politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Good Friday PB Nighthawks cafe
Options
Comments
-
By refusing to comply you are implicitly giving consent to being exposednunu2 said:
Which defeats the purpose of social distancing, our jails are packed!Pagan2 said:
Then like other european countries they will no doubt put in jail sentences for non compliancenunu2 said:
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.rottenborough 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.0 -
Where we could be now if like Sweden we had persisted with herd immunityFloater 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 distancing0 -
according to a leaked document from the hospital at KarolinskaFrancisUrquhart said:
Are you saying that is the policy? Oldies don't get ICU?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
I'm not surprised, there have been similar stories out of other countries suffering stress in the system
1 -
Yep. Our Did Not Attend rate for Non-Covid cases is about 50%. People are shitscared of dying of it.TimT said:
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.FeersumEnjineeya said:
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.RobD said:
Because the NHS is a bottomless pit when it comes to money.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Why would spending more money on it not make it better?RobD said:
I'm guessing simply throwing money at it won't miraculously make it better.Benpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
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.rottenborough said:
There will be a growing number of non-COVID COVID-caused medical deaths the longer the lock down goes on.1 -
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.nunu2 said:
Exactly. There are millions like us. And you say they can't arrest everyone, theres not enough room in the jails ......Andy_JS said:
I'll do the same. They can't arrest everyone.Benpointer said:
You'll be sleep walking into prison then.nunu2 said:
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.rottenborough 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.
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.
Someone needs to get a grip on the messaging from the modellers.
0 -
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..rottenborough 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.
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.0 -
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 1990.0 -
Pretty sure I've already had it anyway.Pagan2 said:
By refusing to comply you are implicitly giving consent to being exposednunu2 said:
Which defeats the purpose of social distancing, our jails are packed!Pagan2 said:
Then like other european countries they will no doubt put in jail sentences for non compliancenunu2 said:
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.rottenborough 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.0 -
Are we sending people from care homes to ICU now then?HYUFD said:
Where we could be now if like Sweden we had persisted with herd immunityFloater 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
Nope, we are not0 -
-
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.Floater said:
according to a leaked document from the hospital at KarolinskaFrancisUrquhart said:
Are you saying that is the policy? Oldies don't get ICU?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
I'm not surprised, there have been similar stories out of other countries suffering stress in the system
So is this leak saying they are already hit max capacity and so can't take anymore, thus rationing?0 -
What about the North Korean system?TGOHF666 said:
Seems the South Korean system is better than the German one #notEuropewilliamglenn said:
When the right learns to stop worrying and love Europe.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?0 -
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.nunu2 said:
Exactly. There are millions like us. And you say they can't arrest everyone, theres not enough room in the jails ......Andy_JS said:
I'll do the same. They can't arrest everyone.Benpointer said:
You'll be sleep walking into prison then.nunu2 said:
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.rottenborough 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.
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.1 -
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.0 -
Not really a meaningful or useful comparison.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
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.1 -
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.Andy_JS said:
I'll do the same. They can't arrest everyone.Benpointer said:
You'll be sleep walking into prison then.nunu2 said:
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.rottenborough 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.1 -
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).0
-
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 etcBenpointer said:
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?nunu2 said:
Exactly. There are millions like us. And you say they can't arrest everyone, theres not enough room in the jails ......Andy_JS said:
I'll do the same. They can't arrest everyone.Benpointer said:
You'll be sleep walking into prison then.nunu2 said:
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.rottenborough 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.
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.0 -
It doesn't mean indefinitely - it means until we have an effective answer to COVID-19.Andy_JS said:
I'll do the same. They can't arrest everyone.Benpointer said:
You'll be sleep walking into prison then.nunu2 said:
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.rottenborough 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.
Basically more overexcited, sensation-mongering media.1 -
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.SeaShantyIrish2 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 1990.1 -
Yes. The most interesting article of the day.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).
How do they think compliance will be by July?1 -
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.1 -
I think you are wasting your breathPagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.0 -
Britain is going to be full of people who are pretty sure they have had it already.nunu2 said:
Pretty sure I've already had it anyway.Pagan2 said:
By refusing to comply you are implicitly giving consent to being exposednunu2 said:
Which defeats the purpose of social distancing, our jails are packed!Pagan2 said:
Then like other european countries they will no doubt put in jail sentences for non compliancenunu2 said:
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.rottenborough 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.
Until they get it.2 -
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.Benpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Blame the legislators, not the NHS ( or Civil Service, or Councils etc etc)0 -
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.0 -
"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.html0 -
A couple of weeks ago we had a few people who thought they had it in early January and November.MarqueeMark said:
Britain is going to be full of people who are pretty sure they have had it already.nunu2 said:
Pretty sure I've already had it anyway.Pagan2 said:
By refusing to comply you are implicitly giving consent to being exposednunu2 said:
Which defeats the purpose of social distancing, our jails are packed!Pagan2 said:
Then like other european countries they will no doubt put in jail sentences for non compliancenunu2 said:
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.rottenborough 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.
