'UK Economy the best in europe'

[Renton 21393]

Yes, Brown has to shoulder a lot of blame, but the thought of Cameron and George Gideon Osborne being in charge at such a time of national importance is not one that fills me with confidence.

 

The tories have underperformed badly given the shit storm aimed at Labour and in particular Brown. But then what positive policies have they suggested? They've spoken out against Labour's actions in the recession (which now looks like it might have been the right thing to do) without offering anything positive as to what they would do. What single positive thing do the tories offer, especially here in the North East?

 

For anyone who thinks this lot of clowns are better or even the same as New Labour (however centre-right NL might have drifted), just look at Cameron's interpretation of the Jam's 'Eton Rifles'. The silver-spooned prick.

[Fop 1]

Brown has to take a lot of blame for the de regulation of the banking system and the failure of the FSA to stop the banks making false profits on selling loans which were more toxic than Chernobyl. When people were short selling they stopped them and told them not to do it again. They then removed the laws curtailing the short selling and quel suprise they started doing it again. This meant that Billions of tax payers money had to go into the banks millions of which went straight back out again in the form of bonuses to the people who caused all the bother. Also remember this is the man who decided to cripple the lowest paid in the job market by doubling their basic tax rate. Some people on here seem to have rose tinted memories.

 

Well he's also (partly) responsible for introducing the minimum wage and working tax credits, and investing a fortune in the NHS and education (not all which has been wisely spent, admittedly). So perhaps some people here have selective memory.

 

I'm not really familiar with the basic tax rate in the low paid, but I'm pretty sure the way you've worded that is misleading at best. Still, you're an Alex Salmon man iirc so no surprises there.

 

 

NHS is basically screwed before talking about spending cuts isn't it? Don't want to think what it will be like with them.

 

 

Don't worry the Conservatives will privatise it for you.

[ChezGiven 0]

Brown has to take a lot of blame for the de regulation of the banking system and the failure of the FSA to stop the banks making false profits on selling loans which were more toxic than Chernobyl. When people were short selling they stopped them and told them not to do it again. They then removed the laws curtailing the short selling and quel suprise they started doing it again. This meant that Billions of tax payers money had to go into the banks millions of which went straight back out again in the form of bonuses to the people who caused all the bother. Also remember this is the man who decided to cripple the lowest paid in the job market by doubling their basic tax rate. Some people on here seem to have rose tinted memories.

 

Well he's also (partly) responsible for introducing the minimum wage and working tax credits, and investing a fortune in the NHS and education (not all which has been wisely spent, admittedly). So perhaps some people here have selective memory.

 

I'm not really familiar with the basic tax rate in the low paid, but I'm pretty sure the way you've worded that is misleading at best. Still, you're an Alex Salmon man iirc so no surprises there.

 

 

NHS is basically screwed before talking about spending cuts isn't it? Don't want to think what it will be like with them.

 

 

Don't worry the Conservatives will privatise it for you.

 

 

They'll have to do something. I'll be dishing out advice on here when they do too.

[Fop 1]

Brown has to take a lot of blame for the de regulation of the banking system and the failure of the FSA to stop the banks making false profits on selling loans which were more toxic than Chernobyl. When people were short selling they stopped them and told them not to do it again. They then removed the laws curtailing the short selling and quel suprise they started doing it again. This meant that Billions of tax payers money had to go into the banks millions of which went straight back out again in the form of bonuses to the people who caused all the bother. Also remember this is the man who decided to cripple the lowest paid in the job market by doubling their basic tax rate. Some people on here seem to have rose tinted memories.

 

Well he's also (partly) responsible for introducing the minimum wage and working tax credits, and investing a fortune in the NHS and education (not all which has been wisely spent, admittedly). So perhaps some people here have selective memory.

 

I'm not really familiar with the basic tax rate in the low paid, but I'm pretty sure the way you've worded that is misleading at best. Still, you're an Alex Salmon man iirc so no surprises there.

 

 

NHS is basically screwed before talking about spending cuts isn't it? Don't want to think what it will be like with them.

 

 

Don't worry the Conservatives will privatise it for you.

 

 

They'll have to do something. I'll be dishing out advice on here when they do too.

