Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The £500 million lie about the NHS. Dr Hill, from the University of Liverpool, told the BBC that the £500m a week figure, which comes from a report he co-wrote with academics at Harvard University, was designed to illustrate how much more the US currently pays for drugs than the UK. "It's a guide to how much money could be involved but it's difficult to predict how much money would be involved," he said. So there is no evidence at all that it will cost £500 million at all, since no-one actually knows till something happen's. A guide, with a made up number, being used by Labour. In general terms. A lie. "not quite......... the point that labour are making is correct....in that one of the things that trump always says to rile up the crowds at his campaign rallies is that he gets his crowd to boo the fact that europe countries and their "socialised healthcare systems" i.e the NHS pay less for drugs than the US counterparts.... and that he wants to drive up those prices so that US consumers will pay less irony being that the US does have biggest "socialised healthcare system" in medicare and medicaid but are specifically by law not able to use there size and potential buying power to drive down drug prices as it is then seen as a competitive advantage against private healthcare providers... the debatable bit is putting an actual price on how much it would cost..... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The £500 million lie about the NHS. Dr Hill, from the University of Liverpool, told the BBC that the £500m a week figure, which comes from a report he co-wrote with academics at Harvard University, was designed to illustrate how much more the US currently pays for drugs than the UK. "It's a guide to how much money could be involved but it's difficult to predict how much money would be involved," he said. So there is no evidence at all that it will cost £500 million at all, since no-one actually knows till something happen's. A guide, with a made up number, being used by Labour. In general terms. A lie. "Have you watched the Dispatches programme? Have you read the US position paper for trade negotiations with the UK? You'll understand the substance to the Labour position if you do. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The £500 million lie about the NHS. Dr Hill, from the University of Liverpool, told the BBC that the £500m a week figure, which comes from a report he co-wrote with academics at Harvard University, was designed to illustrate how much more the US currently pays for drugs than the UK. "It's a guide to how much money could be involved but it's difficult to predict how much money would be involved," he said. So there is no evidence at all that it will cost £500 million at all, since no-one actually knows till something happen's. A guide, with a made up number, being used by Labour. In general terms. A lie.
Have you watched the Dispatches programme?
Have you read the US position paper for trade negotiations with the UK?
You'll understand the substance to the Labour position if you do.
"Yes but it's still a wildly exaggerated figure though  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The £500 million lie about the NHS. Dr Hill, from the University of Liverpool, told the BBC that the £500m a week figure, which comes from a report he co-wrote with academics at Harvard University, was designed to illustrate how much more the US currently pays for drugs than the UK. "It's a guide to how much money could be involved but it's difficult to predict how much money would be involved," he said. So there is no evidence at all that it will cost £500 million at all, since no-one actually knows till something happen's. A guide, with a made up number, being used by Labour. In general terms. A lie.
not quite.........
the point that labour are making is correct....in that one of the things that trump always says to rile up the crowds at his campaign rallies is that he gets his crowd to boo the fact that europe countries and their "socialised healthcare systems" i.e the NHS pay less for drugs than the US counterparts.... and that he wants to drive up those prices so that US consumers will pay less
irony being that the US does have biggest "socialised healthcare system" in medicare and medicaid but are specifically by law not able to use there size and potential buying power to drive down drug prices as it is then seen as a competitive advantage against private healthcare providers...
the debatable bit is putting an actual price on how much it would cost....."So a lie then... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The £500 million lie about the NHS. Dr Hill, from the University of Liverpool, told the BBC that the £500m a week figure, which comes from a report he co-wrote with academics at Harvard University, was designed to illustrate how much more the US currently pays for drugs than the UK. "It's a guide to how much money could be involved but it's difficult to predict how much money would be involved," he said. So there is no evidence at all that it will cost £500 million at all, since no-one actually knows till something happen's. A guide, with a made up number, being used by Labour. In general terms. A lie.
Have you watched the Dispatches programme?
Have you read the US position paper for trade negotiations with the UK?
You'll understand the substance to the Labour position if you do.
