say internal polling showing drop in past two weeks or so in The Donald's favorability & job performace. Numbers which were never that great anyway compared to W in 2001 or Bush the Elder in 1990.
  • Options
    nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,453
    Pagan2 said:

    nunu2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    nunu2 said:

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1248715245486518272/photo/1

    "However, it is understood that Britons will be asked to consider whether social interactions - such as going to an office or visiting relatives - are necessary as part of a plan to live with the virus for many months, or even years. It is hoped that a plan to encourage social distancing to become voluntary will help a second wave emerging."

    Insane.

    Yeah I for one will not be complying if they try to force us to do this for months. We cannot allow ourselves to sleep walk into a police state.
    Then like other european countries they will no doubt put in jail sentences for non compliance
    Which defeats the purpose of social distancing, our jails are packed!
    By refusing to comply you are implicitly giving consent to being exposed
    Pretty sure I've already had it anyway.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    HYUFD said:

    Floater said:

    News from Sweden (Karolinska)

    80 plus - no intensive care

    60 plus and "significant failure in 1 or more organ systems - no intensive care

    Plus plenty of rumblings that they might need to change course re social distancing

    Where we could be now if like Sweden we had persisted with herd immunity
    Are we sending people from care homes to ICU now then?

    Nope, we are not
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited April 2020
    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    News from Sweden (Karolinska)

    80 plus - no intensive care

    60 plus and "significant failure in 1 or more organ systems - no intensive care

    Plus plenty of rumblings that they might need to change course re social distancing

    Are you saying that is the policy? Oldies don't get ICU?
    according to a leaked document from the hospital at Karolinska

    I'm not surprised, there have been similar stories out of other countries suffering stress in the system
    And Sweden has one of the lowest per capita ICU capacity in Europe. No idea if they have been aggressively expanding capacity in the way the UK has. I presume they must have been.

    So is this leak saying they are already hit max capacity and so can't take anymore, thus rationing?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,798
    geoffw said:

    BBC says "John Hopkins University".
    Standards eh?

    Spotted that one yesterday as well. I guess no one complained to bring it to their attention.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,590
    TGOHF666 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    When the right learns to stop worrying and love Europe.
    Seems the South Korean system is better than the German one #notEurope
    What about the North Korean system?
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    nunu2 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    nunu2 said:

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1248715245486518272/photo/1

    "However, it is understood that Britons will be asked to consider whether social interactions - such as going to an office or visiting relatives - are necessary as part of a plan to live with the virus for many months, or even years. It is hoped that a plan to encourage social distancing to become voluntary will help a second wave emerging."

    Insane.

    Yeah I for one will not be complying if they try to force us to do this for months. We cannot allow ourselves to sleep walk into a police state.
    You'll be sleep walking into prison then. :wink:
    I'll do the same. They can't arrest everyone.
    Exactly. There are millions like us. And you say they can't arrest everyone, theres not enough room in the jails ......

    People are happy to do this for while, but not if they think their politicians are taking the piss and using this as an excuse to take away freedoms, which some police forces epecially seem all too keen to do.
    But who thinks that? Some individual policemen have behaved like twats, sure, but theyvhave been roundly told they are behaving like twats by people like 10 downing street. Do you think one political party is covertly trying to permanently take away freedoms beyond what the situation requires, and if so why do you think the other political parties are in broad agreement with their approach? You are sounding a bit student politicky about it all.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,687
    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,579
    edited April 2020
    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    Not really a meaningful or useful comparison.

    Nurses pay scales (in the NHS) run from £18,000 to £104,000.

    Plus whatever more the employer package is worth, plus the job security.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,798
    edited April 2020
    Andy_JS said:

    nunu2 said:

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1248715245486518272/photo/1

    "However, it is understood that Britons will be asked to consider whether social interactions - such as going to an office or visiting relatives - are necessary as part of a plan to live with the virus for many months, or even years. It is hoped that a plan to encourage social distancing to become voluntary will help a second wave emerging."

    Insane.

    Yeah I for one will not be complying if they try to force us to do this for months. We cannot allow ourselves to sleep walk into a police state.
    You'll be sleep walking into prison then. :wink:
    I'll do the same. They can't arrest everyone.
    Are you under the impression they actually think they could? The laws are there to provide some teeth, clearly, an reinforce the message, but voluntary compliance was the only way measures were ever going to work, and have any chance of continuing for any length of time. For the moment there is broad support of that, though bringing in too much earlier probably did not have that, nor will anything indefinite, though how long people actually think things will last in an 'indefinite' period would be key, notwithstanding its literal definition.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,679
    edited April 2020
    Did everyone see the post in the previous thread about the fact that the government was expecting a lot more people to continue working than have actually done so? They weren't expecting this level of compliance with the rules. (Fraser Nelson in the Telegraph).
  • Options
    nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,453

    nunu2 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    nunu2 said:

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1248715245486518272/photo/1

    "However, it is understood that Britons will be asked to consider whether social interactions - such as going to an office or visiting relatives - are necessary as part of a plan to live with the virus for many months, or even years. It is hoped that a plan to encourage social distancing to become voluntary will help a second wave emerging."

