• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

emphasis being on the, "near you." If the private sector can provide proximate health services of the same quality but cheaper than the existing NHS structure then what is the problem?
 
emphasis being on the, "near you." If the private sector can provide proximate health services of the same quality but cheaper than the existing NHS structure then what is the problem?

As the article suggests, it's a step down the road towards the Americanisation of Health care.As a diabetic I wouldn't be able to get private health insurance cover for an affordable price(not would I ever look into it).Don't much fancy the thought of living in a Richard Branson care home for the elderly either.
 
As the article suggests, it's a step down the road towards the Americanisation of Health care.As a diabetic I wouldn't be able to get private health insurance cover for an affordable price(not would I ever look into it).

Did you even read it? It was about commissioning health care services with private institutions through the NHS budget. It had absolutely nothing to do with health insurance as it was funded from general taxation.

The problem with this subject is it is blinded by idealogues on both sides: those that believe the NHS to be the greatest healthcare system in the world (even though it is ranked 18th) and any private sector involvement will lead to people being denied healthcare and dying in the streets. The other side consider the NHS to be the socialist construction of rationing where a death panel preside over whether someone should live or not.

What the government are talking about is funding healthcare through general taxation as it is now (so no health insurance) but using private companies to provide some services. In other words, the state finances rather than provides the service.
 
Ask your MP how many of them are on boards of private health companies; the same companies that will make money from the changes. You will not be surprised that over 100 MP's have such listed interests. Additionally Theresa May is a large share holder of G4S who are making shed loads of money out of May's policing reforms and privatization:angry: of security; obviously not stupid politicians but corrupt and lining their own pockets while too many people think they are doing their best. rant over!
 
Honestly Barna, could it be any worse that it is at the moment?

Judging by the Richard Branson trains I've been on(on the First Great Western line)down to Cornwall,the answer has to be yes, unless you're travelling First Class.His record shops weren't(aren't) much cop either.
 
Theresa May is a large share holder of G4S who are making shed loads of money out of May's policing reforms and privatization:angry:

Really? I would have thought that would be all over the news but I haven't seen anything about it? Do you have a link? I can't find a thing
 
N[B said:
eil_F;1436243]The problem with this subject is it is blinded by idealogues on both sides: those that believe the NHS to be the greatest healthcare system in the world (even though it is ranked 18th) and any private sector involvement will lead to people being denied healthcare and dying in the streets. The other side consider the NHS to be the socialist construction of rationing where a death panel preside over whether someone should live or not
[/B]

I'm well aware (from personal experience)that the NHS is far behind the excellent health care systems in Spain and France.

http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
 
Judging by the Richard Branson trains I've been on(on the First Great Western line)down to Cornwall,the answer has to be yes, unless you're travelling First Class.His record shops weren't(aren't) much cop either.

This is your level of analysis? You complain about health insurance when linking to a Guardian article that doesn't refer once to health insurance. Then you complain about Virgin health care services by referring to a train journey operated by someone other than Virgin. It is subtle, but the First Great Western line is operated by First, not Virgin...
 
Erm,,,

From another website...
Theresa May & her spouse owns a small, non-controlling shareholding in Prudential, which in turns owns a small, non-controlling shareholding in G4S. As do hundreds of thousands of people who have Prudential AND Legal & General life policies and pensions. Crikey, it seems they are all scandalously corrupt!

By the way, May & her spouse bought the Prudential shares in 2002, quite a few years before the G4S got involved in the Olympics…
 
This is your level of analysis? You complain about health insurance when linking to a Guardian article that doesn't refer once to health insurance. Then you complain about Virgin health care services by referring to a train journey operated by someone other than Virgin. It is subtle, but the First Great Western line is operated by First, not Virgin...



"Virgin Care, part of Richard Branson's business empire
, signed a £500m contract with a primary care trust in Surrey to provide community health services over the next five years and is the preferred bidder to land a £130m contract for children's health and social care services in Devon."