"Pure propaganda another word for lie | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Yes but it's still a wildly exaggerated figure though "Worst case scenario, top-end of the range. If the NHS had to pay the same price for US pharma as the medical industry in the US does, the figure rises from £18bn to £40-odd billion a year. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The £500 million lie about the NHS. Dr Hill, from the University of Liverpool, told the BBC that the £500m a week figure, which comes from a report he co-wrote with academics at Harvard University, was designed to illustrate how much more the US currently pays for drugs than the UK. "It's a guide to how much money could be involved but it's difficult to predict how much money would be involved," he said. So there is no evidence at all that it will cost £500 million at all, since no-one actually knows till something happen's. A guide, with a made up number, being used by Labour. In general terms. A lie.
not quite.........
the point that labour are making is correct....in that one of the things that trump always says to rile up the crowds at his campaign rallies is that he gets his crowd to boo the fact that europe countries and their "socialised healthcare systems" i.e the NHS pay less for drugs than the US counterparts.... and that he wants to drive up those prices so that US consumers will pay less
irony being that the US does have biggest "socialised healthcare system" in medicare and medicaid but are specifically by law not able to use there size and potential buying power to drive down drug prices as it is then seen as a competitive advantage against private healthcare providers...
the debatable bit is putting an actual price on how much it would cost....."All that is true but the misleading bit about the £500 million is that it is the figure reached if the NHS payed the same price for all it's drugs as the US pays for all of its. The reality is is that only about 10% of NHS drugs are purchased from US pharmacy companies so only about 10% of drugs is likely to be effected by any change, which puts the figure at closer to £50 million. Still quite a large amount IMHO. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Yes but it's still a wildly exaggerated figure though
Worst case scenario, top-end of the range.
If the NHS had to pay the same price for US pharma as the medical industry in the US does, the figure rises from £18bn to £40-odd billion a year.
"No the only way you can reach anything close to the £500 million (£40 billion a year) is if you assume the NHS pays the same for all it's medicine as the US does including medicines bought from Britain, European and the rest of the world. It's unlikely that the price we pay for medicines bought from non US companies would be effected by any trade deal with the US. As none US medicine purchases make up about 90% of NHS medicine purchases the real figure is going to closer to £4 billion a year. Still quite a large figure but also a realistic one. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" All that is true but the misleading bit about the £500 million is that it is the figure reached if the NHS payed the same price for all it's drugs as the US pays for all of its. The reality is is that only about 10% of NHS drugs are purchased from US pharmacy companies so only about 10% of drugs is likely to be effected by any change, which puts the figure at closer to £50 million. Still quite a large amount IMHO. " I don't think that's right. The NHS currently pays about £18bn a year for US drugs. The market price for those same drugs in the US is £40-odd billion. £25bn divided by 52 weeks = £480m a week. Getting better prices for US drugs bought by the NHS is a negotiating priority for the US Government. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" All that is true but the misleading bit about the £500 million is that it is the figure reached if the NHS payed the same price for all it's drugs as the US pays for all of its. The reality is is that only about 10% of NHS drugs are purchased from US pharmacy companies so only about 10% of drugs is likely to be effected by any change, which puts the figure at closer to £50 million. Still quite a large amount IMHO. I don't think that's right. The NHS currently pays about £18bn a year for US drugs. The market price for those same drugs in the US is £40-odd billion. £25bn divided by 52 weeks = £480m a week. Getting better prices for US drugs bought by the NHS is a negotiating priority for the US Government. " "350 million a week to the eu. We could give that (plus another 100 million) to the US instead"... Think it should be written on a red bus... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
he has been on about cutting them and even disbanding nato in the past now he is giving them more money?????????? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"corbyn we will give more money to the armed forces he has been on about cutting them and even disbanding nato in the past now he is giving them more money??????????"Focus on this election, claims and manifesto, otherwise all UK politicians statements of all time, could break the Internet  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" "350 million a week to the eu. We could give that (plus another 100 million) to the US instead"... Think it should be written on a red bus..." "The Tories send £928 million a week to their chums in the City - let's spend it on the people instead" I'd like to see that on the side of Labour's bus. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" All that is true but the misleading bit about the £500 million is that it is the figure reached if the NHS payed the same price for all it's drugs as the US pays for all of its. The reality is is that only about 10% of NHS drugs are purchased from US pharmacy companies so only about 10% of drugs is likely to be effected by any change, which puts the figure at closer to £50 million. Still quite a large amount IMHO. I don't think that's right. The NHS currently pays about £18bn a year for US drugs. The market price for those same drugs in the US is £40-odd billion. £25bn divided by 52 weeks = £480m a week. Getting better prices for US drugs bought by the NHS is a negotiating priority for the US Government. " . So what your actually saying is the NHS spends nearly a fifth of its entire budget purchasing US pharmaceuticals? I'm no expert but your figures sound like they've been done by that halfwit Abbott | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes, the NHS spends in excess of £18 billion purchasing drugs every year. This is the US negotiating objective from the Office of the United States Trade Representative: "Procedural Fairness for Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices: - Seek standards to ensure that government regulatory reimbursement regimes are transparent, provide procedural fairness, are nondiscriminatory, and provide full market access for U.S. products." US Pharma wants the UK drugs market. " . Firstly, were not discussing pharma though are we, were discussing US pharma, so are you now saying the NHS ONLY buys from US pharma?. Secondly are you talking lessons from Abbott | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"are you now saying the NHS ONLY buys from US pharma?.D" Oh dear, let me make this really simple. The NHS spends £25bn a year on drugs. US pharma wants to get its hands on that market. As part of the trade agreement between the UK and the US. Meanwhile, Trump and his useful idiot Farage want to isolate the UK from its existing suppliers by shunting the UK into the land of WTO rules and its tariff regime. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"are you now saying the NHS ONLY buys from US pharma?.D Oh dear, let me make this really simple. The NHS spends £25bn a year on drugs. US pharma wants to get its hands on that market. As part of the trade agreement between the UK and the US. Meanwhile, Trump and his useful idiot Farage want to isolate the UK from its existing suppliers by shunting the UK into the land of WTO rules and its tariff regime. " . Oh so if X y and z happen despite no suggestions they will then we extrapolate that to..it's gazillions and that's no lie | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I mean American big pharma getting in on drugs they don't even make or own patterns on. Outrageous Jeff "The US companies may not make or own patents on some medication that we use but may have competitive meds instead, that it would be in their interests if we were to use them instead. The pharma lobbying power is huge and Trump has former pharma lobbyists within the White House staff. The USA has much more power than the UK in any trade deal, so could leverage the UK to become financially and contractually obligated to ensure that UK medication supplies are skewed price-wise and with diminished choice, in favour of US meds. Such elements of trade deals would likely not be the standard headline information of any deal but TTIP etc has shown that many terms are not typically equitable or fair for all parties, (usually the smaller state). The UK has form in the pursuit of goals that may not be in all citizens interests, so I'd certainly not trust the current governing party to be acting at all times in the county's and its citizens' best interests. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And in 15 minutes it's gone from 18bn to 25bn. That's brexit inflation for yer "The NHS spends around £18 billion a year on drugs. About 9% of that comes direct from the USA. Other drugs are supplied from the US via other countries, which slightly confuses the issue. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And in 15 minutes it's gone from 18bn to 25bn. That's brexit inflation for yer "My under-estimate. "The UK imported £24.8 billion of pharmaceutical products (in 2016)" - Commons BEIS Committee | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A four day week seems when they get elected they are going to set up a committee to look at implementing it in TEN years.has come out after being ask how the NHS is going to cope with it.So another lie even if they won the election they might not even be in power in ten years." You’re right, but they complained about the same thing in the Victorian era when they switched from a 6 day week to 5 day week. tech has made jobs more efficient, there is no need for a lot of things anyway. Besides i suspect it will be more voluntary than anything. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A four day week seems when they get elected they are going to set up a committee to look at implementing it in TEN years.has come out after being ask how the NHS is going to cope with it.So another lie even if they won the election they might not even be in power in ten years. You’re right, but they complained about the same thing in the Victorian era when they switched from a 6 day week to 5 day week. tech has made jobs more efficient, there is no need for a lot of things anyway. Besides i suspect it will be more voluntary than anything. " no need for a lot of things what are these things companies are paying workers for that are not needed? im sure you could make a fortune telling them. When in the victorian era did they switch from 6 to 5 and who said the same thing? as cant find any info on this through google. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A four day week seems when they get elected they are going to set up a committee to look at implementing it in TEN years.has come out after being ask how the NHS is going to cope with it.So another lie even if they won the election they might not even be in power in ten years. You’re right, but they complained about the same thing in the Victorian era when they switched from a 6 day week to 5 day week. tech has made jobs more efficient, there is no need for a lot of things anyway. Besides i suspect it will be more voluntary than anything. no need for a lot of things what are these things companies are paying workers for that are not needed? im sure you could make a fortune telling them. When in the victorian era did they switch from 6 to 5 and who said the same thing? as cant find any info on this through google."Go back to early victorian times and you will find that most workers were allowed Sunday mornings off to go to church especially if they were in rural areas like norfolk where they would have worked while there was daylight. Long days in the summer, short cold ones in the winter as there was only so much work you could do by candlelight. The arrival of town (coal) gas in the 1860s brought light and the ability to set a more uniform working day which along with rail transport and the telegraph allowed business owners to be more efficient and gave them more incentive to keep skilled workers for longer. This dichotomy between efficiency and rewarding workers for their skills has been derailed by the impact of IT systems to the point that for many companies looking ahead to AI it makes complete sense to look at shorter more efficient working weeks but the flip side to that is for the self employed, and small businesses the demands placed upon them by just in time chains of supply mean that they have to increase their working hours to stay in the game. There have been a number of studies that show a shorter working week with a ban on out of hours emails actually increases productivity and efficiency because people feel rewarded for their efforts rather than ground down by ever increasing demands. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fact: A 4 day working week will drive many small business's like the one I am working for out of business. It just will not survive. End of.......... If Brexit is not settled soon then the business I work for will go out of business and I will no longer be paying taxes and NI so my contribution to the spending plans will end here to. So please give me a real incentive to vote labour please "Business is faced with cost pressures all the time. When every business is faced with the same cost pressure, i.e. a change in working regulations, that cost gets passed onto the consumer. It ain't rocket science. A reduction in working hours also creates space for additional employment opportunities. This was one of the big arguments in 1919 - Britain needed to create space in the workforce for 1 million + men returning from the war. Hence all the industrial action to shorten the working week from 72 hours. The ruling class, however, decided not to demobilise such a huge army and declared war on Russia instead, essentially to keep the soldiers occupied. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fact: A 4 day working week will drive many small business's like the one I am working for out of business. It just will not survive. End of.......... If Brexit is not settled soon then the business I work for will go out of business and I will no longer be paying taxes and NI so my contribution to the spending plans will end here to. So please give me a real incentive to vote labour please
Business is faced with cost pressures all the time.
When every business is faced with the same cost pressure, i.e. a change in working regulations, that cost gets passed onto the consumer.
It ain't rocket science.
A reduction in working hours also creates space for additional employment opportunities.
This was one of the big arguments in 1919 - Britain needed to create space in the workforce for 1 million + men returning from the war.
Hence all the industrial action to shorten the working week from 72 hours.
The ruling class, however, decided not to demobilise such a huge army and declared war on Russia instead, essentially to keep the soldiers occupied.
"All i keep hearing from remainers is we need more workers in the uk so creating even more employment opportunities will only add to the problem.That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fact: A 4 day working week will drive many small business's like the one I am working for out of business. It just will not survive. End of.......... If Brexit is not settled soon then the business I work for will go out of business and I will no longer be paying taxes and NI so my contribution to the spending plans will end here to. So please give me a real incentive to vote labour please
Business is faced with cost pressures all the time.
When every business is faced with the same cost pressure, i.e. a change in working regulations, that cost gets passed onto the consumer.
It ain't rocket science.
A reduction in working hours also creates space for additional employment opportunities.
This was one of the big arguments in 1919 - Britain needed to create space in the workforce for 1 million + men returning from the war.
Hence all the industrial action to shorten the working week from 72 hours.
The ruling class, however, decided not to demobilise such a huge army and declared war on Russia instead, essentially to keep the soldiers occupied.
All i keep hearing from remainers is we need more workers in the uk so creating even more employment opportunities will only add to the problem.That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from. "Ten years is enough time to train doctors and nurses and reintroducing the nurses bursary can only encourage that but in the meantime there will be a shortage post brexit and I cant see many easy replacements for all the eu ones we will lose post brexit. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" All i keep hearing from remainers is we need more workers in the uk so creating even more employment opportunities will only add to the problem.That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from. " Well, the Tories reckon it will cost the public sector £4bn a year. The IFS says Johnson's tax handout for the £45-80k band will cost £8bn a year. Choices. One benefits the few, the other the many. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fact: A 4 day working week will drive many small business's like the one I am working for out of business. It just will not survive. End of.......... If Brexit is not settled soon then the business I work for will go out of business and I will no longer be paying taxes and NI so my contribution to the spending plans will end here to. So please give me a real incentive to vote labour please
Business is faced with cost pressures all the time.
When every business is faced with the same cost pressure, i.e. a change in working regulations, that cost gets passed onto the consumer.
It ain't rocket science.
A reduction in working hours also creates space for additional employment opportunities.
This was one of the big arguments in 1919 - Britain needed to create space in the workforce for 1 million + men returning from the war.
Hence all the industrial action to shorten the working week from 72 hours.
The ruling class, however, decided not to demobilise such a huge army and declared war on Russia instead, essentially to keep the soldiers occupied.
