The Politics Thread 2019

[Norman]

2 hours ago, ariotofmyown said:

Trump this morning...

"I don’t see [the NHS] being on the table. Somebody asked me a question today and I say everything is up for negotiation, because everything is. But that’s something I would not see as part of trade. That’s not trade.”

Think he is actually senile. Yesterday he said...

"When you’re dealing on trade, everything is on the table. So NHS or anything else. A lot more than that,”

He doesn't know what it is or how it works. Yesterday he was asked 3 times in a conference before May had to step in to explain it to him. Only now does he realise it isn't open in a trade deal.

Because, and I repeat,, it is protected in law.

It doesn't stop the media trying to spin that Trump wants to buy the NHS, though.

[Curtains]

4 minutes ago, McRamFan said:

Labour's, under Blair, however Blair was a soft version of Thatcher, and carried on with some of her polices and practices, such as the decimation of manufacturing and illegal wars. 

Go read the first article you posted, in full.  Then you will see that PFI was a throw of the dice because Thatcher had shafted the country that hard, there was little or no other options.  Those that objected to PFI, had no alternative.  It was either go PFI and be screwed at 90%, or do nothing and remain screwed at 99.99%.

Even the right wing telegraph cannot completely attribute it all to Labour.

 

NHS needs discussions though as we know it’s not perfect and just throwing money at it in the wrong areas won’t work. 

[McRamFan]

3 minutes ago, Norman said:

Because, and I repeat,, it is protected in law.

Please post a link to the legislation regarding that.

If you are relying on the Health Protection Agency Act 2004, it was repealed by Health and Social Care Act 2012.

Here is a useful link. https://www.sochealth.co.uk/national-health-service/health-law/

 

[Norman]

1 minute ago, McRamFan said:

Please post a link to the legislation regarding that.

If you are relying on the Health Protection Agency Act 2004, it was repealed by Health and Social Care Act 2012.

Here is a useful link. https://www.sochealth.co.uk/national-health-service/health-law/

 

No I am not. And I have already posted a trade agreement we are part of, that states that it is protected against any FTA.

"World Trade Organisation’s General Agreement on Trade and Services (GATS) requires that public services are safeguarded from the terms of Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), provided that they are not supplied on a commercial basis or in competition."

[McRamFan]

27 minutes ago, Norman said:

No I am not. And I have already posted a trade agreement we are part of, that states that it is protected against any FTA.

"World Trade Organisation’s General Agreement on Trade and Services (GATS) requires that public services are safeguarded from the terms of Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), provided that they are not supplied on a commercial basis or in competition."

It is not protected by UK law.  The governments first act was to weaken the NHS, in 2012.  It may now be safe as they do not have a working majority.

WTO protects public sector jobs, health, education social security etc, in that you are correct, however we have seen an erosion of the rules protecting the NHS and more 'private' companies move in.  So how effective WTO rules will be in protecting the NHS is a very gray area.

Even if the core is protected, what is not protected is supply lines, and the way the US does business.

[Norman]

12 minutes ago, McRamFan said:

It is not protected by UK law.  The governments first act was to weaken the NHS, in 2012.  It may now be safe as they do not have a working majority.

WTO protects public sector jobs, health, education social security etc, in that you are correct, however we have seen an erosion of the rules protecting the NHS and more 'private' companies move in.  So how effective WTO rules will be in protecting the NHS is a very gray area.

Even if the core is protected, what is not protected is supply lines, and the way the US does business.

No it's not gray.

The NHS was protected by the EU, who agreed is still meets the criteria, in all FSAs and in the TTIP agreement, where both sides agree it still meets the criteria. Everyone agrees in still fits the criteria.

You are mixing up the laws on FTAs and the laws protecting the NHS through our parliament that makes sure it conforms with the trade agreement laws I posted.

If the USA can provide private contracts cheaper than we currently have, then why shouldn't they?

It would never get through parliament, hasn't got through parliament and Trump understands now that it can't be part of any FTA. As stated yesterday.

 

[jono]

We all want the NHS to be there and be free. The fear of ill health for any of us is horrific. The NHS is a treasure and we must all continue to value it and ensure its continuation. I don't believe any political party doesn't want that or understand its what 99% of the electorate insist on.

Yet I am left with some interesting thoughts and questions

Should the NHS really fund things like fertility treatment in an over crowded country/world ? There will be other "conditions" that our right to get "treatment" is assumed - when perhaps we should be saying, you aren't hampered in your everyday life. This isn't necessary for your general health wellbeing and comfort so if you want it then just maybe you should try and sort it out yourself ? 

