Stop voting for fucking Tories
-
- Posts: 3585
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:37 am
Bad for the economy Tories strike again.
-
- Posts: 792
- Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:09 pm
Was that the nhs or the government?Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:22 pmOkay, I'll start with the £8.7bn lost out of the £12.1bn spent on PPE. Efficient management or not?
- Paddington Bear
- Posts: 5961
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:29 pm
- Location: Hertfordshire
A double whammy of the parties and a major fall in living standards/incomes could send Boris to poll ratings that finish him off
Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot, But he'll remember with advantages, What feats he did that day
- Torquemada 1420
- Posts: 11155
- Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:22 am
- Location: Hut 8
The NHS is probably the world's 4th largest employer after the US military, the Chinese army and Walmart. In a country the size of Britain! It is, or will be consuming 40% of all Govt. expenditure.GogLais wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 10:11 amI’ve never got round to doing links, blame either age or inertia, but there’s stuff published by the ONS and the Kings Fund that backs that up. If you can point me to something else then fine.Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 10:02 amYou have to be sh*tting me?GogLais wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 9:59 am I thought the NHS was relatively efficient, at least in terms of management and administration costs. The well-known problem is that it is now expected to spend money on a load of things that were inconceivable when it was originally set up as a free at the point of delivery service.
- Torquemada 1420
- Posts: 11155
- Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:22 am
- Location: Hut 8
In truth, it will have largely or all have been the Govt masquerading as the NHS I suspect. Rather like the NHS app.Happyhooker wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:25 pmWas that the nhs or the government?Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:22 pmOkay, I'll start with the £8.7bn lost out of the £12.1bn spent on PPE. Efficient management or not?
Last edited by Torquemada 1420 on Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I think a few bn of that is a loss based on the fact that the price that had to be paid for PPE at the time was substantially more than its value now. As others have said there’s the alleged scandal of directing PPE contracts to chums, I doubt that NHS management had much say in that. I’d guess it was led by the Department of Health. Or was it Wealth?Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:22 pmOkay, I'll start with the £8.7bn lost out of the £12.1bn spent on PPE. Efficient management or not?
- Torquemada 1420
- Posts: 11155
- Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:22 am
- Location: Hut 8
8th. Add in the Chinese railways, Chinese Interior Ministry, Russian military and McDonalds. That's if you view the UK NHS as one organisation. Might be more realistic to view it as four, one for each country. Then NHS England would also be behind the Indian Army, Amazon, the Chinese State petroleum company and the Chinese state Energy company, and around the same with the Indian railway.Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:35 pmThe NHS is probably the world's 4th largest employer after the US military, the Chinese army and Walmart. In a country the size of Britain! It is, or will be consuming 40% of all Govt. expenditure.
Doesn't change the point but I find that kind of nerdery interesting.
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
-
- Posts: 792
- Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:09 pm
Which kinda negates your point about this being a sign of bad nhs managementTorquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:37 pmIn truth, it will have largely or all have been the Govt masquerading as the NHS I suspect. Rather like the NHS app.Happyhooker wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:25 pmWas that the nhs or the government?Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:22 pm
Okay, I'll start with the £8.7bn lost out of the £12.1bn spent on PPE. Efficient management or not?
Political interference is a key cause for inefficiency in the NHS.Happyhooker wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:47 pmWhich kinda negates your point about this being a sign of bad nhs managementTorquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:37 pmIn truth, it will have largely or all have been the Govt masquerading as the NHS I suspect. Rather like the NHS app.
If you have to make changes every couple of years when a new minister wants to make an impact with his new initiative, any efficiency benefits never get to bed in and have the effect desired.
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
Or the way markets work And anway I suspect that was a central Gov't process rather than the NHS, which is where we started off.Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:39 pmThat's a polite way of saying they allowed themselves to be ripped off?
That's because we lump them all as NHS. I'd be very surprised if comparable European countries have smaller overall numbers of health care workers. As regards the 40%, there may well be a good case for some sort of means-tested/insurance system.Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:35 pmThe NHS is probably the world's 4th largest employer after the US military, the Chinese army and Walmart. In a country the size of Britain! It is, or will be consuming 40% of all Govt. expenditure.
- Torquemada 1420
- Posts: 11155
- Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:22 am
- Location: Hut 8
Muckdonalds is a franchise. It does not count.Biffer wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:42 pm8th. Add in the Chinese railways, Chinese Interior Ministry, Russian military and McDonalds. That's if you view the UK NHS as one organisation. Might be more realistic to view it as four, one for each country. Then NHS England would also be behind the Indian Army, Amazon, the Chinese State petroleum company and the Chinese state Energy company, and around the same with the Indian railway.Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:35 pmThe NHS is probably the world's 4th largest employer after the US military, the Chinese army and Walmart. In a country the size of Britain! It is, or will be consuming 40% of all Govt. expenditure.
