Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Brexit
Jun 18, 2019 15:47:47 GMT 1
Brexit, by Deleted on Jun 18, 2019 15:47:47 GMT 1, I never said "Tories good, Labour bad". I said the Tories are trusted far more on the economy than Labour. And they are. That's not just my view. That's the view of the general public. Right so. Could you tell me why it is you think the party who want to sell the nhs will be better than the party who don't want to. Especially in a post brexit firestorm?
I never said "Tories good, Labour bad". I said the Tories are trusted far more on the economy than Labour. And they are. That's not just my view. That's the view of the general public. Right so. Could you tell me why it is you think the party who want to sell the nhs will be better than the party who don't want to. Especially in a post brexit firestorm? Nobody wants to "sell" the NHS, not even the Tories. But sometimes it makes sense to contact out certain operations to private companies, for the sake of the patient as much as anything else. I think we have to get away from this naive and simplistic concept that private = bad and public = good. There is a huge amount of wastage attached to the NHS; I know I used to work in the NHS. It's also worth pointing out that the NHS is not free. We all pay for it and we all deserve value for money. If the NHS was scrapped and the money we all saved from scrapping the NHS was then handed over in premiums for private health insurance then perhaps we would all be better off. The NHS is not some sacred cow that must be preserved no matter what and regardless of how many billions we keep throwing at it. |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Brexit
Jun 18, 2019 15:58:27 GMT 1
Brexit, by Deleted on Jun 18, 2019 15:58:27 GMT 1, I normally admire YouGov but this is an appallingly badly worded question. I personally wouldn't know how to answer it. What about if you don't give a damn about the integrity of the Tory party but still dread a Labour government? What about if you believe in Scottish independence regardless of being a Conservative or Labour voter? Or if you believe in the reunification of the island of Ireland? Or how about if you believe that labour will cause even more significant damage to the UK economy than the Tories?
I normally admire YouGov but this is an appallingly badly worded question. I personally wouldn't know how to answer it. What about if you don't give a damn about the integrity of the Tory party but still dread a Labour government? What about if you believe in Scottish independence regardless of being a Conservative or Labour voter? Or if you believe in the reunification of the island of Ireland? Or how about if you believe that labour will cause even more significant damage to the UK economy than the Tories? |
|
|
|
Brexit
Jun 18, 2019 16:12:41 GMT 1
Brexit, by Happy Shopper on Jun 18, 2019 16:12:41 GMT 1, Right so. Could you tell me why it is you think the party who want to sell the nhs will be better than the party who don't want to. Especially in a post brexit firestorm? Nobody wants to "sell" the NHS, not even the Tories. But sometimes it makes sense to contact out certain operations to private companies, for the sake of the patient as much as anything else. I think we have to get away from this naive and simplistic concept that private = bad and public = good. There is a huge amount of wastage attached to the NHS; I know I used to work in the NHS. It's also worth pointing out that the NHS is not free. We all pay for it and we all deserve value for money. If the NHS was scrapped and the money we all saved from scrapping the NHS was then handed over in premiums for private health insurance then perhaps we would all be better off. The NHS is not some sacred cow that must be preserved no matter what and regardless of how many billions we keep throwing at it.
Needs less wastage, yes, but paying for services from companies that have to make a profit for shareholders would never make financial sense. I can't see how that could ever be cheaper.
Right so. Could you tell me why it is you think the party who want to sell the nhs will be better than the party who don't want to. Especially in a post brexit firestorm? Nobody wants to "sell" the NHS, not even the Tories. But sometimes it makes sense to contact out certain operations to private companies, for the sake of the patient as much as anything else. I think we have to get away from this naive and simplistic concept that private = bad and public = good. There is a huge amount of wastage attached to the NHS; I know I used to work in the NHS. It's also worth pointing out that the NHS is not free. We all pay for it and we all deserve value for money. If the NHS was scrapped and the money we all saved from scrapping the NHS was then handed over in premiums for private health insurance then perhaps we would all be better off. The NHS is not some sacred cow that must be preserved no matter what and regardless of how many billions we keep throwing at it. Needs less wastage, yes, but paying for services from companies that have to make a profit for shareholders would never make financial sense. I can't see how that could ever be cheaper. |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Brexit
Jun 18, 2019 16:32:05 GMT 1
Brexit, by Deleted on Jun 18, 2019 16:32:05 GMT 1, Nobody wants to "sell" the NHS, not even the Tories. But sometimes it makes sense to contact out certain operations to private companies, for the sake of the patient as much as anything else. I think we have to get away from this naive and simplistic concept that private = bad and public = good. There is a huge amount of wastage attached to the NHS; I know I used to work in the NHS. It's also worth pointing out that the NHS is not free. We all pay for it and we all deserve value for money. If the NHS was scrapped and the money we all saved from scrapping the NHS was then handed over in premiums for private health insurance then perhaps we would all be better off. The NHS is not some sacred cow that must be preserved no matter what and regardless of how many billions we keep throwing at it. Needs less wastage, yes, but paying for services from companies that have to make a profit for shareholders would never make financial sense. I can't see how that could ever be cheaper.
But profits will happen regardless anyway. Drug companies make millions out of the NHS every year, as do companies that make hospital equipment, mobility aids, cleaning products, food distributers etc. etc.
Nobody wants to "sell" the NHS, not even the Tories. But sometimes it makes sense to contact out certain operations to private companies, for the sake of the patient as much as anything else. I think we have to get away from this naive and simplistic concept that private = bad and public = good. There is a huge amount of wastage attached to the NHS; I know I used to work in the NHS. It's also worth pointing out that the NHS is not free. We all pay for it and we all deserve value for money. If the NHS was scrapped and the money we all saved from scrapping the NHS was then handed over in premiums for private health insurance then perhaps we would all be better off. The NHS is not some sacred cow that must be preserved no matter what and regardless of how many billions we keep throwing at it. Needs less wastage, yes, but paying for services from companies that have to make a profit for shareholders would never make financial sense. I can't see how that could ever be cheaper. Profit does not automatically mean higher prices. It may sound counter-intuitive but the opposite could, in theory, also be true. Aldi sell incredibly cheap food and still make huge profits. If Aldi was a public run company, food items would not necessarily go down in price. But profits will happen regardless anyway. Drug companies make millions out of the NHS every year, as do companies that make hospital equipment, mobility aids, cleaning products, food distributers etc. etc. |
|
|
|
Brexit
Jun 18, 2019 16:41:32 GMT 1
Brexit, by Bill Hicks on Jun 18, 2019 16:41:32 GMT 1, Sooooooooooooooooooo For the record, you think that the disaster capitalists who are in power now are going to be better at dealing with the clusterf**kof post brexit to a group of people who are opposed to selling everything off to various dodgy states and corporations and would prefer to nationalise them instead? Yes. Absolutely. In fact, according to the polls, most people do. When asked about the economy, Labour consistently poll really badly against the Tories.
The Tories also stay quiet on private debt, they also have little to say about the ‘other’ deficit — the current account deficit. This is a measure of how much the country is reliant on foreigners to finance our spending. The deficit expanded from 2011 onward to reach almost 5% of GDP. This is an important source of vulnerability for a country which is about to try and extricate itself from economic integration with its closest neighbours.
The Tories present themselves, as the party of economic competence — and the media dutifully echoes the message. The truth is that the Tories have mismanaged the economy for the last nine years, needlessly imposing austerity, choking off growth in productivity, wages and incomes. They then called an entirely unnecessary referendum, gambling the future prosperity of the country for political gain.
Sooooooooooooooooooo For the record, you think that the disaster capitalists who are in power now are going to be better at dealing with the clusterf**kof post brexit to a group of people who are opposed to selling everything off to various dodgy states and corporations and would prefer to nationalise them instead? Yes. Absolutely. In fact, according to the polls, most people do. When asked about the economy, Labour consistently poll really badly against the Tories. The Tories economic record is: stagnant wages and productivity, weak investment and manufacturing, rising household debt, and a large external deficit. The Tories also stay quiet on private debt, they also have little to say about the ‘other’ deficit — the current account deficit. This is a measure of how much the country is reliant on foreigners to finance our spending. The deficit expanded from 2011 onward to reach almost 5% of GDP. This is an important source of vulnerability for a country which is about to try and extricate itself from economic integration with its closest neighbours. The Tories present themselves, as the party of economic competence — and the media dutifully echoes the message. The truth is that the Tories have mismanaged the economy for the last nine years, needlessly imposing austerity, choking off growth in productivity, wages and incomes. They then called an entirely unnecessary referendum, gambling the future prosperity of the country for political gain. |
|
|
|
Brexit
Jun 18, 2019 16:42:51 GMT 1
Brexit, by Happy Shopper on Jun 18, 2019 16:42:51 GMT 1, Needs less wastage, yes, but paying for services from companies that have to make a profit for shareholders would never make financial sense. I can't see how that could ever be cheaper. Profit does not automatically mean higher prices. It may sound counter-intuitive but the opposite could, in theory, also be true. Aldi sell incredibly cheap food and still make huge profits. If Aldi was a public run company, food items would not necessarily go down in price. But profits will happen regardless anyway. Drug companies make millions out of the NHS every year, as do companies that make hospital equipment, mobility aids, cleaning products, food distributers etc. etc.
What are you talking about? If things cost the same, only the NHS doesn't need to charge the extra for the profit, then obviously they can supply cheaper.
