Farage - whose side is he on?

[DrWindy]

What you and I choose to spend our money on should be down to you and I. We all deserve equal opportunity. Banning things isn’t and never will be the answer.

Again - you're introducing a element of choice here. Whether one needs medical treatment isn't an issue of choice, is it?

Agreed, it’s not a choice.

The NHS should be able to facilitate that in a reasonable time. Of course it should. However if you don’t want to wait a reasonable time and want treatment urgently then I think its ok to pay for it. That is not ruining the NHS. It’s government policy that is doing that.

[Hoover Attack]

It isn’t. That’s what you are choosing not to understand.

But it is.

If those in power had to rely on the NHS, the NHS would be in a much better condition than it is now. The fact they have an alternative means they don't care.

[Hoover Attack]

The NHS should be able to facilitate that in a reasonable time. Of course it should. However if you don’t want to wait a reasonable time and want treatment urgently then I think its ok to pay for it. That is not ruining the NHS. It’s government policy that is doing that.

This is it.

'The Government' isn't a thing. Its made up of people. People that don't have to rely on the NHS.

Do you not see how that would change policy?

[DrWindy]

I disagree. I tell you why. In an emergency you always go NHS whether you have private healthcare or buckets of gold. So why is it so bad?

[Dunners]

Taking this in a different direction, Reform UK are seriously investing in advertising and generating "content" aimed at Gen Z via TikTok. There has been a growing far right movement with younger generations in Europe for a few years now, but up until recently it has been largely an older age group in the UK. Looks like that could be about to change.

[Dunners]

What you and I choose to spend our money on should be down to you and I. We all deserve equal opportunity. Banning things isn’t and never will be the answer.

Again - you're introducing a element of choice here. Whether one needs medical treatment isn't an issue of choice, is it?

To be fair, some of us choose to pursue lifestyle choices that increase the risk of medical intervention. I make this comment with a slight pang of guilt over the noise of bottles rattling in my recycling bin every time I move it.

[StillSpike]

What you and I choose to spend our money on should be down to you and I. We all deserve equal opportunity. Banning things isn’t and never will be the answer.

Again - you're introducing a element of choice here. Whether one needs medical treatment isn't an issue of choice, is it?

To be fair, some of us choose to pursue lifestyle choices that increase the risk of medical intervention. I make this comment with a slight pang of guilt over the noise of bottles rattling in my recycling bin every time I move it.

I share those guilty pangs - and used to be a heavy smoker as well. However, I don't think you can "ration" medical care on the basis of lifestyle choice. You can start with "smokers are choosing their lifestyle so they're less deserving of medical attention" (although once addicted, is it that much of a choice?). And where does that end ? I'd imagine Cyclists - especially in that London - are more likely to get hurt on the roads than someone who takes the bus - so are cyclists less deserving of medical attention?

Access to decent, timely and effective healthcare is and should always be a universal right - there's no "deserves" about it - and it's up to society to provide that. We really don't want to go down the route that Mr Farage wants us to - where it's insurance based. That way leads to massive profits for the insurance industry - and massive costs to the user.

[Dunners]

Just to clarify - I'm not suggesting we ration medial care on lifestyle choice. I'd be f*cked.

[EastDerehamO]

Healthcare is an interesting one. I believe in an NHS for everyone funded out of taxation, but it’s clearly not in a fit state at the moment - awful waiting lists, difficulty in getting dental treatment etc etc, so something needs to change. But (say) if someone chooses to have private health treatment one year (say) at a cost of 2 grand, instead of a holiday, I don’t see it’s up to me or anyone else to tell them they shouldn’t spend their money that way, any more than I should tell them they can’t go on holiday.

Back to an earlier post mentioning Reform UK saying it’s the Immigration Election. I have never understood why controlling immigration is often seen as automatically right wing. There are a lot of traditional Labour voters who backed Brexit for various reasons, one being to have a government accountable in this country for decisions which impact this country, including immigration. I don’t consider those voters to be right wing, and their voting history would concur.

[Dunners]

....But (say) if someone chooses to have private health treatment one year (say) at a cost of 2 grand, instead of a holiday, I don’t see it’s up to me or anyone else to tell them they shouldn’t spend their money that way, any more than I should tell them they can’t go on holiday.

The counter argument to this has already been made above.

...I have never understood why controlling immigration is often seen as automatically right wing.

It isn't, although I appreciate that many adopt a reflex response to the issue along perceived tribal lines.

But it's worth pointing out that, aside from those arriving by dingy at Dover (which is a fraction of total net migration), migration levels in the UK are not uncontrolled. They are a deliberate consequence of policy and trade agreements arising post-Brexit. This is exactly what Brexit was always about.

I'm not saying that this applies to you, but anyone who voted for Brexit on the basis that it would result in reduced immigration levels has been taken for a mug.

[Dunners]

Taking this in a different direction, Reform UK are seriously investing in advertising and generating "content" aimed at Gen Z via TikTok. There has been a growing far right movement with younger generations in Europe for a few years now, but up until recently it has been largely an older age group in the UK. Looks like that could be about to change.

Just caught this from Bastani. Forward to 7:35, but the kids are getting radicalised.

[Hoover Attack]

I disagree. I tell you why. In an emergency you always go NHS whether you have private healthcare or buckets of gold. So why is it so bad?

Do you think 'elites' go and sit in A&E for 8 hours to wait for an X-ray on a suspected broken wrist?

Granted, they'll get picked up off the street by an NHS ambulance the same as the rest of us but they'll be out of the A&E ward and off to their hospital of choice asap.

[DrWindy]

I disagree. I tell you why. In an emergency you always go NHS whether you have private healthcare or buckets of gold. So why is it so bad?

Do you think 'elites' go and sit in A&E for 8 hours to wait for an X-ray on a suspected broken wrist?

Granted, they'll get picked up off the street by an NHS ambulance the same as the rest of us but they'll be out of the A&E ward and off to their hospital of choice asap.

I am not talking about broken wrists. I am meaning heart attacks. Road traffic accidents. If it’s serious there’s no difference and everyone is treated equally. This service is no better. This is why I don’t agree with your view.

It’s been a good discussion

[Hoover Attack]

A suspected broken wrist is still an emergency.

In the extreme emergencies, heart attacks and serious RTAs etc, obviously everyone is reliant on the same service (at present - watch this space). I'm not sure what your point is?

[Currywurst and Chips]

Taking this in a different direction, Reform UK are seriously investing in advertising and generating "content" aimed at Gen Z via TikTok. There has been a growing far right movement with younger generations in Europe for a few years now, but up until recently it has been largely an older age group in the UK. Looks like that could be about to change.

Just caught this from Bastani. Forward to 7:35, but the kids are getting radicalised.

Just as the franchise is about to be extended to children

[oxo]

If a person wishes to go and see a doctor, surgeon or dentist then they should have that right. That doesn’t need to be at the detriment of anyone else.

But it is to the detriment of everyone else.

This is the link you can't or are choosing not to understand.

It isn’t. That’s what you are choosing not to understand.

Everyone is entitled to have a roof over their head should they want to. By the logic being shown everyone who has their own home shouldn’t unless everyone else can. It’s a nonsense.

The NHS is mismanaged but it’s not because doctors take private patients.

Do you think the standard of healthcare would be better or worse if the NHS were the only provider?

[DrWindy]

But it is to the detriment of everyone else.

This is the link you can't or are choosing not to understand.

It isn’t. That’s what you are choosing not to understand.

Everyone is entitled to have a roof over their head should they want to. By the logic being shown everyone who has their own home shouldn’t unless everyone else can. It’s a nonsense.

The NHS is mismanaged but it’s not because doctors take private patients.

Do you think the standard of healthcare would be better or worse if the NHS were the only provider?

It’s very difficult to say. However if you suddenly take all the people who have either medical insurance or self pay and then drop them into the NHS system? I think an already struggling NHS would be atrocious.

[DrWindy]

A suspected broken wrist is still an emergency.

In the extreme emergencies, heart attacks and serious RTAs etc, obviously everyone is reliant on the same service (at present - watch this space). I'm not sure what your point is?

My point is that you claim if the rich had to use the NHS then it would be better. I’m simply pointing out that they do already for emergency care and it isn’t better.

Last comment on this from me. The NHS is there for everyone and should be at the required standard. The fact it is not is due to poor management of the NHS. It’s not due to private healthcare.

[Hoover Attack]

They have to use it to get picked up off the street and brought into a hospital. But that’s it. Thats why the NHS’s A&E provision is a cut above everything else they do.

The fact the rest of the NHS is not at the required standard is due to under funding. A deliberate choice because the wealthy and powerful don’t want to pay their fair share of taxes, they’d rather take out private healthcare for themselves and sod everyone else. If the private option wasn’t available to them, they’d be demanding the NHS was improved (for themselves, and therefore everyone by default).

[Dunners]

They have to use it to get picked up off the street and brought into a hospital. But that’s it. That's why the NHS’s A&E provision is a cut above everything else they do.

The fact the rest of the NHS is not at the required standard is due to under funding. A deliberate choice because the wealthy and powerful don’t want to pay their fair share of taxes, they’d rather take out private healthcare for themselves and sod everyone else. If the private option wasn’t available to them, they’d be demanding the NHS was improved (for themselves, and therefore everyone by default).

Not disagreeing with your points in general, but not sure I agree that the A&E provision is a cut above everything else the NHS does. It's just that, as far as an A&E provisions goes, the NHS is still (for now) the only game in town.

The A&E provision is a disaster right now. I've had reason to visit A&E with family members several times in the last few years (including quite recently) and a 12+ hour wait is not uncommon, often with NHS admin f*cking up follow-up referrals. But that's mainly due to the sheer numbers of people being referred to A&E for minor issues because of the shambles of the GP system.

In fact, once you get past A&E and the life-threatening delays before you're referred to specialist units/consultants for various medial issues, the quality of care from the NHS is brilliant. Private medical insurance is now the way to shorten the wait for accessing that care.

But, as I said, not disagreeing with the point that we'd see miraculous improvements across all areas of the NHS if the wealthiest had no choice but to use it too at every stage of their care.

[Max B Gold]

They have to use it to get picked up off the street and brought into a hospital. But that’s it. That's why the NHS’s A&E provision is a cut above everything else they do.

The fact the rest of the NHS is not at the required standard is due to under funding. A deliberate choice because the wealthy and powerful don’t want to pay their fair share of taxes, they’d rather take out private healthcare for themselves and sod everyone else. If the private option wasn’t available to them, they’d be demanding the NHS was improved (for themselves, and therefore everyone by default).

Not disagreeing with your points in general, but not sure I agree that the A&E provision is a cut above everything else the NHS does. It's just that, as far as an A&E provisions goes, the NHS is still (for now) the only game in town.

The A&E provision is a disaster right now. I've had reason to visit A&E with family members several times in the last few years (including quite recently) and a 12+ hour wait is not uncommon, often with NHS admin f*cking up follow-up referrals. But that's mainly due to the sheer numbers of people being referred to A&E for minor issues because of the shambles of the GP system.

In fact, once you get past A&E and the life-threatening delays before you're referred to specialist units/consultants for various medial issues, the quality of care from the NHS is brilliant. Private medical insurance is now the way to shorten the wait for accessing that care.

But, as I said, not disagreeing with the point that we'd see miraculous improvements across all areas of the NHS if the wealthiest had no choice but to use it too at every stage of their care.

So you're saying things can be different. You've changed your tune.

If there was the political will to advance an argument that the vast wealth accumulated by billionaires and others can only happen because of the efforts of the whole of society and therefore should be shared by all. The NHS and other public services could be properly funded.

I believe there is a name for it but the corporate mafia who currently run the political shitshow have been very actively eradicating that kind of thinking for the past 40 years. The struggle for a civilised world continues.

[Currywurst and Chips]

Assumed this was a thread about Farage gaffes not socialist utopia

[Dunners]

They have to use it to get picked up off the street and brought into a hospital. But that’s it. That's why the NHS’s A&E provision is a cut above everything else they do.

The fact the rest of the NHS is not at the required standard is due to under funding. A deliberate choice because the wealthy and powerful don’t want to pay their fair share of taxes, they’d rather take out private healthcare for themselves and sod everyone else. If the private option wasn’t available to them, they’d be demanding the NHS was improved (for themselves, and therefore everyone by default).

Not disagreeing with your points in general, but not sure I agree that the A&E provision is a cut above everything else the NHS does. It's just that, as far as an A&E provisions goes, the NHS is still (for now) the only game in town.

The A&E provision is a disaster right now. I've had reason to visit A&E with family members several times in the last few years (including quite recently) and a 12+ hour wait is not uncommon, often with NHS admin f*cking up follow-up referrals. But that's mainly due to the sheer numbers of people being referred to A&E for minor issues because of the shambles of the GP system.

In fact, once you get past A&E and the life-threatening delays before you're referred to specialist units/consultants for various medial issues, the quality of care from the NHS is brilliant. Private medical insurance is now the way to shorten the wait for accessing that care.

But, as I said, not disagreeing with the point that we'd see miraculous improvements across all areas of the NHS if the wealthiest had no choice but to use it too at every stage of their care.

So you're saying things can he different. You've flanged your tune.

If there was the political will to advance an argument that the vast wealth accumulated by billionaires and others can only happen because of the efforts of the whole of society and therefore should be shared by all. The NHS and other public services could be properly funded.

I believe there is a name for it but the corporate mafia who currently run the political shitshow have been very actively eradicating that kind of thinking for the past 40 years. The struggle for a civilised world continues.

A fully nationalised and properly funded health service has always been in my manifesto.

[Hoover Attack]

Not disagreeing with your points in general, but not sure I agree that the A&E provision is a cut above everything else the NHS does. It's just that, as far as an A&E provisions goes, the NHS is still (for now) the only game in town.

Of course. That's why I tried clunkily to differentiate between the different seriousnesses of emergencies that A&E see - scraping someone out of a RTA and getting a flatlining heart going are not the same as someone with a suspected broken arm. The really, really serious stuff - there's no way a private offering could provide a better service. It just wouldn't be feasible (ie cost effective) to have a nationwide fleet of ambulances, doctors and hospitals on standby for the elite few. But for the less serious stuff - the bones needing an Xray etc where you or I would have to wait in A&E for hours on end - they can skip the queues and use these pay per use Urgent Care Centres.

I just don't see why DrWindy doesn't see this. I'm beginning to think he's not actually a real doctor after all.

[oxo]

It’s very difficult to say.

No, it’s quite easy. If everybody (including those with money and power) had to use the NHS, far more money and resources would be allocated to it, no question.

However if you suddenly take all the people who have either medical insurance or self pay and then drop them into the NHS system? I think an already struggling NHS would be atrocious.

Yes, you’re right. It would take a while to sufficiently expand its capacity — it’s already massively overstretched — but the cash (including, most notably, the profit) from the private healthcare industry could be used to make the standard of care better for everyone.