C_J I would not be expecting people on minimum wage or unemployed people to necessarily be contributing to this. The left like to paint this as evil Tories deliberately going after the poor and the vulnerable. I think that’s a bit childish personally.
I don’t think you have enough cynicism towards the right then…
James Buchanan, 2005: people who “failed to foresee and save money for their future needs are to be treated, as subordinate members of the species, akin to…animals who are dependent”
C_J Once you start giving stuff to people for free they become dependent on it and think they’re entitled to it.
Bigger conversation there then about what as a human you should be entitled too. Another slippery slope… should they be entitled to water? Food? Shelter? Healthcare? Where do you start and stop? I think if a country is as wealthy as the UK is, we should be able to look after our own, and we should be able to give people free medical care, regardless of the fact that some of them will take it for granted or feel entitled to it.
Are you really that upset by the fact that some poor people are cunts, that you look at the state of America, and think, ’Yeah, they’ve got it right, I fancy a bit of that’? Plenty of the rich and wealthy are cunts too.
I think there is an onus on the NHS itself to do better with management of its service / funding too. If we take the example from yesterday, the Government has done its bit in setting up these arrangements with other countries - the responsibility for reclaiming the costs falls to the NHS. When the unclaimed costs run into the hundreds of millions its pretty negligent on their part to not be recovering the money which could be reinvested into the service.
Amps To be fair though, quoting someone like James Buchanan, an extreme libertarian who was part of the Mont Pelerin Society as typical of the right is roughly equivalent to the right quoting an extreme-left tankie who writes stuff like the owners of capital should be first against the wall and then saying “see, that’s lefties!”
bosstrabs It’s relevant to the NHS though, as it’s Buchanan’s disciples in the States who are trying to take control of the NHS, and it’s there ilk who will stop it from being free at the point of delivery etc. So I think it’s applicable. Also, do you think he’s that different in his thinking to Rees-Mogg?
The percentage is completely irrelevant - it is hundreds of millions of pounds, Amps. When you are an organisation being funded by the taxpayer and you are always claiming that you are being underfunded, you should be looking at yourself and your practices to see if there is wastage. Any organisation that can write off hundreds of millions of pounds and at the same time say they are underfunded needs to have a shake up
Yes, exactly.
Old-Dutch True, but if it’s only 0.005% of their budget (I don’t know what it is, hence I asked), then it dwindles in comparison to the underfunding the Tories have done in tenure. Yes, they should be looking to recoup that money, but, the imperfection of the business model shouldn’t be used as an excuse to not fund it properly or consider privatising it. My car is less than perfect, it’s a dirty diesel and the front plate is cracked and needs replacing, but I’m not about to sell it and ride a bike everywhere until I can afford a new Tesla.
Not disagreeing with the service being underfunded, but at the same time it should be operating in a way that shit like this isn’t happening. It would certainly strengthen their hand when it came to asking for more funding.
Agreed, but unfortunately the sun could shine from their hoop and the Tories would still see it as an asset to be stripped and sold. If they’re willing to sell our national grid they’ll be stiff and salivating at the thought of selling the NHS.
To those who believe that the Tories have underfunded the NHS: how do you know that? As in, how can you tell it’s underfunded? Upon what empirical or theoretical basis have you reached that conclusion? I thought we had the best health service in the world, no?
And what would be an appropriate level of funding? are we talking like 10% more? 50%? Double? Do we literally just keep throwing money at it until they finally say “enough! We’re sorted now thanks!”
And would I also be correct in presuming you also take the view that teachers, policemen and prison wardens are all chronically underpaid as well, slogging their lives away in appallingly underfunded institutions? And state benefits are too low as well yeah? All because Boris Johnson and his ilk refuse to tax the global elite?
Fucking hell. You’re dreaming lads.
Old-Dutch When you are an organisation being funded by the taxpayer and you are always claiming that you are being underfunded, you should be looking at yourself and your practices to see if there is wastage. Any organisation that can write off hundreds of millions of pounds and at the same time say they are underfunded needs to have a shake up
That’s the problem in a nutshell, isn’t it. If a private business does that it goes under and a more professional outfit fills it’s shoes. If the public sector wastes hundreds of millions you get loads of idiots claiming their precious public services are underfunded!
Cj not too far away with both posts there. Hard to argue with either.