This is a direct quote from the article.Have you read it?Branson has proved that he's not a fit and proper person to run a railway franchise or a chain of record shops.
 
Judging by the Richard Branson trains I've been on(on the First Great Western line)down to Cornwall,the answer has to be yes, unless you're travelling First Class.His record shops weren't(aren't) much cop either.

Au contraire. Virgin are probably the best TOC in the country, but I digress.
 
This is a direct quote from the article.Have you read it?Branson has proved that he's not a fit and proper person to run a railway franchise or a chain of record shops.

You now haven'ty read my post correctly as well as the source article. You made a reference to health insurance but the article does not discuss it at all.

You then made a comment about Virgin health care services (which you did because they are referred to in the original article - a point I never disputed). You commented on Virgin health care services by talking about a train network that isn't operated by Virgin. How does a train network operated by First have any relevance to health care provided by Virgin?

In what way is he not a "fit and proper person"? I presume you are using the term to mean, "person I do not like".
 
You now haven'ty read my post correctly as well as the source article. You made a reference to health insurance but the article does not discuss it at all.

You then made a comment about Virgin health care services (which you did because they are referred to in the original article - a point I never disputed). You commented on Virgin health care services by talking about a train network that isn't operated by Virgin. How does a train network operated by First have any relevance to health care provided by Virgin?

In what way is he not a "fit and proper person"? I presume you are using the term to mean, "person I do not like".

It should be obvious that to access a private health scheme people will have to take out private health insurance as many still do here in Spain.I presume you've heard of Bupa?

As far as I'm concerned Branson is just the latest in a long line of self-styled millionare "philanthropists"(Freddy Laker anyone?)who the right wing media in the UK venerate because he knows how to make a quick buck.

I admit I confused Virgin Trains with FGW.Sorry.

Btw,How does one read a post (or source article)correctly?:unsure:By coming to the same conclusions as you?:smiles:
 
It should be obvious that to access a private health scheme people will have to take out private health insurance as many still do here in Spain.I presume you've heard of Bupa?

Once again, the article referred to commissioning private healthcare services from the NHS budget. That means that the NHS will pay a private company to provide services under the remit of the NHS.

The patient will not be asked to pay for the service provided, nor to have private medical insurance, as this is a service delivered under the NHS umbrella. The only difference is that the person actually providing the service will work for Virgin and not the NHS.

In other words, the government uses the NHS budget to purchase services for taxpayer.
 
Once again, the article referred to commissioning private healthcare services from the NHS budget. That means that the NHS will pay a private company to provide services under the remit of the NHS.

The patient will not be asked to pay for the service provided, nor to have private medical insurance, as this is a service delivered under the NHS umbrella. The only difference is that the person actually providing the service will work for Virgin and not the NHS.

In other words, the government uses the NHS budget to purchase services for taxpayer.

Look at a sample of some of the 640 comments on the article and you'll see that most Guardan Online readers agree with me that this would amount to a privatisation of the NHS on the American model.
 
Look at a sample of some of the 640 comments on the article and you'll see that most Guardan Online readers agree with me that this would amount to a privatisation of the NHS on the American model.

Isn't that just because a lot of people see anything to do with the private sector and the NHS as being absolute evidence that we're going to be privatising the NHS? It's been the same with just about every proposed reform in the last 20 years at least.

The article is pretty clear that that is not what is being talked about.
 
Why would I bother doing that? You are a typical Guardian reader so it is hardly suprising that other typical Guardian readers have reached the same conclusion despite there being no evidence for it.

If you position is genuinely that there is a conspiracy to eradicate the NHS and replace it with a US style model based on private health insurance then there is absolutely no evidence for it whatsoever.
 

ShrimperZone Sponsors

FFM MSPFX Foreign Exchange Services
Estuary MFF2
Zone Advertisers Zone Advertisers

ShrimperZone - SUFC Player Sponsorship

Southend United Away Travel


All At Sea Fanzine


Back
Top