Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

General Election 2015 official thread

1959698100101164

Comments

  • During the last labour governments term they increased spending on the NHS over that parliament by 5.7% per year.

    During the coalitions term the increased NHS spending over that parliament by 0.8% per year.

    Given that health inflation is recognised to run at between 3 - 4% per year, the Tories have made deep cuts.

    Much more of the same and and our NHS will reach tipping point. I suspect that is exactly what Cameron and his ilk would love to see.

    Vote Labour to save the only jewell left in this country.

    For someone with limited knowledge on politics, have cutbacks on the NHS been made due to the fact Labour over spent and borrowed when they were last in power? Were these cuts necessary within the last term but might not be as serious going forward?
  • During the last labour governments term they increased spending on the NHS over that parliament by 5.7% per year.

    During the coalitions term the increased NHS spending over that parliament by 0.8% per year.

    Given that health inflation is recognised to run at between 3 - 4% per year, the Tories have made deep cuts.

    Much more of the same and and our NHS will reach tipping point. I suspect that is exactly what Cameron and his ilk would love to see.

    Vote Labour to save the only jewell left in this country.

    For someone with limited knowledge on politics, have cutbacks on the NHS been made due to the fact Labour over spent and borrowed when they were last in power? Were these cuts necessary within the last term but might not be as serious going forward?
    Nonsense.
    Buy now. Pay back when the Tories get back in.
    Booming and busting at its very best.
  • During the last labour governments term they increased spending on the NHS over that parliament by 5.7% per year.

    During the coalitions term the increased NHS spending over that parliament by 0.8% per year.

    Given that health inflation is recognised to run at between 3 - 4% per year, the Tories have made deep cuts.

    Much more of the same and and our NHS will reach tipping point. I suspect that is exactly what Cameron and his ilk would love to see.

    Vote Labour to save the only jewell left in this country.

    For someone with limited knowledge on politics, have cutbacks on the NHS been made due to the fact Labour over spent and borrowed when they were last in power? Were these cuts necessary within the last term but might not be as serious going forward?
    I think the real issue is that Cameron uses the platform of increasing spending on the NHS (which they have at 0.8%) as a means to show they care about the NHS. In reality he knows full well that only increasing by that 0.8% amounts in reality to a cut of at least 2.8% per year.

    The NHS has a funding gap that is estimated at £20 billion by 2020. I don't think any party knows where that money is going to come from. Quite frankly it's scary.

    I know cuts were necessary right across the board under austerity but Cameron has with the last round of NHS spending cuts seriously jeopardised the ability of the NHS to bounce back.

    It's not worth the risk. I think Cameron and his mates with interests in private health care provision are rubbing their hands with glee.





  • Vote Labour to save the only jewell left in this country.

    I'd have to agree. Considering all the gold's gone!

    Not to mention what was once the World's finest final salary pension provisions (thanks Gordon for taxing those out of existence).
  • Fiiish said:

    Greenie said:

    Fiiish said:

    Greenie said:


    My main concern is the health service, so do I vote Conservative and watch it get decimated even further, or do I vote Labour so at least it has a chance to be saved. No brainer really.

    For Welsh voters for their next Welsh Assembly elections, that sentence would go something like this:

    "My main concern is the Welsh NHS, so do I vote Labour and watch it get decimated even further, or do I vote anyone else but Labour so at least it has a chance to be saved. No brainer really."
    Its just white noise now Fiish................!
    You know, I know and everyone knows that the NHS will fall further on its arse if your mates get back in....
    I don't really want the Tories back in but in a straight race between Tories and Labour they're the lesser of two evils on the grander scale of things.

    I just have no idea where Labour get this reputation for being the best party to manage the NHS. The Welsh NHS under their management is doing shockingly compared to the English NHS and pretty much everything people hate about the Tories on the NHS (under-investment, top-down meddling, various crises, privatisation), Labour under Blair and Brown also did their fair share of the aforementioned acts. It's this sycophantic pro-Labour bleating from the sheep without any substance to back up their misguided faith that is the white noise, it's been going on for months now.
    Every doctor, nurse, hca, dentist, midwife, phlebotomist, radiographer or even receptionist that I've personally spoken to within the NHS all say that they are not happy with the way things are and if we want things better we need Labour back. That's good enough for me.
    And they have said that 5, 10 15 20 years ago as well.
  • edited May 2015

    The model was broken even way back in 95 when my wife and I both decided to quit the NHS in order to work abroad. Free health care for all can not possibly work when drugs, treatments and technology costs are becoming increasingly expensive, the population explodes and is living longer, and government revenue declines. As usual Labour supporters think money grows on trees and believe the nasty Tories motivation for existing is to destroy their healthcare, take their jobs away, and give all the savings to their rich mates. Quite why on earth intelligent people believe such rubbish is beyond me. I doubt any politician of either major party is short of a few bob, in fact most, Labour or Conservative, are probably millionaires, if not multi-millionaires. What on earth would be gained by deliberately making the population more unhealthy, more reliant on Government Welfare, just so that their rich mates can buy the latest super yacht?
    If any Labour supporter could explain to me why they continue to believe this rubbish, this myth, I'd love to hear, because I just don't get it. Do people actually think these things through!