Doesn't change the point but I find that kind of nerdery interesting.
The 40% is pish btw. It's about 22%GogLais wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 1:09 pmThat's because we lump them all as NHS. I'd be very surprised if comparable European countries have smaller overall numbers of health care workers. As regards the 40%, there may well be a good case for some sort of means-tested/insurance system.Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:35 pmThe NHS is probably the world's 4th largest employer after the US military, the Chinese army and Walmart. In a country the size of Britain! It is, or will be consuming 40% of all Govt. expenditure.
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... c-spending
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
- Torquemada 1420
- Posts: 11155
- Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:22 am
- Location: Hut 8
Yes. I realised I'd probably used a bad example there but it was already posted. However, I could go on with this forever.Happyhooker wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:47 pmWhich kinda negates your point about this being a sign of bad nhs managementTorquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:37 pmIn truth, it will have largely or all have been the Govt masquerading as the NHS I suspect. Rather like the NHS app.
The patient record system were somewhere between £10bn and £12bn was toileted. And that was a decade ago and makes the PPE numbers look a little dull..
The health authority that spent a few £ million on new ambulances. Which, AFAIK, are still sitting in a lock up years later because the same authority had not planned for having ambulance crews to be able to staff the wagons.
Bedford hospital which spent a considerable sum kitting out an NRMI department. Again, without any thought over the ability to staff it. The unit was being used more by local vets (which, I grant was at least bringing in an income to the hospital)
than it was for human patients.
I have some work to do now. We need to buy some staples for the office. Where's OS when you need him?
Last edited by Torquemada 1420 on Thu Feb 03, 2022 1:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Insane_Homer
- Posts: 5389
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:14 pm
- Location: Leafy Surrey
Anyone remember as far back as October 2021...Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:29 pm A double whammy of the parties and a major fall in living standards/incomes could send Boris to poll ratings that finish him off
Aging wellBumbleCunt wrote:I’ve given you the most important metric – never mind life expectancy, never mind cancer outcomes – look at wage growth.
“Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true.”
- Torquemada 1420
- Posts: 11155
- Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:22 am
- Location: Hut 8
FromBiffer wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 1:13 pmThe 40% is pish btw. It's about 22%GogLais wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 1:09 pmThat's because we lump them all as NHS. I'd be very surprised if comparable European countries have smaller overall numbers of health care workers. As regards the 40%, there may well be a good case for some sort of means-tested/insurance system.Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:35 pm
The NHS is probably the world's 4th largest employer after the US military, the Chinese army and Walmart. In a country the size of Britain! It is, or will be consuming 40% of all Govt. expenditure.
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... c-spending
https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/ap ... nsured.pdf
Is this some nuance? Is there something else significant that the DofH pays for that is technically not the NHS but is included in these numbers? Long term care is about 3% so that cannot explain the discrepancy.Britain set for an NHS-dominated state: by 2024-25, the Department of Health and Social Care will account for around 40 per cent of all day to day government spending, up from 28 per cent two decades earlier.
Sounds like it needs more management then.Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 1:16 pmYes. I realised I'd probably used a bad example there but it was already posted. However, I could go on with this forever.Happyhooker wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:47 pmWhich kinda negates your point about this being a sign of bad nhs managementTorquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:37 pm
In truth, it will have largely or all have been the Govt masquerading as the NHS I suspect. Rather like the NHS app.
The patient record system were somewhere between £10bn and £12bn was toileted. And that was a decade ago and makes the PPE numbers look a little dull..
The health authority that spent a few £ million on new ambulances. Which, AFAIK, are still sitting in a lock up years later because the same authority had not planned for having ambulance crews to be able to staff the wagons.
Bedford hospital which spent a considerable sum kitting out an NRMI department. Again, without any thought over the ability to staff it. The unit was being used more by local vets (which, I grant was at least bringing in an income to the hospital)
than it was for human patients.
I have some work to do now. We need to buy some staples for the office. Where's OS when you need him?
If you add health care and state pensions you get to about 40%.Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 1:27 pmFromBiffer wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 1:13 pmThe 40% is pish btw. It's about 22%
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... c-spending
https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/ap ... nsured.pdf
Is this some nuance? Is there something else significant that the DofH pays for that is technically not the NHS but is included in these numbers? Long term care is about 3% so that cannot explain the discrepancy.Britain set for an NHS-dominated state: by 2024-25, the Department of Health and Social Care will account for around 40 per cent of all day to day government spending, up from 28 per cent two decades earlier.
I think that's likely where the 40% number is from.GogLais wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 1:34 pmIf you add health care and state pensions you get to about 40%.Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 1:27 pmFromBiffer wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 1:13 pm
The 40% is pish btw. It's about 22%
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... c-spending
https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/ap ... nsured.pdf
Is this some nuance? Is there something else significant that the DofH pays for that is technically not the NHS but is included in these numbers? Long term care is about 3% so that cannot explain the discrepancy.Britain set for an NHS-dominated state: by 2024-25, the Department of Health and Social Care will account for around 40 per cent of all day to day government spending, up from 28 per cent two decades earlier.