The NHS does have money to recruit new staff - there are vacancies but the work is hard and skilled - there don't seem to be enough qualified takers. So is the problem just wages, or is it education and attitude ? I cant help feeling it is a combination of many factors way beyond party politics

The huge number of vastly overweight, or drug damaged people who's lifestyle and choices are frankly dire. At what point do we insist people take some personal responsibility and an obligation to change their habits in order to get ongoing help ? I struggle to accept its all about poverty. The numbers are huge, they can be seen on the streets every day .. when did we all become so unfit despite the decline in smoking ?

I am staggered beyond belief at the disability equipment that is handed out .. not that it shouldn't be, its wonderful- but that it doesn't get re used or re allocated to anything like the degree it should be.  

 

[Stive Pesley]

9 minutes ago, jono said:

We all want the NHS to be there and be free. The fear of ill health for any of us is horrific. The NHS is a treasure and we must all continue to value it and ensure its continuation. I don't believe any political party doesn't want that or understand its what 99% of the electorate insist on.

Yet I am left with some interesting thoughts and questions

Should the NHS really fund things like fertility treatment in an over crowded country/world ? There will be other "conditions" that our right to get "treatment" is assumed - when perhaps we should be saying, you aren't hampered in your everyday life. This isn't necessary for your general health wellbeing and comfort so if you want it then just maybe you should try and sort it out yourself ? 

The NHS does have money to recruit new staff - there are vacancies but the work is hard and skilled - there don't seem to be enough qualified takers. So is the problem just wages, or is it education and attitude ? I cant help feeling it is a combination of many factors way beyond party politics

The huge number of vastly overweight, or drug damaged people who's lifestyle and choices are frankly dire. At what point do we insist people take some personal responsibility and an obligation to change their habits in order to get ongoing help ? I struggle to accept its all about poverty. The numbers are huge, they can be seen on the streets every day .. when did we all become so unfit despite the decline in smoking ?

I am staggered beyond belief at the disability equipment that is handed out .. not that it shouldn't be, its wonderful- but that it doesn't get re used or re allocated to anything like the degree it should be.  

 

You raise some good/interesting points  and there is definitely a big conversation to be had around all of these. One thing that seems clear though is that selling off chunks of the NHS into private hands does little or nothing to answer any of these questions. If anything it makes the questions harder to answer as suddenly money/profit enters the equation as an influencing factor.

The biggest changes needed are to focus far more NHS funding and recruitment in areas that will save money and lead to better health down the line

An example I've given before is mental health early intervention services. Loads of evidence shows that the earlier you catch and treat mental health problems, the better the long term outcome., and the subsequent burden on services will reduce. But because that's counter-intuitive (to treat stuff that hasn't yet blown up into a massive problem) and NHS trusts are struggling with targets - these are the first areas to get cut. 

 

 

[GboroRam]

7 hours ago, Curtains said:

At least you admitted it was Labour 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/9356942/Blair-defends-PFI-as-NHS-trusts-face-bankruptcy.html

I think you are arguing two opposite positions at the same time. 

Either Labour is evil due to its consistent over-reliance on the market and the imperialist policies (PFI brought the private sector into public projects, Blair backed the war in Syria etc.) or it's an evil commie left wing party destined to bankrupt the country with its taxing the rich and nationalising everything policies. 

You have to acknowledge that the party of Blair is different to the party of Corbyn. You want your cake and eat it - that's why you can gloss over the tories' policy of continuing with the PFI model, and just criticise labour for PFI.

[Curtains]

1 hour ago, GboroRam said:

I think you are arguing two opposite positions at the same time. 

Either Labour is evil due to its consistent over-reliance on the market and the imperialist policies (PFI brought the private sector into public projects, Blair backed the war in Syria etc.) or it's an evil commie left wing party destined to bankrupt the country with its taxing the rich and nationalising everything policies. 

You have to acknowledge that the party of Blair is different to the party of Corbyn. You want your cake and eat it - that's why you can gloss over the tories' policy of continuing with the PFI model, and just criticise labour for PFI.

PFI is contract based and not easy to scrap. 

Blair and Brown introduced it .

Corbyn wants to renationalise everything  so good luck with that as if he gets in people need to sell all their shares 

 

[jono]

@StivePesley

I think the thing worrying me is that whatever the government throws at it, the ever increasing demands will soak it up with ease. 

look at something like liver disease .. this used to be an oldies disease, years of down the pub after hard graft or endless business lunches for office based work. .. now it’s a different animal. It’s the only major cause of mortality that is rising and by rising I mean 450% in the last 20 years. Most of this increase comes from those in their 30’s. We all joke about getting rat arsed but it isn’t a joke because it has consequences. We are going backwards to the days when folk died in big numbers from booze in their early 30’s. Then you add in the diabetes thing and it gets pretty scary. I see youngsters in their mid 20’s who in their early teens had normal body shapes but in just 10 years they have significantly damaged their bodies - this has always happened but in the past is was much later in life. I can a see a time when the NHS on top of the vast and growing aging population is going to have another tier of society to look after for a very long time. 

We can rant on about cuts privatisations but in the end there is only so much you can get from the tax system and it won’t  enough

yep .. this is my gloom mongers head on ? but while it won’t happen tomorrow it will happen and it doesn’t matter whether it’s Corbyn or Boris that are faced with it ... neither of them have an answer 

 

 

[RamNut]

Just read the headline that Trump said  Brexit is no problem for Ireland.

Love the quote by the irish pm. "He's the president of America and there are nearly 200 countries in the world, so I don't think it's possible for him to have an in-depth understanding of issues in every single county".

?

[1967Ram]

On 03/06/2019 at 12:56, maxjam said:

Meet your potential new (President Trump backed) Prime Minister!

 

 

Support the wealth creators and invest in our country..................................... that's why I say,

"Duck business!"

What a clown this bloke is.

[eddie]

11 hours ago, RamNut said:

Just read the headline that Trump said  Brexit is no problem for Ireland.

Love the quote by the irish pm. "He's the president of America and there are nearly 200 countries in the world, so I don't think it's possible for him to have an in-depth understanding of issues in every single county".

?

Varadkar said that, but he was thinking "Dumbass, the inflatable Trump has a greater in-depth understanding of issues"

[Leeds Ram]

15 hours ago, jono said:

@StivePesley

I think the thing worrying me is that whatever the government throws at it, the ever increasing demands will soak it up with ease. 

look at something like liver disease .. this used to be an oldies disease, years of down the pub after hard graft or endless business lunches for office based work. .. now it’s a different animal. It’s the only major cause of mortality that is rising and by rising I mean 450% in the last 20 years. Most of this increase comes from those in their 30’s. We all joke about getting rat arsed but it isn’t a joke because it has consequences. We are going backwards to the days when folk died in big numbers from booze in their early 30’s. Then you add in the diabetes thing and it gets pretty scary. I see youngsters in their mid 20’s who in their early teens had normal body shapes but in just 10 years they have significantly damaged their bodies - this has always happened but in the past is was much later in life. I can a see a time when the NHS on top of the vast and growing aging population is going to have another tier of society to look after for a very long time. 

We can rant on about cuts privatisations but in the end there is only so much you can get from the tax system and it won’t  enough

yep .. this is my gloom mongers head on ? but while it won’t happen tomorrow it will happen and it doesn’t matter whether it’s Corbyn or Boris that are faced with it ... neither of them have an answer 

 

 

I mean the growth in diabetes and obesity is more related to the sedentary lifestyles we live which includes a growing number of people in jobs which don't require physical exertion. I'm a PhD student and i spend 90% of my day in front of a computer sitting down reading. I live close enough to uni to walk but far enough away it constitutes decent exercise, but loads of students live further and thus get the bus. If you end up in that camp you could legitimately be on your feet for 5-10 minutes a day. If you add in that jobs for people increasingly are taking up beyond the 40 hours (I often work 60 hours a week with part-time tutoring mixed in) then going to the gym or maintaining a regime of exercise becomes increasingly difficult. 

I think there are ways around it, so i use the train a lot and i walk to and from the station twice to three times a week which constitutes 40 minutes walk each away from where I live. I also play tennis during term time and I generally have 1 1/2 meals a day in order to adjust my calorie intake to my more sedentary lifestyle. When i was a kid, I was always playing football, tennis or walking and had a very healthy body weight and this gradually declined during university, especially when i was on medication where i ballooned up as a side effect ! 

Since, I've made these changes I've lost 2 stone this year and could do with shifting another stone of weight or so if I'm being honest.  I think these increases in problems are a natural uptick in a relatively new formulation of increased stress, longer hours and less physical activity in the workplace. 

[eddie]

Remember a month or so ago when I suggested on here that the Government, if they so wished, could prorogue (discontinue as opposed to closing) the parliamentary session as we approach Halloween, thus ensuring that we leave the EU without a deal by preventing any vote or dissent within the House?

Apparently Dominic Raab is now advocating just such an approach.

Kill me now, before I write any more Tory policy.