 

It could be saved, but the combination of the problems that are going to occur anyway (due to general issues, and indeed to the way the "extra spending" was stupidly used), and add to that the big old spending cuts that are going to have come in when we start to try and repay everything and it really is looking like a difficult job.

 

Don't worry though when the "privatised" model combined with our benefits system causes everything to collapse Fop should have already perfected the android body, a few billion deaths and then the new world order will arise

[Happy Face 29]

Is it just my perception or have they spent masses of cash on new hospitals to replace perfectly functional ones, so you still get the same service/wait, just in a shinier building? Or do we have more nurses/doctors/theatres/machines etc. now too?

 

FWIW I couldn't have been happier with the treatment my dad got (cancer) and couldn't be more disgusted with the treatment my mother gets (indeterminate).

[ChezGiven 0]

Brown has to take a lot of blame for the de regulation of the banking system and the failure of the FSA to stop the banks making false profits on selling loans which were more toxic than Chernobyl. When people were short selling they stopped them and told them not to do it again. They then removed the laws curtailing the short selling and quel suprise they started doing it again. This meant that Billions of tax payers money had to go into the banks millions of which went straight back out again in the form of bonuses to the people who caused all the bother. Also remember this is the man who decided to cripple the lowest paid in the job market by doubling their basic tax rate. Some people on here seem to have rose tinted memories.

 

Well he's also (partly) responsible for introducing the minimum wage and working tax credits, and investing a fortune in the NHS and education (not all which has been wisely spent, admittedly). So perhaps some people here have selective memory.

 

I'm not really familiar with the basic tax rate in the low paid, but I'm pretty sure the way you've worded that is misleading at best. Still, you're an Alex Salmon man iirc so no surprises there.

 

 

NHS is basically screwed before talking about spending cuts isn't it? Don't want to think what it will be like with them.

 

 

Don't worry the Conservatives will privatise it for you.

 

 

They'll have to do something. I'll be dishing out advice on here when they do too.

 

It could be saved, but the combination of the problems that are going to occur anyway (due to general issues, and indeed to the way the "extra spending" was stupidly used), and add to that the big old spending cuts that are going to have come in when we start to try and repay everything and it really is looking like a difficult job.

 

Don't worry though when the "privatised" model combined with our benefits system causes everything to collapse Fop should have already perfected the android body, a few billion deaths and then the new world order will arise

 

Thats what the flu virus is for.

[Renton 21393]

Is it just my perception or have they spent masses of cash on new hospitals to replace perfectly functional ones, so you still get the same service/wait, just in a shinier building? Or do we have more nurses/doctors/theatres/machines etc. now too?

 

FWIW I couldn't have been happier with the treatment my dad got (cancer) and couldn't be more disgusted with the treatment my mother gets (indeterminate).

 

What do you mean by indeterminate? If you mean she has symptoms but no definitive diagnosis then that's a tricky one, there's probably not a lot the NHS can do.

 

I'm an employee, a user, and a friend and relative of users. I think the NHS is superb valur for money, I really do. Obviously, as discussed in previous threads, it can't provide all the services people would want, and it can't even really go on existing in its present form if the honest truth is told. Part privatisation and a two tier service are sadly inevitable, the question is which party you trust to bring in the best reforms to make this as palatable as possible. The bottom line is the tories cannot be trusted with the NHS, that's my opinion.

[The Fish 10779]

Excuse my ignorance, but was it not the tories who brought in the culture of the administrative echelon, flooding the NHS with uneccesary consultants and managers, sucking the funds that could have been spent on frivolous things like nurses, beds and medicine

[ChezGiven 0]

Excuse my ignorance, but was it not the tories who brought in the culture of the administrative echelon, flooding the NHS with uneccesary consultants and managers, sucking the funds that could have been spent on frivolous things like nurses, beds and medicine

 

The 'Internal market' of 1992. Seperated all NHS institutions between Payers (PCTs) and Providers (Hospitals and community practices).