All i keep hearing from remainers is we need more workers in the uk so creating even more employment opportunities will only add to the problem.That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from.
Ten years is enough time to train doctors and nurses and reintroducing the nurses bursary can only encourage that but in the meantime there will be a shortage post brexit and I cant see many easy replacements for all the eu ones we will lose post brexit."You do realize that you would have to increase the total workforce by 20% to make this happen and also to increase the spending by the same.Corbyn lives in fantasy land. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"They said the same thing in 1919 when the labour movement went on strike for a reduction in the 72-hour working week. 72 hours! "It was reduced all the way back in 1919, I'd better tell my first employer then, 72 hr weeks were the norm | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fact: A 4 day working week will drive many small business's like the one I am working for out of business. It just will not survive. End of.......... If Brexit is not settled soon then the business I work for will go out of business and I will no longer be paying taxes and NI so my contribution to the spending plans will end here to. So please give me a real incentive to vote labour please
Business is faced with cost pressures all the time.
When every business is faced with the same cost pressure, i.e. a change in working regulations, that cost gets passed onto the consumer.
It ain't rocket science.
A reduction in working hours also creates space for additional employment opportunities.
This was one of the big arguments in 1919 - Britain needed to create space in the workforce for 1 million + men returning from the war.
Hence all the industrial action to shorten the working week from 72 hours.
The ruling class, however, decided not to demobilise such a huge army and declared war on Russia instead, essentially to keep the soldiers occupied.
All i keep hearing from remainers is we need more workers in the uk so creating even more employment opportunities will only add to the problem.That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from.
Ten years is enough time to train doctors and nurses and reintroducing the nurses bursary can only encourage that but in the meantime there will be a shortage post brexit and I cant see many easy replacements for all the eu ones we will lose post brexit.You do realize that you would have to increase the total workforce by 20% to make this happen and also to increase the spending by the same.Corbyn lives in fantasy land."How did you work that out clever clogs? I mean to say ffs you are one of the biggest Brexiteers on here and now you are bleating about the shortage of doctors and nurses? Its called investing in the future and we wouldn’t need to worry about it if we were staying in the EU. Just think of all those useful medical types who like to come over here from the EU and work for the nhs and then pay their taxes. Oh and don’t forget that the tories lies about the cost of labours election promises were based on lumping five years figures into one. PROPAGANDA at its lowest.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fact: A 4 day working week will drive many small business's like the one I am working for out of business. It just will not survive. End of.......... If Brexit is not settled soon then the business I work for will go out of business and I will no longer be paying taxes and NI so my contribution to the spending plans will end here to. So please give me a real incentive to vote labour please
Business is faced with cost pressures all the time.
When every business is faced with the same cost pressure, i.e. a change in working regulations, that cost gets passed onto the consumer.
It ain't rocket science.
A reduction in working hours also creates space for additional employment opportunities.
This was one of the big arguments in 1919 - Britain needed to create space in the workforce for 1 million + men returning from the war.
Hence all the industrial action to shorten the working week from 72 hours.
The ruling class, however, decided not to demobilise such a huge army and declared war on Russia instead, essentially to keep the soldiers occupied.
All i keep hearing from remainers is we need more workers in the uk so creating even more employment opportunities will only add to the problem.That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from.
Ten years is enough time to train doctors and nurses and reintroducing the nurses bursary can only encourage that but in the meantime there will be a shortage post brexit and I cant see many easy replacements for all the eu ones we will lose post brexit.You do realize that you would have to increase the total workforce by 20% to make this happen and also to increase the spending by the same.Corbyn lives in fantasy land.
How did you work that out clever clogs? I mean to say ffs you are one of the biggest Brexiteers on here and now you are bleating about the shortage of doctors and nurses? Its called investing in the future and we wouldn’t need to worry about it if we were staying in the EU. Just think of all those useful medical types who like to come over here from the EU and work for the nhs and then pay their taxes. Oh and don’t forget that the tories lies about the cost of labours election promises were based on lumping five years figures into one. PROPAGANDA at its lowest. "Brexit doesnt mean there will be no more eu doctors or nurses you are swallowing labour bullshit again.The tory policy is a points based immigration policy in that way you can target the workers you need seems to work well for australia new zealand and canada. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fact: A 4 day working week will drive many small business's like the one I am working for out of business. It just will not survive. End of.......... If Brexit is not settled soon then the business I work for will go out of business and I will no longer be paying taxes and NI so my contribution to the spending plans will end here to. So please give me a real incentive to vote labour please
Business is faced with cost pressures all the time.
