I can remember the Labour government years...I seem to recall most crises seemed to be being handled by adults...not posh buffoons. These charlatans make the chaotic Major administration seem competent. Even Cameron looked like he knew how to run an HR department or the logistics team down in the warehouse.
@ReturnToSenda said:
The NHS will continue to be at risk of being overwhelmed for as long as the Tories are in power. You could argue that it's pretty much overwhelmed by default - but even more so in the current climate, and the unvaccinated are only exacerbating the problem.
I'm afraid it doesn't matter who is running the country, and however much they give the NHS it will always need more and the more it gets the more new ways they will find to waste lumps of it.
The whole management structure and the way budgets are run in the NHS is truly shocking and they wouldn't last 5 minutes if they were made to run as a normal business does
One example - multi-million pound scanner has say a 10 year life. Rather than budget an amount each year for its replacement they 'suddenly' discover they need to find the whole sum when it breaks down after 15 years (going against manufacturers recommendations of lifespan is quite normal), they then work out how to find the money they knew they were going to need all along.
@Guppys_Left_Leg I think you may have hit the nail on the head there. The management and organisation of the NHS is a shambles. Anyone who thinks a mere change of Government would magically make everything OK is probably naive at best.
@Guppys_Left_Leg I think you may have hit the nail on the head there. The management and organisation of the NHS is a shambles. Anyone who thinks a mere change of Government would magically make everything OK is probably naive at best.
My company supplies equipment to the NHS. I know far far much more than I could ever post here
@ReturnToSenda said:
The NHS will continue to be at risk of being overwhelmed for as long as the Tories are in power. You could argue that it's pretty much overwhelmed by default - but even more so in the current climate, and the unvaccinated are only exacerbating the problem.
I'm afraid it doesn't matter who is running the country, and however much they give the NHS it will always need more and the more it gets the more new ways they will find to waste lumps of it.
The whole management structure and the way budgets are run in the NHS is truly shocking and they wouldn't last 5 minutes if they were made to run as a normal business does
One example - multi-million pound scanner has say a 10 year life. Rather than budget an amount each year for its replacement they 'suddenly' discover they need to find the whole sum when it breaks down after 15 years (going against manufacturers recommendations of lifespan is quite normal), they then work out how to find the money they knew they were going to need all along.
@Guppys_Left_Leg I think you may have hit the nail on the head there. The management and organisation of the NHS is a shambles. Anyone who thinks a mere change of Government would magically make everything OK is probably naive at best.
It wouldn't magically change everything, but you can't underfund a service for years and years and years and expect it to perform adequately.
Labour in charge under Starmer would be exactly the same as we have now, given that he has publicly supported every single decision the government has made during the pandemic, refusing point blank to actually be an "opposition", often with sub-hallmark platitudes like "we stand side by side with the government", and "now is not the time for a public enquiry".
I agree that it's disorganised - I could give a prime example from personal experience, but I don't want to share that on here - but let's also not pretend the Tories wouldn't privatise the whole thing at the touch of a button if they could.
@ReturnToSenda said:
The NHS will continue to be at risk of being overwhelmed for as long as the Tories are in power. You could argue that it's pretty much overwhelmed by default - but even more so in the current climate, and the unvaccinated are only exacerbating the problem.
I'm afraid it doesn't matter who is running the country, and however much they give the NHS it will always need more and the more it gets the more new ways they will find to waste lumps of it.
The whole management structure and the way budgets are run in the NHS is truly shocking and they wouldn't last 5 minutes if they were made to run as a normal business does
One example - multi-million pound scanner has say a 10 year life. Rather than budget an amount each year for its replacement they 'suddenly' discover they need to find the whole sum when it breaks down after 15 years (going against manufacturers recommendations of lifespan is quite normal), they then work out how to find the money they knew they were going to need all along.
@Guppys_Left_Leg I think you may have hit the nail on the head there. The management and organisation of the NHS is a shambles. Anyone who thinks a mere change of Government would magically make everything OK is probably naive at best.
It wouldn't magically change everything, but you can't underfund a service for years and years and years and expect it to perform adequately.
No, but large amounts of money have been wasted over the years, for example on IT systems not fit for purpose.
It wouldn't magically change everything, but you can't underfund a service for years and years and years and expect it to perform adequately.
Do you honestly believe under any government it hasn't been unfunded? Yes it is probably a bit worse over the past few years but when you see the drain on its resources coping with an aging population and the general obesity of the country I'm not certain anyone in the UK would stomach the tax increases to fund it in the way it might need.
However like I said previously give it more money then parts of the NHS (not frontline workers at all) will find new ways of wasting it. I'm afraid that is simply a fact of how it is set-up and operates.