  • Sponsored links:


  • SHG - why is health inflation higher than normal inflation?
  • But what about page 3
  • MrOneLung said:

    SHG - why is health inflation higher than normal inflation?

    Ageing population, increasing cost of ever more high tech treatments, very high cost of new drugs from the drug companies etc......
  • MrOneLung said:

    SHG - why is health inflation higher than normal inflation?

    Demand and supply.....(longer life expectancies; new drug discoveries; greater medical 'awareness' [as the result of various campaigns eg. skin cancer] etc.)
  • I'm voting for the honest candidate with the best interests of the electorate at heart.
    I refuse to vote for self serving egotistical spineless wannabe puppies.

    So I will be voting for 'none of the above'. Possibly.

    seth plum said:

    Most likely to vote against than for.

    I'm in Bromley & Chislehurst constituency.
    No idea who to vote for at present as I'm unsure if any of them deserve my vote - however seeing as a fair number of folk died in two world wars to ensure we have a democracy to partipate in, someone will get my vote.

    These views from Page 1:

    I will do one of the above.

    As put forward by the right Honourable Gentlemen;

    Arthur, Plum and Ambler

  • edited May 2015
    Poll of the London Area: (YouGov)

    Labour 46% (+2), Conservative 33% (+1), Lib Dem 9% (+1) UKIP 8% (-2), Green 3% (-2).
  • Chizz said:

    In 1997, Labour took office, following Margaret Thatcher and John Major's terms which inflicted two massive recessions, in 1981 and 1990.

    In May 2010, David Cameron "inherited" an economy that was growing at 1% per annum, with wages growing faster than inflation. George Osborne increased VAT to 20% and introduced the severe austerity programme.

    Today, the economy is growing at less than 1/3 of the rate it was when Cameron and Osborne took over. GDP per capita is lower than it was in 2008. Wage growth has slumped to its lowest sustained levels for 159 years. Osborne has added half a trillion to the National Debt. And, to compound matters, uncollected taxation is now £3bn higher than it was five years ago.

    And the Tories say we should trust them with the economy?

    But you've cherry-picked your stats there to attempt to prove your point. So let's try for a little balance. First yes there were recessions under both Thatcher and Major. But GDP rose under Thatcher by 29%.. Also by the time the electorate had forgotten history again in 1997 the economy was extremely robust and growing. It was so good, in fact, that it took Labour three terms to get it properly screwed again. The growth of 1% per annum you talk of inherited by Cameron was already only a third of the growth rates achieved during those dreadful Thatcher years and was, of course, about to fall off the cliff. Best employment ever, ultra-low inflation, stupidly cheap mortgages, no fuel tax escalators or other stealth taxes.......and you say we should gamble on Labour with the economy?
  • Sponsored links:


  • micks1950 said:

    MrOneLung said:

    SHG - why is health inflation higher than normal inflation?

    Ageing population, increasing cost of ever more high tech treatments, very high cost of new drugs from the drug companies etc......

    MrOneLung said:

    SHG - why is health inflation higher than normal inflation?

    Demand and supply.....(longer life expectancies; new drug discoveries; greater medical 'awareness' [as the result of various campaigns eg. skin cancer] etc.)
    But aren't these countered by longer living tax payers, drugs coming out of patent and being drastically reduced in price, cheaper options for treatments such as keyhole surgery etc not requiring hospital stays etc

    Maybe they need to increase car parks fees!!!
  • se9addick said:

    seth plum said:

    When I went to my local hustings last Thursday the Conservative candidate Peter Fortune introduced himself by saying 'well this is my fourth and last hustings of this campaign, and probably my last hustings ever'. If it is a question of the fight in the dog, not the dog in the fight then his opening remark was defeatist. Even the Christian Alliance woman was more positive.
    Peter Fortunes lack of enthusiasm amongst the plebs of Lewisham East resonated with David Cameron's,. I imagine Mr Cameron would rather groove in the garden with Michael Gove and his Bullenden mates than have to exert himself in the fight, his reluctance to debate head to head suggests this. I think that the Conservatives are playing to their core vote and hoping for the best, the other parties seem to be trying to play to a wider audience.
    I will make a prediction, Peter Fortune will not win in Lewisham East.

