Plans begun to plug Bradford hospitals funding black hole

Bradford Royal Infirmary

Bradford Royal Infirmary

First published in News Bradford Telegraph and Argus: Photograph of the Author by , T&A Reporter

Hospital chiefs have started work on a five-year plan which will lead to major changes in the way health services are provided in Bradford as demand rises ahead of expected income.

It was revealed in yesterday’s Telegraph & Argus that the city’s health and social care services face a projected shortfall of £364 million in the next five years and the city’s hospitals will have to cope with £135m of that figure.

Work has now started on a plan for the next half decade to ensure the NHS Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust can provide the health services the public need without spending more than it has coming in.

Final decisions will be made later, but it is likely that increasing numbers of patients will find themselves being cared for at home or in the community rather than going into hospital.

The emergency care provided through A&E, which is heavily used in Bradford, will also be changed to ensure patients get the correct type of care as quickly as possible once the enter the hospital.

But despite tightening finances, it should mean improvements for patients.

Director of finance Matthew Horner said: “We want patients in Bradford to feel they have a seamless journey, not that they are being transported from one organisation to another.

“There will be patients in hospital who could be better cared for at home, supported by community care services. That would release capacity in hospital to allow us to meet demand.”

Work had already started to treat patients away from hospital where possible, but so far the number of beds freed up by those patients had been absorbed by growing demand.

It may be that demand grows faster than beds can be made available by treatment some patients at home.

However, if in-patient numbers are reduced, that may have an impact on the size of hospital sites eventually.

“We have saved bed days already, but because demand has gone up, it is eating into that,” said Mr Horner.

Already, money is being set aside for a new budget called the ‘better care fund’ which will pay for the carers who will treat patients who remain at home or who are discharged earlier than previously expected from hospital after treatment.

Other potential changes involve making hospitals work better, investing money which has been previously saved into modern buildings and siting linked services near to each other to improve efficiency and quality of care for patients.

Comments (28)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:40am Wed 4 Jun 14

pcmanners says...

There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs. pcmanners
  • Score: -6

9:14am Wed 4 Jun 14

BertSanders says...

Labour might win and fill the gap. That is what has happened over the years.
The Tories will then have another economic rescue to deal with. There must be another way other than left/ right politics. Remember Mr Brown "no more boom and bust" Lets hope this is local but I fear not.
Labour might win and fill the gap. That is what has happened over the years. The Tories will then have another economic rescue to deal with. There must be another way other than left/ right politics. Remember Mr Brown "no more boom and bust" Lets hope this is local but I fear not. BertSanders
  • Score: 2

9:27am Wed 4 Jun 14

sorrow&anger says...

It is hard to believe that £364 million can be saved just through efficiency measures. There will have to be some very real cuts which will mean for many of us shorter, and more painful, lives.

If the impact of this shortfall is to be minimised it will need intelligent and careful management. At the moment the Chairman of the Bradford Health Board is Cllr. Green, a man adept at climbing the greasy pole of the local Labour machine, but little else. For all our sakes he needs replacing, and quickly, with a skilled and experienced manager.
It is hard to believe that £364 million can be saved just through efficiency measures. There will have to be some very real cuts which will mean for many of us shorter, and more painful, lives. If the impact of this shortfall is to be minimised it will need intelligent and careful management. At the moment the Chairman of the Bradford Health Board is Cllr. Green, a man adept at climbing the greasy pole of the local Labour machine, but little else. For all our sakes he needs replacing, and quickly, with a skilled and experienced manager. sorrow&anger
  • Score: 27

9:42am Wed 4 Jun 14

Grumpygirl says...

This is the Tories continuing their campaign of killing off the NHS with a thousand cuts so that it can be privatised and turned into a money making machine for the big business 'health providers' who are mostly American.

The Tories are very keen on referendums. There should be one to let the country decide once and for all if health care should still be free or privatised. This will put a stop to the Tories underhand and dishonest manipulation of the NHS.

If we decide that health care is to be free for everyone, then, it's very simple, National Insurance will have to increase. By taxing everybody the risks are spread as widely as possible and an individuals overall cost would be much less than the price of private medical insurance
This is the Tories continuing their campaign of killing off the NHS with a thousand cuts so that it can be privatised and turned into a money making machine for the big business 'health providers' who are mostly American. The Tories are very keen on referendums. There should be one to let the country decide once and for all if health care should still be free or privatised. This will put a stop to the Tories underhand and dishonest manipulation of the NHS. If we decide that health care is to be free for everyone, then, it's very simple, National Insurance will have to increase. By taxing everybody the risks are spread as widely as possible and an individuals overall cost would be much less than the price of private medical insurance Grumpygirl
  • Score: 13

9:44am Wed 4 Jun 14

pellethead says...

pcmanners wrote:
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
What on earth are you babbling on about?
[quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.[/p][/quote]What on earth are you babbling on about? pellethead
  • Score: -23

10:00am Wed 4 Jun 14

BaildonGuy says...

sorrow&anger wrote:
It is hard to believe that £364 million can be saved just through efficiency measures. There will have to be some very real cuts which will mean for many of us shorter, and more painful, lives.

If the impact of this shortfall is to be minimised it will need intelligent and careful management. At the moment the Chairman of the Bradford Health Board is Cllr. Green, a man adept at climbing the greasy pole of the local Labour machine, but little else. For all our sakes he needs replacing, and quickly, with a skilled and experienced manager.
I agree the health service needs professionals not ideologues, but above all it needs a clear and agreed sense of mission. Is it to be run for profit or is it to be free for all? The split seems to be more or less on party lines so we'll all get a chance to express our opinion at the next election.

As for Cllr. Green! As all of us here in Baildon know and saw with Buck Lane, he is not a man who can be relied on to keep his promises. Not the best qualification for running a health service.
[quote][p][bold]sorrow&anger[/bold] wrote: It is hard to believe that £364 million can be saved just through efficiency measures. There will have to be some very real cuts which will mean for many of us shorter, and more painful, lives. If the impact of this shortfall is to be minimised it will need intelligent and careful management. At the moment the Chairman of the Bradford Health Board is Cllr. Green, a man adept at climbing the greasy pole of the local Labour machine, but little else. For all our sakes he needs replacing, and quickly, with a skilled and experienced manager.[/p][/quote]I agree the health service needs professionals not ideologues, but above all it needs a clear and agreed sense of mission. Is it to be run for profit or is it to be free for all? The split seems to be more or less on party lines so we'll all get a chance to express our opinion at the next election. As for Cllr. Green! As all of us here in Baildon know and saw with Buck Lane, he is not a man who can be relied on to keep his promises. Not the best qualification for running a health service. BaildonGuy
  • Score: 17

10:25am Wed 4 Jun 14

Albion. says...

pcmanners wrote:
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?
[quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.[/p][/quote]What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance? Albion.
  • Score: 4

10:45am Wed 4 Jun 14

A650 says...

Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?
Don’t ask awkward questions like that the market is king and if there are losers then it’s their own fault. Pull up the drawbridge and let’s return to the 19th century.

The NHS has its faults but these are far outweighed by the positives. A look at the suffering endured by many in the USA should serve as a warning not to allow the free market to take over health provision.

In order to fund it in the future the only answer that will keep it free to all is to increase taxation or at least start collecting what is already due. The likes of Vodaphone, Goldman Sachs, Amazon, Starbucks etc have all avoided paying billions in tax thanks to cosy deals with successive governments.
[quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.[/p][/quote]What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?[/p][/quote]Don’t ask awkward questions like that the market is king and if there are losers then it’s their own fault. Pull up the drawbridge and let’s return to the 19th century. The NHS has its faults but these are far outweighed by the positives. A look at the suffering endured by many in the USA should serve as a warning not to allow the free market to take over health provision. In order to fund it in the future the only answer that will keep it free to all is to increase taxation or at least start collecting what is already due. The likes of Vodaphone, Goldman Sachs, Amazon, Starbucks etc have all avoided paying billions in tax thanks to cosy deals with successive governments. A650
  • Score: 9

11:21am Wed 4 Jun 14

pcmanners says...

Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?
Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.
[quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.[/p][/quote]What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?[/p][/quote]Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this. pcmanners
  • Score: -20

11:25am Wed 4 Jun 14

Count Jim Moriarty says...

pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?
Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.
Typically nasty Thatcherite nonsense. What she failed to do, the current buch of out of touch toffs are finishing off for her. She must be so proud of them. Meanwhile, the poor and sick suffer.
[quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.[/p][/quote]What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?[/p][/quote]Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.[/p][/quote]Typically nasty Thatcherite nonsense. What she failed to do, the current buch of out of touch toffs are finishing off for her. She must be so proud of them. Meanwhile, the poor and sick suffer. Count Jim Moriarty
  • Score: 17

11:33am Wed 4 Jun 14

Albion. says...

pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?
Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.
So someone with cancer could be saved by surgery and drugs which cost in total £1m, gets left in a darkened room with a revolver on the table, because he only saved £950,000?
[quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.[/p][/quote]What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?[/p][/quote]Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.[/p][/quote]So someone with cancer could be saved by surgery and drugs which cost in total £1m, gets left in a darkened room with a revolver on the table, because he only saved £950,000? Albion.
  • Score: 1

11:38am Wed 4 Jun 14

A650 says...

pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?
Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.
Margaret Thatcher would disagree with you there pal. She knew the value of the NHS and it wasn’t privatised by the back door on her watch. You’re just ranting rubbish and I suspect you’re just an internet troll.

Illness or injury isn’t a lifestyle choice.
[quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.[/p][/quote]What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?[/p][/quote]Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.[/p][/quote]Margaret Thatcher would disagree with you there pal. She knew the value of the NHS and it wasn’t privatised by the back door on her watch. You’re just ranting rubbish and I suspect you’re just an internet troll. Illness or injury isn’t a lifestyle choice. A650
  • Score: 5

11:42am Wed 4 Jun 14

SurprisedByJoyce says...

Grumpygirl wrote:
This is the Tories continuing their campaign of killing off the NHS with a thousand cuts so that it can be privatised and turned into a money making machine for the big business 'health providers' who are mostly American.

The Tories are very keen on referendums. There should be one to let the country decide once and for all if health care should still be free or privatised. This will put a stop to the Tories underhand and dishonest manipulation of the NHS.

If we decide that health care is to be free for everyone, then, it's very simple, National Insurance will have to increase. By taxing everybody the risks are spread as widely as possible and an individuals overall cost would be much less than the price of private medical insurance
I'm with you. A referendum is a good idea. I do wish the Conservatives would come clean about their intentions for the NHS. This latest expensive reorganisation which seems to have caused so much backdoor privatisation wasn't even in their manifesto.

This week Coun. Cooke and his colleagues were demanding fewer GPs in Bradford despite Bradford being one of the worst places in the country for getting an appointment. I suppose this is Tory HQ's way of setting up more private practices. A bit of honesty wouldn't hurt.
[quote][p][bold]Grumpygirl[/bold] wrote: This is the Tories continuing their campaign of killing off the NHS with a thousand cuts so that it can be privatised and turned into a money making machine for the big business 'health providers' who are mostly American. The Tories are very keen on referendums. There should be one to let the country decide once and for all if health care should still be free or privatised. This will put a stop to the Tories underhand and dishonest manipulation of the NHS. If we decide that health care is to be free for everyone, then, it's very simple, National Insurance will have to increase. By taxing everybody the risks are spread as widely as possible and an individuals overall cost would be much less than the price of private medical insurance[/p][/quote]I'm with you. A referendum is a good idea. I do wish the Conservatives would come clean about their intentions for the NHS. This latest expensive reorganisation which seems to have caused so much backdoor privatisation wasn't even in their manifesto. This week Coun. Cooke and his colleagues were demanding fewer GPs in Bradford despite Bradford being one of the worst places in the country for getting an appointment. I suppose this is Tory HQ's way of setting up more private practices. A bit of honesty wouldn't hurt. SurprisedByJoyce
  • Score: 9

11:48am Wed 4 Jun 14

pcmanners says...

Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?
Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.
So someone with cancer could be saved by surgery and drugs which cost in total £1m, gets left in a darkened room with a revolver on the table, because he only saved £950,000?
It's a hard fact but life belongs to the rich. It's only at the end of their existence that the lazy poor realise that they should have worked harder and not spent their life scrounging free stuff off the state. As Mrs Thatcher said you get, and deserve, what you work for.
[quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.[/p][/quote]What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?[/p][/quote]Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.[/p][/quote]So someone with cancer could be saved by surgery and drugs which cost in total £1m, gets left in a darkened room with a revolver on the table, because he only saved £950,000?[/p][/quote]It's a hard fact but life belongs to the rich. It's only at the end of their existence that the lazy poor realise that they should have worked harder and not spent their life scrounging free stuff off the state. As Mrs Thatcher said you get, and deserve, what you work for. pcmanners
  • Score: -12

11:59am Wed 4 Jun 14

Albion. says...

pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?
Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.
So someone with cancer could be saved by surgery and drugs which cost in total £1m, gets left in a darkened room with a revolver on the table, because he only saved £950,000?
It's a hard fact but life belongs to the rich. It's only at the end of their existence that the lazy poor realise that they should have worked harder and not spent their life scrounging free stuff off the state. As Mrs Thatcher said you get, and deserve, what you work for.
You do indeed, but many people do vital work at the lower end of the wage scale, often they end up with long-term physical problems as a result. A company director couldn't get by without his rubbish being cleared or his tea-trolley lady or those who build and maintain his Rolls Royce and Rolex and his out of town (well out) mansion. So they are all as important to society as he is, some of them possibly more, and THEY probably can't afford the skilled services of those who can help you avoid tax bills or fair punishment for wrongdoing.
[quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.[/p][/quote]What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?[/p][/quote]Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.[/p][/quote]So someone with cancer could be saved by surgery and drugs which cost in total £1m, gets left in a darkened room with a revolver on the table, because he only saved £950,000?[/p][/quote]It's a hard fact but life belongs to the rich. It's only at the end of their existence that the lazy poor realise that they should have worked harder and not spent their life scrounging free stuff off the state. As Mrs Thatcher said you get, and deserve, what you work for.[/p][/quote]You do indeed, but many people do vital work at the lower end of the wage scale, often they end up with long-term physical problems as a result. A company director couldn't get by without his rubbish being cleared or his tea-trolley lady or those who build and maintain his Rolls Royce and Rolex and his out of town (well out) mansion. So they are all as important to society as he is, some of them possibly more, and THEY probably can't afford the skilled services of those who can help you avoid tax bills or fair punishment for wrongdoing. Albion.
  • Score: 9

1:12pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Joedavid says...

SurprisedByJoyce wrote:
Grumpygirl wrote:
This is the Tories continuing their campaign of killing off the NHS with a thousand cuts so that it can be privatised and turned into a money making machine for the big business 'health providers' who are mostly American.

The Tories are very keen on referendums. There should be one to let the country decide once and for all if health care should still be free or privatised. This will put a stop to the Tories underhand and dishonest manipulation of the NHS.

If we decide that health care is to be free for everyone, then, it's very simple, National Insurance will have to increase. By taxing everybody the risks are spread as widely as possible and an individuals overall cost would be much less than the price of private medical insurance
I'm with you. A referendum is a good idea. I do wish the Conservatives would come clean about their intentions for the NHS. This latest expensive reorganisation which seems to have caused so much backdoor privatisation wasn't even in their manifesto.

This week Coun. Cooke and his colleagues were demanding fewer GPs in Bradford despite Bradford being one of the worst places in the country for getting an appointment. I suppose this is Tory HQ's way of setting up more private practices. A bit of honesty wouldn't hurt.
We needed our GP's help this week and were seen straight away with our emergency without appointment.
It's not all bad.
[quote][p][bold]SurprisedByJoyce[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Grumpygirl[/bold] wrote: This is the Tories continuing their campaign of killing off the NHS with a thousand cuts so that it can be privatised and turned into a money making machine for the big business 'health providers' who are mostly American. The Tories are very keen on referendums. There should be one to let the country decide once and for all if health care should still be free or privatised. This will put a stop to the Tories underhand and dishonest manipulation of the NHS. If we decide that health care is to be free for everyone, then, it's very simple, National Insurance will have to increase. By taxing everybody the risks are spread as widely as possible and an individuals overall cost would be much less than the price of private medical insurance[/p][/quote]I'm with you. A referendum is a good idea. I do wish the Conservatives would come clean about their intentions for the NHS. This latest expensive reorganisation which seems to have caused so much backdoor privatisation wasn't even in their manifesto. This week Coun. Cooke and his colleagues were demanding fewer GPs in Bradford despite Bradford being one of the worst places in the country for getting an appointment. I suppose this is Tory HQ's way of setting up more private practices. A bit of honesty wouldn't hurt.[/p][/quote]We needed our GP's help this week and were seen straight away with our emergency without appointment. It's not all bad. Joedavid
  • Score: 4

4:59pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Robin of Loxley says...

Grumpygirl wrote:
This is the Tories continuing their campaign of killing off the NHS with a thousand cuts so that it can be privatised and turned into a money making machine for the big business 'health providers' who are mostly American.

The Tories are very keen on referendums. There should be one to let the country decide once and for all if health care should still be free or privatised. This will put a stop to the Tories underhand and dishonest manipulation of the NHS.

If we decide that health care is to be free for everyone, then, it's very simple, National Insurance will have to increase. By taxing everybody the risks are spread as widely as possible and an individuals overall cost would be much less than the price of private medical insurance
It's likely the Tories will be out of office come next year. Hopefully Labour will sort this mess out.
[quote][p][bold]Grumpygirl[/bold] wrote: This is the Tories continuing their campaign of killing off the NHS with a thousand cuts so that it can be privatised and turned into a money making machine for the big business 'health providers' who are mostly American. The Tories are very keen on referendums. There should be one to let the country decide once and for all if health care should still be free or privatised. This will put a stop to the Tories underhand and dishonest manipulation of the NHS. If we decide that health care is to be free for everyone, then, it's very simple, National Insurance will have to increase. By taxing everybody the risks are spread as widely as possible and an individuals overall cost would be much less than the price of private medical insurance[/p][/quote]It's likely the Tories will be out of office come next year. Hopefully Labour will sort this mess out. Robin of Loxley
  • Score: 6

5:06pm Wed 4 Jun 14

pcmanners says...

A650 wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?
Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.
Margaret Thatcher would disagree with you there pal. She knew the value of the NHS and it wasn’t privatised by the back door on her watch. You’re just ranting rubbish and I suspect you’re just an internet troll.

