FREEDOM!!!! [2]

Well, it is for NHS doctors at least. 250 000 pounds a year and all that.

dont knock the NHS. its something a lot of countries could only dream about. Most of the time its perfectly well run and effective. But this is the Freedom thread so dont expect any compliments about anything English. or a fair assesment of its many great qualities.

I didnt knock the NHS- I knocked the ongoing privatisation by the back door that started under Blair and has continued under the Tories, and which thanks to devolution Scotland, NI and Wales have managed to avoid.

"The Blair Government, whilst leaving services free at point of use, has encouraged outsourcing of medical services and support to the private sector. Under the Private Finance Initiative, an increasing number of hospitals have been built (or rebuilt) by private sector consortia; hospitals may have both medical services (such as "surgicentres"),and non-medical services (such as catering) provided under long-term contracts by the private sector. A study by a consultancy company which works for the Department of Health shows that every £200 million spent on privately financed hospitals will result in the loss of 1000 doctors and nurses. The first PFI hospitals contain some 28 per cent fewer beds than the ones they replaced.
The NHS has also encountered significant problems with the IT innovations accompanying the Blair reforms. The NHS's National Programme for IT (NPfIT), believed to be the largest IT project in the world, is running significantly behind schedule and above budget, with friction between the Government and the programme contractors. Originally budgeted at £2.3 billion, present estimates are £20-30 billion and rising."- wiki

bungobaggins wrote:Hmmm, I was led to believe that the NHS was all puppies and sunshine.

In other words, you can argue about breeds of puppies and hours of sunshine, but it's all light-years ahead of current American healthcare.

That certainly goes without saying.

If the health service is better in Scotland why is it your health is worse?

''However, the report also notes that the Scots tend to have worse health than the English, and life expectancy is between two and three years shorter.
However, a spokesman for the Department of Health said: “England spends less per person on health care than Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales but has similar if not better health outcomes.”

That argument is backed up by a 2010 analysis by the Nuffield Trust, a think-tank, which found the NHS in Scotland to be less productive than in England. It found the Scottish NHS delivered poorer healthcare "on almost every measure".

http://www.theguardian.com/society/shortcuts/2014/feb/03/buckfast-triangle-alcoholic-drink-monks-west-scotland

?

 

Mrs Figg wrote:If the health service is better in Scotland why is it your health is worse?

In one word, Crabbit!  

Don’t mock your coworker’s sunny disposition on Monday mornings. His optimism may be keeping his heart healthier than yours, according to researchers from the Harvard School of Public Health. To determine the power of staying positive, researchers looked at 200 previous studies that measured psychological traits, alongside health behaviors and risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Happiness and optimism were both linked to a lower risk of heart disease and stroke, with the most optimistic people having the greatest benefits. The study, published in the journal Psychological Bulletin, also found that optimistic and happy people tended to have healthier lifestyles. They exercised more, ate better, and slept more. In addition, they were less likely to have risk factors for heart disease and stroke, including high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and obesity. All of this is known to contribute to better heart health.

http://www.mensfitness.com/styleandgrooming/fashion/positive-thinking-has-heart-health-benefits

I think we pretty much solved it between us, Dave.

Lifestyle and general disposition.   

Well whats the point in living a long life?- it just gives you much more stuff to be crabbit about for much longer!
Best to get very drunk right from the start and get this bit over with and go on and see if there is anyone in charge to get the blame!


Interesting bit of info regards the EU emerged from the French politial system.
Remember President Barusso and is comments comparing Scotland to Kosovo and his much since maligned claim Scotland would not get into the EU- well the French have been having a go at him for their own internal political reasons and amongst the things to emerge was the accusation that that particular assertion was made in order to win brownie points from the Westminster government. Why does he need brownie points from London? Because he needs their nominations for what he hopes is his next job heading up NATO.

The world is full of arse lickers, youre either used, or you are the abuser.

Hm, where did that Barosso thing emerge?

As we covered earlier what he came out and said didn't make much sense, and showed little regard for the actual EU law. So that's certainly one possible explanation.

Hm, where did that Barosso thing emerge? - Blue

In the French Parliament.

Hm, do you have any further details? There are quite a lot of people in the French parliment I wouldn't take all that seriously. Front National and so on.

No, but I will do some rooting about- it came up in a segment on the Andrew Marr show (Sunday morning politics show on the BBC) but it was short on specifics.

Got more info Blue- from the Herald newspaper-

'Socialist Axelle Lemaire said it was "clearly tactical" for the European Commission president to suggest it would be "difficult if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the EU.
The deputy - dubbed the "MP for Paris-on-Thames" because her northern Europe constitency includes so many British-based voters - is just the latest continental politician to question Mr Barroso's remarks, made on the BBC's Andrew Marr Show last month.
Visiting Scotland, Ms Lemaire said: "It is extremely important to remain neutral and respect the independence debate.
"President Barroso of the European Commission got involved in the debate and give his view on behalf of the member states, which haven't said anything. I thought it was not correct.
"It is clearly tactical because he wants to become secretary general of Nato and he thinks that having the support of Britain for the nomination is a good thing. I take the opposite view, which is that I should not get involved.
Earlier this month Joelle Garriaud-Maylam, a senator from the opposite side of French politics from Ms Lemaire, also attacked the EC president.
Speaking in the Senate, she said: "The threats formulated by Mr Barroso are inappropriate and the result of Spanish and English pressure. London is increasingly worried. They (the threats) are not credible. If Scotland votes for independence, it will stay in the European Union. It would be in England's interest."

I just listened to a story on National Public Radio "All Things Considered"that balanced the YES vs. NO poll numbers against the sales numbers of YES and NO tea cakes at a Glasgow bakery, where sales are running heavily towards YES.

It followed a story on Crimea and segued between stories on the subject of independence. That's a pretty high profile story placement, the highest I've heard so far.

That's remarkably frank speaking from a politician, Petty.   I like that.  

And it ties in well with what we discussed earlier, as I said. I think she's probably right.

Not exactly a scientific poll, but a Glasgow bakery made a bunch of bite sized cakes, half of them with YES in them and half of them with NO, then offered them to passers by (halfway through they also changed round the colours of the icing on each in case that was having an influence) by the end of a week worth of giving away cakes they had given away more YES than NO by about half.

Interestingly however another baker did the same thing in Edinburgh and shifted twice as many NO cakes as YES.

This is surprising as Glasgow historically has been a bastion of Labour support and Labour are for the Union, and Edinburgh is the capital and seat of political power.
You would expect the results to have come out the other way.

That's the story I heard on the radio two days ago. I don't remember the Edinburgh part though.

Of course you know a lot more about the lay of the land there, but it makes sense to me the seats of political power tend to be resistive to change (even the best changes mean more work), while working class areas tend to more eager to "throw the bums out". Does that make sense over there?

People say "you get what you pay for" & they say the same about who is voted in. I think people now are so confused & let down by each & every Government thats got in over the years that people will swing like a deranged Gibbon from one party to the next ? & of course Politicians see this pattern & play for it, pulling people this way & that even more until your blinded.

looks like Italy has finally got a decent PM. I like Renzi and so does Angela Merkel, I think she fancies him.

Now let me think when was the last time the Germans and Italians got chummy and hooked up...  .....  

He's really young. I hope he's not a corrupt asshole like Berlusconi and is able to do some good for Italy.

Berlusconi was funny though, in a ridiculous sort of way.  

Though certainly not someone you would want running your country, I agree.