Until they get it.
0 -
Sounding more and more like those global warming quacks every day.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.html0 -
Tattoo removal is not covered, unless causing significant psychological disturbance, and that is a pretty high bar.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.1 -
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.1 -
Well I had all the symptoms to a tee....2 years ago....and ended up in hospital. Does that mean I am probably immune?eristdoof said:
A couple of weeks ago we had a few people who thought they had it in early January and November.MarqueeMark said:
Britain is going to be full of people who are pretty sure they have had it already.nunu2 said:
Pretty sure I've already had it anyway.Pagan2 said:
By refusing to comply you are implicitly giving consent to being exposednunu2 said:
Which defeats the purpose of social distancing, our jails are packed!Pagan2 said:
Then like other european countries they will no doubt put in jail sentences for non compliancenunu2 said:
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.rottenborough 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.
Until they get it.0 -
Are you @hunchman in disguise?TGOHF666 said:
Sounding more and more like those global warming quacks every day.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.html0 -
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. "0 -
What do we do when Covid-20 strikes in 2032?0
-
Really high bar it seemsFoxy said:
Tattoo removal is not covered, unless causing significant psychological disturbance, and that is a pretty high bar.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
http://www.deadlinenews.co.uk/2011/10/14/over-600000-spent-on-tattoo-removal-by-nhs/1 -
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.”0 -
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.0 -
The madness in the mad has become insanity:
https://twitter.com/acgrayling/status/1248491723333832706?s=191 -
But there is a bar!Foxy said:
Tattoo removal is not covered, unless causing significant psychological disturbance, and that is a pretty high bar.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.0 -
Serious question, I seemed to remember a few regular posters like GideonWise had contracted it. Have they all been seen posting?0
-
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no2 -
The euthanasia/mass-murder indecision is interesting. Which is it Mr Grayling?Casino_Royale said:The madness in the mad has become insanity:
https://twitter.com/acgrayling/status/1248491723333832706?s=19
0 -
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.FrancisUrquhart said:
Are you saying that is the policy? Oldies don't get ICU?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
https://www.somagnews.com/elderly-coronary-virus-cases-allegedly-not-intensive-care-sweden/0 -
Some people are still living in hope of the pivot to the centre by Trump.kle4 said:
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.SeaShantyIrish2 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 1990.0 -
The Germans have always been good at avoiding paying towards the good of others and lapping up whatever goodies others surrender to them.TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
0 -
It won't. It will be Covid-32 (or Covid-31 if it is identified late in 2031)Casino_Royale said:What do we do when Covid-20 strikes in 2032?
1 -
What's really worrying is that over 8,000 people have liked that.rottenborough said:
The euthanasia/mass-murder indecision is interesting. Which is it Mr Grayling?Casino_Royale said:The madness in the mad has become insanity:
https://twitter.com/acgrayling/status/1248491723333832706?s=190 -
I don't think I care, now or thenCasino_Royale said:What do we do when Covid-20 strikes in 2032?
0 -
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no0 -
Usually a suicide attempt, that sort of thing, and even then only if the Tatoo is prominent or done underage.alterego said:
But there is a bar!Foxy said:
Tattoo removal is not covered, unless causing significant psychological disturbance, and that is a pretty high bar.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
0 -
Mini vs beetle? 1960s vs 1930sPagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no0 -
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.Richard_Tyndall said:
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.FrancisUrquhart said:
Are you saying that is the policy? Oldies don't get ICU?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
https://www.somagnews.com/elderly-coronary-virus-cases-allegedly-not-intensive-care-sweden/1 -
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).williamglenn said:
It's the South Korean surveillance system that beats Germany's, not their health system.TGOHF666 said:
Seems the South Korean system is better than the German one #notEuropewilliamglenn said:
When the right learns to stop worrying and love Europe.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?0 -
Not for covid it seemsBenpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no0 -
Is it named after the year?Richard_Tyndall said:
It won't. It will be Covid-32 (or Covid-31 if it is identified late in 2031)Casino_Royale said:What do we do when Covid-20 strikes in 2032?
I thought it was a numerical sequence of novel permutations of Coronaviruses.
Anyway, that wasn't really my point.0 -
But the Beetles we saw in GB in the 60s and 70s were not the same car that was designed in the 30s.alterego said:
Mini vs beetle? 1960s vs 1930sPagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no0 -
If it's kept top secret, how do you know?eristdoof said:
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).williamglenn said:
It's the South Korean surveillance system that beats Germany's, not their health system.TGOHF666 said:
Seems the South Korean system is better than the German one #notEuropewilliamglenn said:
When the right learns to stop worrying and love Europe.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system? 0 -
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.Foxy said:
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.Richard_Tyndall said:
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.FrancisUrquhart said:
Are you saying that is the policy? Oldies don't get ICU?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
https://www.somagnews.com/elderly-coronary-virus-cases-allegedly-not-intensive-care-sweden/0 -
Because... funding!Pagan2 said:
Not for covid it seemsBenpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no0 -
How many suicide attempts are motivated by unliked tattoos per annum?Foxy said:
Usually a suicide attempt, that sort of thing, and even then only if the Tatoo is prominent or done underage.alterego said:
But there is a bar!Foxy said:
Tattoo removal is not covered, unless causing significant psychological disturbance, and that is a pretty high bar.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.0 -
The financing of the German healthcare non-system is an absolute nightmare.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no1 -
So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argumentBenpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no1 -
How many no chancers are put into ICU?Foxy said:
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.Richard_Tyndall said:
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.FrancisUrquhart said:
Are you saying that is the policy? Oldies don't get ICU?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
https://www.somagnews.com/elderly-coronary-virus-cases-allegedly-not-intensive-care-sweden/0 -
But surely that is just proof that throwing money at the system is not necessarily the answer.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
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.1 -
Not many, but that is why tattoo removal on the NHS is very rare.alterego said:
How many suicide attempts are motivated by unliked tattoos per annum?Foxy said:
Usually a suicide attempt, that sort of thing, and even then only if the Tatoo is prominent or done underage.alterego said:
But there is a bar!Foxy said:
Tattoo removal is not covered, unless causing significant psychological disturbance, and that is a pretty high bar.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.0 -
Because The Left are a few idiots on twitter!rottenborough said:1 -
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?0 -
Looked pretty similar to me but I accept technology had moved on somewhat.eristdoof said:
But the Beetles we saw in GB in the 60s and 70s were not the same car that was designed in the 30s.alterego said:
Mini vs beetle? 1960s vs 1930sPagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no0 -
Only if you're happy with a health service 'not quite as good as Germany's'.Floater said:
So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argumentBenpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
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.0 -
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.Benpointer said:
Because... funding!Pagan2 said:
Not for covid it seemsBenpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
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 more0 -
No worries I was just being pedantic.Casino_Royale said:
Is it named after the year?Richard_Tyndall said:
It won't. It will be Covid-32 (or Covid-31 if it is identified late in 2031)Casino_Royale said:What do we do when Covid-20 strikes in 2032?
I thought it was a numerical sequence of novel permutations of Coronaviruses.
Anyway, that wasn't really my point.
Covid-19 Stands for (Co)rona (Vi)rus (D)isease identified (or outbreak) in 20(19)0 -
What do you suggest the government do?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?0 -
"Exercise or you will* die"Benpointer said:
What do you suggest the government do?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?
(* probability = 1%)0 -
So we will persist with a sub-standard health service just because.Benpointer said:
Only if you're happy with a health service 'not quite as good as Germany's'.Floater said:
So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argumentBenpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
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.0 -
The cost of the bureaucracy?Richard_Tyndall said:
But surely that is just proof that throwing money at the system is not necessarily the answer.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
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.0 -
I just looked up the Profile for GideonWise, he was last active on this site today at 5.16pm.FrancisUrquhart said:Serious question, I seemed to remember a few regular posters like GideonWise had contracted it. Have they all been seen posting?
0 -
Why offer it then? How may try it on?Foxy said:
Not many, but that is why tattoo removal on the NHS is very rare.alterego said:
How many suicide attempts are motivated by unliked tattoos per annum?Foxy said:
Usually a suicide attempt, that sort of thing, and even then only if the Tatoo is prominent or done underage.alterego said:
But there is a bar!Foxy said:
Tattoo removal is not covered, unless causing significant psychological disturbance, and that is a pretty high bar.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.0 -
I assume that anyone who still tweets with the hashtag #FBPE has lost touch with reality.rottenborough said:
The euthanasia/mass-murder indecision is interesting. Which is it Mr Grayling?Casino_Royale said:The madness in the mad has become insanity:
https://twitter.com/acgrayling/status/1248491723333832706?s=190 -
Well it seems to work very well in other countries with excellent health care systems.alterego said:
The cost of the bureaucracy?Richard_Tyndall said:
But surely that is just proof that throwing money at the system is not necessarily the answer.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
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.
Actually our whole GP system is rubbish0 -
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.Foxy said:
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.Richard_Tyndall said:
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.FrancisUrquhart said:
Are you saying that is the policy? Oldies don't get ICU?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
https://www.somagnews.com/elderly-coronary-virus-cases-allegedly-not-intensive-care-sweden/1 -
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.alterego said:
The Germans have always been good at avoiding paying towards the good of others and lapping up whatever goodies others surrender to them.TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.0 -
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.Benpointer said:
What do you suggest the government do?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 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.0 -
No, it's going to be better funded going forward.Richard_Tyndall said:
So we will persist with a sub-standard health service just because.Benpointer said:
Only if you're happy with a health service 'not quite as good as Germany's'.Floater said:
So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argumentBenpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
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.
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?0 -
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.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?0 -
I think they alread tried that - obesity kills with or without covid.RobD said:
"Exercise or you will* die"Benpointer said:
What do you suggest the government do?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?
(* probability = 1%)0 -
As I thought, the answer is always more money.Benpointer said:
No, it's going to be better funded going forward.Richard_Tyndall said:
So we will persist with a sub-standard health service just because.Benpointer said:
Only if you're happy with a health service 'not quite as good as Germany's'.Floater said:
So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argumentBenpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
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.
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?1 -
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.alterego said:
Looked pretty similar to me but I accept technology had moved on somewhat.eristdoof said:
But the Beetles we saw in GB in the 60s and 70s were not the same car that was designed in the 30s.alterego said:
Mini vs beetle? 1960s vs 1930sPagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no0 -
Finally, you've got it! Well done.RobD said:
As I thought, the answer is always more money.Benpointer said:
No, it's going to be better funded going forward.Richard_Tyndall said:
So we will persist with a sub-standard health service just because.Benpointer said:
Only if you're happy with a health service 'not quite as good as Germany's'.Floater said:
So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argumentBenpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
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.
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?0 -
Me smart.Benpointer said:
Finally, you've got it! Well done.RobD said:
As I thought, the answer is always more money.Benpointer said:
No, it's going to be better funded going forward.Richard_Tyndall said:
So we will persist with a sub-standard health service just because.Benpointer said:
Only if you're happy with a health service 'not quite as good as Germany's'.Floater said:
So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argumentBenpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
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.
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?0 -
doesBenpointer said:
What do you suggest the government do?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?0 -
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 worksBenpointer said:
No, it's going to be better funded going forward.Richard_Tyndall said:
So we will persist with a sub-standard health service just because.Benpointer said:
Only if you're happy with a health service 'not quite as good as Germany's'.Floater said:
So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argumentBenpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
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.
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?1 -
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.Benpointer said:
No, it's going to be better funded going forward.Richard_Tyndall said:
So we will persist with a sub-standard health service just because.Benpointer said:
Only if you're happy with a health service 'not quite as good as Germany's'.Floater said:
So, slow hand clap for destroying your own argumentBenpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
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.
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 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.1 -
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.rkrkrk said:
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.Benpointer said:
What do you suggest the government do?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 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.
As a long time WFHer, I know how easy it is having the kitchen so close. You really have to discipline yourself.0 -
We talked about this a year or so ago. Obesity kills regardless of covid. And it cost the country a fortune.rkrkrk said:
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.Benpointer said:
What do you suggest the government do?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 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 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.0 -
Can we agree on "could be better"?Richard_Tyndall said:
Well it seems to work very well in other countries with excellent health care systems.alterego said:
The cost of the bureaucracy?Richard_Tyndall said:
But surely that is just proof that throwing money at the system is not necessarily the answer.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no
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.
Actually our whole GP system is rubbish1 -
The best approach would surely be an NHS (with its monolithic organisation and economies of scale) with German level funding!eristdoof said:
The financing of the German healthcare non-system is an absolute nightmare.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
Why do assume the only reason it functioned better is money?Benpointer said:
Why?TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.
Would pumping twice as much money into british leyland have turned it into volkwagen I think we know the answer is no1 -
I hadn't thought it was that much!matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.alterego said:
The Germans have always been good at avoiding paying towards the good of others and lapping up whatever goodies others surrender to them.TGOHF666 said:
Would be crazy to spend at Germans levels without changing our system over to the German one and disbanding the NHS.Benpointer said:
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.Pagan2 said:
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 payerBenpointer said:
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.Floater said:
I want them to have a proper set of prioritiesBenpointer said:
It's hardly surprising that an organisation with over 1.5m employees has some people dedicated to impriving diversity and inclusion.Floater said:
At the moment they are advertising for diversity and inclusion staff - salary over double that being paid nursesBenpointer said:
Like level of funding for example.matthiasfromhamburg said:
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.TGOHF666 said:So the German system is better than the NHS ?
When do we scrap the NHS and copy the German system?
Money is important, but so is a decent set of priorities
Presumably you'd be fine with a properly funded NHS if they just dropped these roles?
Money goes further if spent on the most important things does it not?
More importantly who decides what is a proper set of priorities? I doubt you and I would ever agree.0
This discussion has been closed.