Con merchants

@marcuschown
Our NHS had been for sale for a long time now. The 2012 Heath & Social Care Act laid it open. It's why private companies like Virgin have sued the NHS for not getting contracts. Currently, about 26% of money you pay through tax for the NHS goes to private firms (@CHPIthinktank)

It seems there has been a sudden proliferation of posts on the social media from Tory supporters saying Jeremy Corbyn has been lying and the Tories aren’t selling the NHS.

If that’s true, why are the Tories selling 309 separate parts of the NHS as I type these words?

See for yourself. Just visit www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/Search and type “NHS” in the search box.

When I did so, it produced 309 results.

So don’t let some idiotic Tory troll lie to you about the NHS.

Oh, I know growstuff but this is an election. Do you really think it will all go according to what's been said? It may do. In which case I agree with you; it's not ideal.

Did I call you an idiot? Where? I don't think of your posts as idiotic so I am surprised and I apologise if I did.

Ah - just seen it. That wasn't aimed at you in the way you read it; was an agreement with part of one of your posts. I should have quoted it. This bit.

I'm open to being persuaded that my opinion is wrong, but not when people produce so-called facts which aren't true.

I'm afraid hyperboles, exagerrations and downright lies all seem to be the only weapons used in argument, often to support deep-seated prejudices.

GracesGran The suggestion is a fixed amount per week "lost", with no accounting for need. It is my firm opinion that the 1995 change was fair, but that a handful of women should be compensated for the acceleration of changes, which were introduced in 2011. How dare you call me an idiot? I'm aware of the issues more than most and would be one of the women being offered the maximum of just over £31k.

Witzend You really do have no idea how big a chunk of income £2 or £3 per prescription item would be for some people. And, no, you don't know about anybody else. I don't stockpile medicines. I need them.

The NHS has had two major reorganisations since 2011. What do you suggest changing now?

So we are to set our standards by one discontented worker in the NHS who happened to say the things you wanted to hear.

Probably not Witzend.

That is not to say it cannot be improved but I would not start with those prepared to dismantle it for advice.

Re the NHS sacred cow of 'free at the point of use' , a Swedish friend then living here told me that in Sweden, everybody pays a small amount for the 'board' element of hospital stays, ditto for prescriptions and visits to both GP and A&E.

Even her dad, who was over 90, had to pay for prescriptions. There is however, she said, an annual cap for those who need a lot.
Especially given that Sweden is popularly supposed to be a socialist Utopia, I was very surprised to say the least.

Incidentally the Swedish friend , who lived here for many years and worked for the NHS, was often upset and angry at the waste and inefficiency she witnessed.

I don't know about anybody else, but I've known someone who would stockpile masses and masses of free prescription items, only to have them all periodically thrown away. The waste used to enrage me, and he was someone who could easily have afforded to pay a few £ each time - and he was notoriously tight. If he'd had to pay even £2 or £3 per item I'm sure he'd never have taken so many that he didn't need.

@Rachael_Swindon

And there you have it. They think they can lie and you’ll just swallow it up. Don’t let them get away with it. It’s your NHS.

Private firms given £9.2 billion of the NHS budget despite Hancock promise #GE2019
Record 2018 total comes after health secretary pledged no privatisation on his watch

amp.theguardian.com/society/2019/jul/21/private-firms-nhs-budget-matt-hancock-promise?__twitter_impression=true

New song by Madness attacks the Tory elite – and it should be a chart-topper

voxpoliticalonline.com/2019/11/30/new-song-by-madness-attacks-the-tory-elite-and-it-should-be-a-chart-topper/

GracesGran I've stated on another thread that I don't think that paying out a fixed amount to WASPI women is fair - but that really is just my opinion. (Fri 29-Nov-19 22:20:38)

growstuff I doubt it will be a fixed amount when they finally work it out. It is more likely to be in relation to what has been lost.

I am so fed up with the fake news and repeating it without checking should be some sort of crime but it isn't it's just idiots repeating rubbish. It's not a game. Our future depends on the truth not the lies the Con men spread.

Many married omen worked but were put on to the Married Women's rate of National Insurance so did not receive a pension in their own right.