@drcongo said:
Labour in charge under Starmer would be exactly the same as we have now, given that he has publicly supported every single decision the government has made during the pandemic, refusing point blank to actually be an "opposition", often with sub-hallmark platitudes like "we stand side by side with the government", and "now is not the time for a public enquiry".
He's not lefty enough for many and has been weak and missing at times but I've yet to see much evidence of him being a thieving, serial lying disaster shambles of a man a la Mr Johnson
I think it's the way in which this government shows borderline contempt for it which particularly riles people up. See: Johnson strolling around a hospital without a mask.
@ReturnToSenda said:
I think it's the way in which this government shows borderline contempt for it which particularly riles people up. See: Johnson strolling around a hospital without a mask.
Don't disagree with that at all.
I would add that I see (during work trips to hospitals) employees of that trust doing exactly the same thing too.
Both of which are absolute madness. Alongside all those who don't wear them on the Tube - that really does have to be seen to be believed just how high a % do that - even though its illegal!!!
@Guppys_Left_Leg ...no idea if that'll work. Not saying it hasn't always been under funded, but Labour governments at least gave it more of a chance.
@drcongo It is true that he has supported/voted with the government's measures but only because by the time they've actually acted there is no alternative. The whole "Cpt Hindsight" thing is total BS given he's regularly been calling for action ahead of the government doing anything. No way would he have got everything right but he most definitely wouldn't have handled it as shambolically as it has been. And he wouldn't have been as corrupt in the process.
@ReturnToSenda said:
I think it's the way in which this government shows borderline contempt for it which particularly riles people up. See: Johnson strolling around a hospital without a mask.
Don't disagree with that at all.
I would add that I see (during work trips to hospitals) employees of that trust doing exactly the same thing too.
Both of which are absolute madness. Alongside all those who don't wear them on the Tube - that really does have to be seen to be believed just how high a % do that - even though its illegal!!!
I've found the opposite on the Tube the few times I've been to London recently - although I've always avoided rush hour, so maybe that's why. Probably about 50-50 on the train to and from HW, though - but I guess it wasn't compulsory on them at the time.
The whole management structure and the way budgets are run in the NHS is truly shocking and they wouldn't last 5 minutes if they were made to run as a normal business does
It, of course, isn’t a normal business and is involved in activities that no profit-driven organisation would ever consider.
It couldn’t ever be made to run as a normal business.
A lot of the wastage in the health service is from attempts to create some kind of internal competition to attempt to ape the private sector.
@mooneyman said:
You also don't qualify as a QC unless you have been a very successful and assertive barrister @davecz.
I’m only basing my comment on what he has shown as the leader of the opposition. Not really interested on what he has done before. Not relevant to current circumstances.
@FmG said: @Guppys_Left_Leg ...no idea if that'll work. Not saying it hasn't always been under funded, but Labour governments at least gave it more of a chance.
@drcongo It is true that he has supported/voted with the government's measures but only because by the time they've actually acted there is no alternative. The whole "Cpt Hindsight" thing is total BS given he's regularly been calling for action ahead of the government doing anything. No way would he have got everything right but he most definitely wouldn't have handled it as shambolically as it has been. And he wouldn't have been as corrupt in the process.
A picture says a thousand words. So does hard data.
@mooneyman said:
You also don't qualify as a QC unless you have been a very successful and assertive barrister @davecz.
I’m only basing my comment on what he has shown as the leader of the opposition. Not really interested on what he has done before. Not relevant to current circumstances.
If you would prefer a lying clown in power rather than an intelligent, articulate and honest (in the absence of evidence to the contrary) leader then it is pointless me arguing further with you.
@Malone said:
Would definitely prefer there to be games on without fans, then no games at all. But I know a lot disagree with that.
But unless they get the players really tight in those bubbles like last time, then it's the players getting covid that's the problem, not the fans anyway.
Personally I’d much prefer to see a break to the season introduced now, with games being extended into late May and early June to accommodate. It’s the lesser of two evils.
Persevering now is likely to lead to many games being postponed due to illness, with some teams having a huge number of rearranged games. And if the season does eventually need to be extended then players end up playing through without a proper break in the summer before season 22/23. Seems more sensible to me to have the certainty of a month break now, allowing the players to wind down a bit knowing that the summer break will be truncated. And then resume normal service in early Feb when (hopefully) the situation looks a little better.
Also, games with no fans is utter crap. The EFL should do everything possible to re-jig the season calendar so that most or all games take place in front of fans.
I actually enjoyed a lot of last season as it gave me a way to watch all of the aways when generally I'd be a few aways a season guy.