    Insane.

    Yeah I for one will not be complying if they try to force us to do this for months. We cannot allow ourselves to sleep walk into a police state.
    You'll be sleep walking into prison then. :wink:
    I'll do the same. They can't arrest everyone.
    Exactly. There are millions like us. And you say they can't arrest everyone, theres not enough room in the jails ......

    People are happy to do this for while, but not if they think their politicians are taking the piss and using this as an excuse to take away freedoms, which some police forces epecially seem all too keen to do.
    You really think politicians are doing this because they fancy taking away freedoms, rather than because the available science suggests this is the best way to manage Covid-19?
    I think some politicians are not thinking through clearly enough what they are asking to give up, and how this will affect many individuals on a daily basis. They are to willing to give into to cold scientists, rather than pondering the value of such things as visiting family members, playing in the park etc
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,579
    edited April 2020
    Andy_JS said:

    nunu2 said:

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1248715245486518272/photo/1

    "However, it is understood that Britons will be asked to consider whether social interactions - such as going to an office or visiting relatives - are necessary as part of a plan to live with the virus for many months, or even years. It is hoped that a plan to encourage social distancing to become voluntary will help a second wave emerging."

    Insane.

    Yeah I for one will not be complying if they try to force us to do this for months. We cannot allow ourselves to sleep walk into a police state.
    You'll be sleep walking into prison then. :wink:
    I'll do the same. They can't arrest everyone.
    It doesn't mean indefinitely - it means until we have an effective answer to COVID-19.

    Basically more overexcited, sensation-mongering media.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,798
    edited April 2020

    Interested tidbit in NYT story re: congressional GOP efforts to get Trumpsky to nix his daily briefings and STFU.

    Story said that informed sources within Trump campaign say internal polling showing drop in past two weeks or so in The Donald's favorability & job performace. Numbers which were never that great anyway compared to W in 2001 or Bush the Elder in 1990.

    They had their chance to attempt to corrall him 4 years ago, to see if they could modulate him in some ways. He beat them, and they kowtowed and now emulate him. It's too late now.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259
    Andy_JS said:

    Did everyone see the post in the previous thread about the fact that the government was expecting a lot more people to continue working than have actually done so? They weren't expecting this level of compliance with the rules. (Fraser Nelson in the Telegraph).

    Yes. The most interesting article of the day.

    How do they think compliance will be by July?
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,844

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I think you are wasting your breath
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,125
    nunu2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    nunu2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    nunu2 said:

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1248715245486518272/photo/1

    "However, it is understood that Britons will be asked to consider whether social interactions - such as going to an office or visiting relatives - are necessary as part of a plan to live with the virus for many months, or even years. It is hoped that a plan to encourage social distancing to become voluntary will help a second wave emerging."

    Insane.

    Yeah I for one will not be complying if they try to force us to do this for months. We cannot allow ourselves to sleep walk into a police state.
    Then like other european countries they will no doubt put in jail sentences for non compliance
    Which defeats the purpose of social distancing, our jails are packed!
    By refusing to comply you are implicitly giving consent to being exposed
    Pretty sure I've already had it anyway.
    Britain is going to be full of people who are pretty sure they have had it already.

    Until they get it.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,688

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    The government equality legislation makes it compulsory to report on these things, so obviously all large organisations including the NHS require staff to do so.

    Blame the legislators, not the NHS ( or Civil Service, or Councils etc etc)
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,687
    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,679
    "Britain won't know for weeks whether lockdown can be eased, a top government adviser warned today - as the Cabinet descended into wrangling over fears the draconian curbs themselves could cause 150,000 deaths.

    Epidemiologist Neil Ferguson said 'definitive' proof of whether restrictions have worked will not be available for 'several more weeks'.

    But Prof Ferguson, who has been modelling the outbreak, hinted the public might be amplifying the hit to the economy by following 'social distancing' better the government had 'dared hope'."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8207513/Britain-wont-know-WEEKS-lockdown-eased-warns-science-adviser.html
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,897

    nunu2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    nunu2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    nunu2 said:

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1248715245486518272/photo/1

    "However, it is understood that Britons will be asked to consider whether social interactions - such as going to an office or visiting relatives - are necessary as part of a plan to live with the virus for many months, or even years. It is hoped that a plan to encourage social distancing to become voluntary will help a second wave emerging."

    Insane.

    Yeah I for one will not be complying if they try to force us to do this for months. We cannot allow ourselves to sleep walk into a police state.
    Then like other european countries they will no doubt put in jail sentences for non compliance
    Which defeats the purpose of social distancing, our jails are packed!
    By refusing to comply you are implicitly giving consent to being exposed
    Pretty sure I've already had it anyway.
    Britain is going to be full of people who are pretty sure they have had it already.