When every business is faced with the same cost pressure, i.e. a change in working regulations, that cost gets passed onto the consumer.
It ain't rocket science.
A reduction in working hours also creates space for additional employment opportunities.
This was one of the big arguments in 1919 - Britain needed to create space in the workforce for 1 million + men returning from the war.
Hence all the industrial action to shorten the working week from 72 hours.
The ruling class, however, decided not to demobilise such a huge army and declared war on Russia instead, essentially to keep the soldiers occupied.
All i keep hearing from remainers is we need more workers in the uk so creating even more employment opportunities will only add to the problem.That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from.
Ten years is enough time to train doctors and nurses and reintroducing the nurses bursary can only encourage that but in the meantime there will be a shortage post brexit and I cant see many easy replacements for all the eu ones we will lose post brexit.You do realize that you would have to increase the total workforce by 20% to make this happen and also to increase the spending by the same.Corbyn lives in fantasy land.
How did you work that out clever clogs? I mean to say ffs you are one of the biggest Brexiteers on here and now you are bleating about the shortage of doctors and nurses? Its called investing in the future and we wouldn’t need to worry about it if we were staying in the EU. Just think of all those useful medical types who like to come over here from the EU and work for the nhs and then pay their taxes. Oh and don’t forget that the tories lies about the cost of labours election promises were based on lumping five years figures into one. PROPAGANDA at its lowest. Brexit doesnt mean there will be no more eu doctors or nurses you are swallowing labour bullshit again.The tory policy is a points based immigration policy in that way you can target the workers you need seems to work well for australia new zealand and canada."Freedom of movement within the EU is far better at doing that then the proposed tory party points policy. Just an example is I have a friend who spends her time between running training courses for german nurses who she brings to the uk to gain experience in the nhs. These nurses would probably not fulfil the points criteria and so the program of sharing best practice within the EU would come to an end. Her partner who is a consultant is now seriously considering moving to Germany because it will be easier for both of them to live and work over there than try and negotiate the ham fisted points policy you speak of. So you have a double whammy - a training course that pays into the nhs ending and a consultant leaving the nhs. Hows them beans add up?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from. " It was always a ten year plan. You just weren't paying attention when they first started talking about it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from. It was always a ten year plan. You just weren't paying attention when they first started talking about it." Thats ok then lets have a 20 or 30 year plan then they can say we will all be paid the same for sitting at home Its fantasy mate we need to hear what they will do in the 5 years they have. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from. It was always a ten year plan. You just weren't paying attention when they first started talking about it.Thats ok then lets have a 20 or 30 year plan then they can say we will all be paid the same for sitting at home Its fantasy mate we need to hear what they will do in the 5 years they have." Well thats an easy one, bankrupt the country, scare all big businees away, and double or even treble unemployment xx | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Freedom of movement within the EU is far better at doing that then the proposed tory party points policy. Just an example is I have a friend who spends her time between running training courses for german nurses who she brings to the uk to gain experience in the nhs. These nurses would probably not fulfil the points criteria and so the program of sharing best practice within the EU would come to an end. Her partner who is a consultant is now seriously considering moving to Germany because it will be easier for both of them to live and work over there than try and negotiate the ham fisted points policy you speak of. So you have a double whammy - a training course that pays into the nhs ending and a consultant leaving the nhs. Hows them beans add up? "The Tories have this arbitrary figure in their head that any migrant earning £33k+ a year makes a nett contribution to the UK, and any migrant earning less than £33k a year takes out more than they put in. So the immigration criteria is set at being able to demonstrate you can earn at least 33k a year. Surest way to destroy the NHS. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from. It was always a ten year plan. You just weren't paying attention when they first started talking about it.Thats ok then lets have a 20 or 30 year plan then they can say we will all be paid the same for sitting at home Its fantasy mate we need to hear what they will do in the 5 years they have. Well thats an easy one, bankrupt the country, scare all big businees away, and double or even treble unemployment xx "seems everyone knows that apart from them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from. It was always a ten year plan. You just weren't paying attention when they first started talking about it.Thats ok then lets have a 20 or 30 year plan then they can say we will all be paid the same for sitting at home Its fantasy mate we need to hear what they will do in the 5 years they have. Well thats an easy one, bankrupt the country, scare all big businees away, and double or even treble unemployment xx "Isn't Johnson's BREXIT plans already doing all of that? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from. It was always a ten year plan. You just weren't paying attention when they first started talking about it.Thats ok then lets have a 20 or 30 year plan then they can say we will all be paid the same for sitting at home Its fantasy mate we need to hear what they will do in the 5 years they have. Well thats an easy one, bankrupt the country, scare all big businees away, and double or even treble unemployment xx seems everyone knows that apart from them. "Current Government has been in power for nine years so all the se new promises are shit | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The £500 million lie about the NHS. Dr Hill, from the University of Liverpool, told the BBC that the £500m a week figure, which comes from a report he co-wrote with academics at Harvard University, was designed to illustrate how much more the US currently pays for drugs than the UK. "It's a guide to how much money could be involved but it's difficult to predict how much money would be involved," he said. So there is no evidence at all that it will cost £500 million at all, since no-one actually knows till something happen's. A guide, with a made up number, being used by Labour. In general terms. A lie. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from. It was always a ten year plan. You just weren't paying attention when they first started talking about it.Thats ok then lets have a 20 or 30 year plan then they can say we will all be paid the same for sitting at home Its fantasy mate we need to hear what they will do in the 5 years they have. Well thats an easy one, bankrupt the country, scare all big businees away, and double or even treble unemployment xx seems everyone knows that apart from them. "Best chancellor this country ever had maybe, was Gordon Brown (Labour ) who reduced the national debt while bailing out the Banking Wankers to the tune of 1.6 TRILLION POUNDS .The current goverment has trebled the national debt while imposing austerity measures ,sounds like incompetency to me . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from. It was always a ten year plan. You just weren't paying attention when they first started talking about it.Thats ok then lets have a 20 or 30 year plan then they can say we will all be paid the same for sitting at home Its fantasy mate we need to hear what they will do in the 5 years they have. Well thats an easy one, bankrupt the country, scare all big businees away, and double or even treble unemployment xx seems everyone knows that apart from them.
Best chancellor this country ever had maybe, was Gordon Brown (Labour ) who reduced the national debt while bailing out the Banking Wankers to the tune of 1.6 TRILLION POUNDS .The current goverment has trebled the national debt while imposing austerity measures ,sounds like incompetency to me . "Credits given when credit is due. We need to stop the confusion and chaos that other parties bring. They hate Corbyn and want to outdo him at every turn. But everyone one knows he will deliver stability and decent government for hardworking people, and undo the damage that many parties have done in the last nine years. He is the better choice compared to Boris. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from. It was always a ten year plan. You just weren't paying attention when they first started talking about it.Thats ok then lets have a 20 or 30 year plan then they can say we will all be paid the same for sitting at home Its fantasy mate we need to hear what they will do in the 5 years they have. Well thats an easy one, bankrupt the country, scare all big businees away, and double or even treble unemployment xx seems everyone knows that apart from them.
Best chancellor this country ever had maybe, was Gordon Brown (Labour ) who reduced the national debt while bailing out the Banking Wankers to the tune of 1.6 TRILLION POUNDS .The current goverment has trebled the national debt while imposing austerity measures ,sounds like incompetency to me .
Credits given when credit is due. We need to stop the confusion and chaos that other parties bring. They hate Corbyn and want to outdo him at every turn.
But everyone one knows he will deliver stability and decent government for hardworking people, and undo the damage that many parties have done in the last nine years.
He is the better choice compared to Boris. ". All this shows is that neither of you know any difference between monetary policy and bank of England balance sheets and fiscal policy and UK government balance sheets. It's just yet another sad indictment of how easily conned the voters are. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That is getting off topic though the point was labour are talking about ten years time which really wasnt very clear until someone ask where are all the nurses and doctors who could make this happen come from. It was always a ten year plan. You just weren't paying attention when they first started talking about it.Thats ok then lets have a 20 or 30 year plan then they can say we will all be paid the same for sitting at home Its fantasy mate we need to hear what they will do in the 5 years they have. Well thats an easy one, bankrupt the country, scare all big businees away, and double or even treble unemployment xx seems everyone knows that apart from them.
Best chancellor this country ever had maybe, was Gordon Brown (Labour ) who reduced the national debt while bailing out the Banking Wankers to the tune of 1.6 TRILLION POUNDS .The current goverment has trebled the national debt while imposing austerity measures ,sounds like incompetency to me .
Credits given when credit is due. We need to stop the confusion and chaos that other parties bring. They hate Corbyn and want to outdo him at every turn.
But everyone one knows he will deliver stability and decent government for hardworking people, and undo the damage that many parties have done in the last nine years.