The problem with a "break" is the same situation as with any idea of a winter break.
What if the problem is worse when you're back from this break? You've wasted time you could have been getting some games in.
@ReturnToSenda said:
Only 500 people allowed outdoors in Scotland. It's coming...
I can see the threads now...
"Why aren't I in the first 500 even though I've had a season ticket 43 years, donated my money last year, go to all the aways and always buy food without moaning"
@mooneyman said:
You also don't qualify as a QC unless you have been a very successful and assertive barrister @davecz.
I’m only basing my comment on what he has shown as the leader of the opposition. Not really interested on what he has done before. Not relevant to current circumstances.
If you would prefer a lying clown in power rather than an intelligent, articulate and honest (in the absence of evidence to the contrary) leader then it is pointless me arguing further with you
Who said I preferred Johnson?. I called him incompetent in my original post. Starmer maybe all the things you suggest but he’s hardly set ‘ the world on fire’ as opposition leader. Not sure even his own party fully support him.
What this thread really shows is no matter what party you prefer, we are in a right bloody mess with these so called politicians. Maybe it is time to draw a close to party politics altogether.
@mooneyman said:
You also don't qualify as a QC unless you have been a very successful and assertive barrister @davecz.
I’m only basing my comment on what he has shown as the leader of the opposition. Not really interested on what he has done before. Not relevant to current circumstances.
If you would prefer a lying clown in power rather than an intelligent, articulate and honest (in the absence of evidence to the contrary) leader then it is pointless me arguing further with you
Who said I preferred Johnson?. I called him incompetent in my original post. Starmer maybe all the things you suggest but he’s hardly set ‘ the world on fire’ as opposition leader. Not sure even his own party fully support him.
Because he's the definition of an inoffensive centrist , his appeal isn't meant for labour supporters, it's to be more palatable to disillusioned Tory's and the right wing media.
When there's anything remotely resembling left wing leadership, it simply gets called communism and smeared, so they've given up trying and have gone back to the Blair type "were not as horrible as the Tories" , with little actual labour substance
@Blue_since_1990 said:
What this thread really shows is no matter what party you prefer, we are in a right bloody mess with these so called politicians. Maybe it is time to draw a close to party politics altogether.
@mooneyman said:
You also don't qualify as a QC unless you have been a very successful and assertive barrister @davecz.
I’m only basing my comment on what he has shown as the leader of the opposition. Not really interested on what he has done before. Not relevant to current circumstances.
If you would prefer a lying clown in power rather than an intelligent, articulate and honest (in the absence of evidence to the contrary) leader then it is pointless me arguing further with you
Who said I preferred Johnson?. I called him incompetent in my original post. Starmer maybe all the things you suggest but he’s hardly set ‘ the world on fire’ as opposition leader. Not sure even his own party fully support him.
Because he's the definition of an inoffensive centrist , his appeal isn't meant for labour supporters, it's to be more palatable to disillusioned Tory's and the right wing media.
When there's anything remotely resembling left wing leadership, it simply gets called communism and smeared, so they've given up trying and have gone back to the Blair type "were not as horrible as the Tories" , with little actual labour substance
There's actually a fair bit in-between, Iain Duncan Smiths Tories wouldn't have given you the minimum wage for example, and many would have sneered at Starmer for voting against restrictions which were overdue anyway, but it's not as if the Tories are a coherent bunch all pulling in the same direction either.
Plenty of time for that to all play out but a bit of accountability for the chap who seemed desperate to become PM but seems reluctant to do anything in post wouldn't go a miss.
@Blue_since_1990 said:
What this thread really shows is no matter what party you prefer, we are in a right bloody mess with these so called politicians. Maybe it is time to draw a close to party politics altogether.
Anarchy?
There's a really good documentary called Accidental Anarchist, well worth seeking out.
Comments
You also don't qualify as a QC unless you have been a very successful and assertive barrister @davecz.
I can remember the Labour government years...I seem to recall most crises seemed to be being handled by adults...not posh buffoons. These charlatans make the chaotic Major administration seem competent. Even Cameron looked like he knew how to run an HR department or the logistics team down in the warehouse.
@Guppys_Left_Leg I think you may have hit the nail on the head there. The management and organisation of the NHS is a shambles. Anyone who thinks a mere change of Government would magically make everything OK is probably naive at best.
My company supplies equipment to the NHS. I know far far much more than I could ever post here
It wouldn't magically change everything, but you can't underfund a service for years and years and years and expect it to perform adequately.
Labour in charge under Starmer would be exactly the same as we have now, given that he has publicly supported every single decision the government has made during the pandemic, refusing point blank to actually be an "opposition", often with sub-hallmark platitudes like "we stand side by side with the government", and "now is not the time for a public enquiry".