[Renton 21393]

Excuse my ignorance, but was it not the tories who brought in the culture of the administrative echelon, flooding the NHS with uneccesary consultants and managers, sucking the funds that could have been spent on frivolous things like nurses, beds and medicine

 

Daily Mail nonsense. You need administrators and managers in any large organisation for it to function; considering the size of the NHS (the second biggest organization in the world iirc), it compares very favourably to other private companies in this regard. Not to mention massive increases in the numbers of doctors and nurses that have been employed and trained (at great expense), and an ever-increasing litigious environment where people are only too willing to sue at the slightest mistake (all which has to be dealt with, and not by clinicians).

 

Basically Fish, you're talking bollocks. Take the managers from any organization and see what happens.

[Happy Face 29]

Is it just my perception or have they spent masses of cash on new hospitals to replace perfectly functional ones, so you still get the same service/wait, just in a shinier building? Or do we have more nurses/doctors/theatres/machines etc. now too?

 

FWIW I couldn't have been happier with the treatment my dad got (cancer) and couldn't be more disgusted with the treatment my mother gets (indeterminate).

 

What do you mean by indeterminate? If you mean she has symptoms but no definitive diagnosis then that's a tricky one, there's probably not a lot the NHS can do.

 

I'm an employee, a user, and a friend and relative of users. I think the NHS is superb valur for money, I really do. Obviously, as discussed in previous threads, it can't provide all the services people would want, and it can't even really go on existing in its present form if the honest truth is told. Part privatisation and a two tier service are sadly inevitable, the question is which party you trust to bring in the best reforms to make this as palatable as possible. The bottom line is the tories cannot be trusted with the NHS, that's my opinion.

 

No diagnosis.

 

She has a problem with pituitary function. And yeah, it's not fair to blame the NHS, it seems to be a worldwide problem with the illness that the doctors have a stock response of "eat healthily and exercise more" because it's all a hazy mystery to them.

 

We've got more answers from other sufferers on Yahoo forums and tests we've paid for ourselves in the last 2 months than in the previous 2 years of box ticking "hows it going? We'll do no tests as we're sure it's asthma, try this other inhaler" appointments.

Edited June 15, 2009 by Happy Face

[The Fish 10779]

woo wah wee wah, cool your jets Gordon, I was asking, not stating. Hence "Excuse my ignorance". It's the aussies you should be mad at.

 

All I was going off was the bitching and moaning that a couple of Nurses unloaded on me. Ashamed to say I know now t about the internal machinations of the NHS. Ask me how to make a Bolognese and I'll set you right, but Doctors and Nurses are just extras in 24 to me.

[Renton 21393]

woo wah wee wah, cool your jets Gordon, I was asking, not stating. Hence "Excuse my ignorance". It's the aussies you should be mad at.

 

All I was going off was the bitching and moaning that a couple of Nurses unloaded on me. Ashamed to say I know now t about the internal machinations of the NHS. Ask me how to make a Bolognese and I'll set you right, but Doctors and Nurses are just extras in 24 to me.

 

Jealousy from the nurses there Fish ( for Catmag, KD, and SM) sorry for the harsh reply. It's a criticism that by and large doesn't withstand analysis for me though. You simply can't maintain the NHS by cutting out the management (though some are overpaid imo). I'll add a disclaimer here and point out that I'm not an NHS manager, I've no vested interests.

[Renton 21393]

Is it just my perception or have they spent masses of cash on new hospitals to replace perfectly functional ones, so you still get the same service/wait, just in a shinier building? Or do we have more nurses/doctors/theatres/machines etc. now too?

 

FWIW I couldn't have been happier with the treatment my dad got (cancer) and couldn't be more disgusted with the treatment my mother gets (indeterminate).

 

What do you mean by indeterminate? If you mean she has symptoms but no definitive diagnosis then that's a tricky one, there's probably not a lot the NHS can do.

 

I'm an employee, a user, and a friend and relative of users. I think the NHS is superb valur for money, I really do. Obviously, as discussed in previous threads, it can't provide all the services people would want, and it can't even really go on existing in its present form if the honest truth is told. Part privatisation and a two tier service are sadly inevitable, the question is which party you trust to bring in the best reforms to make this as palatable as possible. The bottom line is the tories cannot be trusted with the NHS, that's my opinion.

 

No diagnosis.

