Jump to content

Europe --- In or Out


Christmas Tree
 Share

Europe?  

92 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

All of which, I acknowledge, takes us back to "why wouldn't they just say that". And come to think of it, all they said was 50,000 additional nurses. It's only when people delved into the numbers that all of a sudden this became an issue - not by the design of the Tories, but because some journalist has picked it up, misinterpreted the implications, and suddenly it was everywhere.

 

If you're talking about how you arrived at the number of 50,000 - then explaining that part of the figure comes from retentions is just an explanatory aspect of your justification. I doubt they ever really anticipated that anyone would probe this particular issue tbh because the net result is 50,000 additional nurses. So actually, that's probably your answer as to why they didn't just say what they meant - they thought they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rayvin, An old teacher once wrote on a blackboard on our first day with him.....

 

2 + 2 = 5

 

..... And then asked us ways to get to that answer. Obviously nobody could do it. He then told us 2 + 2 = 5 is only correct if he says it's correct and don't forget it or else. The teacher turned out to be a great teacher, (an eccentric bloke with a big dollop of 'hard cunt-ness'). Think of the Tories claims in the same way with the twist that they aren't great politicians and are soft as shite. :good:

 

 

 

 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It reminds me of that old nursery rhyme that never quite took off....

 

There was 50,000 nurses

Sitting on the wall.

50,000 nurses added to them all

And if 31,000 nurses were already there,

There'd be 26 member's of the cabinet

Talking out their arse.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/12/2020 at 21:24, Rayvin said:

I give a fuck because I've spent the last few pages taking fire from half the fucking forum because some of them somehow couldn't understand what I was saying despite my several quite basic attempts to state it, and the others just weighed in with digs which revealed nothing to me other than their lack of confidence in engaging the point.

 

I don't care if I'm right or wrong, I have enough self-respect not to give a shit - I'd prefer to just know what the truth is. But it's taken me about 30 posts to get to the point where anyone actually genuinely tried to understand what I was saying. Quick to wade in, slow to engage. You think it's been a collective waste of your time? It's been a lot fucking worse on my side, let me tell you.

 

In direct answer to your point, I want you to explain something for me. If the NHS has put in their own strategic policy document for the next five years that a 2% increase in retention will mean a net increase in 12,400 nurses - the document specifically says that - what do you think that they're getting at? Because for me, that's exactly the same point that the Tories are making. Exactly the same. So what the fuck am I getting wrong about that? It has to mean, surely, that the yearly intake of new nurses that graduate into the system will remain broadly constant - yes those graduates may then need 4 months of training or whatever, but they were coming into the system either way. That's the only possible way, surely, that the NHS can conclude that a 2% increase in retention leads to an overall numerical increase in nurses.

 

So when the Tories come in and claim the same thing, albeit without understanding what the fuck they're saying, that's what we surely have to conclude. They are creating 50,000 posts, and they're doing it by co-opting and scaling up an existing NHS strategy. I've given several reasons why they might word it this way, the fact that the strategy was already in place is probably a significant one.

 

Also:

 

 

What do you think that retention does then? Has net zero impact? If so, why is the NHS claiming the opposite?

in my defence i was slow to wade in or engage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

 

And yes, he is actually being serious.

 

Why has it changed already? I thought nothing changed until the end of the year.

 

Also, I agree on some analysis he's being serious, but what the hell did he expect? How can any Brexiter possibly not have seen this shit coming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

in my defence i was slow to wade in or engage

 

I've just spent several days being grumpy because of an existential crisis, a presentation I had to give for a job interview at 7.30 in the morning yesterday, and the subsequent lack of sleep that I had in the days before.

 

I fixated on the nurses thing as a distraction. I'm just weird, basically.

Edited by Rayvin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Why has it changed already? I thought nothing changed until the end of the year.

 

Also, I agree on some analysis he's being serious, but what the hell did he expect? How can any Brexiter possibly not have seen this shit coming.

It hasn’t changed. He’s a moron. Like the other 17,399,999 of them.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

I've just spent several days being grumpy because of an existential crisis, a presentation I had to give for a job interview at 7.30 in the morning yesterday, and the subsequent lack of sleep that I had in the days before.

 

sounds like this discussion was a good use of your time then :lol:

hope the presentation went well!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine you take a job offer paying £50k p.a. having previously earned £19k p.a., but your company only pays you £31k because it turns out the offer included the £19k you no longer receive for your previous... no, it's no good, my heart's not in it

  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Meenzer said:

Imagine you take a job offer paying £50k p.a. having previously earned £19k p.a., but your company only pays you £31k because it turns out the offer included the £19k you no longer receive for your previous... no, it's no good, my heart's not in it

 

You fucking agreed with me anyway :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.