And just check out the issue with prices in the US to see how the NHS holds prices down for all those things you listed.
It's just common sense that, as they're a monopoly, they can demand a better price for supplying the whole country. Private hospitals don't have that leverage.
The NHS is not perfect, but Big Pharma is the real problem we all face.
Needs less wastage, yes, but paying for services from companies that have to make a profit for shareholders would never make financial sense. I can't see how that could ever be cheaper. Profit does not automatically mean higher prices. It may sound counter-intuitive but the opposite could, in theory, also be true. Aldi sell incredibly cheap food and still make huge profits. If Aldi was a public run company, food items would not necessarily go down in price. But profits will happen regardless anyway. Drug companies make millions out of the NHS every year, as do companies that make hospital equipment, mobility aids, cleaning products, food distributers etc. etc. What are you talking about? If things cost the same, only the NHS doesn't need to charge the extra for the profit, then obviously they can supply cheaper. And just check out the issue with prices in the US to see how the NHS holds prices down for all those things you listed. It's just common sense that, as they're a monopoly, they can demand a better price for supplying the whole country. Private hospitals don't have that leverage. The NHS is not perfect, but Big Pharma is the real problem we all face. |
|
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Brexit
Jun 18, 2019 17:25:27 GMT 1
Brexit, by Deleted on Jun 18, 2019 17:25:27 GMT 1, "..only the NHS doesn't need to charge the extra for the profit, then obviously they can supply cheaper."
This is where socialist ideology breaks down. It is not a given that a publicly operated company will provide goods and services at a cheaper rate than a privately owned company even taking in to consideration profits to shareholders. Other factors also come in to play, like efficiency and productivity and the encouragement of innovation. There is *no* incentive for publicly owned companies to become more efficient or more cost-effective. This happened in the old Soviet Union. The whole economy was collapsing under government ownership and so, as an experiment, they started to allow some small businesses to keep their own profits. Suddenly things started looking up and more people were able to buy more goods and at cheaper prices...which in turn brought more money in to central government coffers and greater prosperity to the country as a whole.
"..only the NHS doesn't need to charge the extra for the profit, then obviously they can supply cheaper."
This is where socialist ideology breaks down. It is not a given that a publicly operated company will provide goods and services at a cheaper rate than a privately owned company even taking in to consideration profits to shareholders. Other factors also come in to play, like efficiency and productivity and the encouragement of innovation. There is *no* incentive for publicly owned companies to become more efficient or more cost-effective. This happened in the old Soviet Union. The whole economy was collapsing under government ownership and so, as an experiment, they started to allow some small businesses to keep their own profits. Suddenly things started looking up and more people were able to buy more goods and at cheaper prices...which in turn brought more money in to central government coffers and greater prosperity to the country as a whole.
|
|
|
|
Brexit
Jun 18, 2019 17:26:41 GMT 1
via mobile
Brexit, by Daylight Robber on Jun 18, 2019 17:26:41 GMT 1, I normally admire YouGov but this is an appallingly badly worded question. I personally wouldn't know how to answer it. What about if you don't give a damn about the integrity of the Tory party but still dread a Labour government? What about if you believe in Scottish independence regardless of being a Conservative or Labour voter? Or if you believe in the reunification of the island of Ireland? Or how about if you believe that labour will cause even more significant damage to the UK economy than the Tories?
The people questioned are members of the Conservative and Unionist Party FFS.
I normally admire YouGov but this is an appallingly badly worded question. I personally wouldn't know how to answer it. What about if you don't give a damn about the integrity of the Tory party but still dread a Labour government? What about if you believe in Scottish independence regardless of being a Conservative or Labour voter? Or if you believe in the reunification of the island of Ireland? Or how about if you believe that labour will cause even more significant damage to the UK economy than the Tories? The people questioned are members of the Conservative and Unionist Party FFS. |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Brexit
Jun 18, 2019 17:32:08 GMT 1
Brexit, by Deleted on Jun 18, 2019 17:32:08 GMT 1, I normally admire YouGov but this is an appallingly badly worded question. I personally wouldn't know how to answer it. What about if you don't give a damn about the integrity of the Tory party but still dread a Labour government? What about if you believe in Scottish independence regardless of being a Conservative or Labour voter? Or if you believe in the reunification of the island of Ireland? Or how about if you believe that labour will cause even more significant damage to the UK economy than the Tories? The people questioned are members of the Conservative and Unionist Party FFS.
