General Random Conversation..

[Rayvin 5226]

Yep, maybe so. Don't see how that's the idealist's fault though. NuLabour's maybe. Not people who're voting Corbyn because they're sick of the same old shit.

[ewerk 30656]

Principle over pragmatism.

[Renton 21642]

Yep, maybe so. Don't see how that's the idealist's fault though. NuLabour's maybe. Not people who're voting Corbyn because they're sick of the same old shit.

There you again, same old shit, implying equivalence between the likes of Burnham and Cameron. Fine, if that's what you believe.

 

Me, I've worked in the nhs throughout the new labour years and the Tories. I know the difference, as will most users by now. Protection of public services is one area where the Tories and labour (of any variety) have always been poles apart. Like the emperor killing Luke with his lightening, only at the end will you see this.

[Rayvin 5226]

Yeah but with no credible opposition they'll be doing it well into 2025.

Not disagreeing with that either. But if we continue following pragmatism, based on the evidence of the past 15-20 years, we end up being slowly moved away from the position we all thought we were occupying.

 

This is the wrong thread for this - but I do fully respect what you're saying. I dunno, maybe you're right and idealists are the problem, but I don't think I would do anything differently.

Edited February 12, 2016 by Rayvin

[Rayvin 5226]

There you again, same old shit, implying equivalence between the likes of Burnham and Cameron. Fine, if that's what you believe.

 

Me, I've worked in the nhs throughout the new labour years and the Tories. I know the difference, as will most users by now. Protection of public services is one area where the Tories and labour (of any variety) have always been poles apart. Like the emperor killing Luke with his lightening, only at the end will you see this.

 

I'm not implying equivalence for what it's worth. I would have accepted Burnham. I don't think Old Nulabour=Tories.

 

They still weren't good enough though, the whole bottom fell out of whatever movement they started with. Something new was needed as evidenced by the fact that it happened.

[ewerk 30656]

There's nothing wrong with idealism, it's what keeps the centre honest. But it's the people in power who make the decisions and you can't do that from the fringes, regardless whether the fringes are expanding a bit or not.

Edited February 12, 2016 by ewerk

[Rayvin 5226]

Maybe you're right, but I have the hope that the further the Tories push this, the more the fringes become mainstream. I suppose you'd argue that's naive. Maybe you're right but fuck it, we're heading down this path now, may as well stay the course.

Edited February 12, 2016 by Rayvin

[ewerk 30656]

That's pretty much exactly what I think and I pray that a centre left candidate emerges before 2020 who can make you and others like you change your mind. Because I don't have a vote in the matter.

[Rayvin 5226]

I confess that division in the left is rather pointless. For what it's worth, if Corbyn proves to be a bust I'll head back into line again.

[NJS 4389]

There you again, same old shit, implying equivalence between the likes of Burnham and Cameron. Fine, if that's what you believe.

 

Me, I've worked in the nhs throughout the new labour years and the Tories. I know the difference, as will most users by now. Protection of public services is one area where the Tories and labour (of any variety) have always been poles apart. Like the emperor killing Luke with his lightening, only at the end will you see this.

New Labour started the process of NHS privatisation.

[Renton 21642]

New Labour started the process of NHS privatisation.

Now you're at it as well.

 

What do you mean? Opened the internal market (Thatcher anyway)? Privatised ancillary services? Provided new infrastructure through PFI?

 

Labour increased spending on the NHS massively in both absolute and real terms. They improved staff conditions and morale beyond measure. In fact, the effect of New Labour on the NHS was transformative for the good imo. It's almost beyond dispute under labour we created one of the best, fairest, most efficient health services in the world (check the OECD if you doubt this).

 

I can sort of understand how someone of Rayvin doesn't appreciate this because of his age, but a bit surprised you don't tbh. All seems a bit disingenuous to give you an excuse to support Corbyn to me. You can criticise New Labour for many things but the NHS shouldn't be one of them imo.

Edited February 12, 2016 by Renton

[NJS 4389]

Now you're at it as well.

 

What do you mean? Opened the internal market (Thatcher anyway)? Privatised ancillary services? Provided new infrastructure through PFI?

 

Labour increased spending on the NHS massively in both absolute and real terms. They improved staff conditions and morale beyond measure. In fact, the effect of New Labour on the NHS was transformative for the good imo. It's almost beyond dispute under labour we created one of the best, fairest, most efficient health services in the world (check the OECD if you doubt this).

 

I can sort of understand how someone of Rayvin doesn't appreciate this because of his age, but a bit surprised you don't tbh. All seems a bit disingenuous to give you an excuse to support Corbyn to me. You can criticise New Labour for many things but the NHS shouldn't be one of them imo.

The NHS did improve under New Labour and I'm not denying the money injected but the legacy of PFI is as toxic as fuck. The internal market was started by the Tories (as was PFI) but it was massively increased under Blair.

 

If you can have a go at Hunt and the rest of the cunts for having links to private healthcare companies (pefectly justified) then I don't think you can ignore how many ex Labour ministers have eaten out of that trough as well.

 

Of course New Labour and the remaining Blairites supported/still support the NHS at heart (though I'd doubt the likes of Kendal) whereas we know where the cunts want to go, but the shift towards acceptance of private involvment, though not started, was greatly advanced by Blair. It is this acceptance now being sold that I think is the main problem.

[Renton 21642]

The NHS did improve under New Labour and I'm not denying the money injected but the legacy of PFI is as toxic as fuck. The internal market was started by the Tories (as was PFI) but it was massively increased under Blair.

 

If you can have a go at Hunt and the rest of the cunts for having links to private healthcare companies (pefectly justified) then I don't think you can ignore how many ex Labour ministers have eaten out of that trough as well.