Illness or injury isn’t a lifestyle choice.
Why are we right thinking people who speak for the silent majority always accused of being trolls by lefties like you? There is too much socialist nonsense in the media, especially from the Guardian, The Independent and the communists at the BBC. Even the T&A prints the opinions of known Socialists showing how biased it is.
[quote][p][bold]A650[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.[/p][/quote]What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?[/p][/quote]Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.[/p][/quote]Margaret Thatcher would disagree with you there pal. She knew the value of the NHS and it wasn’t privatised by the back door on her watch. You’re just ranting rubbish and I suspect you’re just an internet troll. Illness or injury isn’t a lifestyle choice.[/p][/quote]Why are we right thinking people who speak for the silent majority always accused of being trolls by lefties like you? There is too much socialist nonsense in the media, especially from the Guardian, The Independent and the communists at the BBC. Even the T&A prints the opinions of known Socialists showing how biased it is. pcmanners
  • Score: 12

5:06pm Wed 4 Jun 14

OrionKarl says...

To Be Transparent and Accountable is to be cost effective - For your perspective, please allow me to share the Daley Plan for Health Care below for its cost effectiveness; that is if managed in a transparent and accountable way.

The Daley Plan:

Described below as a seven part straw man, the Daily Plan proposes a means to afford the finest health care system in the world for all Americans without socialized medicine!

The Daley Plan is further intended to redesign the health care system in order to protect the nation and welfare of the people from the obsolescence of the current one; and avoid using our nation's health as a tax strategy by the Federal Government, and while not having to impose excessive deductibles on the people by insurance companies. This is also while strengthening the US economy with tax payer burden relief of the trillions of dollars for existing Medicare and Medicaid programs.

1- To redesign the profit model of the health care / insurance and drug industry: They (the industry) spend a fortune on IT (information technology) systems where the sole purpose is for denying claims. Proposed is to have them instead process claims on behalf the Dept of Health. This is where they can make a percentage on each claim. Hence, the more claims processed, the more of a fortune they can amass. Consider that there are 300,000,000 Americans. That is regardless if employed or unemployed. Claims processors could bid for the business!

2- The claims for health services provided (from a hospital, practitioner, etc) are to be sent to the Dept of Health. Obviously there would be normalization of pricing, but by no means intending to compromise quality that is provided. This does not mean that medical practitioners need to be the working poor, but obviously cannot price gouge either, as it would be more of a level playing field where quality at competitive prices from practitioners would be looked at favorably by the government.

3- To finance the cost of operations (practitioners, Dept of Health, IT operations, etc), tax exempt bonds are assumed. It is not a requirement that anyone buy into these, but frankly Wall Street would drop their pants to get them. As a private investor, such as in having a 401K, etc, what is left after taxes is not much. Tax exempt means tax exempt and for that matter considered from your gross income and not from your net. In investing in such bonds, you have further lowered your taxable income while having built a very large one for retirement; or to be redeemed at which time you wish.

4- The mechanics of finance: Let us assume that 25% of the total bond financing actually covers item #3 above. Then 75% is exercised on Wall Street to replenish the %25 that is to be used. If and when, and assumed often based on fair and competitive capital market practices, that the 25% exceeds its water mark (hitting 26 – 30%) as an example, that +% is returned to the investors who participate.

5- Being far more profitable for all concerned, it can be pushed much faster through Congress. The stake holders in item # 1 can have far greater profits. This is while achieving this with far less convoluted tactics rather than an antiquated bait and switch claim denial model.

6- Tax exempt investments will move the economy with far more momentum than otherwise – Wall Street has greater potential to make fortunes without having to be crooks –

7- Tax payer burden is relieved of the estimated trillions of dollars of the federal budget per year in costs for Medicare / Medicaid which would be considered obsolete federal and state programs. Instead , this money could move in to our communities, while having the Federal Government cost effective in serving the people while reducing a major portion of national debt.

Now could you imagine our three branches of federal government rally to a real solution.

Thanks for reading this,

Orion Karl Daley
http://vibranteconom
y.wordpress.com/
To Be Transparent and Accountable is to be cost effective - For your perspective, please allow me to share the Daley Plan for Health Care below for its cost effectiveness; that is if managed in a transparent and accountable way. The Daley Plan: Described below as a seven part straw man, the Daily Plan proposes a means to afford the finest health care system in the world for all Americans without socialized medicine! The Daley Plan is further intended to redesign the health care system in order to protect the nation and welfare of the people from the obsolescence of the current one; and avoid using our nation's health as a tax strategy by the Federal Government, and while not having to impose excessive deductibles on the people by insurance companies. This is also while strengthening the US economy with tax payer burden relief of the trillions of dollars for existing Medicare and Medicaid programs. 1- To redesign the profit model of the health care / insurance and drug industry: They (the industry) spend a fortune on IT (information technology) systems where the sole purpose is for denying claims. Proposed is to have them instead process claims on behalf the Dept of Health. This is where they can make a percentage on each claim. Hence, the more claims processed, the more of a fortune they can amass. Consider that there are 300,000,000 Americans. That is regardless if employed or unemployed. Claims processors could bid for the business! 2- The claims for health services provided (from a hospital, practitioner, etc) are to be sent to the Dept of Health. Obviously there would be normalization of pricing, but by no means intending to compromise quality that is provided. This does not mean that medical practitioners need to be the working poor, but obviously cannot price gouge either, as it would be more of a level playing field where quality at competitive prices from practitioners would be looked at favorably by the government. 3- To finance the cost of operations (practitioners, Dept of Health, IT operations, etc), tax exempt bonds are assumed. It is not a requirement that anyone buy into these, but frankly Wall Street would drop their pants to get them. As a private investor, such as in having a 401K, etc, what is left after taxes is not much. Tax exempt means tax exempt and for that matter considered from your gross income and not from your net. In investing in such bonds, you have further lowered your taxable income while having built a very large one for retirement; or to be redeemed at which time you wish. 4- The mechanics of finance: Let us assume that 25% of the total bond financing actually covers item #3 above. Then 75% is exercised on Wall Street to replenish the %25 that is to be used. If and when, and assumed often based on fair and competitive capital market practices, that the 25% exceeds its water mark (hitting 26 – 30%) as an example, that +% is returned to the investors who participate. 5- Being far more profitable for all concerned, it can be pushed much faster through Congress. The stake holders in item # 1 can have far greater profits. This is while achieving this with far less convoluted tactics rather than an antiquated bait and switch claim denial model. 6- Tax exempt investments will move the economy with far more momentum than otherwise – Wall Street has greater potential to make fortunes without having to be crooks – 7- Tax payer burden is relieved of the estimated trillions of dollars of the federal budget per year in costs for Medicare / Medicaid which would be considered obsolete federal and state programs. Instead , this money could move in to our communities, while having the Federal Government cost effective in serving the people while reducing a major portion of national debt. Now could you imagine our three branches of federal government rally to a real solution. Thanks for reading this, Orion Karl Daley http://vibranteconom y.wordpress.com/ OrionKarl
  • Score: -12

5:19pm Wed 4 Jun 14

SurprisedByJoyce says...

Joedavid wrote:
SurprisedByJoyce wrote:
Grumpygirl wrote:
This is the Tories continuing their campaign of killing off the NHS with a thousand cuts so that it can be privatised and turned into a money making machine for the big business 'health providers' who are mostly American.

The Tories are very keen on referendums. There should be one to let the country decide once and for all if health care should still be free or privatised. This will put a stop to the Tories underhand and dishonest manipulation of the NHS.

If we decide that health care is to be free for everyone, then, it's very simple, National Insurance will have to increase. By taxing everybody the risks are spread as widely as possible and an individuals overall cost would be much less than the price of private medical insurance
I'm with you. A referendum is a good idea. I do wish the Conservatives would come clean about their intentions for the NHS. This latest expensive reorganisation which seems to have caused so much backdoor privatisation wasn't even in their manifesto.

This week Coun. Cooke and his colleagues were demanding fewer GPs in Bradford despite Bradford being one of the worst places in the country for getting an appointment. I suppose this is Tory HQ's way of setting up more private practices. A bit of honesty wouldn't hurt.
We needed our GP's help this week and were seen straight away with our emergency without appointment.
It's not all bad.
I think the NHS still tries to do a good job, especially in emergencies. I find the problem comes with uncomfortable or painful non life-threatening conditions, then the queues just get longer and longer. I sometimes wonder if they think old people are worth treating at all.

When I asked why I had to wait so long for an appointment the receptionist told me that these days the doctors have to spend a lot of their time on committees deciding how to spend the NHS money. This seems silly to me, where is the advantage in turning doctors into accountants. Accountants can't fix my hip.
[quote][p][bold]Joedavid[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SurprisedByJoyce[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Grumpygirl[/bold] wrote: This is the Tories continuing their campaign of killing off the NHS with a thousand cuts so that it can be privatised and turned into a money making machine for the big business 'health providers' who are mostly American. The Tories are very keen on referendums. There should be one to let the country decide once and for all if health care should still be free or privatised. This will put a stop to the Tories underhand and dishonest manipulation of the NHS. If we decide that health care is to be free for everyone, then, it's very simple, National Insurance will have to increase. By taxing everybody the risks are spread as widely as possible and an individuals overall cost would be much less than the price of private medical insurance[/p][/quote]I'm with you. A referendum is a good idea. I do wish the Conservatives would come clean about their intentions for the NHS. This latest expensive reorganisation which seems to have caused so much backdoor privatisation wasn't even in their manifesto. This week Coun. Cooke and his colleagues were demanding fewer GPs in Bradford despite Bradford being one of the worst places in the country for getting an appointment. I suppose this is Tory HQ's way of setting up more private practices. A bit of honesty wouldn't hurt.[/p][/quote]We needed our GP's help this week and were seen straight away with our emergency without appointment. It's not all bad.[/p][/quote]I think the NHS still tries to do a good job, especially in emergencies. I find the problem comes with uncomfortable or painful non life-threatening conditions, then the queues just get longer and longer. I sometimes wonder if they think old people are worth treating at all. When I asked why I had to wait so long for an appointment the receptionist told me that these days the doctors have to spend a lot of their time on committees deciding how to spend the NHS money. This seems silly to me, where is the advantage in turning doctors into accountants. Accountants can't fix my hip. SurprisedByJoyce
  • Score: 14

5:31pm Wed 4 Jun 14

FinlandStation says...

A650 wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?
Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.
Margaret Thatcher would disagree with you there pal. She knew the value of the NHS and it wasn’t privatised by the back door on her watch. You’re just ranting rubbish and I suspect you’re just an internet troll.

Illness or injury isn’t a lifestyle choice.
Mrs Thatcher new the value of the NHS and its price also.

Her NHS Trusts were the first, very deliberate, step on the road to privatisation. She knew that this would not be popular so it has had to be done by stealth. Exactly the tactic being followed by the present Government who have no electoral mandate for the privatisation of any parts of the NHS.
[quote][p][bold]A650[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.[/p][/quote]What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?[/p][/quote]Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.[/p][/quote]Margaret Thatcher would disagree with you there pal. She knew the value of the NHS and it wasn’t privatised by the back door on her watch. You’re just ranting rubbish and I suspect you’re just an internet troll. Illness or injury isn’t a lifestyle choice.[/p][/quote]Mrs Thatcher new the value of the NHS and its price also. Her NHS Trusts were the first, very deliberate, step on the road to privatisation. She knew that this would not be popular so it has had to be done by stealth. Exactly the tactic being followed by the present Government who have no electoral mandate for the privatisation of any parts of the NHS. FinlandStation
  • Score: 2

6:09pm Wed 4 Jun 14

BD16 says...

Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?
Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.
So someone with cancer could be saved by surgery and drugs which cost in total £1m, gets left in a darkened room with a revolver on the table, because he only saved £950,000?
It's a hard fact but life belongs to the rich. It's only at the end of their existence that the lazy poor realise that they should have worked harder and not spent their life scrounging free stuff off the state. As Mrs Thatcher said you get, and deserve, what you work for.
You do indeed, but many people do vital work at the lower end of the wage scale, often they end up with long-term physical problems as a result. A company director couldn't get by without his rubbish being cleared or his tea-trolley lady or those who build and maintain his Rolls Royce and Rolex and his out of town (well out) mansion. So they are all as important to society as he is, some of them possibly more, and THEY probably can't afford the skilled services of those who can help you avoid tax bills or fair punishment for wrongdoing.
Albion. I'm surprised at you falling for this numpty. It's a wind up, roll and smoke or that other one, landless peasant was one of his names,or somebody similar creating a spoof account to post the sort of ultra right wing gibberish that nobody could ever take seriously.

I was talking to an American lady recently. Her daughter has married a Brit and moved over here, unfortunately she's developed cancer. Her mother couldn't praise the treatment she's getting on the NHS enough, she would have nothing like this in the US where they would have loads of insurance assessments before they even started to treat her. Made me proud to be British.
[quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.[/p][/quote]What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?[/p][/quote]Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.[/p][/quote]So someone with cancer could be saved by surgery and drugs which cost in total £1m, gets left in a darkened room with a revolver on the table, because he only saved £950,000?[/p][/quote]It's a hard fact but life belongs to the rich. It's only at the end of their existence that the lazy poor realise that they should have worked harder and not spent their life scrounging free stuff off the state. As Mrs Thatcher said you get, and deserve, what you work for.[/p][/quote]You do indeed, but many people do vital work at the lower end of the wage scale, often they end up with long-term physical problems as a result. A company director couldn't get by without his rubbish being cleared or his tea-trolley lady or those who build and maintain his Rolls Royce and Rolex and his out of town (well out) mansion. So they are all as important to society as he is, some of them possibly more, and THEY probably can't afford the skilled services of those who can help you avoid tax bills or fair punishment for wrongdoing.[/p][/quote]Albion. I'm surprised at you falling for this numpty. It's a wind up, roll and smoke or that other one, landless peasant was one of his names,or somebody similar creating a spoof account to post the sort of ultra right wing gibberish that nobody could ever take seriously. I was talking to an American lady recently. Her daughter has married a Brit and moved over here, unfortunately she's developed cancer. Her mother couldn't praise the treatment she's getting on the NHS enough, she would have nothing like this in the US where they would have loads of insurance assessments before they even started to treat her. Made me proud to be British. BD16
  • Score: 3

6:27pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Albion. says...

BD16 wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?
Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.
So someone with cancer could be saved by surgery and drugs which cost in total £1m, gets left in a darkened room with a revolver on the table, because he only saved £950,000?
It's a hard fact but life belongs to the rich. It's only at the end of their existence that the lazy poor realise that they should have worked harder and not spent their life scrounging free stuff off the state. As Mrs Thatcher said you get, and deserve, what you work for.
You do indeed, but many people do vital work at the lower end of the wage scale, often they end up with long-term physical problems as a result. A company director couldn't get by without his rubbish being cleared or his tea-trolley lady or those who build and maintain his Rolls Royce and Rolex and his out of town (well out) mansion. So they are all as important to society as he is, some of them possibly more, and THEY probably can't afford the skilled services of those who can help you avoid tax bills or fair punishment for wrongdoing.
Albion. I'm surprised at you falling for this numpty. It's a wind up, roll and smoke or that other one, landless peasant was one of his names,or somebody similar creating a spoof account to post the sort of ultra right wing gibberish that nobody could ever take seriously.

I was talking to an American lady recently. Her daughter has married a Brit and moved over here, unfortunately she's developed cancer. Her mother couldn't praise the treatment she's getting on the NHS enough, she would have nothing like this in the US where they would have loads of insurance assessments before they even started to treat her. Made me proud to be British.
That's true, I write a daily blog for a site in the US and people still say how they envy our health system, even with it's shortcomings.
Yes I was suspicious of that particular character but sometimes you just like an argument.
[quote][p][bold]BD16[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.[/p][/quote]What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?[/p][/quote]Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.[/p][/quote]So someone with cancer could be saved by surgery and drugs which cost in total £1m, gets left in a darkened room with a revolver on the table, because he only saved £950,000?[/p][/quote]It's a hard fact but life belongs to the rich. It's only at the end of their existence that the lazy poor realise that they should have worked harder and not spent their life scrounging free stuff off the state. As Mrs Thatcher said you get, and deserve, what you work for.[/p][/quote]You do indeed, but many people do vital work at the lower end of the wage scale, often they end up with long-term physical problems as a result. A company director couldn't get by without his rubbish being cleared or his tea-trolley lady or those who build and maintain his Rolls Royce and Rolex and his out of town (well out) mansion. So they are all as important to society as he is, some of them possibly more, and THEY probably can't afford the skilled services of those who can help you avoid tax bills or fair punishment for wrongdoing.[/p][/quote]Albion. I'm surprised at you falling for this numpty. It's a wind up, roll and smoke or that other one, landless peasant was one of his names,or somebody similar creating a spoof account to post the sort of ultra right wing gibberish that nobody could ever take seriously. I was talking to an American lady recently. Her daughter has married a Brit and moved over here, unfortunately she's developed cancer. Her mother couldn't praise the treatment she's getting on the NHS enough, she would have nothing like this in the US where they would have loads of insurance assessments before they even started to treat her. Made me proud to be British.[/p][/quote]That's true, I write a daily blog for a site in the US and people still say how they envy our health system, even with it's shortcomings. Yes I was suspicious of that particular character but sometimes you just like an argument. Albion.
  • Score: 2

6:34pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Grumpygirl says...

BD16 wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?
Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.
So someone with cancer could be saved by surgery and drugs which cost in total £1m, gets left in a darkened room with a revolver on the table, because he only saved £950,000?
It's a hard fact but life belongs to the rich. It's only at the end of their existence that the lazy poor realise that they should have worked harder and not spent their life scrounging free stuff off the state. As Mrs Thatcher said you get, and deserve, what you work for.
You do indeed, but many people do vital work at the lower end of the wage scale, often they end up with long-term physical problems as a result. A company director couldn't get by without his rubbish being cleared or his tea-trolley lady or those who build and maintain his Rolls Royce and Rolex and his out of town (well out) mansion. So they are all as important to society as he is, some of them possibly more, and THEY probably can't afford the skilled services of those who can help you avoid tax bills or fair punishment for wrongdoing.
Albion. I'm surprised at you falling for this numpty. It's a wind up, roll and smoke or that other one, landless peasant was one of his names,or somebody similar creating a spoof account to post the sort of ultra right wing gibberish that nobody could ever take seriously.

I was talking to an American lady recently. Her daughter has married a Brit and moved over here, unfortunately she's developed cancer. Her mother couldn't praise the treatment she's getting on the NHS enough, she would have nothing like this in the US where they would have loads of insurance assessments before they even started to treat her. Made me proud to be British.
Truly, Albion, BD16 is right. PC is a wind up. Even Daily Mail readers aren't that extreme. As a minor student of style, I'm not even convinced it's the same person each time. It'll be some journalist trying to get a book together; like that Henry Root bloke who wrote all those silly letters back in the 80's.

The best thing is to ignore the idiot. I do. Let's also hope that the T&A stops encouraging him by publishing his stuff. I think it's what the divine Margaret used to refer to as the “oxygen of publicity”. (And that is definitely the last time I quote that woman favourably.)
[quote][p][bold]BD16[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.[/p][/quote]What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?[/p][/quote]Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.[/p][/quote]So someone with cancer could be saved by surgery and drugs which cost in total £1m, gets left in a darkened room with a revolver on the table, because he only saved £950,000?[/p][/quote]It's a hard fact but life belongs to the rich. It's only at the end of their existence that the lazy poor realise that they should have worked harder and not spent their life scrounging free stuff off the state. As Mrs Thatcher said you get, and deserve, what you work for.[/p][/quote]You do indeed, but many people do vital work at the lower end of the wage scale, often they end up with long-term physical problems as a result. A company director couldn't get by without his rubbish being cleared or his tea-trolley lady or those who build and maintain his Rolls Royce and Rolex and his out of town (well out) mansion. So they are all as important to society as he is, some of them possibly more, and THEY probably can't afford the skilled services of those who can help you avoid tax bills or fair punishment for wrongdoing.[/p][/quote]Albion. I'm surprised at you falling for this numpty. It's a wind up, roll and smoke or that other one, landless peasant was one of his names,or somebody similar creating a spoof account to post the sort of ultra right wing gibberish that nobody could ever take seriously. I was talking to an American lady recently. Her daughter has married a Brit and moved over here, unfortunately she's developed cancer. Her mother couldn't praise the treatment she's getting on the NHS enough, she would have nothing like this in the US where they would have loads of insurance assessments before they even started to treat her. Made me proud to be British.[/p][/quote]Truly, Albion, BD16 is right. PC is a wind up. Even Daily Mail readers aren't that extreme. As a minor student of style, I'm not even convinced it's the same person each time. It'll be some journalist trying to get a book together; like that Henry Root bloke who wrote all those silly letters back in the 80's. The best thing is to ignore the idiot. I do. Let's also hope that the T&A stops encouraging him by publishing his stuff. I think it's what the divine Margaret used to refer to as the “oxygen of publicity”. (And that is definitely the last time I quote that woman favourably.) Grumpygirl
  • Score: 0

6:36pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Albion. says...

Grumpygirl wrote:
BD16 wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?
Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.
So someone with cancer could be saved by surgery and drugs which cost in total £1m, gets left in a darkened room with a revolver on the table, because he only saved £950,000?
It's a hard fact but life belongs to the rich. It's only at the end of their existence that the lazy poor realise that they should have worked harder and not spent their life scrounging free stuff off the state. As Mrs Thatcher said you get, and deserve, what you work for.
You do indeed, but many people do vital work at the lower end of the wage scale, often they end up with long-term physical problems as a result. A company director couldn't get by without his rubbish being cleared or his tea-trolley lady or those who build and maintain his Rolls Royce and Rolex and his out of town (well out) mansion. So they are all as important to society as he is, some of them possibly more, and THEY probably can't afford the skilled services of those who can help you avoid tax bills or fair punishment for wrongdoing.
Albion. I'm surprised at you falling for this numpty. It's a wind up, roll and smoke or that other one, landless peasant was one of his names,or somebody similar creating a spoof account to post the sort of ultra right wing gibberish that nobody could ever take seriously.

I was talking to an American lady recently. Her daughter has married a Brit and moved over here, unfortunately she's developed cancer. Her mother couldn't praise the treatment she's getting on the NHS enough, she would have nothing like this in the US where they would have loads of insurance assessments before they even started to treat her. Made me proud to be British.
Truly, Albion, BD16 is right. PC is a wind up. Even Daily Mail readers aren't that extreme. As a minor student of style, I'm not even convinced it's the same person each time. It'll be some journalist trying to get a book together; like that Henry Root bloke who wrote all those silly letters back in the 80's.

The best thing is to ignore the idiot. I do. Let's also hope that the T&A stops encouraging him by publishing his stuff. I think it's what the divine Margaret used to refer to as the “oxygen of publicity”. (And that is definitely the last time I quote that woman favourably.)
Probably another of the Baildon sock puppet collection.
[quote][p][bold]Grumpygirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BD16[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.[/p][/quote]What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?[/p][/quote]Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.[/p][/quote]So someone with cancer could be saved by surgery and drugs which cost in total £1m, gets left in a darkened room with a revolver on the table, because he only saved £950,000?[/p][/quote]It's a hard fact but life belongs to the rich. It's only at the end of their existence that the lazy poor realise that they should have worked harder and not spent their life scrounging free stuff off the state. As Mrs Thatcher said you get, and deserve, what you work for.[/p][/quote]You do indeed, but many people do vital work at the lower end of the wage scale, often they end up with long-term physical problems as a result. A company director couldn't get by without his rubbish being cleared or his tea-trolley lady or those who build and maintain his Rolls Royce and Rolex and his out of town (well out) mansion. So they are all as important to society as he is, some of them possibly more, and THEY probably can't afford the skilled services of those who can help you avoid tax bills or fair punishment for wrongdoing.[/p][/quote]Albion. I'm surprised at you falling for this numpty. It's a wind up, roll and smoke or that other one, landless peasant was one of his names,or somebody similar creating a spoof account to post the sort of ultra right wing gibberish that nobody could ever take seriously. I was talking to an American lady recently. Her daughter has married a Brit and moved over here, unfortunately she's developed cancer. Her mother couldn't praise the treatment she's getting on the NHS enough, she would have nothing like this in the US where they would have loads of insurance assessments before they even started to treat her. Made me proud to be British.[/p][/quote]Truly, Albion, BD16 is right. PC is a wind up. Even Daily Mail readers aren't that extreme. As a minor student of style, I'm not even convinced it's the same person each time. It'll be some journalist trying to get a book together; like that Henry Root bloke who wrote all those silly letters back in the 80's. The best thing is to ignore the idiot. I do. Let's also hope that the T&A stops encouraging him by publishing his stuff. I think it's what the divine Margaret used to refer to as the “oxygen of publicity”. (And that is definitely the last time I quote that woman favourably.)[/p][/quote]Probably another of the Baildon sock puppet collection. Albion.
  • Score: 2

6:43pm Wed 4 Jun 14

Grumpygirl says...

Albion. wrote:
BD16 wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
Albion. wrote:
pcmanners wrote:
There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine.

