Junior Doctors row: 98% vote to strike

[Eric Arthur]

I don't think that it's pointless, I think it's the crux of the issue.

 

We want a Premier League healthcare system, but we pay a Championship level of funding towards it. So along the way compromises have to be made, Hunt is expecting the junior doctors to make the compromises on this occasion.

 

We'd like be but as it stands we as a nation don't want to either modernise the NHS or pay for it. I think we both agree that the organisation is a basketcase and needs some radical reform. A 24/7 NHS is a good step towards a Premier League NHS through cost neutralish modernisation.

 

Remember that Hunt is just the minister with a policy and a flak jacket. He hasn't done the negotiation.

[JFKvsNixon]

We'd like be but as it stands we as a nation don't want to either modernise the NHS or pay for it. I think we both agree that the organisation is a basketcase and needs some radical reform. A 24/7 NHS is a good step towards a Premier League NHS through cost neutralish modernisation.

 

Remember that Hunt is just the minister with a policy and a flak jacket. He hasn't done the negotiation.

 

If you believe that the NHS is a basket case then it goes a long way to explaining your position, this Washington based think tank sung the praises of the NHS, compare the funding and the outcomes between us and the US.

 

Of course with any large organisation, it is not perfect, and it always needs to improve, but you could also say the same about any other large organisations such as the supermarkets or the banks.

 

Also, how can you put more people on night shifts and weekends without hiring more staff? It's worth remembering that the thing that currently limits how many staff is on nights and the weekends is the Hospital's unwillingness to put staff on nights and weekends in an effort to cut costs.

 

As I've said plenty of times, Hunt's disingenuous attitude towards the NHS's staff throughout his tenure at Health has been part of the problem. Remember that the nurses and midwives ended up striking during their negotiations, the first time that the midwives had ever had a strike. Again as I said earlier, I'm not being into Tory, just look at my post here on SF, I just think that Hunt has been spectacularly inept as Sec State of Health.

[El Cid]

Remember that Hunt is just the minister with a policy and a flak jacket. He hasn't done the negotiation.

 

Our Conservative Government carries the can, if things get out of hand, someone very high up should resign.

Some would say that is the case already.

[Eric Arthur]

If you believe that the NHS is a basket case then it goes a long way to explaining your position, this Washington based think tank sung the praises of the NHS, compare the funding and the outcomes between us and the US.

That's a strawman, like comparing apples with orangutans.

[sutty27]

Thats highly misleading though.

 

A straightforward increase in the amount spent needs to take into account:

 

1. Inflation.

2. Whether you are providing additional services.

3. Whether there are more people to whom those services are provided.

4. How that money is spent.

 

If funding has increased in lines with inflation os slightly above, then it means much less if there is a greater demand on those services in terms of treatments offered (new drugs) more people needing healthcare (dementia , obesity, cancer) and a larger population.

 

The amount per capita takes into account population growth, I have no idea what the NHS's inflation rate it, it will obviously be different to the average inflation rate because they don't buy the same stuff that the average person buys. Its their job to make the most of the money they are given and the governments job to make sure get the most out of the available resources.

 

---------- Post added 16-02-2016 at 12:55 ----------

 

I really do not think that I've descended to name calling, I thought I was accurately describing you. After all you did say that you believed that I thought that everything was the fault of the Tories, and that the NHS wasn't in the middle of a spending crisis.

 

These commentss do suggest that you are ignorant of the facts, something that I believe is important to bear in mind when reading the rest of your posts.

 

Calling me ignorant isn't the best way to debate a topic.

[psynuk]

Its their job to make the most of the money they are given and the governments job to make sure get the most out of the available resources.

 

---------- Post added 16-02-2016 at 12:55 ----------

 

 

Calling me ignorant isn't the best way to debate a topic.