 

Of course New Labour and the remaining Blairites supported/still support the NHS at heart (though I'd doubt the likes of Kendal) whereas we know where the cunts want to go, but the shift towards acceptance of private involvment, though not started, was greatly advanced by Blair. It is this acceptance now being sold that I think is the main problem.

The internal market in the NHS is actually a good thing though, the alternative is a monopolistic behemoth that would be the sole supplier and provider of health care, not going to work in the 21st century. I'll say again that under labour the NHS was an exemplar health service throughout the world. Now it is being starved of funds and driven to ideological destruction.

[Renton 21642]

As for PFI, I think it's problems are exaggerated. Iirc it accounts for 3% of NHS expenditure, which doesn't seem that bad considering the infrastructure it bought and considering what it replaced. It's much higher in some trusts admittedly. Still, it was a pragmatic solution that was less than perfect rather than some machievelian plot to privatise the NHS.

[Kid Dynamite 7034]

My mother works for NHS England and knows a lot more about the history of the service than me. She has a lot of gratitude towards Blairs support of the NHS during his time in power

Edited February 13, 2016 by StraightEdgeWizard

[NJS 4389]

The internal market in the NHS is actually a good thing though, the alternative is a monopolistic behemoth that would be the sole supplier and provider of health care, not going to work in the 21st century. I'll say again that under labour the NHS was an exemplar health service throughout the world. Now it is being starved of funds and driven to ideological destruction.

 

Why would the "old" NHS not work now?

 

I don't see why a local health authority would need to buy-in services from other areas or from the private sector if it was properly funded.

 

This goes back to my point that they've (both Tory and NL) sold the idea that there must be room for the private sector in everything when there's no proof, especially from other "privatised" industries that the market is best.

[ChezGiven 0]

I did a thesis on the internal market in the NHS, I don't have the answer as to whether it has worked or not but the work that I picked up on was through a series of occasional papers by the London School of Economics by a left leaning prof. He used the Markets vs Hierarchies work of Oliver Williamson to say that the cost of running the market in the NHS would be higher than the benefits.

 

5 years later that prof was working for Blair and masterminding his 3rd way Socialism. 15 years later Williamson won the Nobel prize for the Hierarchies work. Take of that what you will, don't know of any formal work that has tested the hypothesis that the market in the NHS is more efficient.

[Renton 21642]

The NHS is still probably the most joined up health service in the western world. I don't know if there are any pre-Thatcher nhs models left to compare it to but the bottom line is that under new labour it worked pretty well and contrary to the right wing perception was very efficient and manager light.

 

Anyway, the point is that you (NJS, Ravin, generic Corbynites) keep equating labour as being the same as the Tories with respect to the ambitions and general direction of the nhs. Two things about this. First, it's bullshit because the underlying philosophies of the parties are still completely different. Secondly, it's dangerous, because the result is we get an unelectable opposition and the very thing nobody wants happens by default.

 

Sickening state of affairs this for me.

[NJS 4389]

Do you think if Milliband had won that Balls' austerity lite would have not seen further NHS reform?

 

I don't think Blairites are full on tories when it comes to the NHS (they are on other things) but as I said the privatisation acceptance slippery slope wouldn't have been reversed.

 

If you think an "effective" opposition has to be some kind of new labour-esque centrist party then fair enough but I don't think that would guarantee an NHS we all want.

 

For the record I don't think Corbyn is good enough but the debate and bravery to actually think about left wing policies rather than the safe tory-lite new labour stuff is good for the party and the country as a whole. As it stands I don't think they'll win in 2020 but the European debate and the coming crash might change that.

[Renton 21642]

Do you think if Milliband had won that Balls' austerity lite would have not seen further NHS reform?

 

I don't think Blairites are full on tories when it comes to the NHS (they are on other things) but as I said the privatisation acceptance slippery slope wouldn't have been reversed.

 

If you think an "effective" opposition has to be some kind of new labour-esque centrist party then fair enough but I don't think that would guarantee an NHS we all want.

 

For the record I don't think Corbyn is good enough but the debate and bravery to actually think about left wing policies rather than the safe tory-lite new labour stuff is good for the party and the country as a whole. As it stands I don't think they'll win in 2020 but the European debate and the coming crash might change that.

I think parties say what they think they need to RE: austerity. Doesn't mean they would have carried it out. Labour were cowards with their message and not directly addressing the lies told by the Tories, plus they had the wrong leader. Add in Scotland and it was a disaster. It'll be nowt compared to 2020 though.

 

The referendum is crucial. Another thing Corbyn is weak as piss about. I'm not even sure what he believes about Europe.

[Rayvin 5226]

I think parties say what they think they need to RE: austerity. Doesn't mean they would have carried it out. Labour were cowards with their message and not directly addressing the lies told by the Tories, plus they had the wrong leader. Add in Scotland and it was a disaster. It'll be nowt compared to 2020 though.

 

The referendum is crucial. Another thing Corbyn is weak as piss about. I'm not even sure what he believes about Europe.

 

He seems to believe that he wants out, but is following the party line on it, hence the lack of conviction. The EU referendum is set up to be an utter shambles across the board, sadly.

[Renton 21642]

 

He seems to believe that he wants out, but is following the party line on it, hence the lack of conviction. The EU referendum is set up to be an utter shambles across the board, sadly.

I'm really scared of an out vote. If this is yet another thing Corbyn believes him I respect him even less. I mean the trident submarines without missiles was shear comedy.

 

Anyway, it would be good if a mod could move the last page or so to the politics thread.

[ewerk 30656]

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/121152

[Renton 21642]

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/121152

Signed, may cause a bit if embarrassment at least.

[Rayvin 5226]

Also signed.