You're right that everything seems unfair to someone. That's basically what politics is all about. It's the job of government to share out resources as fairly as possible, but it's impossible for everybody to be happy because everybody thinks they have a strong case for a bigger slice of the pie.

From what I remember, married couples, by default, had an enhanced tax-free allowance. When only the husband worked, this meant he received a bit extra for his dependant spouse. It was possible to opt for individual tax allowances, which was what my ex-husband and I did. I can't remember the exact details, but it meant that we both had slightly increased individual allowances.

This continued for married couples in retirement. Married couples also received an enhanced pension, because the wife (usually) wasn't expected to have built up a pension entitlement in her own right. It was unfair to single people and an anachronism in this day and age, when it is usual for both partners in a marriage to work.

We never got it, I thought it was for retired couples.
Both couples I mentioned were retired.

Everything is unfair to someone.

It is my opinion that Gordon Brown was right to scrap it and I think (my opinion) the new allowance should be scrapped too.

But the Married Couple's Allowance was unfair to single people, for whom living costs are often higher because fixed costs can't be shared. It's no longer relevant in an age when women have more rights (and responsibilities) in their own name. My former husband and I never did receive it because both of us worked and earned approximately the same amount. If one of us had earned double and the other hadn't needed to work, we would have received it and that wasn't fair either.

I'ce heard three ambulance horror stories in the last fortnight.
None the fault of the paramedics.

Gordon Brown scrapped it.

Callestemon I live in the East of England and there are plenty of similar stories about our local ambulance service. My own experience has been excellent, but I'm only too aware of some real tales of horror. The East of England Ambulance Service relies very heavily on private providers.

Fairness never seems to apply when governments change these rules.
For instance, a government (can't remember which) took away the Married Couple's Allowance without warning. It was not a large amount but could have made a difference to the standard of living for some, eg pensioners. Someone I know lost this allowance, his neighbour, just a week older than him, retained it as it was retained for those born before April 1935.

GracesGran I've stated on another thread that I don't think that paying out a fixed amount to WASPI women is fair - but that really is just my opinion.

Nevertheless, I agree with you that I wish people would deal with facts. Maybe because I'm affected, I've tried hard right from the beginning (1995) to find out the facts and form an opinion based on those facts. I really doesn't help when anybody comes out with lies such as a quarter of WASPI women being millionaires. (Misguided beliefs about the role of NICs don't help either, by the way.)

I'm open to being persuaded that my opinion is wrong, but not when people produce so-called facts which aren't true.

I'm afraid hyperboles, exagerrations and downright lies all seem to be the only weapons used in argument, often to support deep-seated prejudices.

Callistemon Thanks for the explanation. I take your point.

EllanVannin My opinion.You don't have to agree with me. I'm not asking/telling anyone to agree with me, so think what you like.

It was nothing to do with opinion. You repeated distorted fact. Are 25% of the Waspi women millionaires - no. You said they were and you were wrong. Simple. 25% ARE NOT MILLIONAIRES THEY EARN £37,000 A YEAR - WHILE THEY CAN WORK. £50,000 IN PENSION SAVINGS ONLY GETS YOU £2,500 A YEAR TO LIVE ON WHEN YOU ARE NOT RECEIVING YOUR PENSION AND MAY NOT BE ABLE TO WORK.

It is quite despicable of the DM or any other person or publisher to lie in this way about the situation of these women. Why do it and why do you come back and say the lie is only an opinion?

If you turn the truth on its head people will tell you you have got it wrong. Do you expect everyone to agree with the lies?

There is a cultural divide in our country. Some of us believe in facts and believe that if they are a part of a discussion we should be able to say where they came from and who was writing about them and THEY SHOULD BE THE TRUTH.

Others believe that if anyone contradicts their opinion, even if it is blatantly untrue they are rude and unfair. What sort of discussion is that!

Would you count yourself amongst the majority of the population who are idiots Hetty58?
Or do you consider yourself to be superior to the rest?

Very good analogy GracesGran. I've noticed how they are all far worse before an election and I wonder who they think they're kidding. I suppose, though, it must work or they wouldn't do it - so I have to conclude that the UK is largely populated by idiots!