    Until they get it.
    A couple of weeks ago we had a few people who thought they had it in early January and November.
  • Options
    TGOHF666TGOHF666 Posts: 2,052
    Andy_JS said:

    "Britain won't know for weeks whether lockdown can be eased, a top government adviser warned today - as the Cabinet descended into wrangling over fears the draconian curbs themselves could cause 150,000 deaths.

    Epidemiologist Neil Ferguson said 'definitive' proof of whether restrictions have worked will not be available for 'several more weeks'.

    But Prof Ferguson, who has been modelling the outbreak, hinted the public might be amplifying the hit to the economy by following 'social distancing' better the government had 'dared hope'."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8207513/Britain-wont-know-WEEKS-lockdown-eased-warns-science-adviser.html

    Sounding more and more like those global warming quacks every day.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,688
    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    Tattoo removal is not covered, unless causing significant psychological disturbance, and that is a pretty high bar.
  • Options
    TGOHF666TGOHF666 Posts: 2,052

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    eristdoof said:

    nunu2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    nunu2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    nunu2 said:

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1248715245486518272/photo/1

    "However, it is understood that Britons will be asked to consider whether social interactions - such as going to an office or visiting relatives - are necessary as part of a plan to live with the virus for many months, or even years. It is hoped that a plan to encourage social distancing to become voluntary will help a second wave emerging."

    Insane.

    Yeah I for one will not be complying if they try to force us to do this for months. We cannot allow ourselves to sleep walk into a police state.
    Then like other european countries they will no doubt put in jail sentences for non compliance
    Which defeats the purpose of social distancing, our jails are packed!
    By refusing to comply you are implicitly giving consent to being exposed
    Pretty sure I've already had it anyway.
    Britain is going to be full of people who are pretty sure they have had it already.

    Until they get it.
    A couple of weeks ago we had a few people who thought they had it in early January and November.
    Well I had all the symptoms to a tee....2 years ago....and ended up in hospital. Does that mean I am probably immune?
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,687
    TGOHF666 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Britain won't know for weeks whether lockdown can be eased, a top government adviser warned today - as the Cabinet descended into wrangling over fears the draconian curbs themselves could cause 150,000 deaths.

    Epidemiologist Neil Ferguson said 'definitive' proof of whether restrictions have worked will not be available for 'several more weeks'.

    But Prof Ferguson, who has been modelling the outbreak, hinted the public might be amplifying the hit to the economy by following 'social distancing' better the government had 'dared hope'."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8207513/Britain-wont-know-WEEKS-lockdown-eased-warns-science-adviser.html

    Sounding more and more like those global warming quacks every day.
    Are you @hunchman in disguise?
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,679
    edited April 2020
    Andy Burnham's message about not lifting the lockdown by area seemingly hasn't got through to Prof Neil Ferguson.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8207513/Britain-wont-know-WEEKS-lockdown-eased-warns-science-adviser.html

    "Lockdown could be lifted in stages, government experts suggested today.

    Prof Neil Ferguson suggested any loosening will vary by area and 'age'.

    'Without doubt measures will be targeted, probably by age, by geography, and we will need to introduce - in my view - much larger levels of testing at a community level to really be able to isolate cases and more effectively identify where transmission has happened,' he said. "
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,394
    What do we do when Covid-20 strikes in 2032?
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,844
    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    Tattoo removal is not covered, unless causing significant psychological disturbance, and that is a pretty high bar.
    Really high bar it seems
    http://www.deadlinenews.co.uk/2011/10/14/over-600000-spent-on-tattoo-removal-by-nhs/
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259
    The Hill:

    "Trump on Friday described the decision on when and how to reopen the country as the most difficult one he’s had to make in his life, underscoring the careful line he is walking between concerns about the economy and public health during the coronavirus outbreak.

    “I don’t know that I’ve had a bigger decision. But I’m going to surround myself with the greatest minds. Not only the greatest minds, but the greatest minds in numerous different businesses, including the business of politics and reason,” Trump told reporters at a White House press briefing.

    “And we’re going to make a decision, and hopefully it’s going to be the right decision,” he continued. “I will say this. I want to get it open as soon as we can.”
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,687
    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,394
    The madness in the mad has become insanity:

    https://twitter.com/acgrayling/status/1248491723333832706?s=19
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    Tattoo removal is not covered, unless causing significant psychological disturbance, and that is a pretty high bar.
    But there is a bar!
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    Serious question, I seemed to remember a few regular posters like GideonWise had contracted it. Have they all been seen posting?
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,844

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259

    The madness in the mad has become insanity:

    https://twitter.com/acgrayling/status/1248491723333832706?s=19

    The euthanasia/mass-murder indecision is interesting. Which is it Mr Grayling?
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,963

    Floater said:

    News from Sweden (Karolinska)

    80 plus - no intensive care

    60 plus and "significant failure in 1 or more organ systems - no intensive care

    Plus plenty of rumblings that they might need to change course re social distancing

    Are you saying that is the policy? Oldies don't get ICU?
    I did a look at the Swedish newspapers and came up with this. Looks like it is being decided on a hospital by hospital basis. But there is a lot of talk about Sweden's health system being close to collapse.

    https://www.somagnews.com/elderly-coronary-virus-cases-allegedly-not-intensive-care-sweden/
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    kle4 said:

    Interested tidbit in NYT story re: congressional GOP efforts to get Trumpsky to nix his daily briefings and STFU.

