[Hirsute]

Obviously I am a deeply embedded member of the tofu eating wokerati who reads the odd guardian article, but even so, this did make me laugh out loud.

Users worried Boris 2.0 permanently corrupted

‘But there is no Safe Mode, just Lunatic Mode’

 

 

Topic

[Rich_cb]

This is a personal favourite:
This is a personal favourite:

‘Britain is awful, you people are scum’ – the Labour left’s new slogan

[Hirsute]

Had to subscribe to avoid the

Had to subscribe to avoid the ads.

That’s capitalism for you.

[hawkinspeter]

Imma leave this here

Imma leave this here

https://newsthump.com/2022/10/27/tests-reveal-crows-more-intelligent-than-tory-voters/

[chrisonabike]

I agree about the care side. 

I agree about the care side.  That may also have bearing on our results vis-a-vis other countries.  It’s complex and very definitely political because governments have to show “successes” in this area.

In general (e.g. not just NHS now) I think being victims of our own success is one strand of it.  How we manage having more older people and a greater proportion of older people has lagged behind our ability to keep alive longer.

[Dnnnnnn]

Rich_cb wrote:

Rich_cb wrote:

The shift to the right narrative is similarly nonsensical. Taxation is at its highest level since King George VI was on the throne. Is that right wing? Government spending is even higher than that. Is that right wing?

Tax and spending are at high levels because 2010s economic growth was anaemic and has gotten worse since covid (we’re still not back to pre-covid GDP,). And covid required huge public spending, so public spending being a high share of GDP isn’t surprising. Comparator countries are in a similar position, except that they’ve had better growth.

The rightward shift can be for some things and not others. Rising populism seems to be have brought a search for simplistic, dog-whistle solutions (perhaps more socially than economically to the right) more than a consistent ideological path.
 

[Dnnnnnn]

Rich_cb wrote:

Rich_cb wrote:

If they can’t do it with an 80 seat majority then when can they do it? It’s just a Labour party ‘boogeyman’ threat.

Tend to agree. Apart from the past 12.5 years, the Tories have been in power for most of the time since the NHS was created and yet its share of national public spending keeps on rising.  

No doubt there are some Tories who’d like a US-style system – but like those who favour much-increased immigration, abolishing the planning system or capital punishment, it just ain’t gonna happen. “The NHS is the closest thing the English have to a religion”, as Nigel Lawson said.

Labour have also have fringe beliefs/believers too (e.g. unilateral disarmament) – neither side’s get their own way very often.

I wonder how much of the current problems are down to the weakness of the social care system? The NHS isn’t great on its own, probably either in funding or structure – but it does seem to be hobbled by having to make up for social care’s weaknesses.

[Rich_cb]

I replied previously with
I replied previously with several examples and a link to a detailed comparison.

Avoidable mortality is the best overall single measure. This is lower in Germany and IIRC Australia.

Survival rates from common cancers and serious illnesses is another good guide to the performance of a healthcare system.

Germany and Australia outperform the UK on these measures too although the UK does well on Diabetes.

[Secret_squirrel]

Rich_cb wrote:

Rich_cb wrote:

The German system has been better than the UK system when spending was near equal.

I’d still like to see your evidence for that and your definition of better.  Waiting lists are/were virtually non-existent in Germany – but their better system doesnt show up in life expectancy (pre-Covid).

This seems fairly even handed on Pro’s and Con’s.   Certainly doesnt suggest major change is needed.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38899811

 

[Rich_cb]

The German system has been
The German system has been better than the UK system when spending was near equal.

It probably wouldn’t be as good if Germany spent less but the NHS wouldn’t be as good as the German system even if spending was increased to match German spending.

The principle benefit of the German model, as I’ve previously emphasised, is the removal of political interference.

The German ‘spending’ is a mixture of both state and private expenditure.

By encouraging and enabling greater private provision they increase health spending and make it far less vulnerable to political influence.

[Sniffer]

I am not against a

I am not against a conversation against about changing the system.   Whatever system we have we will need to invest in and pay for.

I don’t believe the German system woulf be as good with UK spending per capita. 

It is dishonest to say that nothing could be imrpoved with within the NHS model or that other models wouldn’t work.  It is also dishonest to say that spending less than other comparable countries will deliver their health care outcomes if we adopt their model.

[Rich_cb]

As I pointed out in my
As I pointed out in my previous comment.

The underperformance persisted even when the funding was running at much higher levels, ergo, funding cannot be the only cause of the underperformance.

Which leaves us with the system itself.

Another advantage of moving to the German model would be the removal of politics from the equation. That alone would bring much needed stability and stop the large fluctuations in funding etc.

[Sniffer]

I don’t think that’s entirely

Rich_cb wrote:

I don’t think that’s entirely the case.

Maybe not, but I don’t think you can ignore it.

Only Italy of the G7 countries spends less per head than the UK.

[Rich_cb]

If it’s not happened yet then
If it’s not happened yet then it simply won’t happen. It was a believable lie in 2010. The Conservatives had been out of power for years, they could be planning anything! After 12 years in power it’s lost any sense of credibility.

We’ll find out soon enough, the Conservatives will almost certainly lose in 2024 so they’ve got 2 years to put the ‘secret master plan’ into action. I won’t hold my breath.

The shift to the right narrative is similarly nonsensical.

Taxation is at its highest level since King George VI was on the throne. Is that right wing?

Government spending is even higher than that. Is that right wing?

The Dublin Convention allows asylum seekers to be removed to another country and to have their application for UK asylum summarily dismissed. We were signatories to that for years whilst we were members of the EU.

The Rwanda plan is simply a different version of the same idea.

[NOtotheEU]

TheBillder wrote:

TheBillder wrote:

I would argue that a progressive government would do as much as possible to improve the lives of as many people as possible.

I am looking forward to voting for this new political party when someone starts it.

[brooksby]

If you put a frog into

If you put a frog into boiling water it will leap out. But if you put it in tepid water and then heat the water gradually…

The whole narrative and the political landscape have been changed around us over the last twelve years, rich, with everything being gradually shifted further and further right… (my god! Flying asylum seekers to central Africa as a mainstream policy?)

Its not nonsense or a Laaay-baaah bogeyman. It is a desire and a target of many Conservatives and it will happen.

[Author]

Replies