I agree that it's disorganised - I could give a prime example from personal experience, but I don't want to share that on here - but let's also not pretend the Tories wouldn't privatise the whole thing at the touch of a button if they could.
No, but large amounts of money have been wasted over the years, for example on IT systems not fit for purpose.
Do you honestly believe under any government it hasn't been unfunded? Yes it is probably a bit worse over the past few years but when you see the drain on its resources coping with an aging population and the general obesity of the country I'm not certain anyone in the UK would stomach the tax increases to fund it in the way it might need.
However like I said previously give it more money then parts of the NHS (not frontline workers at all) will find new ways of wasting it. I'm afraid that is simply a fact of how it is set-up and operates.
He's not lefty enough for many and has been weak and missing at times but I've yet to see much evidence of him being a thieving, serial lying disaster shambles of a man a la Mr Johnson
I think it's the way in which this government shows borderline contempt for it which particularly riles people up. See: Johnson strolling around a hospital without a mask.
Don't disagree with that at all.
I would add that I see (during work trips to hospitals) employees of that trust doing exactly the same thing too.
Both of which are absolute madness. Alongside all those who don't wear them on the Tube - that really does have to be seen to be believed just how high a % do that - even though its illegal!!!
That is a ballot I want a ticket for.
I wonder how the Government will be able to arrange work meetings with those restrictions
@Guppys_Left_Leg
...no idea if that'll work. Not saying it hasn't always been under funded, but Labour governments at least gave it more of a chance.
@drcongo It is true that he has supported/voted with the government's measures but only because by the time they've actually acted there is no alternative. The whole "Cpt Hindsight" thing is total BS given he's regularly been calling for action ahead of the government doing anything. No way would he have got everything right but he most definitely wouldn't have handled it as shambolically as it has been. And he wouldn't have been as corrupt in the process.
I've found the opposite on the Tube the few times I've been to London recently - although I've always avoided rush hour, so maybe that's why. Probably about 50-50 on the train to and from HW, though - but I guess it wasn't compulsory on them at the time.
The whole management structure and the way budgets are run in the NHS is truly shocking and they wouldn't last 5 minutes if they were made to run as a normal business does
It, of course, isn’t a normal business and is involved in activities that no profit-driven organisation would ever consider.
It couldn’t ever be made to run as a normal business.
A lot of the wastage in the health service is from attempts to create some kind of internal competition to attempt to ape the private sector.
I’m only basing my comment on what he has shown as the leader of the opposition. Not really interested on what he has done before. Not relevant to current circumstances.
A picture says a thousand words. So does hard data.
If you say you support the NHS, vote Labour.
If you would prefer a lying clown in power rather than an intelligent, articulate and honest (in the absence of evidence to the contrary) leader then it is pointless me arguing further with you.
I actually enjoyed a lot of last season as it gave me a way to watch all of the aways when generally I'd be a few aways a season guy.
The problem with a "break" is the same situation as with any idea of a winter break.
What if the problem is worse when you're back from this break? You've wasted time you could have been getting some games in.
I can see the threads now...
"Why aren't I in the first 500 even though I've had a season ticket 43 years, donated my money last year, go to all the aways and always buy food without moaning"
Behind closed doors seems more likely than circuit breaker at the moment
Can’t understand the 500, you may as well say no spectators in football matches at all.
Who said I preferred Johnson?. I called him incompetent in my original post. Starmer maybe all the things you suggest but he’s hardly set ‘ the world on fire’ as opposition leader. Not sure even his own party fully support him.
What this thread really shows is no matter what party you prefer, we are in a right bloody mess with these so called politicians. Maybe it is time to draw a close to party politics altogether.
Because he's the definition of an inoffensive centrist , his appeal isn't meant for labour supporters, it's to be more palatable to disillusioned Tory's and the right wing media.
When there's anything remotely resembling left wing leadership, it simply gets called communism and smeared, so they've given up trying and have gone back to the Blair type "were not as horrible as the Tories" , with little actual labour substance
Anarchy?
There's actually a fair bit in-between, Iain Duncan Smiths Tories wouldn't have given you the minimum wage for example, and many would have sneered at Starmer for voting against restrictions which were overdue anyway, but it's not as if the Tories are a coherent bunch all pulling in the same direction either.
Plenty of time for that to all play out but a bit of accountability for the chap who seemed desperate to become PM but seems reluctant to do anything in post wouldn't go a miss.
BJ confirms no more restrictions before Christmas - so Boxing Day should be as normal if the game is on ?
There's a really good documentary called Accidental Anarchist, well worth seeking out.