John Marwood
I ♥ cryptic crosswords
Let's say for the sake of argument 2%
Welcome to Stafford Forum. Please or sign-up and start posting!
No. Not because I am against the principle of it but because all politicians are liars and cheats. They would say the increase in tax was to spend on the NHS, but then squander it all on some pointless war somewhere or on some other kind of bullshit based upon whichever colour banner they stand under.
In addition the NHS would really need to get it's act together. Lose the interminable tiers of middle management, focus on care and caring for patients rather than statistics by not only appointing more front-line staff, but ensuring that the staff have the correct attitude to be in a caring profession and get rid of the free-loading that takes place in the NHS by charging those from abroad that have never contributed financially here but expect free treatment (I know that is only a small fraction of the costs involved in the NHS but it is the principle that counts, after all I have to take out medical insurance to pay for anything going wrong when I travel abroad, and would show that the powers that be had some understanding of how to run things that OUR money is spent on).
Edited to add that I would want an assurance that this money would be spent on the English, Welsh and N. Irish NHS and not to fund some highly spurious promises made to the Scots or to fund the policies of the Scots government like free prescriptions for the Scots only.
The only people who could guarantee it are politicians. Politicians are liars and cheats. Draw your own conclusion.So if all of the above, which I agree with, could be guaranteed would you say yes to the increase in tax?
I voted no because I am pretty damn sure there is enough waste in the NHS to easily fund the gap, they just need to cut out the flipping waste - such as boob jobs for women who want to be glamour models, even if they do claim it is for their self esteem - fook em, thats not what the NHS is for.
The Daily Mail owners , the private heath suppliers and Conservative Party will be delighted to know that their propaganda works on the distracted masses of the UK
So are you saying that no-one has ever had a boob job at the NHS's expense for lame reasons such as "it affects my self confidence"?
And are you saying that there isn't any waste in the NHS?
If so then, frankly, you are wrong!
I'm not sure it's a coincidence that the same newspapers who bemoan too much wastage in the NHS are the first up in arms when NICE decide it isn't cost effective to spend a million pounds on an experimental treatment to keep someone with terminal cancer going for an extra 6 weeks either.
But surely thats the point - wastage does need to be cut out so that the most important and effective uses of funds can be realised.
Since I know Marwood loves a good daily mail stereotype to make himself feel superior to everyone else and to support his political leanings.... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2006006/NHS--2-packet-pasta-cost-50-including-delivery.html
Why is it wrong for anyone - Daily Mail or otherwise - to moan about wasting money and then moan someone isn't getting Cancer drugs because they are too expensive. The moan about the former is because it leads to the later...
And just for the Daily Mail lovers, other news outlets are available....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/h...savings-possible-of-scandalous-NHS-waste.html
http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/waste/2013/07/nao-report-nhs-waste.html
http://www.nao.org.uk/report/managing-the-transition-to-the-reformed-health-system-2/
You further prove my point, thank you
If calling it "propaganda" and blaming it on the Daily Mail makes you feel justified in burying your head in the sand about NHS waste, then i'm happy for you. Ignorance really is bliss.
One bomb for isis or one fully staffed bed for a hospital? You decide......
More like one bomb for Isis or one fully staffed ward for 3 months.One bomb for isis or one fully staffed bed for a hospital? You decide......