The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.
What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?
Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.
So someone with cancer could be saved by surgery and drugs which cost in total £1m, gets left in a darkened room with a revolver on the table, because he only saved £950,000?
It's a hard fact but life belongs to the rich. It's only at the end of their existence that the lazy poor realise that they should have worked harder and not spent their life scrounging free stuff off the state. As Mrs Thatcher said you get, and deserve, what you work for.
You do indeed, but many people do vital work at the lower end of the wage scale, often they end up with long-term physical problems as a result. A company director couldn't get by without his rubbish being cleared or his tea-trolley lady or those who build and maintain his Rolls Royce and Rolex and his out of town (well out) mansion. So they are all as important to society as he is, some of them possibly more, and THEY probably can't afford the skilled services of those who can help you avoid tax bills or fair punishment for wrongdoing.
Albion. I'm surprised at you falling for this numpty. It's a wind up, roll and smoke or that other one, landless peasant was one of his names,or somebody similar creating a spoof account to post the sort of ultra right wing gibberish that nobody could ever take seriously.

I was talking to an American lady recently. Her daughter has married a Brit and moved over here, unfortunately she's developed cancer. Her mother couldn't praise the treatment she's getting on the NHS enough, she would have nothing like this in the US where they would have loads of insurance assessments before they even started to treat her. Made me proud to be British.
That's true, I write a daily blog for a site in the US and people still say how they envy our health system, even with it's shortcomings.
Yes I was suspicious of that particular character but sometimes you just like an argument.
I too meet Americans who are in despair over their health system, which they regard as irreparably broken, and who would like something a lot closer to the European model. So why do the Tories so keen on turning the NHS into an American style system. Could it have anything to do with the profits that can be made?
[quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BD16[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pcmanners[/bold] wrote: There is no point in prolonging the agony, the NHS is falling apart as do all misguided socialist schemes that try to replace the market. Everything has to be paid for, including health care. The Government has very nearly privatised the NHS and after the next election the pretence of free care will be entirely abolished and replaced by private medicine. The poor can then decide whether to buy medical insurance or Sky TV and super lager. The choice will be theirs.[/p][/quote]What about those who have a chronic illness or are elderly and can't get medical insurance?[/p][/quote]Tough. They should have saved. It is not the job of the state to bail out those who won't shift for themselves. Poverty is a lifestyle choice. Mrs Thatcher understood this.[/p][/quote]So someone with cancer could be saved by surgery and drugs which cost in total £1m, gets left in a darkened room with a revolver on the table, because he only saved £950,000?[/p][/quote]It's a hard fact but life belongs to the rich. It's only at the end of their existence that the lazy poor realise that they should have worked harder and not spent their life scrounging free stuff off the state. As Mrs Thatcher said you get, and deserve, what you work for.[/p][/quote]You do indeed, but many people do vital work at the lower end of the wage scale, often they end up with long-term physical problems as a result. A company director couldn't get by without his rubbish being cleared or his tea-trolley lady or those who build and maintain his Rolls Royce and Rolex and his out of town (well out) mansion. So they are all as important to society as he is, some of them possibly more, and THEY probably can't afford the skilled services of those who can help you avoid tax bills or fair punishment for wrongdoing.[/p][/quote]Albion. I'm surprised at you falling for this numpty. It's a wind up, roll and smoke or that other one, landless peasant was one of his names,or somebody similar creating a spoof account to post the sort of ultra right wing gibberish that nobody could ever take seriously. I was talking to an American lady recently. Her daughter has married a Brit and moved over here, unfortunately she's developed cancer. Her mother couldn't praise the treatment she's getting on the NHS enough, she would have nothing like this in the US where they would have loads of insurance assessments before they even started to treat her. Made me proud to be British.[/p][/quote]That's true, I write a daily blog for a site in the US and people still say how they envy our health system, even with it's shortcomings. Yes I was suspicious of that particular character but sometimes you just like an argument.[/p][/quote]I too meet Americans who are in despair over their health system, which they regard as irreparably broken, and who would like something a lot closer to the European model. So why do the Tories so keen on turning the NHS into an American style system. Could it have anything to do with the profits that can be made? Grumpygirl
  • Score: 1

10:48pm Wed 4 Jun 14

voiceforyouth says...

1) Get rid of the all the pointless extra management tiers
2) Have a basic contribution for all prescriptions
3) Have a deposit of £5 for all appointments you miss your appointment you don't get your deposit back, help cut all missed appointments
4) Every tourist to have medical insurance before entering country
5) Invest in more nurses
6) Lower payments on compensation
7) have more GP's in hospitals. to many people going with issues that can be solved at home.
8) Invest in community first aid training sessions, schools, colleges.
This is a start of increasing savings.
1) Get rid of the all the pointless extra management tiers 2) Have a basic contribution for all prescriptions 3) Have a deposit of £5 for all appointments you miss your appointment you don't get your deposit back, help cut all missed appointments 4) Every tourist to have medical insurance before entering country 5) Invest in more nurses 6) Lower payments on compensation 7) have more GP's in hospitals. to many people going with issues that can be solved at home. 8) Invest in community first aid training sessions, schools, colleges. This is a start of increasing savings. voiceforyouth
  • Score: 2

2:29pm Thu 5 Jun 14

basil fawlty says...

voiceforyouth wrote:
1) Get rid of the all the pointless extra management tiers 2) Have a basic contribution for all prescriptions 3) Have a deposit of £5 for all appointments you miss your appointment you don't get your deposit back, help cut all missed appointments 4) Every tourist to have medical insurance before entering country 5) Invest in more nurses 6) Lower payments on compensation 7) have more GP's in hospitals. to many people going with issues that can be solved at home. 8) Invest in community first aid training sessions, schools, colleges. This is a start of increasing savings.
Short term measures are fine but in the long term they should get rid of the dilapidated BRI and build a new modern hospital with up to date wards and other facilities such as decent parking, in a location that ambulances and the general public can access more easily. The BRI would have been knocked down decades ago if it had been in any other major city.
[quote][p][bold]voiceforyouth[/bold] wrote: 1) Get rid of the all the pointless extra management tiers 2) Have a basic contribution for all prescriptions 3) Have a deposit of £5 for all appointments you miss your appointment you don't get your deposit back, help cut all missed appointments 4) Every tourist to have medical insurance before entering country 5) Invest in more nurses 6) Lower payments on compensation 7) have more GP's in hospitals. to many people going with issues that can be solved at home. 8) Invest in community first aid training sessions, schools, colleges. This is a start of increasing savings.[/p][/quote]Short term measures are fine but in the long term they should get rid of the dilapidated BRI and build a new modern hospital with up to date wards and other facilities such as decent parking, in a location that ambulances and the general public can access more easily. The BRI would have been knocked down decades ago if it had been in any other major city. basil fawlty
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree