fruitisbad Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 Look whos talking I was refering to your emotive 'situation' and hyperbole. th ewhole 'your mums dying of cancer and some asylum seeking transvestite is stealing your mums medicine from under her nose routine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fruitisbad Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 Prevention of communicable diseases in other countries is one step in preventing them in this country. exactly. Regarless of what you may want we are all interlinked in this world. what we do affects other countries and what happens there can have a knock on effect here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
love_rat Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 you are sounding very ignorant. you can't make this personal. It's not like people who feel they can't live with themselves in their own body have chosen that path. There must be a way so that everyone can be happy. you are talking about prioritising certain illnesses over others. that would be a terrible state of affairs. discrimination because you aren';t ill enough, according to you? as wit regard to the AID thing, surely keeping up aid, making the world a fairer place will stoip all these people from ''other countries'' clogging up the system here. Aid comes at a cost, it benefits us massively through raiding world wide wliveing standards and through essentially buying political favours. Some illnesses should take priority over others. How can someone who is a man, who decides to be a women be classed as ill? What next, are we going to have operations to change people from humans to parrots - to accomodate someone who wants to be an animal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
love_rat Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 I was refering to your emotive 'situation' and hyperbole. th ewhole 'your mums dying of cancer and some asylum seeking transvestite is stealing your mums medicine from under her nose routine Well they are taking medicine from someone who desperatly needs it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 But this isn't even news. We hhave all known for years the Tories are targeting the NHS to make it unworkable so they can try and justify privatising it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrFloppy Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 I was refering to your emotive 'situation' and hyperbole. th ewhole 'your mums dying of cancer and some asylum seeking transvestite is stealing your mums medicine from under her nose routine Not mine mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrFloppy Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 Prevention of communicable diseases in other countries is one step in preventing them in this country. Like TB? The disease that was more or less non existent in this country (as a result of inoculating our own kids at around the age of 10 or something) until the doors were thrown open to almost everyone who wants to come live here. Now tb is very much a problem. Last year there were 9,040 TB cases in the UK, said the Health Protection Agency. A total of 8,621 people were infected in 2008. TB campaigners said the rise in the number of cases was shocking and called for more work to alert people, including doctors, to the possibility of infection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fruitisbad Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 Some illnesses should take priority over others. How can someone who is a man, who decides to be a women be classed as ill? What next, are we going to have operations to change people from humans to parrots - to accomodate someone who wants to be an animal? someones life that is so unberable that you are constrantly depreseed and possibly suicidal? You don't just march down th edocors say I want a sex change and they go okay! you are required to have Gp referals to psychiatrists back to surgeons and on and on. the process taking years if it even goes through many pri,mary care trust already consider it a low priority an will only fund a couple per year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Afilsdesigne Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 All of these big decisions are couched in the same language "The NHS's cash crisis is so great that it will have to either cut services to patients or close accident and emergency and maternity units if it is to avoid going bust". This either/or of core services is, of course, quite misleading and very emotive. For example, in a NATIONAL Health Service, you should expect the SAME standard of care no matter where you live. So this implies a whole tranche of regional management, sat around making local decisions, could be replaced by a single panel of say not for profit trustees, doing the same thing but nationally. Now that would save a ton of money, probably more than enough to pay for all the threatened services and more besdes. Making non UK residents pay, up front (or via compulsory insurance), for all treatment would save cash. Cutting child and maternity benefits for all new babies born in 10 months time or later would remove the midwife problem and solve a lot of other social issues too. Possibly most contentious is accepting that the NHS should be free (UK residents only) but only for basic healthcare. There are a myriad of new and expensive treatments available and it is obvious that we can't afford all of them. We have to make painful choices as to what we include in 'basic' healthcare. For example, if you eat yourself up to 40 stones, should the taxpayer fund your gastric band operation? I submit you are responsible for your own actions and hence no. Over and above basic healthcare, we might need some sort of insurance scheme. Difficult. The NHS is a wonderful thing but we need to value it and it must be affordable. Just wishing away the problems won't solve anything. It should be driven by the highest standards of patient care managed by old fashioned Matrons who really cared and not by remote managers buried in spreadsheets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fruitisbad Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 All of these big decisions are couched in the same language "The NHS's cash crisis is so great that it will have to either cut services to patients or close accident and emergency and maternity units if it is to avoid going bust". This either/or of core services is, of course, quite misleading and very emotive. For example, in a NATIONAL Health Service, you should expect the SAME standard of care no matter where you live. So this implies a whole tranche of regional management, sat around making local decisions, could be replaced by a single panel of say not for profit trustees, doing the same thing but nationally. Now that would save a ton of money, probably more than enough to pay for all the threatened services and more besdes. Making non UK residents pay, up front (or via compulsory insurance), for all treatment would save cash. Cutting child and maternity benefits for all new babies born in 10 months time or later would remove the midwife problem and solve a lot of other social issues too. Possibly most contentious is accepting that the NHS should be free (UK residents only) but only for basic healthcare. There are a myriad of new and expensive treatments available and it is obvious that we can't afford all of them. We have to make painful choices as to what we include in 'basic' healthcare. For example, if you eat yourself up to 40 stones, should the taxpayer fund your gastric band operation? I submit you are responsible for your own actions and hence no. Over and above basic healthcare, we might need some sort of insurance scheme. Difficult. The NHS is a wonderful thing but we need to value it and it must be affordable. Just wishing away the problems won't solve anything. It should be driven by the highest standards of patient care managed by old fashioned Matrons who really cared and not by remote managers buried in spreadsheets. not for profit?? dont be daft! why would anyone do anythign not for profit? I know privitisation hindered stuff back in the day but can we all admit we should give it another go? get the right people in for the job rather than self invested people who want to take the system for all its worth. the right complains about benefit claiments but what about the people in these companies taking the country for all it's worth? there has got to be a compromise between the benfits of free markets (ie competition and pricing policies) and the benfits of not for profit organisations (PROFITS AREN@T THE DRIVING FACTOR AT THE EXPENSE OF YOUR STAKEHOLDERS) it's not rocket science. Im no communist, but why can't there be an element of ethics and decency with capitalism? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.