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
-
- Posts: 3585
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:37 am
Wage growth has been stagnant for a long time though. Asset growth is the most important metric. Housing prices going down with interest rates rising will be what finishes them off.Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 1:22 pmAnyone remember as far back as October 2021...Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:29 pm A double whammy of the parties and a major fall in living standards/incomes could send Boris to poll ratings that finish him off
Aging wellBumbleCunt wrote:I’ve given you the most important metric – never mind life expectancy, never mind cancer outcomes – look at wage growth.
- Hal Jordan
- Posts: 4154
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:48 pm
- Location: Sector 2814
Yep, the second the housing market takes a misstep the whole Government is dead meat, never mind whoever is Prime Minister.
That's why successive Governments have fed it a diet of PEDs to keep it boosted for decades.
That's why successive Governments have fed it a diet of PEDs to keep it boosted for decades.
I assume those noted public sector organisations Accenture, BT, Fujitsu et al share none of the blame here...Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 1:16 pmThe patient record system were somewhere between £10bn and £12bn was toileted. And that was a decade ago and makes the PPE numbers look a little dull..
It was one of those projects where a shit-ton of blame is to be had - the NHS, the cabinet, the private companies they outsourced to, pretty much everything was a fuckup. But you can point to shit-tons of big projects in the private sector that end up exactly the same way.
Johnson's head of policy, Munira Mirza, has quit over his Saville jibe.
She can hardly be accused of being a snowflake; she's the architect of the culture wars policy, anti-woke officer in chief.
She can hardly be accused of being a snowflake; she's the architect of the culture wars policy, anti-woke officer in chief.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/exc ... avile-slur‘I believe it was wrong for you to imply this week that Keir Starmer was personally responsible for allowing Jimmy Savile to escape justice. There was no fair or reasonable basis for that assertion. This was not the usual cut and thrust of politics; it was an inappropriate and partisan reference to a horrendous case of child sex abuse. You tried to clarify your position today but, despite my urging, you did not apologise for the misleading impression you gave.’
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
Fuck me!!! His refusal to aplogise for anything he does wrong is costing him dear. She must be one of his most trusted advisors. Wonder if the right wing loon Dougie Smith, Mirza's husband who is an aide in No10 will follow her?Biffer wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 4:10 pm Johnson's head of policy, Munira Mirza, has quit over his Saville jibe.
She can hardly be accused of being a snowflake; she's the architect of the culture wars policy, anti-woke officer in chief.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/exc ... avile-slur‘I believe it was wrong for you to imply this week that Keir Starmer was personally responsible for allowing Jimmy Savile to escape justice. There was no fair or reasonable basis for that assertion. This was not the usual cut and thrust of politics; it was an inappropriate and partisan reference to a horrendous case of child sex abuse. You tried to clarify your position today but, despite my urging, you did not apologise for the misleading impression you gave.’
Cummings straight in
Clearly he's not a better man than she pretends to think. Even now they're prostrating themselves in the face of his "extraordinary abilities" while he does his level best to prove himself a worse man than even his detractors claim.
I suspect that, when you’ve worked for someone for 14 years, it might be difficult to admit that that person is a despicable shit and always has been.
-
- Posts: 3585
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:37 am
It's hard to believe she didn't realise he was always a power hungry, immoral, pos. She jumped before she was pushed to salvage some dignity.Lobby wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 5:15 pmI suspect that, when you’ve worked for someone for 14 years, it might be difficult to admit that that person is a despicable shit and always has been.
Along with Laurence Fox and Claire Fox amongst others who’ve transferred from far left to far right
Her husband Dougie Smith has been on the far right of the Conservative Party since he was a student and is still in Downing St. Though his claim to fame is organising upmarket sex parties
- Margin__Walker
- Posts: 2744
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 5:47 am
The coming days and weeks should be amusing. Lots of conservatives pretending that they've only now got the measure of the man.
He's the same prick they hitched their wagon to. It's not like any of this is a surprise
-
- Posts: 3585
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:37 am
The bad news is it allows them to elect a "sensible" option and somehow manage to convince everyone they have nothing to do with Johnson. As Johnson has convinced everyone the last 10 years have nothing to do with him and any grievance you have about the last few years is not the Tories fault.Margin__Walker wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 6:58 pm
The coming days and weeks should be amusing. Lots of conservatives pretending that they've only now got the measure of the man.
He's the same prick they hitched their wagon to. It's not like any of this is a surprise
-
- Posts: 3585
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:37 am
Chopper the Courtesan is faithful until the end.