I normally admire YouGov but this is an appallingly badly worded question. I personally wouldn't know how to answer it. What about if you don't give a damn about the integrity of the Tory party but still dread a Labour government? What about if you believe in Scottish independence regardless of being a Conservative or Labour voter? Or if you believe in the reunification of the island of Ireland? Or how about if you believe that labour will cause even more significant damage to the UK economy than the Tories? The people questioned are members of the Conservative and Unionist Party FFS. Yes, I know. You can be a Conservative and still believe in Scottish independence. You can be a Conservative and still believe that things are not dependant upon Scotland and Northern Ireland remaining part of the UK. You can be a Conservative and still believe there are more important things at stake here than a significant improvement in the economy. |
|
|
|
Brexit
Jun 18, 2019 17:37:14 GMT 1
Brexit, by Happy Shopper on Jun 18, 2019 17:37:14 GMT 1, " ..only the NHS doesn't need to charge the extra for the profit, then obviously they can supply cheaper."
This is where socialist ideology breaks down. It is not a given that a publicly operated company will provide goods and services at a cheaper rate than a privately owned company even taking in to consideration profits to shareholders. Other factors also come in to play, like efficiency and productivity and the encouragement of innovation. There is *no* incentive for publicly owned companies to become more efficient or more cost-effective. This happened in the old Soviet Union. The whole economy was collapsing under government ownership and so, as an experiment, they started to allow some small businesses to keep their own profits. Suddenly things started looking up and more people were able to buy more goods and at cheaper prices...which in turn brought more money in to central government coffers and greater prosperity to the country as a whole.
haha... Yes, something badly run, and corrupt, is not going to be better than something well run. That's common sense.
But you can't assume that private companies will be better run, more efficient or cheaper either.
It hasn't worked for the trains in the UK.
" ..only the NHS doesn't need to charge the extra for the profit, then obviously they can supply cheaper."
This is where socialist ideology breaks down. It is not a given that a publicly operated company will provide goods and services at a cheaper rate than a privately owned company even taking in to consideration profits to shareholders. Other factors also come in to play, like efficiency and productivity and the encouragement of innovation. There is *no* incentive for publicly owned companies to become more efficient or more cost-effective. This happened in the old Soviet Union. The whole economy was collapsing under government ownership and so, as an experiment, they started to allow some small businesses to keep their own profits. Suddenly things started looking up and more people were able to buy more goods and at cheaper prices...which in turn brought more money in to central government coffers and greater prosperity to the country as a whole. haha... Yes, something badly run, and corrupt, is not going to be better than something well run. That's common sense. But you can't assume that private companies will be better run, more efficient or cheaper either. It hasn't worked for the trains in the UK. |
|
|
|
Brexit
Jun 18, 2019 17:47:36 GMT 1
via mobile
Brexit, by Daylight Robber on Jun 18, 2019 17:47:36 GMT 1, The people questioned are members of the Conservative and Unionist Party FFS. Yes, I know. You can be a Conservative and still believe in Scottish independence. You can be a Conservative and still believe that things are not dependant upon Scotland and Northern Ireland remaining part of the UK. You can be a Conservative and still believe there are more important things at stake here than a significant improvement in the economy.
I'd respectfully suggest that party members should believe in protecting the Union pretty much above all else.
Edit. And the fact that a majority would happily see the destruction of the party of which they are members is absolutely ludicrous.
The people questioned are members of the Conservative and Unionist Party FFS. Yes, I know. You can be a Conservative and still believe in Scottish independence. You can be a Conservative and still believe that things are not dependant upon Scotland and Northern Ireland remaining part of the UK. You can be a Conservative and still believe there are more important things at stake here than a significant improvement in the economy. I'd respectfully suggest that party members should believe in protecting the Union pretty much above all else. Edit. And the fact that a majority would happily see the destruction of the party of which they are members is absolutely ludicrous. |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Brexit
Jun 18, 2019 18:26:26 GMT 1
Brexit, by Deleted on Jun 18, 2019 18:26:26 GMT 1, " ..only the NHS doesn't need to charge the extra for the profit, then obviously they can supply cheaper."
This is where socialist ideology breaks down. It is not a given that a publicly operated company will provide goods and services at a cheaper rate than a privately owned company even taking in to consideration profits to shareholders. Other factors also come in to play, like efficiency and productivity and the encouragement of innovation. There is *no* incentive for publicly owned companies to become more efficient or more cost-effective. This happened in the old Soviet Union. The whole economy was collapsing under government ownership and so, as an experiment, they started to allow some small businesses to keep their own profits. Suddenly things started looking up and more people were able to buy more goods and at cheaper prices...which in turn brought more money in to central government coffers and greater prosperity to the country as a whole. haha... Yes, something badly run, and corrupt, is not going to be better than something well run. That's common sense. But you can't assume that private companies will be better run, more efficient or cheaper either. It hasn't worked for the trains in the UK.
"Yes, something badly run, and corrupt, is not going to be better than something well run. That's common sense."
