General Election 2019 thread (21 Viewers)

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
To be fair that is showing roughly the same increase over time as under Labour. Of course we can never tell if it would've continued that way had Labour stayed in power and at the time Labour was more to the right than it is now.

However one thing we can say is that this trend has not led to improvements in service at all. It is in fact worse so the advantages of doing it are very much under question.

Not party political. Blair wanted privatisation too. Point is it’s already happening so the idea “they’ll never get away with it” is a little naive.
 

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
No I think Trump's aides tell him to say it if he wants Alexander to win so they could potentially be on the table in the trade deal. Or he can say 'yes' or 'we're looking into that' and lose Johnson votes so it's not available to US companies.

I think the whole thing is semantics anyway. Technically 'the NHS' wouldn't be on the table. But all the services etc could be put up for tender with the US being given first dibs on them. So although 'the NHS' is still public in terms of funding and availability to all, it's all provided by private companies.

Being a largely closed system it's more liable to profiteering - all you need to ensure is that your tender is the one accepted and we've seen before that hasn't necessarily gone to the cheapest/best available. G4S continually fuck up yet get given huge swathes of govt contracts. If these companies come back and say we can't do it for the quoted price then it's either cough up or let the system fail, which would be catastrophic politically as well as for the population. If it did it would have to be taken back over by the state so once again profits are privatised, losses are nationalised and ends up costing more than if the state had just provided it in the first place.
Hmmm...so it IS a conspiracy

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
However one thing we can say is that this trend has not led to improvements in service at all. It is in fact worse so the advantages of doing it are very much under question.

I think you are right there. People who work for 'X' service provider are probably not the same people (even if simply moved from NHS to 'X' provider), & do not feel or have the same pride or committent to the NHS that those actually working FOR the NHS have & bring in terms of goodwill. I believe we actually lose value for money...but of course that is not measurable on a spreadsheet is it?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
Boris still running scared of Andrew Neil. Let's face it, he hasn't got the bollocks to face him.
0820319684c7a25911112b50a86a6ad7.jpg


Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
 

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
see Dominic Raab has admitted US drug companies will be able to charge us more for drugs post Brexit but says it's unlikely they will.
Yes Dominic, big pharmacy companies in the States who have instigated an opioid epidemic which kills 70,000 a year in order to make huge profits won't get greedy will they?!
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
see Dominic Raab has admitted US drug companies will be able to charge us more for drugs post Brexit but says it's unlikely they will.
Yes Dominic, big pharmacy companies in the States who have instigated an opioid epidemic which kills 70,000 a year in order to make huge profits won't get greedy will they?!
It’s alright we’ll only buy half as much therefore it will be the same cost.
 

Ian1779

Well-Known Member
see Dominic Raab has admitted US drug companies will be able to charge us more for drugs post Brexit but says it's unlikely they will.
Yes Dominic, big pharmacy companies in the States who have instigated an opioid epidemic which kills 70,000 a year in order to make huge profits won't get greedy will they?!

Hold tight - CCHQ will be along soon to tell us all we’re off our tits on overpriced opioids....
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
see Dominic Raab has admitted US drug companies will be able to charge us more for drugs post Brexit but says it's unlikely they will.
Yes Dominic, big pharmacy companies in the States who have instigated an opioid epidemic which kills 70,000 a year in order to make huge profits won't get greedy will they?!

Like it was promised the Royal Mail shares wouldn't be sold immediately making a massive profit on a ridiculous low offer price?
 

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
see Dominic Raab has admitted US drug companies will be able to charge us more for drugs post Brexit but says it's unlikely they will.
Yes Dominic, big pharmacy companies in the States who have instigated an opioid epidemic which kills 70,000 a year in order to make huge profits won't get greedy will they?!
The Pharma companies don't dish the drugs out...what you're suggesting is that Doctors are easily incorruptible.

IF they charge more for their drugs...I can guarantee you that unless their drug has a pretty significant advantage over EU or UK alternatives Medicines Optimisation squads will actively move patients OFF their expensive ones.

Then they will reduce the prices back down but it will be too late.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
Because if it's privatised it can be moved more to the profit angle than the service angle. As it is if people don't get the treatment they need it's the fault of the service and we have to look at how that service can be improved so it can be provided. With a more private system it's the fault of the individual for not being able to afford the treatment/insurance that covers it.
So they couldn't make money selling drugs to the NHS like countries in the EU do presently? As in we 'might' have a drug shortage soon?
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
Your second para is nonsense. There’s been no threats.

As for your first. Just because something isn’t run for profit doesn’t mean you can’t profit from it. Simple example: when my school was made an academy our budget basically remained the same, the sponsor insisted we buy our paper through him, it was more expensive than our previous supplier but it made him a profit. He privatised the catering which meant the same staff came back offering smaller meals for more money. He also took over several million quids worth of land and gave several family members well paid board positions. Side note: he was then made a Tory Lord.
No-deal Brexit could cause ‘fatal’ medicine shortages, health unions warn

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...hin-a-fortnight-of-a-no-deal-brexit-2hbzwzsbh

How many links would you like? It was mentioned enough on here as a reason we shouldn't leave.
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
Not party political. Blair wanted privatisation too. Point is it’s already happening so the idea “they’ll never get away with it” is a little naive.
The problem that we have in the way the NHS has been privatised so far is it saves not paying out immediately for instance new hospitals. But we have to pay for it eventually. They build and pay. We pay for many years and they make a fortune out of us. And this style of contract comes out of the budget for the NHS.
 

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
The Pharma companies don't dish the drugs out...what you're suggesting is that Doctors are easily incorruptible.

IF they charge more for their drugs...I can guarantee you that unless their drug has a pretty significant advantage over EU or UK alternatives Medicines Optimisation squads will actively move patients OFF their expensive ones.

Then they will reduce the prices back down but it will be too late.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

you might want to look at Purdues sales and marketing strategy in the States and how they pushed oxycontin.
I'm not saying that would happen here but they never would have succeeded without corrupt doctors, (and some naïve ones as well) in the US.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
The problem that we have in the way the NHS has been privatised so far is it saves not paying out immediately for instance new hospitals. But we have to pay for it eventually. They build and pay. We pay for many years and they make a fortune out of us. And this style of contract comes out of the budget for the NHS.

PFI was a result of trying to do proper government on neoliberal ideals. It was a terrible idea. What Blair proved is the Thatcherite way of running the economy can’t provide public services or improvements in QoL or the economy. It always leads to a crash because it’s unsustainable.

Which is why we need Corbyn ;)
 

rob9872

Well-Known Member
XR targeting all parties and have glued themselves to the UnLib-UnDem's so far. Nothing but trouble-makers, arrest them all and keep arresting them with longer sentences for repeat offenders.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
XR targeting all parties and have glued themselves to the UnLib-UnDem's so far. Nothing but trouble-makers, arrest them all and keep arresting them with longer sentences for repeat offenders.

Eh?

How about no? You want to arrest me for attending a meeting? Why?

Also, arrestables are trying to get arrested, not sure you’ve thought this through.
 

Philosoraptor

Well-Known Member
And the disaster zone starts again.

Will someone pop a question in to a hustings about what they would do about bullying in the workplace.

 
Last edited:

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Never been exit-polled before because Cov has been such safe seats but reckon there might a few knocking about in Cov S and NW this time round.
 

Philosoraptor

Well-Known Member
I think it's going to come down to a simple equation.

It was mentioned earlier on it he thread but I just let it go then.

Tory remainers and Labour leavers.

These are the one that are most likely to switch to another party or not vote at all.

It was pointed out that Tory remainers are the most likely to stay with their own party. I think there is another reason more logical conclusion that all of the groups respect the result of the EU referendum.

I can only see one group moving with enough clout to affect the GE and that is Labour leave voters moving to other camps or not vote at all.
 
Last edited:

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
And the disaster zone starts again.

Will someone pop a question in to a hustings about what they would do about bullying in the workplace.



TBF blocking anonymous abusive twitter accounts is pretty standard. Same goes for that “Cov Road Safety” weirdo.

Sort of people that write letters in green pen.

If you want politicians to take you seriously on social media use your real name.

The Kings Hill lot are nutters. All over my local FB group as well turning red and waffling about bollocks.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
I think it's going to come down to a simple equation.

It was mentioned earlier on it he thread but I just let it go then.

Tory remainers and Labour leavers.

These are the one that are most likely to switch to another party or not vote at all.

It was pointed out that Tory remainers are the most likely to stay with their own party. I think there is another reason more logical conclusion that all of the groups respect the result of the EU referendum.

I can only see one group moving with enough clout to affect the GE and that is Labour leave voters moving to other camps or not vote at all.

I think most of the recent movement has been Labour remainers actually. The gains have generally been at the expense of the LDs
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top