The Coronavirus and its impact on sport/Fans Return (Merged)

[Red-Robbo]

Hard to argue that the pay freeze on NHS staff during the Cameron administration, scrapping of nursing bursaries and Brexit haven't all contributed to our major shortage of nurses.

Also, to be fair to the dreadful Blair, he was the last PM to consistently deliver large above inflation increases in health spending over a prolonged period. The poorly thought out PFI was on top of that - and was opposed by Labour's current leader. Many new local hospitals, including West Mendip, Shepton Mallet and Bridgwater were either built or planned during this era.

But TBH we are where we are now.

It's up to the current administration to expand the health service to deal as best as possible with the current crisis - and hopefully learn the lessons of past mistakes.

We can all point to mistakes made by both parties, but that doesn't help the current situation.

[Stortz]

17 minutes ago, wood_red said:

I do not know how the NHS would have coped in 2009 and I doubt it would be much different because they were underfunded then. My point is that the likes of the same posters will accuse the underfunding solely on the Conservatives, it has been every single Government, and it seems to me the NHS is still paying a massive price due to Blairs Government.

I am not blaming solely the person who left Government in 2007, but that Government has to take some sort of responsibility of why the NHS is in the state it currently is shouldn't they? It seems that many on here cannot even bring themselves to say that as it just doesn't suit, and just blame the Conservatives.

On the point that Blair left in 2007, does that mean we cannot blame him for anything then because he left in 2007? How much did he spend on the war in Iraq? Are we not allowed to question that because he left in 2007? That obviously means that Thatcher or Hitler have nothing to answer for then in your opinion?

By the same token, it seems that you're unable to accept that the dismantling of the welfare state and NHS since 2010 has any bearing today because people made bad decisions prior to that?

Ignoring the NHS, do you or do you not think that local councils would have been far more involved in the response to this disease if their funding had not been reduced by up to 60% in the last decade? Who will you blame for that, Ramsay MacDonald? Attila the Hun?

[BUTOR]

2 hours ago, reddogkev said:

Starting to think that humanity may never fully recover from this situation.  There's too much damage being caused to the world's infrastructure that will only worsen with time and may never be restored.

Remember the days when football seemed important?

Sorry to sound overly bleak.

 

I don’t think society will ever be the same again, but that isn’t necessarily a negative. There had to be a shift in the mindset, a reality check. Self efficiency, community and adequate health care seem more important now than they ever have and that’s because they are the back bone of ANY society. The trouble is, we’ve been completely de-moralised and chipped away at as a population, led to believe and fight for things that are so minuscule in meaning that we’ve forgotten what really matters. 
 

Maybe this will remind us, it’s probably our last chance. 

[Northern Red]

33 minutes ago, Red Army 75 said:

This is what we are dealing with. What an absolute *** . 

Anyone doing it should be right at the back of the queue when it comes to needing the NHS.

[Super]

Hopefully some slightly positive news from Germany

The head of Germany's public health institute has said there are signs the exponential upwards curve in new coronavirus infections in the country is flattening off for the first time.

Lothar Wieler, head of the Robert Koch Institute added it was a result of social distancing measures.

He said: "We are seeing signs that the exponential growth curve is flattening off slightly.

"But I will only be able to confirm this trend definitively on Wednesday."

He added he was optimistic that measures taken so far in Germany, including school closures, instructions on hand-washing and strict warnings against public gatherings, were already having an effect.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Stortz said:

By the same token, it seems that you're unable to accept that the dismantling of the welfare state and NHS since 2010 has any bearing today because people made bad decisions prior to that?

Ignoring the NHS, do you or do you not think that local councils would have been far more involved in the response to this disease if their funding had not been reduced by up to 60% in the last decade? Who will you blame for that, Ramsay MacDonald? Attila the Hun?

Of course it would better in the current climate and easier to deal with if their funding hadn't have been cut. I doubt anybody will disagree with that - but why were the cutbacks taken in the first place? 

Why are we not allowed to blame a previous Government for anything? It surely has a knock on effect doesn't it? How much was spent killing people in Iraq - that could have went to the NHS couldn't it, or can't we bring that up because he was gone in 2007?

If Labour get in next time around will the same people blame them for a underfunded NHS after 3/4 years, or will they blame the Tories who are out of power?

If you think that Blairs Government doesn't deserve any flak or need to take any responsibility for the current situation because he was gone in 2007, then that is up to you. But I don't see any reason why the PFI situation and ongoing costs cannot be brought up. 

[downendcity]

1 hour ago, wood_red said:

I didn't say he invented them, but it seems that he used them hugely in his Government and the NHS is massively paying the price for that still? The point being that the likes of certain posters will blame the NHS underfunding solely on the Conservatives but it surely goes a lot deeper than that. 

I just read one quote that is shocking and says "Penny Mordaunt, the former Defence Secretary, is among those who have warned that PFI schemes have “crippled hospital finances” as it can be revealed hospital bosses in her Portsmouth North constituency will pay out an extra £700m for a hospital expansion scheme signed under the Labour government in 2005".

 

I think I have got these figures right, but our new local hospital, that opened in 2010, had build costs of about £300m

However PFI costs £40m a year, so over the next 30 years will have cost the trust a total of £1.2bn! If that were a mortgage (which is essentially what it is) then there is the equivalent of £900m interest charged on the original £300m PFI borrowing. There were a lot of new hospitals built during that time, all with PFi finance, so it doesn't take a genius to work out how much this is costing the NHS.

Not only that, but everything within the hospital has to be done through the PFI company. So when my wife was working as a medical secretary, if they needed a shelf putting  up it would cost a few hundred pounds, so you can imagine what sort of costs are being incurred for work and maintenance, on an ongoing basis.

 

 

 

 

[downendcity]

6 minutes ago, Northern Red said:

Anyone doing it should be right at the back of the queue when it comes to needing the NHS.

.....but you just now that these idiots will not be the ones catching the virus. 

[Odysseus]

35 minutes ago, wood_red said:

I do not know how the NHS would have coped in 2009 and I doubt it would be much different because they were underfunded then. My point is that the likes of the same posters will accuse the underfunding solely on the Conservatives, it has been every single Government, and it seems to me the NHS is still paying a massive price due to Blairs Government.

I am not blaming solely the person who left Government in 2007, but that Government has to take some sort of responsibility of why the NHS is in the state it currently is shouldn't they? It seems that many on here cannot even bring themselves to say that as it just doesn't suit, and just blame the Conservatives.

On the point that Blair left in 2007, does that mean we cannot blame him for anything then because he left in 2007? How much did he spend on the war in Iraq? Are we not allowed to question that because he left in 2007? That obviously means that Thatcher or Hitler have nothing to answer for then in your opinion?

I think Blair rightly receives criticism, at least before it become associated with the “hard left”. Muppets like Wes Streeting MP were only yesterday criticising the current  Labour admin over its public spending proposals and to drop them. Which shows they’ve learned nothing from the mistakes of New Labour. He was also given a front page link in the Observer in the middle of a national crisis which says it all 

[Stortz]

4 minutes ago, wood_red said:

Of course it would better in the current climate and easier to deal with if their funding hadn't have been cut. I doubt anybody will disagree with that - but why were the cutbacks taken in the first place? 

Why are we not allowed to blame a previous Government for anything? It surely has a knock on effect doesn't it? How much was spent killing people in Iraq - that could have went to the NHS couldn't it, or can't we bring that up because he was gone in 2007?

If Labour get in next time around will the same people blame them for a underfunded NHS after 3/4 years, or will they blame the Tories who are out of power?

If you think that Blairs Government doesn't deserve any flak or need to take any responsibility for the current situation because he was gone in 2007, then that is up to you. But I don't see any reason why the PFI situation and ongoing costs cannot be brought up. 

You seem to be mistaking me for a Blair supporter, and I certainly am not- quite the reverse.

You also seem to have conveniently ignored the second part of my post? Were Blair or the Labour party to blame for the 60% decrease in council funding in the last decade which is now hampering our response? If not who was?

If you think that succesive Tory Governments since 2010 don't deserve any flak or need to take any responsibility for the current situation, then that is up to you. But I don't see any reason why the defunding of all public services cannot be brought up. 

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Northern Red said:

Anyone doing it should be right at the back of the queue when it comes to needing the NHS.

If only, it is muppets like that either won't get it, or end up getting it severely thus needing the NHS and taking the place of someone else who deserves the help of the NHS moreso than that pr1ck.

Personally when (hopefully) this is all over, then he should be tested to see if he has had the virus, and if he has arrest him and charge him for something serious, if he has passed it on then in theory he could have killed someone. Lock him up, then see how he likes licking another prisoner.....

[bcfc01]

4 minutes ago, Bouncearoundtheground said:

I don’t think society will ever be the same again, but that isn’t necessarily a negative. There had to be a shift in the mindset, a reality check. Self efficiency, community and adequate health care seem more important now than they ever have and that’s because they are the back bone of ANY society. The trouble is, we’ve been completely de-moralised and chipped away at as a population, led to believe and fight for things that are so minuscule in meaning that we’ve forgotten what really matters. 
 

Maybe this will remind us, it’s probably our last chance. 

A positive amongst the gloom is that the environment is thriving in some areas.

The canals in Venice for example are now apparently clear and populated with fish, swans and even dolphins - those canals were like mud and stank to high heaven in places when I was there a couple of years ago. 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/20/nature-is-taking-back-venice-wildlife-returns-to-tourist-free-city

I think the mindset of people will change, for instance I won't be using the pub as much when they are back open - saving a few quid a month in the process. I don't miss it at all. Similarly, going to football - its apparent that it isn't really that important and I've not missed that either. I'll still go when it starts back up but maybe not as much as I did. Things I am missing is socialising with friends and family and its hammered home how important their well being and company is over other things.

But I'm sorry to say that the same morons who are selfishly defying advice and bulk buying etc will not change as they haven't changed during this crisis - they've just become worse arseholes than they were before and will be the same arseholes when this is all over.

 

[downendcity]

2 hours ago, wood_red said:

Nobody will disagree that the NHS is massively underfunded, but it has hardly been just the last few years has it. I thought it was a good point by downendcity that nobody seemed to respond to at all regarding PFI. 

How much money has Blairs actions cost the NHS, and still continues to cost them? Does anyone have the answers?

 

Posted this a few minutes ago.

7 minutes ago, downendcity said:

I think I have got these figures right, but our new local hospital, that opened in 2010, had build costs of about £300m

However PFI costs £40m a year, so over the next 30 years will have cost the trust a total of £1.2bn! If that were a mortgage (which is essentially what it is) then there is the equivalent of £900m interest charged on the original £300m PFI borrowing. There were a lot of new hospitals built during that time, all with PFi finance, so it doesn't take a genius to work out how much this is costing the NHS.

Not only that, but everything within the hospital has to be done through the PFI company. So when my wife was working as a medical secretary, if they needed a shelf putting  up it would cost a few hundred pounds, so you can imagine what sort of costs are being incurred for work and maintenance, on an ongoing basis.

 

[Red-Robbo]

Worth reading this fella's explanation of empty supermarket shelves. It's not all down to idiocy. The thread explains it.

 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Stortz said:

You seem to be mistaking me for a Blair supporter, and I certainly am not- quite the reverse.

You also seem to have conveniently ignored the second part of my post? Were Blair or the Labour party to blame for the 60% decrease in council funding in the last decade which is now hampering our response? If not who was?

If you think that succesive Tory Governments since 2010 don't deserve any flak or need to take any responsibility for the current situation, then that is up to you. But I don't see any reason why the defunding of all public services cannot be brought up. 

I haven't said you are any type of Blair supporter. 

Conveniently ignored? I said in the first line "Of course it would better in the current climate and easier to deal with if their funding hadn't have been cut. I doubt anybody will disagree with that - but why were the cutbacks taken in the first place? 

I also don't think I have said they don't deserve any flak, but what I am saying is they don't deserve ALL the flak which comes from certain angles/media.

[downendcity]

3 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

A positive amongst the gloom is that the environment is thriving in some areas.

The canals in Venice for example are now apparently clear and populated with fish, swans and even dolphins - those canals were like mud and stank to high heaven in places when I was there a couple of years ago. 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/20/nature-is-taking-back-venice-wildlife-returns-to-tourist-free-city

I think the mindset of people will change, for instance I won't be using the pub as much when they are back open - saving a few quid a month in the process. I don't miss it at all. Similarly, going to football - its apparent that it isn't really that important and I've not missed that either. I'll still go when it starts back up but maybe not as much as I did. Things I am missing is socialising with friends and family and its hammered home how important their well being and company is over other things.

But I'm sorry to say that the same morons who are selfishly defying advice and bulk buying etc will not change as they haven't changed during this crisis - they've just become worse arseholes than they were before and will be the same arseholes when this is all over.

 

Also read that the heat map of the planet has improved in only a few weeks since populations stopped travelling as much ( other than British day trippers visiting the coast!!) and massively reduced air travel. 

Mrs D mentioned yesterday that Idris Elba ( who has the virus) has tweeted that he thinks the virus is nature attempting to wipe out the human race in order to protect the planet. I'm not saying a I agree completely , but if the consequences of the virus is that the environment is better able to recover, then you can see some sort of logic if the virus restores more of a balance in nature. 

Can't help thinking of the "mad" scientist's thinking in Dan Brown's Angels & Demons!

 

[Odysseus]

8 minutes ago, wood_red said:

I haven't said you are any type of Blair supporter. 

Conveniently ignored? I said in the first line "Of course it would better in the current climate and easier to deal with if their funding hadn't have been cut. I doubt anybody will disagree with that - but why were the cutbacks taken in the first place? 

I also don't think I have said they don't deserve any flak, but what I am saying is they don't deserve ALL the flak which comes from certain angles/media.

The cutbacks were a ideological game from George Osbourne. There wasn’t much evidence behind what he did other than the private sector can be more “efficient”. Economists warned at the time austerity and hitting key public services wouldn’t grow an economy enough to tackle spiralling national debt. Labour’s original proposals to reduce the deficit at a much slower rate would have incurred interest but it would’ve grew the economy more sustainably and not left us so vulnerable. 

Edited March 23, 2020 by Odysseus

[exAtyeoMax]

On 22/03/2020 at 00:02, Atticus said:

Really don't get that. I was out of work about 9 years ago for a month because I was made redundant and the jobcentre was a living hell. Made me feel tiny and like I was worthless. And that was just the person I had to see that made me feel like that. 

I had the same experience when I was on JSA a couple of years ago for about a year, whereas my friend’s brother didn’t get any and he had been unemployed for over 20 years. He is just lazy, wouldn’t even help out at that housing initiative in Bemmie which could’ve used his skills as a chip pie. 

The JCP made me feel like I was a criminal, treated me like scum. It was awful. 

[bcfc01]

3 minutes ago, downendcity said:

Also read that the heat map of the planet has improved in only a few weeks since populations stopped travelling as much ( other than British day trippers visiting the coast!!) and massively reduced air travel. 

Mrs D mentioned yesterday that Idris Elba ( who has the virus) has tweeted that he thinks the virus is nature attempting to wipe out the human race in order to protect the planet. I'm not saying a I agree completely , but if the consequences of the virus is that the environment is better able to recover, then you can see some sort of logic if the virus restores more of a balance in nature. 

Can't help thinking of the "mad" scientist's thinking in Dan Brown's Angels & Demons!

 

We were talking about this at home yesterday and agreed that there is so much of the UK we haven't seen that we'll be limiting overseas holidays in favour of the UK in future. I think having the time to sit down and have a chat because of isolation makes things a bit clearer even though we are both working from home (me to a lesser degree). Too much going on previously to have time to take stock. I'm even contemplating selling the business and retiring once this is over - hadn't entered my head before.

As for the armageddon theory - bit too deep for me, but each to his own.

Great book, film ok.

[Maesknoll Red]

https://placestovisitthisweekend.com

[LondonBristolian]

2 hours ago, AshtonGreat said:

To be fair, if the world managed to recover from two world wars and the Spanish flu, it can recover from this

I agree but, at the same time, the world wars and, to an extent, the Spanish flu, were world changing events. Globally, societies looked very different afterwards. Arguably, after World War One, it ultimately changed for the worse and, after World War Two, it changed for the better.

This is not going to be the end of "THE" world but it might well be the end of "A" world. Something this major is going to have a long-lasting impact in ways we can't yet conceive. 

[LondonBristolian]

19 minutes ago, downendcity said:

Also read that the heat map of the planet has improved in only a few weeks since populations stopped travelling as much ( other than British day trippers visiting the coast!!) and massively reduced air travel. 

Mrs D mentioned yesterday that Idris Elba ( who has the virus) has tweeted that he thinks the virus is nature attempting to wipe out the human race in order to protect the planet. I'm not saying a I agree completely , but if the consequences of the virus is that the environment is better able to recover, then you can see some sort of logic if the virus restores more of a balance in nature. 

Can't help thinking of the "mad" scientist's thinking in Dan Brown's Angels & Demons!

 

I don't think nature is quite so self-aware as to cunningly and deliberately reset the balance but I certainly think this is a reminder that we and our current way of life are not invulnerable to change. 

[downendcity]

7 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

We were talking about this at home yesterday and agreed that there is so much of the UK we haven't seen that we'll be limiting overseas holidays in favour of the UK in future. I think having the time to sit down and have a chat because of isolation makes things a bit clearer even though we are both working from home (me to a lesser degree). Too much going on previously to have time to take stock. I'm even contemplating selling the business and retiring once this is over - hadn't entered my head before.

As for the armageddon theory - bit too deep for me, but each to his own.

Great book, film ok.

