Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
ExpandMyMind

Jeremy Corbyn releases leaked government docs

40 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

and then
9 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

I keep hearing narratives like this, and it doesn't make any sense to me. Under what circumstances could an American company "buy" elements of the National Health Service, and run them at a profit whilst still maintaining statutory standards ? The concept itself seems irrational ? 

Sounds like fear-mongering to me.  I don't know enough facts about the NHS to make judgments but I do know the American system.  Even broken, it guarantees care for everyone and usually the poor get exactly the same care as the rich.  Now that we're bringing in millions of non-contributing "immigrants" and are guaranteeing them healthcare, housing and education it's only a matter of time before the system either crashes or begins to seriously decline in quality.  It isn't magic, it's math.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
RoofGardener
10 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

The NHS subsidies medicines. Why would the UK continue to subsidise an industry it just privatised ? 

Umm... no it doesn't ? The pharmaceutical industries are private industries. They sell to the NHS, among many other organisations worldwide. 

Why would any trade deal with the USA change that ? 

Sure, hypothetically, the USA could sell pharmaceuticals to the NHS for less money than the existing providers. But that would only benefit the NHS. 

So where is this "NHS being sold" meme come from ? On the face of it, it just seems economic nonsense ? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Risky
3 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Umm... no it doesn't ? The pharmaceutical industries are private industries. They sell to the NHS, among many other organisations worldwide. 

Why would any trade deal with the USA change that ? 

Sure, hypothetically, the USA could sell pharmaceuticals to the NHS for less money than the existing providers. But that would only benefit the NHS. 

So where is this "NHS being sold" meme come from ? On the face of it, it just seems economic nonsense ? 

They will dominate the pharma industry in the UK and you'll be paying the same price for drugs as our Americans friends do. The NHS will be commercialised. This means that who ever gets access or buy's certain aspects of the NHS will do so with maximising profits in mind. Generic drugs will face greater pressure to stay out of the British market. i.e. higher prices. Less choice of drugs. and less legal recourse.

You tell me if thats a good thing. And before you say that they won't privatise the NHS or open it up then think again.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
8 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

They will dominate the pharma industry in the UK and you'll be paying the same price for drugs as our Americans friends do. The NHS will be commercialised. This means that who ever gets access or buy's certain aspects of the NHS will do so with maximising profits in mind. Generic drugs will face greater pressure to stay out of the British market. i.e. higher prices. Less choice of drugs. and less legal recourse.

You tell me if thats a good thing. And before you say that they won't privatise the NHS or open it up then think again.  

I certainly wouldn't say that your scenario represents a "good thing" - for from it. . But I'd also say that your scenario is disconnected and irrational ? 

Do accomplish what you suggest would require MULTIPLE Acts of Parliament. It seems to me incredibly unlikely that any Government would undertake such a thing, as 

  1. Such an Act would be HIGHLY unlikely to get a majority in the House, and
  2. It would be electoral suicide. 
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Risky
5 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

I certainly wouldn't say that your scenario represents a "good thing" - for from it. . But I'd also say that your scenario is disconnected and irrational ? 

Do accomplish what you suggest would require MULTIPLE Acts of Parliament. It seems to me incredibly unlikely that any Government would undertake such a thing, as 

  1. Such an Act would be HIGHLY unlikely to get a majority in the House, and
  2. It would be electoral suicide. 

Well next time you speak with an American be sure to tell them your views on medicine prices and private health cover in the U.S. and any trade deal with the Americans will be across the field and EVERYTHING will be up for discussion. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stevewinn
7 hours ago, Setton said:

Gosh well if the Tories say so, it must be true. 

Well if the remainers are saying it, it must be false.

Funny how communists see the U.S as a bad guy, in the same way Socialists do. not because the U.S is a bad guy, just that they don't want the illusion of their socialist system being a total disaster.

 

7 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

The same people who’ve been treating the NHS like crap for years - the TINO party.

 

 

 

 

Tory In Name Only.

Yes, the NHS safe in Labours hands. care to look at PFI and the debt that's put the NHS in.

the same labour that has privatised services in the NHS by 6% compared to the Tories 3%

Labour the party who always leave office with the public finances in worse state than when they took office. (resulting in whoever follows them having to make cuts) (and then because of the budget breaking EU rules we have to follow EU spending regulations)

The UK was under EU budget control from 2008 when Decision 2008/713 stated the UK was running an excessive deficit and had to take action to reduce it. The deficit worsened thanks to the great recession, so they reinforced the requirement. They required us to make spending cuts and tax rises worth 1.75% of GDP a year  (£38.5bn a year at current values) from 2010/11 to 2014/15. In 2015 they reviewed the position and renewed the requirement to cut spending or raise taxes as they remained concerned about the level of state debt to GDP. They set specific reducing deficit targets of 4.1% of GDP for 2015-165 and 2.7% of GDP for 2016/17. The UK government always filed the relevant figures and submitted to the discipline imposed, as it is required to do by Treaty .

In 2017 they decided the UK had complied and lifted the excessive deficit plan after a nine year programme of cuts. They however said “As from 2017-18 the UK is subject to the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact and should progress towards the minimum medium term objective at an appropriate pace…and comply with the debt criteria in accordance with Article 2(1a) of Regulation EC No 1467/97.” (i.e. the aim of economic policy had to be to get state borrowing down to 60% of GDP from around 87% over the medium term).

get back to me.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
52 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

Well next time you speak with an American be sure to tell them your views on medicine prices and private health cover in the U.S. and any trade deal with the Americans will be across the field and EVERYTHING will be up for discussion. 

A trade deal can't trump Parliament, @Captain Risky. The NHS can't be privatised without multiple Acts of Parliament. End of :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stevewinn
12 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

A trade deal can't trump Parliament, @Captain Risky. The NHS can't be privatised without multiple Acts of Parliament. End of :) 

Its crazy talk from crazy people losing politically. the same ones who lost the referendum and are set to lose this election also, their all drinking in the last chance saloon,

they cant tell us who's selling it, who's buying it, and how much its worth.

What i find strange there would be no need to sign a deal with any third country that did damage to the UK. We trade perfectly well now, so we should only sign a deal which improved on current trading. It is absurd to say we would have to privatise the NHS to have a FTA with the USA. No UK government or Parliament would accept such a proposition, and the President of the USA has already said he understands that.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
1 hour ago, stevewinn said:

. It is absurd to say we would have to privatise the NHS to have a FTA with the USA. 

Probably why no one has said that, as you know perfectly well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stevewinn
1 hour ago, Setton said:

Probably why no one has said that, as you know perfectly well. 

pleasing to see we are in agreement and you have finally abandoned the silly notion of selling the NHS in order for a trade deal with the U.S. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
1 hour ago, stevewinn said:

pleasing to see we are in agreement and you have finally abandoned the silly notion of selling the NHS in order for a trade deal with the U.S. 

 

Never said that. 

At least Boris is vaguely competent at lying. You just make yourself look stupid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
stevewinn
10 minutes ago, Setton said:

Never said that. 

At least Boris is vaguely competent at lying. You just make yourself look stupid. 

You never say a lot of things. But at least you agree with me. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
2 hours ago, stevewinn said:

You never say a lot of things.

That's true. Because unlike certain people, I'm not in the habit of making things up out of blind loyalty to an ideology. 

But that's just me. 

Quote

But at least you agree with me. 

On that very specific statement, which no one has disagreed with, yes. 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RabidMongoose
13 minutes ago, Setton said:

That's true. Because unlike certain people, I'm not in the habit of making things up out of blind loyalty to an ideology. 

But that's just me. 

On that very specific statement, which no one has disagreed with, yes. 

Oh yes you are!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.