Jump to content

Recommended Posts

That depends what you mean by 'the left'. Basically, if you want it to mean someone who is on the extreme left, then of course, yes, by definition they will be dogmatic. But I'm talking about the mainstream parties who broadly stand on opposite sides of the political divide. If I use your logic then 'the right' are all fascists.
You are right about Lloyds (my mistake), but I didn't mention Northern Rock/Bradford and bingley and as I said, it's not particularly relevant to my point. You can knock down straw men if you like, but the point that I was making is that the Tories take a dogmatically ideological position with regards privatisation, rather than a pragmatic one.

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I think that is your biased observation. You

> seem

> > to be saying that when Labour do a bad

> > privatisation it is a 'mistake', but when the

> > Tories do it it is 'dogmatism'? Where is the

> > evidence for that statement?

> >

> > > You couldn't turn that around and accuse

> Labour

> > of looking to Nationalise at any opportunity.

> >

> > I would say there is little, if no difference,

> > between Labour's view on privatisation and Tory.

>

> > NHS, council housing, utilities have all been

> > privatised, prepared for privatisation or

> listed

> > for privatisation by Labour and Tory alike. In

> > fact, it's worth noting, since the NHS is such

> a

> > hot topic, that when Blair took office (i.e.

> post

> > Thatcher/Major) there was little to no

> > privatisation in the NHS. Yet, by 2008 that had

> > changed markedly, especially though PPI.

> >

> > Can you list a few areas that Tories have

>d?

>

> You miss the point. Labour are willing to use the

> private sector for service delivery. Whether one

> agrees with where and how they've chosen to do

> this is another debate. The point is, they are

> willing to accept private sector involvement or

> not, depending on the case. My point was that The

> Conservatives fundamentally believe that the state

> should commission services, not run them (a point

> you already accepted). That is dogma. That is a

> position which basically says, the state should

> not be involved in running services regardless of

> circumstances. It is not pragmatic, it is purely

> ideological.


So Loz, rather than trying to debate the merits of individual privatisations, whats your respnse to my main point?

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rahrahrah Wrote:

> > You miss the point. Labour are willing to use the private sector for service delivery. Whether one

> > agrees with where and how they've chosen to do this is another debate. The point is, they are

> > willing to accept private sector involvement or not, depending on the case. My point was that The

> > Conservatives fundamentally believe that the state should commission services, not run them (a point

> > you already accepted). That is dogma. That is a position which basically says, the state should

> > not be involved in running services regardless of circumstances. It is not pragmatic, it is purely

> > ideological.

>

> So Loz, rather than trying to debate the merits of

> individual privatisations, whats your respnse to my main point?


My response is that you are again looking at Labour privatisations through rose-coloured glasses and your 'point' doesn't bear deeper scrutiny. The pace of privatisation did not at all slow during the Blair/Brown administrations (and, indeed, went where Major feared to tread). I cannot recall Labour ever reversing a Tory privatisation by policy, only when forced to by circumstances (i.e. Network Rail). The history of privatisation in the UK just does not support your view.

Forget politics - I have terminal cancer , I have been treated by the NHS since 2007 when the fabulous surgeons at The Royal Marsden Hospital removed a 4 kg tumour.Sadly it came back 2 years ago and now I am on palliative chemotherapy ,my treatment could not have been better and that's all I have to say .If you have an ingrowing toe nail and feel a bit underwhelmed by your treatment then thats tough, get over it OR GO PRIVATE !

For 9 months I was on a trial drug that cost ?190 / day to the NHS and it didn't cost me a penny, had I had private health insurance it would have only covered me for 3 months on this drug hence I may not have been around to type this !

What a heartless post. Unbelievable.


If you bothered to read the post by mark88 properly you would know that he isn't recovering at all.

But you are obviously too busy bickering with Loz & talking politics (yet again)


I feel so sorry for you mark88. I do agree with you about the NHS and am pleased that you've been happy with the treatment you received.

mark88 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Forget politics - I have terminal cancer , I have

> been treated by the NHS since 2007 when the

> fabulous surgeons at The Royal Marsden Hospital

> removed a 4 kg tumour.Sadly it came back 2 years

> ago and now I am on palliative chemotherapy ,my

> treatment could not have been better and that's

> all I have to say .If you have an ingrowing toe

> nail and feel a bit underwhelmed by your treatment

> then thats tough, get over it OR GO PRIVATE !

> For 9 months I was on a trial drug that cost ?190

> / day to the NHS and it didn't cost me a penny,

> had I had private health insurance it would have

> only covered me for 3 months on this drug hence I

> may not have been around to type this !


The NHS saved my life, and Prolonged my mothers who survived 7years after her diagnosis thanks to blood transfusions,Plasma exchange, and Chemo.

Yes-along with many other people I get angsty when I find it hard to get a GP appointment or wait months for a physiotherapy referral but when you really really need them the NHS is incredible-we are so lucky to live in a country where such a health service exists.

And Mark88 stay strong and god bless.

Over ten times my life has been saved from acute asthma attacks by the NHS.


However, I know someone with severe mental health illness and the NHS is not able to help sufficiently. If you have a broken bit of body they're there for you till it's fixed. If your mind is broke, the NHS can't cope. The Community Mental Health teams are overworked to the max with high staff turnover and so there's rarely any continuity of care which is important in mental health care. I think this area of the NHS is shameful. And it's not helped by a government that punishes the sick with no benefits if they fail ATOS tests, which means they are often in more need of health care because they can't afford it. I know this is the East Dulwich Forum and not many of you will know of this side of society (she said, maybe sounding patronising without meaning to), but I promise you this happens. The NHS does waste money without a doubt. Management structures are out of control, and the Complaints System is woefully inadequate. The GP practices (and this was on the news this morning) are now all well over capacity with many GPs retiring and not enough wanting to fill the vacancies.


What's so special about the NHS? It has a great history, and it maybe once was the best in the world, but society's problems are also the NHS problems. I also fear for its future.

PeckhamRose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> However, I know someone with severe mental health

> illness and the NHS is not able to help

> sufficiently. If you have a broken bit of body

> they're there for you till it's fixed. If your

> mind is broke, the NHS can't cope.


This is so true. I've seen my mother's life destroyed by mental health issues, and in the process, my dad's too. It seems mental health services have always been hopelessly underfunded. I do wonder what would happened if she'd access to talking therapies when she was much younger but all that was on offer for many years was drugs, which in most cases at best control symptoms but don't offer a cure.


She's now old enough that even when help has been offered (after a lengthy stay in hospital) she's become too entrenched in her ways to be willing to engage with it. The one real respite my Dad was getting from caring for her was the one day a week she went to a day centre for people with mental heath issues - lasted a couple of months and then the centre closed and the service wasn't offered elsewhere.


I do wonder whether some of the priorities in the NHS aren't just a bit screwed. My nan when in her late eighties was treated for bowel cancer, with no prospect of a cure, and the extra months she got were all spent in hospital with some unpleasant side effects that it appears they'd failed to make clear before they started treatment. She said before she died if she had been told about the poor quality of the extra life she'd be given by the treatment she'd have said no thanks. I don't like to imagine how much money was spent on this - felt like they were more concerned about prolonging life at any cost than allowing her to die with some dignity.

Well... I had a tumour when I was a child, and the NHS treatment probably saved my life too. But to be blunt, this is missing the point. Just because we benefitted from life saving/prolonging treatment doesn't automatically make our system better than other western european countries.

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
  • Latest Discussions

    • OOOOooooOOOooohhhHHHHHH 👜 👜 👜 
    • That's actually why the Sherlock Holmes stories were so popular. There was so little crime people found it exciting to imagine robberies and murders happening in London.
    • Yes, because of course there were no violent robberies in the olden days. Pretty much no crime happened at all I believe through the entire Victorian era.
    • Hi all, Im a Southwark council leaseholder and live downstairs in a ground floor flat, there is one flat above me, it's a house with individual front doors leading from the street into the shared pathway. My neighbour told me he has had a ring doorbell installed, no discussion as to how I would feel being on camera everytime I go in and out or in my front garden. I was told it's only for deliveries and doesn't record and only activates when pressed, however I don't know this and I feel really uncomfortable everytime I'm out in garden or on doorstep talking to people. Everytime I walk in/out, it lights up and in the eve it has a  infra red  light. Now I've read up that as he said its only for deliveries, he could set it so it only activates when pressed, however it activates with its motion sensor. Had he said to me about getting it installed, I could have had the opportunity to ask about it recording etc but nothing except it's being installed and when I arrived home it was there. I don't like being horrible to people however I feel I have not been considered in his decision and I feel very uncomfortable as, some times I have to stand on doorstep to get signal for my mobile and I really don't like the idea of being watched and listened to. Has anyone got any advice as I'm beginning to get angry as I've asked about it once and was told it only activates when pressed. I believe this is not true. I know southwark council say you need to ask permission to make sure the neighbours are OK with it, I don't really want to go down that road but I don't know how to approach the subject again. They also put a shed approx 3 foot from my back room window, these places are built so my window faces their rear garden and there upstairs window  faces mine. They said it's there temporarily, that was over a year ago and it does affect the light, plus I'm hoping to sell up soon and the view from window is mainly a dark brown shed. When I've mentioned this, I was told they have no where else to put it, whereas originally they said its only temporary, Also the floorboards above are bare and I get woke early morning and at night, the thudding is so bad my light shakes and window rattles, so I mentioned this and asked if they have rugs, I was told when they get the boards re sanded they will get rugs, I should have asked if they could get rugs and just take them up when boards being done, which I would have done had it been me living above someone, their attitude was I can just put up with it until they are ready. so they had the floor boards done, and the workmen was hammering screws, yes screws, in the floorboards, I spoke to workmen to ask how much longer and they said yes, are using screws to make less noise! I could hear the cordless screwdriver, not an issue but for every screw there were at least 8 whacks, the owners had gone out to avoid the noise  so I  spoke to workmen as the noise was unbearable, the sanding, not an issue at all, people need to get things done to their home and I'm fine that on occasions there will be temporary noise. now I have a nice crack on my bedroom ceiling, I mentioned this to owner but no response, he said there were alot of loose floorboards and it will be much better now, not so noisy, as though I don't know the difference between squeaking floor boards and thudding, and nothing was mentioned re the crack or that they now have rugs, which if it were me, I'd be trying to resolve the issue so we can get on with feeling happy in our homes. so I'm feeling it's a total lack of consideration. these places are old and Edwardian and I've lived here over 40 years, had 4 different neighbours and it's only now the noise of thudding is really bad and the people before had floorboards but nothing like this. As you can probably tell I'm really wound up and I don't want to end up exploding at them, I've always got on with neighbours and always said if there's a problem with my dog, pls let me know, always tell me, however I feel it's got to the point where I say something and I'm fobbed off. I know I should tell them but I'm angry, perhaps I should write them a letter. Any suggestions greatly appreciated and thank you for reading my rant. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...