| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
This won't make the front page like corbyns interview because the chief rabbi is a close friend of Boris and the press on the whole is controlled by the Tory party ....The Sun , The Mail , The Telegraph , The Express and of course the BBC which has John humpries a raving Tory , Laura kuensberg , Andrew Neil and nick Robinson who was leader of the young conservatives at university
It stinks , as does the Tory party
Boris Johnson talked about privatising the NHS as far back as 2003
The problem with this issue is that to make it digestible for the general public you have to dumb it down so far that it becomes about privatisation when really we are talking about stripping back the protections that prevent the NHS from paying US levels for drugs. Big US pharma wants this, Donald wants this for a few different reasons.
Documentary on Netflix about valeant, can't remember the name but it provides an insight into how these businesses are run and how damaging they have been for people who are forced to use their products.
No.
Most of the media reaction so far echoes the Tory response: nothing to see here; the document shows what the USA wants but not what the UK would give. That brings it back to the question of trust in Johnson and the Tories. I don't believe a word of their claims the NHS is safe with them and not on the table in UK/US trade negotiations. I hope and expect that social media is less likely to trust the spin.
The organisation that first leaked the documents in a redacted form has put out a good statement to summarise the key points:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...and-faith-live
The campaigning group Global Justice Now has welcomed the release of the leaked documents. The organisation released the original, heavily redacted version of these papers that were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act. These were the papers Jeremy Corbyn was brandishing during the ITV debate last week.
In a news release, Global Justice Now also offered its own summary of what these documents show. Here it is in full.
The US pushing lower food standards on Britain post Brexit, including allowing imports of chlorine-washed chickens, less nutritional labelling on foods, and less protection for regional food like stilton cheese. The US offered to help the UK government ‘sell’ chlorine chicken to a sceptical British public and stated that parliamentary scrutiny of food standards is ‘unhelpful’.
The US banning any mention of climate change in a US-UK trade deal.
US officials threatening UK civil servants that they would undermine US trade talks if they supported certain EU positions in international forums.
The US suggesting a ‘corporate court system’ in a US-UK deal, which would allow big business to sue the British government, in secret and without appeal, for anything they regard as ‘unfair’. Recent similar cases have included suing governments for trying to phase out use of coal.
US officials pushing a far reaching proposals on the digital economy, giving Big Tech companies like Facebook, Google and Amazon sweeping freedoms to move and use our online data, which would make taxation and regulation of these companies more difficult and prohibit Labour proposals for a public broadband service.
Threats to public services like the NHS, via sweeping services liberalisation. The British government would need to exclude everything not subject to liberalisation in order to protect public services, while bringing formerly public services like the mail, or rail companies back into public ownership would be much harder.
US officials making a further threat to NHS in terms of medicine pricing policy, with special concern about Brits paying more for cancer medicines which the US feels Britain doesn’t pay enough for. Trade negotiators have received special lobbying from pharmaceutical corporations as part of the trade talks.
US officials demanding US experts and multinational corporations are able to participate in standard-setting in Britain post Brexit.
A promise by both sides to keep talks secret from the public.
Such nonsense !
They've got hold of what the Americans originally asked for. Obviously they'd ask for everything as a starting point ,as would we or anyone else . That'd be true for healthcare products and everything else in both economies. The British negotiators ruled that out completely ages ago and the Americans agreed - the President even made a statement confirming that no part of the NHS would be discussed further.
Pity really because the NHS is a total **** up and 40 years behind US healthcare , but since it's the socialist's replacement for God, it'd be unpopular with a lot of people to rationalise or update it. Far better to see the NHS killing people every day than admit that the very last operating relic of the 1940's Socialist dream isn't much good !
Of course, pointing this out will be seen as supporting BoJo, but actually it's not. It's supporting common sense and rejecting a political stunt which has no substance whatsoever. It might play well with the extreme left, who hate America with its pesky rights and liberties and cling to the fantasy that the NHS works, but I think most people will see it as an anti semite whose been caught out trying to divert attention away from that in a silly and desperate ploy
What measures are you using to make that assessment?Originally Posted by RonnieBird
Remember those far off, balmy days of summer when RonnieBird told us he was an intellectual?
The thoughts of a doctor at a hospital Johnson has visited during the campaign;-
https://twitter.com/HinduMonkey/stat...24351795605508
Sorry if failing to be taken in by propoganda and judging by actually seeing both systems work disqualifies me from that.
I'm sure you get a much more accurate impression by watching the One Show.
Well, providing you have the common sense to buy good healthcare cover, which is cheaper than your nation insurance contributions, there's not much treatment you can't get, and get without waiting or begging.
If you call a doctors office they'll usually tell you to come round immediately - if not you call another one. They'll treat you with respect and the place will be clean. If you need some hospital treatment they'll RECOMMEND a hospital , call them up and they'll ASK YOU when you can come in. When you get there they'll again speak to you like a human being rather than a retard or a beggar and it'll be clean and organised. They'll have all sorts of scanners and modern machines in house and you'll have your own room if you have to stay there.
I could go on....
Now all this relies on you having the freedom and common sense to get medical cover, ( or not), and I know it doesn't sit comfortably in the socialist mind to allow people adult decisions like that, but the fact is that it's much better.
Ha ha, that cracked me up fair play!Remember those far off, balmy days of summer when RonnieBird told us he was an intellectual?
Our Phil (Ronnie) an intellectual; that's too fantastical to imagine! Go easy on him please Bob.
It definitely disqualifies you from making sweeping statements. Health outcomes are meticulously recorded and analysed in the majority of countries and I have never seen anything to suggest that what you said is even remotely true.
The average health insurance quote for a 21 year old in the USA (massive variety by state) is $4800 a year. Not that it is in any way relevant, because we know this isn't how healthcare is paid for, but to pay that in national insurance you would need to earn 40k.
I have decided to get us some quotes to see what I am getting for my $4800. I picked Atlanta and said I was a 35 year old male earning $50,000 dollars a year (that would be nice). In the UK, I would have contributed around £1600 to healthcare (£38k salary, 8.8k deducted and health spending is roughly 18% of tax take). For that price I not only ensure that I am covered but also my friends, the homeless guy and also any visitors to the country who might get injured running me over before they are shuffled out of the country under cover of darkness at Demonic Raab's request.
Doesn't sound like a win to move to the USA so far but lets dig a bit further. I did a search on Nerd Wallet, I am a bit of a nerd so it seemed a good fit. My most affordable is $316 a month so still roughly twice as much as I pay in the UK, you will have to let me know if this is the kind of insurance you were referring to. I have lots of results, because everybody wants to insure a healthy young non-smoker who says he doesn't go to the doctor. I pick a plan in the middle (as I have good common sense) and away I go. I am covered now, it cost me a little bit more than it would in the UK (2.5 times the price) but Ronnie has ensured me it is the land of milk and honey so I am happy.
Wait a second, what is a 'deductible'? From healthcare.gov a deductible is:
The amount you pay for covered health care services before your insurance plan starts to pay. With a $2,000 deductible, for example, you pay the first $2,000 of covered services yourself.
Well my deductible for this policy is $6000, there are a few expensive policies with lower deductibles but I haven't read deeper to see what they cover.
It is confusing and your life may depend on having read the smallprint, our system is cheaper (10,000$ per head vs 4,000 per head), universal, not biased by age, location or against those with conditions and I can't see any evidence to suggest that it delivers worse outcomes. You are the one who is 40 years behind Ronnie.
Political leader in staged visit scandal eh
Gosh that's a new one on me!!
The health service in the modern age is simply unfundable, and the placement and use of the many billions funding this wonderful organisation is also questionable.
No one ever debates the real issues , they just use it as a political football to score points as a way of getting power .
A decent politician would say hey lets get togther and make this a cross part consensus issue and agreement.
Sadly Labour likes to weaponise the matter more than anyone in its pursuit of said power .
I should think most people earn more than 40k in the USA. Irrelevant to most people though because your employer usually covers that and you can top it up if you want to.
The treatment is miles better in any case. There’s also the Blue Cross for people without healthcare and I visited someone in a blue cross hospital so I can tell you they’re also better than the nhs
The nhs is way too big to be run efficiently and it’s not
Yeah you and Bob are the real intellectuals here. In fairness to Bob though he’s not a freaky stalker like you is he ?
The average for full time work is a little above here I believe. Roughly $45k, the median is a little lower so about half of all people in full time work earn less than that.
If the treatment is 'miles better' why are their health outcomes worse by almost every measure?
Nearly 50 million people are uninsured, 80% of these are working people or their dependants. I don't think they lack common sense, they probably can't afford the 10-12k it costs to get insurance for their family.
What do you mean by 'unfundable'?
Just like the tories suddenly promising 50,000 new nurses and 40 new hospitals oops were not allowed to criticise the tories or The Squad get upset.
Can you imagine what it's gonna be like on here when the alt-right squad led by our resident troll as cheerleader get their heartfelt wish and their beloved Tories get a thumping majority! Unfundible? It'll be bloody unbearable!!!
Well I can only report what I've seen.
I'm not fond of relying too much on statistics because people can present them in any way they like. All I can say is that they seem very on top of things and the NHS don't .
It occurred to me that if you split the NHS up it might be manageable , and if patients had the choice of which one to use perhaps they'd start exhibiting a bit of compassion and humanity.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote