Someone called me a racist............

[sir danny cullip]

which in tree hugging beardy circles makes you a racist

whats the country coming to . . .

My thoughts exactly

 

[Caveman]

The NHS is a mess and needs sorting out! Not a racist comment at all.

 

[zefarelly]

agreed . . .its a hideously innefficient beast.

if they sacked all the un necessary managers and employed and properly paid a few more nurses instead it'd help
also I think they should make whingers sign when theyre admitted. the threat of litigation is crippling also. FFS theyre trained professionals, let them get on with their jobs.

 

[Norman Baker suck my lozenge]

Fraid I agree with this.

You are not a racist Harty for raising these questions but it's pathetic posing the question as a choice between much-needed funding for the NHS and some money being give to the most desperate people on earth

We now full well there are millions of choices been made on public spending - how about the billions we just spent on a useless war in Iraq that has turned that country into a playground for terrorists?

Or how about, god forbid, we reverse Thatcher and Blair's selfish tax cuts and spend more money on both the NHS and disaster relief for the dying?

You could have posed the questions that way, but the way you did Harty just turned this thread into a carnival for NSC's foremost xenophobic bigots. Piss-poor.

I think you are wrong here my friend.
It's ok for the government to say skools and ospitals will suffer if they reduce fuel tax,so why don't they say skools and ospitals will suffer because they're gonna send in excess of £100 million of our money to Pakistan,Hartys right in My opinion,charity begins at home.Sort out our own problems,if there's any money left then help out disaster stricken countrys.

 

[Lokki 7]

Harty you are not a racist. But if one of the wealthiest nations on earth can not give £30million in response to a natural disaster of unimaginable scale without drawing criticism then I despair. As was mentioned on telly last night, Simon Cowell pays more than £30m in tax in a year, it is not a lot of money for this country to donate and it will not detract from the NHS budget. It will however save lives and alleviate severe distress and suffering. Who cares where those people happen to live? It is money well spent.

 

[larus]

Hear hear. In pakistan, they are paying for people to get tents so that they can LIVE. In worthing, its more likely that the operations that are being cancelled are for minor operations. Put something in some bloody perspective for once.

If you want someting to moan about (which isnt unusual for you judging by your constant whinging on your phone in) how about complain about the £30 MILLION going towards a new nuclear "defence system" that our government is paying for.

Stop being so heartless.

You'd be thinking very differently if you were in Pakistan right now.

Well put BAG, and spot on.

 

[larus]

Fraid I agree with this.

You are not a racist Harty for raising these questions but it's pathetic posing the question as a choice between much-needed funding for the NHS and some money being give to the most desperate people on earth

We now full well there are millions of choices been made on public spending - how about the billions we just spent on a useless war in Iraq that has turned that country into a playground for terrorists?

Or how about, god forbid, we reverse Thatcher and Blair's selfish tax cuts and spend more money on both the NHS and disaster relief for the dying?

You could have posed the questions that way, but the way you did Harty just turned this thread into a carnival for NSC's foremost xenophobic bigots. Piss-poor.

Not often I agree with LI on political issues, but on (part) of this I do.

My only disagreement would be in the assumption that by throwing huge amounts more money at the NHS it will improve it.

IMO, it needs private enterprise to run the servcies, but delivery still free to. Give companies the incentive to make it efficient,albeit by protecting workers etc, but don't be afraid to let people make a profit from a public service. Gordon Brown has proved that by throwing money at the NHS, it doesn;t improve it....

 

[ben andrews' girlfriend]

I love you, Laura.

Love you too Max

 

[Dave the OAP]

Laura

Did you hear about mark?

 

[ben andrews' girlfriend]

Laura

Did you hear about mark?

Yup

 

[binky]

Fraid I agree with this.

Or how about, god forbid, we reverse Thatcher and Blair's selfish tax cuts and spend more money on both the NHS and disaster relief for the dying?

I wasn't aware that the current government, (headed by Tony Blair), had actually made any tax cuts.
Could you identify them for me please.
Personally, I'm paying more direct and indirect taxes now than I ever have.
If you add on the "taxes" where we now pay far more for government funded services, (Passports, Dentistry, MOT etc), we are in poorer shape than at any time since WW2.

 

[Richard Whiteley]

There is a growing trend to acuse people of racism as a knee jerk responce to something someone doesn't agree with or understand.

There is a growing trend from right wing numbnuts to throw racism into any argument so that they can pull out the old PC card. Ends any kind of sensible debate.

 

[enigma]

There is a growing trend from right wing numbnuts to throw racism into any argument so that they can pull out the old PC card. Ends any kind of sensible debate.

too true.

 

[London Irish]

IMO, it needs private enterprise to run the servcies, but delivery still free to. Give companies the incentive to make it efficient,albeit by protecting workers etc, but don't be afraid to let people make a profit from a public service. Gordon Brown has proved that by throwing money at the NHS, it doesn;t improve it....

That is a right-wing myth I'm afraid. Numerous indepedent studies have shown that private finance initiatives (PFI) and public-private partnerships (PPP) are costing the taxpayer far more. That is why respected non-political associations like the British Medical Association oppose them so vehemently.

Yes, the NHS does need much more funding, the reasons are very simple, we have an ageing population that requires far more health care and the cost of treatments is soaring.

We simply have to decide as a society whether we want an expanded NHS to give our elderly the respect and dignity they deserve in our old age, or do we want to go down the current road of lining the pockets of the shareholders of rapacious companies who are creaming off vast profits at the expense of the taxpayer.

It's a straightforward moral choice. Most continental European countries spend far more per head of population on health care than we do.

And guess what. Those same countries also have bigger disaster aid budgets than we do too

 

[zefarelly]

the cost of treatments is soaring.

its only a minor issue in the grand scheme of things, but the pharmasutical companies make a bloody fortune out of the NHS . . . .its about time they got beaten up lots by the purchasers

 

[Barrel of Fun]

You only have to look as far as Pharmaceutical companies and realise who is profitting from the NHS, as Zafarelly pointed out. Check them out on the stock market. They are making an absolute killing.

 

[Lokki 7]

Check them out on the stock market. They are making an absolute killing.

And providing a vast amount of tax revenue for the government in the process, not to mention employment opportunities across the country. Plus of course many of the shareholders will be ordinary members of the public who have invested in pensions. It is not just fat cats that benefit from these "stock market killings". There is also the argument that a high profit marin for pharmacuticle companies provides an incentive to develop new drugs and treatments which benefits us all in the long run.

 

[zefarelly]

They are making an absolute killing.

sounds like the drugs they gave my Dad when he had cancer . . . it was working at the tumors fine, just f***ed his liver first

 

[Dave the OAP]

What really got me about the Pakistan disaster is the fact that certain european countries pledged support and then reneged on that support...France, Germany, Holland, Belgium to name 4

With us its a bit different as although people don't like it, as a hangover from Empire days, we are still regarded as some sort of "beholdent parent - (sp?) Also there is a huge Pakistani population here and TB and his crew must be seen to be acting on their behalf as well as ours

 

[Barrel of Fun]

And providing a vast amount of tax revenue for the government in the process, not to mention employment opportunities across the country. Plus of course many of the shareholders will be ordinary members of the public who have invested in pensions. It is not just fat cats that benefit from these "stock market killings". There is also the argument that a high profit marin for pharmacuticle companies provides an incentive to develop new drugs and treatments which benefits us all in the long run.

You can very well go round and round in circles. The fact of the matter is, people who are investing in stock markets are more than liekly to use that money for other purposes and so it is leaving "healthcare" and going towards other products or services.