    Story said that informed sources within Trump campaign say internal polling showing drop in past two weeks or so in The Donald's favorability & job performace. Numbers which were never that great anyway compared to W in 2001 or Bush the Elder in 1990.

    They had their chance to attempt to corrall him 4 years ago, to see if they could modulate him in some ways. He beat them, and they kowtowed and now emulate him. It's too late now.
    Some people are still living in hope of the pivot to the centre by Trump.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    The Germans have always been good at avoiding paying towards the good of others and lapping up whatever goodies others surrender to them.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,963
    edited April 2020

    What do we do when Covid-20 strikes in 2032?

    It won't. It will be Covid-32 (or Covid-31 if it is identified late in 2031)
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,394

    The madness in the mad has become insanity:

    https://twitter.com/acgrayling/status/1248491723333832706?s=19

    The euthanasia/mass-murder indecision is interesting. Which is it Mr Grayling?
    What's really worrying is that over 8,000 people have liked that.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100

    What do we do when Covid-20 strikes in 2032?

    I don't think I care, now or then
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,687
    edited April 2020
    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,688
    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    Tattoo removal is not covered, unless causing significant psychological disturbance, and that is a pretty high bar.
    But there is a bar!
    Usually a suicide attempt, that sort of thing, and even then only if the Tatoo is prominent or done underage.

  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    Mini vs beetle? 1960s vs 1930s
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,688

    Floater said:

    News from Sweden (Karolinska)

    80 plus - no intensive care

    60 plus and "significant failure in 1 or more organ systems - no intensive care

    Plus plenty of rumblings that they might need to change course re social distancing

    Are you saying that is the policy? Oldies don't get ICU?
    I did a look at the Swedish newspapers and came up with this. Looks like it is being decided on a hospital by hospital basis. But there is a lot of talk about Sweden's health system being close to collapse.

    https://www.somagnews.com/elderly-coronary-virus-cases-allegedly-not-intensive-care-sweden/
    All ICU outreach teams assess patient suitability, and this is nothing new. It is not just resources, it is about clinical appropriateness. ICU is not a pleasant place to be if there is no chance of getting well again.
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,897

    TGOHF666 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    When the right learns to stop worrying and love Europe.
    Seems the South Korean system is better than the German one #notEurope
    It's the South Korean surveillance system that beats Germany's, not their health system.
    Germans consider that passing on an email address with out that person's permission is a violation, and the testing of facial recognition sowtware at a Berlin station was caused an outrage. There is no surveillance in Germany (except the spying that the BND manage to keep top secret).
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,844

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    Not for covid it seems
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,394

    What do we do when Covid-20 strikes in 2032?

    It won't. It will be Covid-32 (or Covid-31 if it is identified late in 2031)
    Is it named after the year?

    I thought it was a numerical sequence of novel permutations of Coronaviruses.

    Anyway, that wasn't really my point.
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,897
    alterego said:

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    Mini vs beetle? 1960s vs 1930s
    But the Beetles we saw in GB in the 60s and 70s were not the same car that was designed in the 30s.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,687
    eristdoof said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    When the right learns to stop worrying and love Europe.
    Seems the South Korean system is better than the German one #notEurope
    It's the South Korean surveillance system that beats Germany's, not their health system.
    Germans consider that passing on an email address with out that person's permission is a violation, and the testing of facial recognition sowtware at a Berlin station was caused an outrage. There is no surveillance in Germany (except the spying that the BND manage to keep top secret).
    If it's kept top secret, how do you know? :wink:
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,963
    Foxy said:

    Floater said:

    News from Sweden (Karolinska)

    80 plus - no intensive care

    60 plus and "significant failure in 1 or more organ systems - no intensive care

    Plus plenty of rumblings that they might need to change course re social distancing

    Are you saying that is the policy? Oldies don't get ICU?
    I did a look at the Swedish newspapers and came up with this. Looks like it is being decided on a hospital by hospital basis. But there is a lot of talk about Sweden's health system being close to collapse.

    https://www.somagnews.com/elderly-coronary-virus-cases-allegedly-not-intensive-care-sweden/
    All ICU outreach teams assess patient suitability, and this is nothing new. It is not just resources, it is about clinical appropriateness. ICU is not a pleasant place to be if there is no chance of getting well again.
    Yep I wasn't posting in support of the claim, just saying this was the only mention I could find. But it would be interesting to see if the same criteria were applied before the Covid-19 outbreak.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,687
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    Not for covid it seems
    Because... funding!
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    Foxy said:

    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    Tattoo removal is not covered, unless causing significant psychological disturbance, and that is a pretty high bar.
    But there is a bar!
    Usually a suicide attempt, that sort of thing, and even then only if the Tatoo is prominent or done underage.