[eddie]

20 minutes ago, old ram 15 said:

I mean the growth in diabetes and obesity is more related to the sedentary lifestyles we live which includes a growing number of people in jobs which don't require physical exertion. I'm a PhD student and i spend 90% of my day in front of a computer sitting down reading. I live close enough to uni to walk but far enough away it constitutes decent exercise, but loads of students live further and thus get the bus. If you end up in that camp you could legitimately be on your feet for 5-10 minutes a day. If you add in that jobs for people increasingly are taking up beyond the 40 hours (I often work 60 hours a week with part-time tutoring mixed in) then going to the gym or maintaining a regime of exercise becomes increasingly difficult. 

I think there are ways around it, so i use the train a lot and i walk to and from the station twice to three times a week which constitutes 40 minutes walk each away from where I live. I also play tennis during term time and I generally have 1 1/2 meals a day in order to adjust my calorie intake to my more sedentary lifestyle. When i was a kid, I was always playing football, tennis or walking and had a very healthy body weight and this gradually declined during university, especially when i was on medication where i ballooned up as a side effect ! 

Since, I've made these changes I've lost 2 stone this year and could do with shifting another stone of weight or so if I'm being honest.  I think these increases in problems are a natural uptick in a relatively new formulation of increased stress, longer hours and less physical activity in the workplace. 

I've now lost 5 stone in the last year, just by eating sensibly and becoming a little less sedentary.

I start swimming next week in an attempt to shed another 2 stone. If I can do it, anyone can.

[jono]

6 hours ago, old ram 15 said:

I mean the growth in diabetes and obesity is more related to the sedentary lifestyles we live which includes a growing number of people in jobs which don't require physical exertion. I'm a PhD student and i spend 90% of my day in front of a computer sitting down reading. I live close enough to uni to walk but far enough away it constitutes decent exercise, but loads of students live further and thus get the bus. If you end up in that camp you could legitimately be on your feet for 5-10 minutes a day. If you add in that jobs for people increasingly are taking up beyond the 40 hours (I often work 60 hours a week with part-time tutoring mixed in) then going to the gym or maintaining a regime of exercise becomes increasingly difficult. 

I think there are ways around it, so i use the train a lot and i walk to and from the station twice to three times a week which constitutes 40 minutes walk each away from where I live. I also play tennis during term time and I generally have 1 1/2 meals a day in order to adjust my calorie intake to my more sedentary lifestyle. When i was a kid, I was always playing football, tennis or walking and had a very healthy body weight and this gradually declined during university, especially when i was on medication where i ballooned up as a side effect ! 

Since, I've made these changes I've lost 2 stone this year and could do with shifting another stone of weight or so if I'm being honest.  I think these increases in problems are a natural uptick in a relatively new formulation of increased stress, longer hours and less physical activity in the workplace. 

It is  definitely about sedentary activities. The manual work isn't there. I saw a programme where todays kids were put through a series of physical tests that 1950's kids did.

Fascinating results which from memory showed something like the following

The bottom 10% of kids from both eras recorded similar results 

Of the Top 10% the modern kids were a whisker better than the 1950's kids

The scary one was the 80% in the middle who were way way behind their 1950's counter parts.

I still  believe that processed foods are also part of it and doing something very odd to our bodies in terms of fat storage and body/organ function. We have this sugar tax but I prefer avoid any of the artificial sweeteners.  At least with sugar we know what it is and we know its effects. 

[Leeds Ram]

1 hour ago, jono said:

It is  definitely about sedentary activities. The manual work isn't there. I saw a programme where todays kids were put through a series of physical tests that 1950's kids did.

Fascinating results which from memory showed something like the following

The bottom 10% of kids from both eras recorded similar results 

Of the Top 10% the modern kids were a whisker better than the 1950's kids

The scary one was the 80% in the middle who were way way behind their 1950's counter parts.

I still  believe that processed foods are also part of it and doing something very odd to our bodies in terms of fat storage and body/organ function. We have this sugar tax but I prefer avoid any of the artificial sweeteners.  At least with sugar we know what it is and we know its effects. 

I mean with sugar it depends, i was talking to a close friend about this and we were both saying sugar is the crack of food. I think the general lack of fitness is simply directly related to the growth of office jobs and bad food being in abundance. 

[McRamFan]

15 hours ago, jono said:

processed foods

Nail on the head.

Biggest consumer of processed food - USA, 2nd UK.

Most obese country USA, 2nd UK.

You should not eat anything, that is processed, that has more than 5 ingredients, or if you struggle with that, has an ingredient that you cannot pronounce or recognise.