 

She has a problem with pituitary function. And yeah, it's not fair to blame the NHS, it seems to be a worldwide problem with the illness that the doctors have a stock response of "eat healthily and exercise more" because it's all a hazy mystery to them.

 

We've got more answers from other sufferers on Yahoo forums and tests we've paid for ourselves in the last 2 months than in the previous 2 years of box ticking "hows it going? We'll do no tests as we're sure it's asthma, try this other inhaler" appointments.

 

Thought it might be something like this. It's a tricky one, I don't think the NHS can cope if they can't label a person. Hope she finds what she needs somewhere though.

[Renton 21393]

Excuse my ignorance, but haven't labour sold off most schools and hospitals and then got developers to build shiny new ones and rent them back to us on the never, never.

 

I don't know much about Private Finance Iniative, I'm sure it has massive drawbacks, but at least the new hospitals and schools were built. What would the tories have done?

[snakehips 0]

Excuse my ignorance, but haven't labour sold off most schools and hospitals and then got developers to build shiny new ones and rent them back to us on the never, never.

 

Correct. PFI.

 

Vince Cable (the man who seems to speak the most sense out of everyone ifam) came out with an eye opener recently. He said that the next thing that was in great need of overhaul is public sector pensions. So, all you Government employees who get some sort of pension, be warned, it IS gonna happen.

[Fop 1]

Excuse my ignorance, but was it not the tories who brought in the culture of the administrative echelon, flooding the NHS with uneccesary consultants and managers, sucking the funds that could have been spent on frivolous things like nurses, beds and medicine

 

Daily Mail nonsense. You need administrators and managers in any large organisation for it to function; considering the size of the NHS (the second biggest organization in the world iirc), it compares very favourably to other private companies in this regard. Not to mention massive increases in the numbers of doctors and nurses that have been employed and trained (at great expense), and an ever-increasing litigious environment where people are only too willing to sue at the slightest mistake (all which has to be dealt with, and not by clinicians).

 

Basically Fish, you're talking bollocks. Take the managers from any organization and see what happens.

 

 

Take 1/2 the managers away from any organization and......... you make much more profit.

[Fop 1]

Excuse my ignorance, but haven't labour sold off most schools and hospitals and then got developers to build shiny new ones and rent them back to us on the never, never.

 

I don't know much about Private Finance Iniative, I'm sure it has massive drawbacks, but at least the new hospitals and schools were built. What would the tories have done?

 

 

It does, like paying much much more over the long term (but as that isn't within a term of parliament it is effectively "never" in political terms - of course in actual terms to the taxpayer it's a bugger).

[Fop 1]

Dodging the spending challenge

 

Analysis

By Steve Schifferes

Economics reporter, BBC News

 

budget deficit

 

On the day the government is announcing new plans for public spending in the next year, it has postponed its planned review of future public spending from April 2010 until after the next general election.

 

"The spending period currently operating in government stretches beyond the next election and therefore it is reasonable to review public spending at that time," Business Secretary Lord Mandelson told the BBC.

 

Mr Brown promised to unveil his vision, but it has been delayed

 

"We are not in a position, in June 2009, to be able to forecast what growth will be and what the performance of the economy will be in 2011. That is why we have to wait," he said.

 

Conservative leader David Cameron has condemned the government as "dishonest" and says it is a "blatant attempt to cover up the truth about Labour's cuts".

 

 

We know that a major fiscal tightening is on the cards over the course of the next parliament

Economics editor Stephanie Flanders

 

read Stephanie's blog

UK recovery 'likely to be slow'

 

However, the Conservatives have made it clear they will only decide on future departmental spending plans after they are in government.

 

Indeed, all the parties have been battling over future public spending for weeks, despite the fact that an election could be nearly a year away.

 

Labour has accused the Conservatives of planning 10% cuts in spending for all departments except health, while the Conservatives say that Labour refuses to admit that it is planning to cut public investment in the future.

Difficult future

 

But in fact both parties are reluctant to publish detailed spending plans - and for good political reasons: the scale of the possible cuts are truly horrendous.

 

The independent think tank, the Institute for Fiscal Studies, has estimated that over the next decade the government will have to reduce spending, or increase taxes, by £90bn - that would cost every UK family £2,840 per year by 2017-18.

 

In the first years of the next Parliament, the government has in fact already published its plans in broad outline.

 

 

These show that public spending will fall by 0.3% in real terms. But when the increases in spending that the government does not control are taken into account (such as debt interest and benefits), the real cut in spending by government departments is substantial.

 

It is also clear that, following the boost in capital spending on bricks and mortar such as schools and hospitals, the government is planning big cuts in capital budgets in the future.

 

And if the spending in the biggest and most popular programmes are protected - especially those in health and education, which make up half of departmental spending - then the scale of cuts in other departments is very substantial indeed.

 

The IFS has calculated that if there are no cuts in spending on the NHS - which makes up one-quarter of all spending - then other departments would need to be cut by 9.6% in real terms over the three-year spending review, and if education was also protected, then there would need to be 13.5% cuts.

 

But, given the scale of the problem, it is not clear whether either party is still committed to ring-fencing any big area of spending, whatever individual spokesmen say.

 

Not enough

 

But even cuts on this scale may not be enough.

 

With the government plans still leaving the deficit at 5% of GDP at the end of the next Parliament, the need for a painful adjustments after the next general election in 2010 is increasingly called for by many observers.

 

The OECD and IMF have both warned of the need for a credible plan to bring the budget into balance, and ratings agency Standard and Poor's has said it is putting Britain's AAA credit rating on review until such a plan emerges.

 

And the governor of the Bank of England has warned that the cost of government and private borrowing could rise if markets lose faith in the government's credibility. He has urged the chancellor to take action more quickly to address the budget gap.

 

But for the political parties, the scale of such adjustments could mean big - if temporary - tax rises as well as further cuts in vital public services, something that no one wants to talk about going into a general election.

 

Labour has already started by introducing a higher income tax rate for the rich, but there have been suggestions that VAT should be raised or some of VAT-exempt items included. In the 1980s recession, the Conservatives raised VAT to balance the budget, while in the 1990s a variety of indirect taxes were increased or created.

 

The size of the gap between spending and tax revenues - with the government taking in just three pounds for every four pounds it spends - makes it likely that all the big revenue raisers - (income tax, national insurance, and VAT) may have to be tapped in the future.

 

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8124312.stm

 

That benefits spending is eye watering.

[The Fish 10779]

That we spend almost as much on benefits as we do on Education and Health combined is lunacy. Surely a better equipped workforce in better health would eradicate the need for such a sum to be spent on benefits?

 

I maintain that if we fix the education system in this country everything else would eventually fall into line. Teachers on a competitive wage, the facilities to support engaging learning.

 

The Army pays for your tuition if you then serve, why not do something similar with Teachers?

 

I dunno I'm spitballing...

[ewerk 30370]

The Army pays for your tuition if you then serve, why not do something similar with Teachers?

 

I dunno I'm spitballing...

 

Don't teachers get paid to do their PGCE nowadays?

[Rob W 0]

for far too long teachers in the UK have got away with turning out people who can neither read nor write - I think a short sharp shock to them is in order - lets say fire the bottom 5% of performers???

[Rob W 0]

for far too long teachers in the UK have got away with turning out people who can neither read nor write - I think a short sharp shock to them is in order - lets say fire the bottom 5% of performers???

[Meenzer 15432]

*buzz* Repetition

[AgentAxeman 174]

for far too long teachers in the UK have got away with turning out people who can neither read nor write - I think a short sharp shock to them is in order - lets say fire the bottom 5% of performers???

 

 

what a daft statement!! whos to say the replacements would be any better!! I'd rather have experienced shit than inexperienced shit!! oh, and i'm not mentioning class sizes etc.. FFS!!

 

and also, dont blame the teachers for all the ills. both present and past governments have constantly fucked about with the system for years and its difficult to take on a 12 yr project (education of a child) if the goalposts are being constantly moved!!

 

lastly, remember, its almost impossible to educate someone who doesnt want to be educated. no discipline left in schools now so you cant force children if they dont want to learn!!

 

 

back to the thread - BEST IN EUROPE!!!! YOU'RE HAVING A F*CKING LAUGH AINT YA!!!!!!

Edited June 30, 2009 by AvatarAxeman