    Is he the incumbent ? If so, what's his majority ?
    Not the incumbent.
  • MrOneLung said:

    micks1950 said:

    MrOneLung said:

    SHG - why is health inflation higher than normal inflation?

    Ageing population, increasing cost of ever more high tech treatments, very high cost of new drugs from the drug companies etc......

    MrOneLung said:

    SHG - why is health inflation higher than normal inflation?

    Demand and supply.....(longer life expectancies; new drug discoveries; greater medical 'awareness' [as the result of various campaigns eg. skin cancer] etc.)
    But aren't these countered by longer living tax payers, drugs coming out of patent and being drastically reduced in price, cheaper options for treatments such as keyhole surgery etc not requiring hospital stays etc

    Maybe they need to increase car parks fees!!!
    Taxpayers are living longer but the length of time they actually spend paying tax is still the same length.

    There's also the rarely-discussed issue of the fact that people aren't dying of simple things as often and the care for those things are relatively cheap (broken bones, major bleeding, breathing problems etc.), meaning people are living long enough to become ill by illnesses that are expensive to treat, such as cancer, and instead of dying quickly of cancer they spend years on end receiving treatment. This isn't a bad thing at all and shows how far modern medicine has come but the fact is instead of people having a quick and cheap death we're adjusting towards a healthcare system where more and more of the patients currently in treatment have been in treatment for years and will be in treatment for years to come, usually fairly expensive treatment at that.
  • MrOneLung said:

    SHG - why is health inflation higher than normal inflation?

    There was a US report in 2010 which compared our NHS with health service with those from a six other countries. It was quite interesting as the NHS ranked a creditable third overall, but interestingly ranked 1st for efficiency. This was interesting because the US ranked 7th . You would imagine if you believe what you read and hear that privatisation increases the efficiency of the NHS but you can’t get more privatised than the US.

    Why does the NHS inflation rise every year above normal inflation? It is a combination of a number of things. There is an increasing population and an increasing elderly population aligned with new treatments with higher costs. And our lifestyles create issues in themselves. It was calculated by the last Labour government what they had to provide to make the NHS stronger. Whilst everybody bar the most ardent opponent will accept this, some say that whilst improvements were made, they could have been achieved with less money through greater efficiencies. I think this is where the report is useful. Everything can of course be made more efficient, but this is not that easy in a health service which was already more efficient than those of a number of other comparable countries.

  • I work in the NHS (front line) trust me the cuts the Tories have made are biting.

    Just so we understand how NHS costs are escalating and where most of it has gone relative to inflation (staffing costs).

    Spending in real terms is virtually unchanged since 2010. It would be more accurate to say that this Government has struggled to make available NHS resources (increasing in nominal terms) stretch to meet escalating demand for services.

    The real problem is more older people are being hospitalised and they cost a lot more than younger people. It's not cuts it's the sheer logistics of trying to keep resources in step with escalating demand, but hey, the NHS is the best game of political football we've got.
  • If money is so tight in the NHS why was there a £722mn net surplus in their accounts for 2013/4 and why has the Oxleas NHS trust spent money on an advertising hoarding at the bottom of the North Stand?
  • One memory of the Thatcher/Major years, which I mention because it has been raised in this thread, was council house sell offs and 15% interest rstes. Nice bit of churning there from which those in the financial sector could get their cut.
    Now we have the proposal for Housing Association right to buy which I have already discussed. The Conservative party are not a party of home ownership for a young person leaving care at 18 in Lewisham East with a minimum wage job at Nandos. Indeed the Conservative party is a party of homelessness for such an 18 year old given their record on social housing.
  • edited May 2015
    seth plum said:


    The Conservative party are not a party of home ownership for a young person leaving care at 18 in Lewisham East with a minimum wage job at Nandos. Indeed the Conservative party is a party of homelessness for such an 18 year old given their record on social housing.

    Well at least they have a job under The Tories. Under Labour they'd be jobless.

  • MrOneLung said:

    SHG - why is health inflation higher than normal inflation?

    Micks1950 answered your question. Year on year just keeping up with the new technology that patients expect is phenomenonly costly.

    Some very good answers above but I'll give you an example from the field I know about.

    20 years ago if a hospital bought a new CT scanner they could expect it to last and be effective for say 15 years. Now to all intents and purposes it will be technically obsolete in about five years. Why ? Because the information it provides is not good enough to satisfy the demands of the technology spin offs that use that data set. Cancer planning systems for example are only as good as the information you put into them. Treatments are year on year improving and becoming more complex. Complex needs good data otherwise it's not only inefficient but potentially dangerous.

    20 years ago, cancer services didn't have real access to MRI or PET now it's crucial to combine the information from many modalities to create good treatment pathways and better outcomes. Outcomes that the public have a right and expect.

    You can't go cheap on health. It doesn't work.



Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!