Exactly. A badly run NHS is going to be worse than a well run private hospital. I'm glad to see you realise that is common sense.
" ..only the NHS doesn't need to charge the extra for the profit, then obviously they can supply cheaper."
This is where socialist ideology breaks down. It is not a given that a publicly operated company will provide goods and services at a cheaper rate than a privately owned company even taking in to consideration profits to shareholders. Other factors also come in to play, like efficiency and productivity and the encouragement of innovation. There is *no* incentive for publicly owned companies to become more efficient or more cost-effective. This happened in the old Soviet Union. The whole economy was collapsing under government ownership and so, as an experiment, they started to allow some small businesses to keep their own profits. Suddenly things started looking up and more people were able to buy more goods and at cheaper prices...which in turn brought more money in to central government coffers and greater prosperity to the country as a whole. haha... Yes, something badly run, and corrupt, is not going to be better than something well run. That's common sense. But you can't assume that private companies will be better run, more efficient or cheaper either. It hasn't worked for the trains in the UK. On the contrary. I am old enough to remember when the trains were all publicly owned. I have traumatic flashbacks of everyone standing in an overcrowded train on my way to work with all the seats ripped to shreds with springs hanging out of them. You don't get that anymore, thank goodness. And that's all down to privatisation. " Yes, something badly run, and corrupt, is not going to be better than something well run. That's common sense." Exactly. A badly run NHS is going to be worse than a well run private hospital. I'm glad to see you realise that is common sense. |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Brexit
Jun 18, 2019 18:31:25 GMT 1
Brexit, by Deleted on Jun 18, 2019 18:31:25 GMT 1, Yes, I know. You can be a Conservative and still believe in Scottish independence. You can be a Conservative and still believe that things are not dependant upon Scotland and Northern Ireland remaining part of the UK. You can be a Conservative and still believe there are more important things at stake here than a significant improvement in the economy. I'd respectfully suggest that party members should believe in protecting the Union pretty much above all else. Edit. And the fact that a majority would happily see the destruction of the party of which they are members is absolutely ludicrous.
Incidentally, why should protecting the union be thought of as more important than anything else? I'm sure a lot of Scottish Tories and Scottish Labour Party voters would strongly disagree with you.
Yes, I know. You can be a Conservative and still believe in Scottish independence. You can be a Conservative and still believe that things are not dependant upon Scotland and Northern Ireland remaining part of the UK. You can be a Conservative and still believe there are more important things at stake here than a significant improvement in the economy. I'd respectfully suggest that party members should believe in protecting the Union pretty much above all else. Edit. And the fact that a majority would happily see the destruction of the party of which they are members is absolutely ludicrous. I was simply pointing out that the graph posted had very limited options. The options in each case were either a or b when they should have been a, b, c or d. Incidentally, why should protecting the union be thought of as more important than anything else? I'm sure a lot of Scottish Tories and Scottish Labour Party voters would strongly disagree with you. |
|
|
|
Brexit
Jun 18, 2019 19:35:13 GMT 1
Brexit, by Bill Hicks on Jun 18, 2019 19:35:13 GMT 1, haha... Yes, something badly run, and corrupt, is not going to be better than something well run. That's common sense. But you can't assume that private companies will be better run, more efficient or cheaper either. It hasn't worked for the trains in the UK. On the contrary. I am old enough to remember when the trains were all publicly owned. I have traumatic flashbacks of everyone standing in an overcrowded train on my way to work with all the seats ripped to shreds with springs hanging out of them. You don't get that anymore, thank goodness. And that's all down to privatisation. Since privatisation, the bill has been shared between the taxpayer and the passenger. The contribution from the state has almost doubled from £2.3bn in 1996 to £4.2bn in real terms in 2016-17, despite a conscious decision in recent years to push more of the cost on to users’ shoulders. Ticket prices have risen: they are now 25 per cent higher in real terms than in 1995 and 30 per cent higher than in France, Holland, Sweden and Switzerland. The latest average rise in fares of 3.4 per cent was greeted with outrage.
Journeys are often uncomfortable: 23 per cent of customers commuting into London at peak hours have to stand. According to the consumer group Which?, delays of at least 30 minutes afflicted more than 7m journeys last year.
Privatisation was supposed to unleash efficiencies that would justify the returns private operators demand for their services. So why, more than two decades in, have the UK’s railways not delivered more.
When National Express handed back the keys to the East Coast line franchise in 2009, it was renationalised the following five years under state control, it increased ticket sales, returned about £1bn to the taxpayer and delivered record levels of customer satisfaction.
haha... Yes, something badly run, and corrupt, is not going to be better than something well run. That's common sense. But you can't assume that private companies will be better run, more efficient or cheaper either. It hasn't worked for the trains in the UK. On the contrary. I am old enough to remember when the trains were all publicly owned. I have traumatic flashbacks of everyone standing in an overcrowded train on my way to work with all the seats ripped to shreds with springs hanging out of them. You don't get that anymore, thank goodness. And that's all down to privatisation. Since privatisation, the bill has been shared between the taxpayer and the passenger. The contribution from the state has almost doubled from £2.3bn in 1996 to £4.2bn in real terms in 2016-17, despite a conscious decision in recent years to push more of the cost on to users’ shoulders. Ticket prices have risen: they are now 25 per cent higher in real terms than in 1995 and 30 per cent higher than in France, Holland, Sweden and Switzerland. The latest average rise in fares of 3.4 per cent was greeted with outrage.
Journeys are often uncomfortable: 23 per cent of customers commuting into London at peak hours have to stand. According to the consumer group Which?, delays of at least 30 minutes afflicted more than 7m journeys last year. Privatisation was supposed to unleash efficiencies that would justify the returns private operators demand for their services. So why, more than two decades in, have the UK’s railways not delivered more.
When National Express handed back the keys to the East Coast line franchise in 2009, it was renationalised the following five years under state control, it increased ticket sales, returned about £1bn to the taxpayer and delivered record levels of customer satisfaction. |
|
|
|
lorraballs
New Member
🗨️ 215
👍🏻 198
September 2012
|
Brexit
Jun 18, 2019 22:11:42 GMT 1
Brexit, by lorraballs on Jun 18, 2019 22:11:42 GMT 1, haha... Yes, something badly run, and corrupt, is not going to be better than something well run. That's common sense. But you can't assume that private companies will be better run, more efficient or cheaper either. It hasn't worked for the trains in the UK. On the contrary. I am old enough to remember when the trains were all publicly owned. I have traumatic flashbacks of everyone standing in an overcrowded train on my way to work with all the seats ripped to shreds with springs hanging out of them. You don't get that anymore, thank goodness. And that's all down to privatisation. " Yes, something badly run, and corrupt, is not going to be better than something well run. That's common sense." Exactly. A badly run NHS is going to be worse than a well run private hospital. I'm glad to see you realise that is common sense.
haha... Yes, something badly run, and corrupt, is not going to be better than something well run. That's common sense. But you can't assume that private companies will be better run, more efficient or cheaper either. It hasn't worked for the trains in the UK. On the contrary. I am old enough to remember when the trains were all publicly owned. I have traumatic flashbacks of everyone standing in an overcrowded train on my way to work with all the seats ripped to shreds with springs hanging out of them. You don't get that anymore, thank goodness. And that's all down to privatisation. " Yes, something badly run, and corrupt, is not going to be better than something well run. That's common sense." Exactly. A badly run NHS is going to be worse than a well run private hospital. I'm glad to see you realise that is common sense. These ‘well it was shit back then so it’ll be shit now’ are moronic. The 70’s are nearly 50 years ago. 50 years before that was the 1920’s. Things change. Technology changes. Global geopolitics change. Everything changes. The only constant is that the rich get richer and the rest of us pay the price. |
|
Leo Boyd
Artist
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,476
👍🏻 2,090
June 2016
|
Brexit
Jun 18, 2019 23:21:13 GMT 1
Brexit, by Leo Boyd on Jun 18, 2019 23:21:13 GMT 1, Just in the interest of transparency, today warchet sent me a pm that said
Well done on being the forums biggest arse wipe
Which would be fine I guess if he had posted it in this thread but... I dunno I find that kind of behavior pretty weird.
Anyways cheers warchet
I hope you are doing well wherever you are.
Just in the interest of transparency, today warchet sent me a pm that said
Well done on being the forums biggest arse wipe
Which would be fine I guess if he had posted it in this thread but... I dunno I find that kind of behavior pretty weird.
Anyways cheers warchet
I hope you are doing well wherever you are.
|
|
moron
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,711
👍🏻 1,051
September 2017
|
Brexit
Jun 23, 2019 20:37:46 GMT 1
Brexit, by moron on Jun 23, 2019 20:37:46 GMT 1, Just in the interest of transparency, today warchet sent me a pm that said Well done on being the forums biggest arse wipe Which would be fine I guess if he had posted it in this thread but... I dunno I find that kind of behavior pretty weird. Anyways cheers warchet I hope you are doing well wherever you are.
I've been called worse
Just in the interest of transparency, today warchet sent me a pm that said Well done on being the forums biggest arse wipe Which would be fine I guess if he had posted it in this thread but... I dunno I find that kind of behavior pretty weird. Anyways cheers warchet I hope you are doing well wherever you are. I've been called worse |
|
moron
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,711
👍🏻 1,051
September 2017
|
Brexit
Jun 23, 2019 20:42:21 GMT 1
Brexit, by moron on Jun 23, 2019 20:42:21 GMT 1, I'm not sure what this image is supposed to be telling me. Could you explain? My guess would be there should be room for everyone….
I'm not sure what this image is supposed to be telling me. Could you explain? My guess would be there should be room for everyone…. Including Hells Angels |
|
moron
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,711
👍🏻 1,051
September 2017
|
Brexit
Jun 23, 2019 20:47:53 GMT 1
Brexit, by moron on Jun 23, 2019 20:47:53 GMT 1, This is the world I want Not some gammon inspired universe of white fat old men telling me to hate everything and everyone that doesn’t fit their narrow pathetic world view ✊
There again as for fat white blokes you have no problem investing thousands in art by some fat white bloke.
Keep the commie dream alive.
This is the world I want Not some gammon inspired universe of white fat old men telling me to hate everything and everyone that doesn’t fit their narrow pathetic world view ✊ You prefer a world where some fat old blokes with beards oppress women and make them wear full burka. There again as for fat white blokes you have no problem investing thousands in art by some fat white bloke. Keep the commie dream alive. |
|
moron
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,711
👍🏻 1,051
September 2017
|
Brexit
Jun 23, 2019 20:50:00 GMT 1
Brexit, by moron on Jun 23, 2019 20:50:00 GMT 1, I dont think he has friends in hamas or hezbollah does he? i know he was involved in promoting peace negotiations with them, but you wouldnt be silly enough to confuse the two would you? i mean, its a matter of record in Hansard, so its pretty well documented. Our friend blanksky ignores the part about promoting peace and dialogue. I respect politicians who will speak to all sides where there is war or discord in an attempt to promote peace.
I dont think he has friends in hamas or hezbollah does he? i know he was involved in promoting peace negotiations with them, but you wouldnt be silly enough to confuse the two would you? i mean, its a matter of record in Hansard, so its pretty well documented. Our friend blanksky ignores the part about promoting peace and dialogue. I respect politicians who will speak to all sides where there is war or discord in an attempt to promote peace. Corbyn played no part in the good friday agreement and as for peace and dialogue. The game Corbyn plays is obvious. It's called " the enemy of my enemy is my friend" |
|
moron
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,711
👍🏻 1,051
September 2017
|
Brexit
Jun 23, 2019 20:53:15 GMT 1
|
|
irl1
Full Member
🗨️ 9,274
👍🏻 9,381
December 2017
|
Brexit
Jun 23, 2019 21:46:20 GMT 1
Brexit, by irl1 on Jun 23, 2019 21:46:20 GMT 1, Just in the interest of transparency, today warchet sent me a pm that said Well done on being the forums biggest arse wipe Which would be fine I guess if he had posted it in this thread but... I dunno I find that kind of behavior pretty weird. Anyways cheers warchet I hope you are doing well wherever you are. I've been called worse 
Just in the interest of transparency, today warchet sent me a pm that said Well done on being the forums biggest arse wipe Which would be fine I guess if he had posted it in this thread but... I dunno I find that kind of behavior pretty weird. Anyways cheers warchet I hope you are doing well wherever you are. I've been called worse With a lot more to come |
|
|
|
Leo Boyd
Artist
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,476
👍🏻 2,090
June 2016
|
Brexit
Jun 23, 2019 23:23:20 GMT 1
Brexit, by Leo Boyd on Jun 23, 2019 23:23:20 GMT 1, Yeah man I don't object to the insult per se
just the way that it was done
I don't have any dealing with our charming warchet outside of this thread so for him to send me insults via a pm just seems pretty weird to me.
It is a kind of bully behavior that is designed to shut down debate.
anyway
night ya'll 
Yeah man I don't object to the insult per se just the way that it was done I don't have any dealing with our charming warchet outside of this thread so for him to send me insults via a pm just seems pretty weird to me. It is a kind of bully behavior that is designed to shut down debate. anyway night ya'll |
|
mojo
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,191
👍🏻 3,724
May 2014
|
Brexit
Jun 26, 2019 13:34:58 GMT 1
Brexit, by mojo on Jun 26, 2019 13:34:58 GMT 1, Dumb & Dumber starring Boris Johnson & Jeremy Hunt...This Brexit smells funky 
Dumb & Dumber starring Boris Johnson & Jeremy Hunt...This Brexit smells funky |
|
mojo
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,191
👍🏻 3,724
May 2014
|
Brexit
Jun 26, 2019 16:26:36 GMT 1
Brexit, by mojo on Jun 26, 2019 16:26:36 GMT 1, I wonder if he paints massive racist slogans and outright lies about the N.H.S on his wine box crate creations?
BACK BORIS (into a small padded cell then lock door and run).
I wonder if he paints massive racist slogans and outright lies about the N.H.S on his wine box crate creations?
BACK BORIS (into a small padded cell then lock door and run).
|
|
|
|
Brexit
Jun 26, 2019 20:36:58 GMT 1
via mobile
Brexit, by Daylight Robber on Jun 26, 2019 20:36:58 GMT 1, I wonder if he paints massive racist slogans and outright lies about the N.H.S on his wine box crate creations? BACK BORIS (into a small padded cell then lock door and run). Laugh now but one day he'll be in charge!
This bus nonsense has been an amazing success for Johnson. It's diverted the focus away from the fact there is evidence (despite an earlier denial) that he's been working with Bannon. It's also bumped the "£350m on the side of a bus" story down the Google search rankings, when Googling 'Boris' and 'Bus'. He's trying to bury what an utterly disastrous person he is.
I wonder if he paints massive racist slogans and outright lies about the N.H.S on his wine box crate creations? BACK BORIS (into a small padded cell then lock door and run). Laugh now but one day he'll be in charge! This bus nonsense has been an amazing success for Johnson. It's diverted the focus away from the fact there is evidence (despite an earlier denial) that he's been working with Bannon. It's also bumped the "£350m on the side of a bus" story down the Google search rankings, when Googling 'Boris' and 'Bus'. He's trying to bury what an utterly disastrous person he is. |
|
Leo Boyd
Artist
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,476
👍🏻 2,090
June 2016
|
Brexit
Jun 27, 2019 0:26:24 GMT 1
Brexit, by Leo Boyd on Jun 27, 2019 0:26:24 GMT 1, I wonder if he paints massive racist slogans and outright lies about the N.H.S on his wine box crate creations? BACK BORIS (into a small padded cell then lock door and run). Laugh now but one day he'll be in charge! This bus nonsense has been an amazing success for Johnson. It's diverted the focus away from the fact there is evidence (despite an earlier denial) that he's been working with Bannon. It's also bumped the "£350m on the side of a bus" story down the Google search rankings, when Googling 'Boris' and 'Bus'. He's trying to bury what an utterly disastrous person he is.
I wonder if he paints massive racist slogans and outright lies about the N.H.S on his wine box crate creations? BACK BORIS (into a small padded cell then lock door and run). Laugh now but one day he'll be in charge! This bus nonsense has been an amazing success for Johnson. It's diverted the focus away from the fact there is evidence (despite an earlier denial) that he's been working with Bannon. It's also bumped the "£350m on the side of a bus" story down the Google search rankings, when Googling 'Boris' and 'Bus'. He's trying to bury what an utterly disastrous person he is. Man that is cynical as fuck but yeah of course when you put you put it like that it is pretty obvious. |
|
rebate
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,050
👍🏻 961
January 2018
|
Brexit
Jun 27, 2019 13:10:48 GMT 1
Brexit, by rebate on Jun 27, 2019 13:10:48 GMT 1, And Hunt is now giving the people that will earn the most from a university education, The gift of not having to pay!
Gifts for the rich, debt trap for the rest.
And Hunt is now giving the people that will earn the most from a university education, The gift of not having to pay!
Gifts for the rich, debt trap for the rest.
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Brexit
Jun 27, 2019 15:27:49 GMT 1
Brexit, by Deleted on Jun 27, 2019 15:27:49 GMT 1, And Hunt is now giving the people that will earn the most from a university education, The gift of not having to pay! Gifts for the rich, debt trap for the rest.
What's wrong with that? Sounds like a win-win situation to me. Better than Boris' ideas anyway.
And Hunt is now giving the people that will earn the most from a university education, The gift of not having to pay! Gifts for the rich, debt trap for the rest. It's an incentive for people who wish to set up their own business and who provide employment for people who do not have that wish or ambition. What's wrong with that? Sounds like a win-win situation to me. Better than Boris' ideas anyway. |
|
rebate
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,050
👍🏻 961
January 2018
|
Brexit
Jun 27, 2019 15:37:40 GMT 1
Brexit, by rebate on Jun 27, 2019 15:37:40 GMT 1, And Hunt is now giving the people that will earn the most from a university education, The gift of not having to pay! Gifts for the rich, debt trap for the rest. It's an incentive for people who wish to set up their own business and who provide employment for people who do not have that wish or ambition. What's wrong with that? Sounds like a win-win situation to me. Better than Boris' ideas anyway.
And Hunt is now giving the people that will earn the most from a university education, The gift of not having to pay! Gifts for the rich, debt trap for the rest. It's an incentive for people who wish to set up their own business and who provide employment for people who do not have that wish or ambition. What's wrong with that? Sounds like a win-win situation to me. Better than Boris' ideas anyway. More money given to those who can most afford to pay it off. Its not really any different from Bojo's ideas. |
|