He is the better choice compared to Boris. .
All this shows is that neither of you know any difference between monetary policy and bank of England balance sheets and fiscal policy and UK government balance sheets.
It's just yet another sad indictment of how easily conned the voters are."Labour saved the economy, the tories spaffed money on tax breaks for the rich, top down reorganisation of the nhs, the universal credit system, minting coins celebrating brexit, advertisements on Brexit. And I suspect you’ve been educated at the LSE then? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/07/russia-involved-in-leak-of-papers-saying-nhs-is-for-sale-says-reddit | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well, that's a shame
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/07/russia-involved-in-leak-of-papers-saying-nhs-is-for-sale-says-reddit"who would have thought it?????? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well, that's a shame
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/07/russia-involved-in-leak-of-papers-saying-nhs-is-for-sale-says-redditwho would have thought it?????? "It's a shame, i thought the Russians were on Boris's side. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well, that's a shame
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/07/russia-involved-in-leak-of-papers-saying-nhs-is-for-sale-says-redditwho would have thought it??????
It's a shame, i thought the Russians were on Boris's side. "yeah you would think so by some of the posts on here but if you were russia what would you prefer? the uk out of the eu or the uk with no nukes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well, that's a shame
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/07/russia-involved-in-leak-of-papers-saying-nhs-is-for-sale-says-redditwho would have thought it??????
It's a shame, i thought the Russians were on Boris's side. yeah you would think so by some of the posts on here but if you were russia what would you prefer? the uk out of the eu or the uk with no nukes. "Hmmmm i hadn't considered that. Maybe we'll be the next Crimea! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well, that's a shame
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/07/russia-involved-in-leak-of-papers-saying-nhs-is-for-sale-says-reddit"Not saying it’s convenient but....now I am wondering what tomorrow’s revelation will be....Catweazle ate my hamster? Dominic Cummings is the great grandson of Goebbels? Nothing would surprise me these days | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Manchester Evening News has interesting stat. The UK in 2019 has more food banks than it has branches of McDonalds and Burger King." Yet how many of those people relying on food banks will vote Conservative? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Manchester Evening News has interesting stat. The UK in 2019 has more food banks than it has branches of McDonalds and Burger King. Yet how many of those people relying on food banks will vote Conservative?" Or vote at all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Manchester Evening News has interesting stat. The UK in 2019 has more food banks than it has branches of McDonalds and Burger King. Yet how many of those people relying on food banks will vote Conservative? Or vote at all. " As I have to someone else on this forum. If you do not vote you lose the right to complain about the state of the nation. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Manchester Evening News has interesting stat. The UK in 2019 has more food banks than it has branches of McDonalds and Burger King. Yet how many of those people relying on food banks will vote Conservative? Or vote at all. As I have to someone else on this forum. If you do not vote you lose the right to complain about the state of the nation." Why you telling me? I know that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Manchester Evening News has interesting stat. The UK in 2019 has more food banks than it has branches of McDonalds and Burger King. Yet how many of those people relying on food banks will vote Conservative? Or vote at all. As I have to someone else on this forum. If you do not vote you lose the right to complain about the state of the nation. Why you telling me? I know that. " Not telling you anything. I'm adding to your point that the many of the people who have a chance to change their circumstances and don't. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"451 pages of trade documents concerning talks between US/Uk show the NHS is up for sale. Yet , nowhere in the documents does it say anything remotely like that. The NHS is only mentioned 4 or 5 times in the document, written before Johnson became PM. I’m sure the yanks would love to get their sweaty mitts on the NHS. So what? " That's the problem when you get into sound bite politics and no one looking into the details. We have the Conservative sound bite of "get BREXIT done" when anybody who actually looks into it knows it simply won't be. And we have the Labour sound bites of "NHS not for sale" when anybody who actually looks into it knows it's not and never could or would be. And let's not even get into the lies both sides are peddling about who they'll tax, how much and what they're going to spend it all on; or not. But everyone seems happy enough prompting the lies that favour their side and convincing themselves that it's all true, despite the fast amounts information out there from many different reputable sources that it's not. I just find it totally unbelievable that so many people can be so easily taken in. I keep on hoping for a Bobby Ewing moment and that I'm going to wake up from this political nightmare and the last 5 just haven't actually happened. From where I'm seeing it it's as if the truth just doesn't matter anymore just as long as 'your' side wins. Whatever happens on Thursday this disregard for truth, not just by politicians but it would seem by the people too, cannot possibly end well. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