    How many suicide attempts are motivated by unliked tattoos per annum?
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,897

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    The financing of the German healthcare non-system is an absolute nightmare.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argument
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    Foxy said:

    Floater said:

    News from Sweden (Karolinska)

    80 plus - no intensive care

    60 plus and "significant failure in 1 or more organ systems - no intensive care

    Plus plenty of rumblings that they might need to change course re social distancing

    Are you saying that is the policy? Oldies don't get ICU?
    I did a look at the Swedish newspapers and came up with this. Looks like it is being decided on a hospital by hospital basis. But there is a lot of talk about Sweden's health system being close to collapse.

    https://www.somagnews.com/elderly-coronary-virus-cases-allegedly-not-intensive-care-sweden/
    All ICU outreach teams assess patient suitability, and this is nothing new. It is not just resources, it is about clinical appropriateness. ICU is not a pleasant place to be if there is no chance of getting well again.
    How many no chancers are put into ICU?
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,963

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    But surely that is just proof that throwing money at the system is not necessarily the answer.

    There are certainly a few easy wins we could learn from European health systems such as charging for GPs visits and then refunding for all but the very rich as long as they actually attend. Seems a very good way to cut down on missed appointments in a stroke.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,688
    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    Tattoo removal is not covered, unless causing significant psychological disturbance, and that is a pretty high bar.
    But there is a bar!
    Usually a suicide attempt, that sort of thing, and even then only if the Tatoo is prominent or done underage.

    How many suicide attempts are motivated by unliked tattoos per annum?
    Not many, but that is why tattoo removal on the NHS is very rare.
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,897
    Because The Left are a few idiots on twitter!
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    If there's no vaccine, then perhaps 60-70% are going to get this virus.

    Given what we know about the disease, shouldn't the government be doing everything it can to try and get the overweight and obese on a diet (and exercising)?

    Yes social distancing, but that's playing for time.
    If you're getting the disease, you want to be in the best shape you can be to beat it right?
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    eristdoof said:

    alterego said:

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    Mini vs beetle? 1960s vs 1930s
    But the Beetles we saw in GB in the 60s and 70s were not the same car that was designed in the 30s.
    Looked pretty similar to me but I accept technology had moved on somewhat.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,687
    Floater said:

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argument
    Only if you're happy with a health service 'not quite as good as Germany's'.

    Personally I'd like our health service to be the best in the world... which it could be for a lot less per person than many other country's. But the government have for too long tried to do it on the cheap.

    Anyway, I don't know why I bother arguing with you. The argument is over, you've lost. The NHS is not going to be dismantled; it's going to be funded much better going forward. Covid-19 will see to that.
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,844

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    Not for covid it seems
    Because... funding!
    You haven't shown that merely raising the funding level to germanies would change that you have merely asserted it and that is not evidence.

    From this pandemic however we do have evidence that sometimes the NHS is more costly than private would provide

    The cost of providing an icu bed is 400 for the NHS and 300 for a private sector hospital. The sooner we look at better health care systems and learn from them the better and yes part of that may be more funding but until the left accepts that maybe the nhs isnt all great then most people are not going to opt for funding it more
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,963

    What do we do when Covid-20 strikes in 2032?

    It won't. It will be Covid-32 (or Covid-31 if it is identified late in 2031)
    Is it named after the year?

    I thought it was a numerical sequence of novel permutations of Coronaviruses.

    Anyway, that wasn't really my point.
    No worries I was just being pedantic.

    Covid-19 Stands for (Co)rona (Vi)rus (D)isease identified (or outbreak) in 20(19)
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,687
    rkrkrk said:

    If there's no vaccine, then perhaps 60-70% are going to get this virus.

    Given what we know about the disease, shouldn't the government be doing everything it can to try and get the overweight and obese on a diet (and exercising)?

    Yes social distancing, but that's playing for time.
    If you're getting the disease, you want to be in the best shape you can be to beat it right?

    What do you suggest the government do?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969

    rkrkrk said:

    If there's no vaccine, then perhaps 60-70% are going to get this virus.

    Given what we know about the disease, shouldn't the government be doing everything it can to try and get the overweight and obese on a diet (and exercising)?

    Yes social distancing, but that's playing for time.
    If you're getting the disease, you want to be in the best shape you can be to beat it right?

    What do you suggest the government do?
    "Exercise or you will* die"

    (* probability = 1%)
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,963

    Floater said:

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argument
    Only if you're happy with a health service 'not quite as good as Germany's'.

    Personally I'd like our health service to be the best in the world... which it could be for a lot less per person than many other country's. But the government have for too long tried to do it on the cheap.

    Anyway, I don't know why I bother arguing with you. The argument is over, you've lost. The NHS is not going to be dismantled; it's going to be funded much better going forward. Covid-19 will see to that.
    So we will persist with a sub-standard health service just because.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    But surely that is just proof that throwing money at the system is not necessarily the answer.

    There are certainly a few easy wins we could learn from European health systems such as charging for GPs visits and then refunding for all but the very rich as long as they actually attend. Seems a very good way to cut down on missed appointments in a stroke.
    The cost of the bureaucracy?
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,897

    Serious question, I seemed to remember a few regular posters like GideonWise had contracted it. Have they all been seen posting?

    I just looked up the Profile for GideonWise, he was last active on this site today at 5.16pm.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    Foxy said:

    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    Tattoo removal is not covered, unless causing significant psychological disturbance, and that is a pretty high bar.
    But there is a bar!
    Usually a suicide attempt, that sort of thing, and even then only if the Tatoo is prominent or done underage.

    How many suicide attempts are motivated by unliked tattoos per annum?
    Not many, but that is why tattoo removal on the NHS is very rare.
    Why offer it then? How may try it on?
  • Options

    The madness in the mad has become insanity:

    https://twitter.com/acgrayling/status/1248491723333832706?s=19

    The euthanasia/mass-murder indecision is interesting. Which is it Mr Grayling?
    I assume that anyone who still tweets with the hashtag #FBPE has lost touch with reality.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,963
    alterego said:

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    But surely that is just proof that throwing money at the system is not necessarily the answer.

    There are certainly a few easy wins we could learn from European health systems such as charging for GPs visits and then refunding for all but the very rich as long as they actually attend. Seems a very good way to cut down on missed appointments in a stroke.
    The cost of the bureaucracy?
    Well it seems to work very well in other countries with excellent health care systems.

    Actually our whole GP system is rubbish
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited April 2020
    Foxy said:

    Floater said:

    News from Sweden (Karolinska)

    80 plus - no intensive care

    60 plus and "significant failure in 1 or more organ systems - no intensive care

    Plus plenty of rumblings that they might need to change course re social distancing

    Are you saying that is the policy? Oldies don't get ICU?
    I did a look at the Swedish newspapers and came up with this. Looks like it is being decided on a hospital by hospital basis. But there is a lot of talk about Sweden's health system being close to collapse.

    https://www.somagnews.com/elderly-coronary-virus-cases-allegedly-not-intensive-care-sweden/
    All ICU outreach teams assess patient suitability, and this is nothing new. It is not just resources, it is about clinical appropriateness. ICU is not a pleasant place to be if there is no chance of getting well again.
    Visiting my wife when she was in ICU really rammed home 1) my wife was doing OK really, she was the only conscious person there and 2) ICU is really fucking grim.
  • Options
    alterego said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    The Germans have always been good at avoiding paying towards the good of others and lapping up whatever goodies others surrender to them.
    Well spotted, and just imagine how many ventilators, how much PPE the 350 trillion quid the Fourth Reich extorted weekly from your coffers may have bought the NHS.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908

    rkrkrk said:

    If there's no vaccine, then perhaps 60-70% are going to get this virus.

    Given what we know about the disease, shouldn't the government be doing everything it can to try and get the overweight and obese on a diet (and exercising)?

    Yes social distancing, but that's playing for time.
    If you're getting the disease, you want to be in the best shape you can be to beat it right?

    What do you suggest the government do?
    I mean at a minimum get someone senior in the press conferences to say: if you're overweight, now is the time to deal with it. You can help yourself, and help the NHS.

    I don't want to blame overweight people and I appreciate that can be a tricky line to walk at times, but we should be broadcasting this increases your likelihood of dying.

    Other measures could be to allow more time outside for the overweight!? Try to get supermarkets to stock less unhealthy food? Or ban advertising of alcohol for now? There must be a few public health interventions we could try.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,687

    Floater said:

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argument
    Only if you're happy with a health service 'not quite as good as Germany's'.

    Personally I'd like our health service to be the best in the world... which it could be for a lot less per person than many other country's. But the government have for too long tried to do it on the cheap.

    Anyway, I don't know why I bother arguing with you. The argument is over, you've lost. The NHS is not going to be dismantled; it's going to be funded much better going forward. Covid-19 will see to that.
    So we will persist with a sub-standard health service just because.
    No, it's going to be better funded going forward.

    I believe most of the shortcomings in service are caused or exacerbated by inadequate funding.

    I guess you think it's an inate feature of a state run service?
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    rkrkrk said:

    If there's no vaccine, then perhaps 60-70% are going to get this virus.

    Given what we know about the disease, shouldn't the government be doing everything it can to try and get the overweight and obese on a diet (and exercising)?

    Yes social distancing, but that's playing for time.
    If you're getting the disease, you want to be in the best shape you can be to beat it right?

    I have the flu jab every year and, so far it's worked but I understand it has limited efficiency, I believe 60%. I'm sure Foxy will put me right. Pending Foxy's advice, I reckon cure is better than prevention.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,687
    RobD said:

    rkrkrk said:

    If there's no vaccine, then perhaps 60-70% are going to get this virus.

    Given what we know about the disease, shouldn't the government be doing everything it can to try and get the overweight and obese on a diet (and exercising)?

    Yes social distancing, but that's playing for time.
    If you're getting the disease, you want to be in the best shape you can be to beat it right?

    What do you suggest the government do?
    "Exercise or you will* die"

    (* probability = 1%)
    I think they alread tried that - obesity kills with or without covid.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969

    Floater said:

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argument
    Only if you're happy with a health service 'not quite as good as Germany's'.

    Personally I'd like our health service to be the best in the world... which it could be for a lot less per person than many other country's. But the government have for too long tried to do it on the cheap.

    Anyway, I don't know why I bother arguing with you. The argument is over, you've lost. The NHS is not going to be dismantled; it's going to be funded much better going forward. Covid-19 will see to that.
    So we will persist with a sub-standard health service just because.
    No, it's going to be better funded going forward.

    I believe most of the shortcomings in service are caused or exacerbated by inadequate funding.

    I guess you think it's an inate feature of a state run service?
    As I thought, the answer is always more money.
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,897
    alterego said:

    eristdoof said:

    alterego said:

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    Mini vs beetle? 1960s vs 1930s
    But the Beetles we saw in GB in the 60s and 70s were not the same car that was designed in the 30s.
    Looked pretty similar to me but I accept technology had moved on somewhat.
    The outside yes, but in those days a lot of technology was being improved on the inside, while being made to fit in the same "shell", because it kept production costs down. Telephones were similar. In the UK there were only a handful of designs for the outside of telephones in a 30 year period 1950-80 but the inside was developing quite rapidly.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,687
    RobD said:

    Floater said:

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argument
    Only if you're happy with a health service 'not quite as good as Germany's'.

    Personally I'd like our health service to be the best in the world... which it could be for a lot less per person than many other country's. But the government have for too long tried to do it on the cheap.

    Anyway, I don't know why I bother arguing with you. The argument is over, you've lost. The NHS is not going to be dismantled; it's going to be funded much better going forward. Covid-19 will see to that.
    So we will persist with a sub-standard health service just because.
    No, it's going to be better funded going forward.

    I believe most of the shortcomings in service are caused or exacerbated by inadequate funding.

    I guess you think it's an inate feature of a state run service?
    As I thought, the answer is always more money.
    Finally, you've got it! Well done.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969

    RobD said:

    Floater said:

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argument
    Only if you're happy with a health service 'not quite as good as Germany's'.

    Personally I'd like our health service to be the best in the world... which it could be for a lot less per person than many other country's. But the government have for too long tried to do it on the cheap.

    Anyway, I don't know why I bother arguing with you. The argument is over, you've lost. The NHS is not going to be dismantled; it's going to be funded much better going forward. Covid-19 will see to that.
    So we will persist with a sub-standard health service just because.
    No, it's going to be better funded going forward.

    I believe most of the shortcomings in service are caused or exacerbated by inadequate funding.

    I guess you think it's an inate feature of a state run service?
    As I thought, the answer is always more money.
    Finally, you've got it! Well done.
    Me smart.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100

    rkrkrk said:

    If there's no vaccine, then perhaps 60-70% are going to get this virus.

    Given what we know about the disease, shouldn't the government be doing everything it can to try and get the overweight and obese on a diet (and exercising)?

    Yes social distancing, but that's playing for time.
    If you're getting the disease, you want to be in the best shape you can be to beat it right?

    What do you suggest the government do?
    does
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,844

    Floater said:

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argument
    Only if you're happy with a health service 'not quite as good as Germany's'.

    Personally I'd like our health service to be the best in the world... which it could be for a lot less per person than many other country's. But the government have for too long tried to do it on the cheap.

    Anyway, I don't know why I bother arguing with you. The argument is over, you've lost. The NHS is not going to be dismantled; it's going to be funded much better going forward. Covid-19 will see to that.
    So we will persist with a sub-standard health service just because.
    No, it's going to be better funded going forward.

    I believe most of the shortcomings in service are caused or exacerbated by inadequate funding.

    I guess you think it's an inate feature of a state run service?
    It is being better funded for the duration once again you make an assertion with no evidence. I fully expect once the crisis is over NHS funding will return to its previous level. Before you say lots will kick up a fuss if its not better funded I will counter with a lot of us will kick up a fuss if it is funded higher without drastic changes to how it works
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,963

    Floater said:

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argument
    Only if you're happy with a health service 'not quite as good as Germany's'.

    Personally I'd like our health service to be the best in the world... which it could be for a lot less per person than many other country's. But the government have for too long tried to do it on the cheap.