Mrs D and I got out a map yesterday to organise or travel plans for the next few months.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

40 minutes ago, Stortz said:

You seem to be mistaking me for a Blair supporter, and I certainly am not- quite the reverse.

You also seem to have conveniently ignored the second part of my post? Were Blair or the Labour party to blame for the 60% decrease in council funding in the last decade which is now hampering our response? If not who was?

If you think that succesive Tory Governments since 2010 don't deserve any flak or need to take any responsibility for the current situation, then that is up to you. But I don't see any reason why the defunding of all public services cannot be brought up. 

No one is to blame... currently we are just seeing point scoring between two sides as if it's business as usual. I'm afraid to say, and I hope I'm wrong, something has changed but some haven't realised it yet.

There are times of plenty and times of famine and the government of the day react's accordingly. The financial crash happened and the civil service was trimmed accordingly - this is simply about economical competence (carrying on with the head firmly stuck in the sand is pure stupidity). It appeared, only just recently, that the country had moved on from the last 'catastrophe' and we were to move out of austerity. It turns out that the austerity we experienced was 'austerity lite' and we now have a real cluster **** that will test this country to the full.

This is a worst case scenario and hopefully things won't that bleak. But if it is bleak, we need to pull your heads out of our arses and get a grip.

To add, it appears that working for the civil service is a safe place to be. They might not like the cuts that have taken place but they sure do have more job security than the rest of us... at the moment (if taxes dry up, they'll be in the same boat as everyone else).

Edited March 23, 2020 by bcfcfinker

[pillred]

15 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said:

I had the same experience when I was on JSA a couple of years ago for about a year, whereas my friend’s brother didn’t get any and he had been unemployed for over 20 years. He is just lazy, wouldn’t even help out at that housing initiative in Bemmie which could’ve used his skills as a chip pie. 

The JCP made me feel like I was a criminal, treated me like scum. It was awful. 

Do they pay JSA for a year now? you were lucky I received it for 26 weeks that was all I was entitled,  and because  my wife was working that was all the benefits I could get despite after working continuously for 35 years, made my blood boil when I personally knew people that had not worked for years and yet seemed to have a life just as comfortable as mine. 

[Eddie Hitler]

3 minutes ago, pillred said:

Do they pay JSA for a year now? you were lucky I received it for 26 weeks that was all I was entitled,  and because  my wife was working that was all the benefits I could get despite after working continuously for 35 years, made my blood boil when I personally knew people that had not worked for years and yet seemed to have a life just as comfortable as mine. 

I don't think it's worth getting over-excited about a pitiful £73.10.  The level of JSA for somebody actively seeking work is just rude IMO.

Age	JSA weekly amount
Up to 24	up to £57.90
25 or over	up to £73.10
Couples (both aged over 18)	up to £114.85

https://www.gov.uk/jobseekers-allowance

[Odysseus]

4 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

I don't think it's worth getting over-excited about a pitiful £73.10.  The level of JSA for somebody actively seeking work is just rude IMO.

Age	JSA weekly amount
Up to 24	up to £57.90
25 or over	up to £73.10
Couples (both aged over 18)	up to £114.85

https://www.gov.uk/jobseekers-allowance

Compare this to a friend of mine in Brussels who left their job can keep their full salary for a year or maybe even 2. According to a certain odious politician they’re not a “real country though”.

Edited March 23, 2020 by Odysseus

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Odysseus said:

Compare this to a friend of mine in Brussels who left their job can keep their full salary for a year or maybe even 2. According to a certain odious politician they’re not a “real country though”.

This tends to be the case across Germany, France, the Benelux countries, Spain and Italy. This will have an impact on the UK because businesses will look to countries that protect their workforces less and lay them off first i.e. the big international companies who have a European footprint will cut UK first.

Better hang in there, the ride of life is just about to get even bumpier.

[Roger Red Hat]

2 hours ago, wood_red said:

I do not know how the NHS would have coped in 2009 and I doubt it would be much different because they were underfunded then.

They would have coped better as there was far greater support in society, a society that hadn't been ravaged by 10 years of unnecessary austerity, and the tory/Liberal health legislation introduced by Andrew Lansley in 2011/12.

 

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

They would have coped better as there was far greater support in society, a society that hadn't been ravaged by 10 years of unnecessary austerity, and the tory/Liberal health legislation introduced by Andrew Lansley in 2011/12.

 

I don't think cutbacks were unnecessary, maybe some were and some were done in the wrong places etc.

What have you got to say about the obscene PFI contracts? Do you not think this is part of the reason for cutbacks and partly why there is even less money for the NHS?