 

but you are coming across as rather ignorant and bringing immigration into the fray wont change that.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/society/commentisfree/2016/feb/09/nhs-part-privatised-health-service-complexity-costs-billions

 

"Margaret Thatcher’s government introduced the internal market in 1990, creating a split between purchasers and providers. New Labour expanded the private finance initiative, further opening the door to commercialisation. The Conservative-Lib Dem coalition reneged on a major election promise, introducing the biggest ever restructuring"

 

"Virgin Care ... admits a profit intention of at least 8%"

 

" The private sector is said to have received 70% of contracts awarded over 2013-14"

 

 

 

If approx %20 of the £110b budget is going into private companies and their 'skimming' profit and the government is awarding %70 of contracts to private firms I can't see how they are getting 'the most out of available resources'.

 

well I can, but it's a rather jaded view that involves the words gravy train and

privatisation.

[sutty27]

but you are coming across as rather ignorant and bringing immigration into the fray wont change that.

 

 

Its not ignorant to have a different opinion, its actually quite normal, even when people are presented with the same information they can and often do form different opinions to each other.

If Hospitals are short of money even though they have more money than they had before one could conclude that either more people are using the hospitals or the same number of people are in need of more care. Its likely a bit of both and the more people side of the equation is the direct result of immigration.

[999tigger]

The amount per capita takes into account population growth, I have no idea what the NHS's inflation rate it, it will obviously be different to the average inflation rate because they don't buy the same stuff that the average person buys. Its their job to make the most of the money they are given and the governments job to make sure get the most out of the available resources.

.

 

But it doesnt take into account inflation.

It doesnt take into account the provision of new treatments.

Nor general shifts in health in an ageing population.

 

---------- Post added 16-02-2016 at 20:31 ----------

 

If Hospitals are short of money even though they have more money than they had before one could conclude that either more people are using the hospitals or the same number of people are in need of more care. Its likely a bit of both and the more people side of the equation is the direct result of immigration.

 

 

Then you would be rather simplistic without looking at other factors and not just your usual agenda of immigration.

[sutty27]

But it doesnt take into account inflation.

It doesnt take into account the provision of new treatments.

Nor general shifts in health in an ageing population.

 

---------- Post added 16-02-2016 at 20:31 ----------

 

 

 

Then you would be rather simplistic without looking at other factors and not just your usual agenda of immigration.

 

What is the NHS's inflation figure?

Who much do all these new treatments cost?

How much extra does the NHS need to cover the cost of the ageing population?

 

 

My opinion isn't simplistic it is based on all the available information, the increase in population is just one small part of it.

 

Not that any of this has anything to do with the very good contract offered to junior doctors.

 

 

What is your opinion based on other than what the BMA say?

 

---------- Post added 16-02-2016 at 21:40 ----------

 

I just checked and it turns out that NHS budget in England did get the above inflation rises it was promised this parliament, but by only the "bare minimum" margin.

 

And will receive an additional £10 billion a year above inflation by 2020.

[onewheeldave]

If you believe that the NHS is a basket case then it goes a long way to explaining your position, this Washington based think tank sung the praises of the NHS, compare the funding and the outcomes between us and the US.

 

 

The NHS is a mess. It's pathetic admin system alone guarantees it will be a mess.

 

Comparing it to the American medical system and offering that as some kind of reason to think the NHS isn't a mess, is like saying muds OK cos it's better than dog***t.

 

 

Of course with any large organisation, it is not perfect, and it always needs to improve, but you could also say the same about any other large organisations such as the supermarkets or the banks.

 

Here we go par for the course placation by a habitual apologist. The NHS is so far removed from 'perfect' that to use the term in connection with it, is absurd.

 

I do agree that you can say the same ('it's not perfect') about any large organisation, but, unlike the NHS, supermarkets are actually fit for purpose, and, while I am less tolerant to long waits than most, the fact is, I can get from one end of a supermarket queue to another, without starving to death, unlike the NHS, with waiting lists that are so long, that there's a fair chance the patient will die of their illness before they get seen.