    Anyway, I don't know why I bother arguing with you. The argument is over, you've lost. The NHS is not going to be dismantled; it's going to be funded much better going forward. Covid-19 will see to that.
    So we will persist with a sub-standard health service just because.
    No, it's going to be better funded going forward.

    I believe most of the shortcomings in service are caused or exacerbated by inadequate funding.

    I guess you think it's an inate feature of a state run service?
    So as I said we will persist with a sub-standard health service. And we will pay a lot more for it to stay sub-standard.

    As long as people like you wrongly attribute the failures of the system to a lack of funding we will never see it improve.

    And no it is not an innate feature of a state run system. It is an innate feature of a system that is treated less like a public service and more like a religion where anyone who criticises it is condemned as being a shill for a US type system.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    rkrkrk said:

    rkrkrk said:

    If there's no vaccine, then perhaps 60-70% are going to get this virus.

    Given what we know about the disease, shouldn't the government be doing everything it can to try and get the overweight and obese on a diet (and exercising)?

    Yes social distancing, but that's playing for time.
    If you're getting the disease, you want to be in the best shape you can be to beat it right?

    What do you suggest the government do?
    I mean at a minimum get someone senior in the press conferences to say: if you're overweight, now is the time to deal with it. You can help yourself, and help the NHS.

    I don't want to blame overweight people and I appreciate that can be a tricky line to walk at times, but we should be broadcasting this increases your likelihood of dying.

    Other measures could be to allow more time outside for the overweight!? Try to get supermarkets to stock less unhealthy food? Or ban advertising of alcohol for now? There must be a few public health interventions we could try.
    Not only get those who are overweight to try and shift the extra pounds, but with so many people working from home, try to give advice on how not to pile it on.

    As a long time WFHer, I know how easy it is having the kitchen so close. You really have to discipline yourself.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,687
    rkrkrk said:

    rkrkrk said:

    If there's no vaccine, then perhaps 60-70% are going to get this virus.

    Given what we know about the disease, shouldn't the government be doing everything it can to try and get the overweight and obese on a diet (and exercising)?

    Yes social distancing, but that's playing for time.
    If you're getting the disease, you want to be in the best shape you can be to beat it right?

    What do you suggest the government do?
    I mean at a minimum get someone senior in the press conferences to say: if you're overweight, now is the time to deal with it. You can help yourself, and help the NHS.

    I don't want to blame overweight people and I appreciate that can be a tricky line to walk at times, but we should be broadcasting this increases your likelihood of dying.

    Other measures could be to allow more time outside for the overweight!? Try to get supermarkets to stock less unhealthy food? Or ban advertising of alcohol for now? There must be a few public health interventions we could try.
    We talked about this a year or so ago. Obesity kills regardless of covid. And it cost the country a fortune.

    We should have some sort of calorie tax imo. Everyone can have a personal allowance of 2000 calories (paid as a UI?). Then tax calories like hell.

    It may not cut obesity that much but it would raise a lot of money to help pay for the consequences.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100

    alterego said:

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    But surely that is just proof that throwing money at the system is not necessarily the answer.

    There are certainly a few easy wins we could learn from European health systems such as charging for GPs visits and then refunding for all but the very rich as long as they actually attend. Seems a very good way to cut down on missed appointments in a stroke.
    The cost of the bureaucracy?
    Well it seems to work very well in other countries with excellent health care systems.

    Actually our whole GP system is rubbish
    Can we agree on "could be better"?
  • Options
    eristdoof said:

    Pagan2 said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    Why?
    Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?

    Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
    But of course the NHS is actually tremendously efficient. We spend only 2/3rds of what Germany spends per person on health care and yet get overall outcomes that are much better than 2/3rds as good as Germany's.
    The financing of the German healthcare non-system is an absolute nightmare.
    The best approach would surely be an NHS (with its monolithic organisation and economies of scale) with German level funding!
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100

    alterego said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    TGOHF666 said:

    So the German system is better than the NHS ?

    When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?

    May not be easy and possibly not even advisable to 'copy' the whole shebang, but it may be useful to look at certain issues and take some ideas away from that.
    Like level of funding for example.
    At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nurses

    Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
    It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.

    Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
    I want them to have a proper set of priorities

    Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?

    I am not sure how much is spent on things you don't consider are priorities but I suspect for the example quoted it a miniscule proporton of the overall spend.

    More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
    It is not just non jobs however, the nhs also does things like tattoo removal etc. Frankly as someone with tattoos I think if I want them gone it should be me paying for it not the tax payer
    I agree. But none of this should be used as an excuse not to fund the NHS at German levels of funding if we want German levels of health care.
    Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.
    The Germans have always been good at avoiding paying towards the good of others and lapping up whatever goodies others surrender to them.
    Well spotted, and just imagine how many ventilators, how much PPE the 350 trillion quid the Fourth Reich extorted weekly from your coffers may have bought the NHS.
    I hadn't thought it was that much!
This discussion has been closed.