Jump to content
IGNORED

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


Loderingo

Recommended Posts

3 minutes 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 stopped giving a F about football some time back. I was chatting to a friend of mine over the weekend (oft-mentioned on here, PNE st holder), he similarly is glad of the break from having to watch shite upon shite week upon week.

In all seriousness, I agree, who gives a stuff about anything but the real priorities of health and safety right now?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/03/2020 at 15:40, downendcity said:

2018-19 the NHS paid out £2.4bn( not million) in compensation. When you bear in mind the total NHS budget is about £130n that's a big chunk. Yes there will always be mistakes and families affected should receive compensation, but how much of this is driven by the blame and claim culture heavily promoted by accident claim lawyers? 

Also, for those wanting to get political about the NHS and particularly the Tory's funding in the last decade, then you need to factor in the costs of PFI incurred under Labour's government pre 2010( why did they need to use PFI when we/they were enjoying what Blair proudly boasted to be the strongest economy?) . Our new local hospital was signed off by Blair's health secretary in 2002, the building funded by PFI. When the new hospital opened in 2010, annual PFI costs of £40m ensured that it was in deficit before the doors had opened so ! The PFI commitment runs for a further 30 years!!!

That's just one hospital, but imagine the pfi costs at all the new hospitals commissioned in the early 2000s?

Financing PFI and compensation payouts must account for a massive amount of the NHS budget, all of which would make a big difference to front line  patient care, which is what we need just now.

 

 

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?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes 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.

 

There's obviously going to be some tough times ahead, a lot of readjusting and change but not quite sure we are at doomsday scenarios yet...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Redpool said:

In the US. I can get an mri tomorrow 

You would have to wait 12-16 weeks in the UK.

I get injured tomorrow, I can immediately get into see a surgeon and get scheduled.

Current wait time for orthopedic surgery in the UK is 4-6 months

We have zero access to things like HRT & TRT. Our govt won’t financially support things like that

It’s 3-4 week wait to see a freaking regular doctor in this country. 
 

Not so ridiculous...

 

 

 

11 hours ago, MarcusX said:

It might be ok if you have insurance, I can’t get my head around having a complete accident and leaving hospital with a 6 figure bill. Health care based on financial standing is awful.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/563519/

 

 

 

11 hours ago, Redpool said:

Obamacare left those on the lower financial standing even worse.

Its quite funny how we say we hope to never have a healthcare system like the US. They say the exact same about us. Funny old world 

 

11 hours ago, Nibor said:

In the UK you can have private healthcare and get access to things quickly if you have the money, just the same as the US.

The difference is that if you don't have the money you aren't given a choice limited to death or bankruptcy, you can actually get treated for free without having to ruin your entire family's future.

You get emergency care immediately with no bill.

 

11 hours ago, Odysseus said:

Any American I’ve met in this county begs to differ and are amazed no matter who you are you get live saving treatment for free. I’d rather have that for the many than the inconvenience of having to wait weeks longer for an MRI. The problem with our current health system is due to Tory underfunding and staff shortages. 

 

11 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

The citizens of this country also have the option to pay for healthcare if they so wish, securing most of what you refer to above. 

The difference is the most vulnerable in society get screwed by the system you describe.

The NHS is the envy of most Americans I've spoken to, granted they are progressive New Yorkers or Californians. You've presumably only ever discussed it with people that are equally as narrow-minded and thick as you are.

 

10 hours ago, bcfcfinker said:

I've commented on some of your points.

You are right to a point about the American system to a point. What you forgot to mentions is this:
How much money you have to have to get this level of service or if you have the 'right' insurance.
If you have don't have the money or the insurance, you're ****ed.

You'd have been better off comparing the NHS to the European health care systems such as France or Germany (I know little about the others... I'm led to believe that some of the other healthcare systems can be a little hit and miss). In my view, the French and German services are superior to the NHS.

The NHS is a socialised health care system (it is not free as some like to think, it's paid for by taxation) so it's not perfect, it is abused, but on the whole it is good - you won't be billed at point of delivery and you will not have to claim anything back from an insurance provider.

If you are not satisfied with the this 'free' service, then you either pay or get health insurance (BUPA, AXA PPP, Cigna etc.).

And for the record, I'm no labour or Lib Dem supporter and definitely not far left or right - shouldn't take too much of a genius to work that one out.

Sorry for the multiple quotes but I wanted to make a couple of points. 
 

The US system is multi-faceted. They have Medicare, which offers state-funded healthcare for the over 65’s and for the disabled. 
They have Medicaid which offers state-funded healthcare based on means testing. 
Then they have Private Healthcare for those who are deemed to be able to “afford it”. 
 

What many people don’t realise is that the state funded programme covers 64% of treatment and makes up 17.1% of their GDP. Compare that to ours at 9%. 
So the US spend nearly twice as much in terms of GDP than we do. 
We are also the 13th ranked in Europe for spending vs GDP. 
 

There is a lot wrong with their system, as there is with ours. But it’s important to make the point that it is not a system whereby everyone gets turned away or face huge bills if they don’t have insurance. They spend more than we do and a large part of the population DO get free healthcare. 
 

I’m not gonna get into the rights and wrongs but just want to make that point. 

Edited by Harry
  • Like 1
  • Hmmm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes 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?

 

NHS funding has been a problem since it came into being in 1948. 
The 1944 white paper estimated the annual cost at £132m. 
In the first full year in 1948, the actual cost was £248m. 
By 1951 it had increased to £384m. 

The system has been playing catch-up since day 1. 

  • Hmmm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Harry said:

NHS funding has been a problem since it came into being in 1948. 
The 1944 white paper estimated the annual cost at £132m. 
In the first full year in 1948, the actual cost was £248m. 
By 1951 it had increased to £384m. 

The system has been playing catch-up since day 1. 

All the while, a preventative approach to healthcare is almost non-existent. 

We allow manufacturers to market food barely any better to eat than the packaging it comes in. We allow our population to be sedentary and obese. 

There's still little emphasis on people taking responsibility for their own health. 

Edited by CotswoldRed
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes 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?

 

Public Finance Initiatives were introduced by John Major's Tory Government in 1992.

They proliferated under Blair, but he didn't invent them.

 

Edited by Stortz
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Redpool said:

In the US. I can get an mri tomorrow 

You would have to wait 12-16 weeks in the UK.

I get injured tomorrow, I can immediately get into see a surgeon and get scheduled.

Current wait time for orthopedic surgery in the UK is 4-6 months

We have zero access to things like HRT & TRT. Our govt won’t financially support things like that

It’s 3-4 week wait to see a freaking regular doctor in this country. 
 

Not so ridiculous...

 

 

You can get an mri in the UK in the same time frame..........if you can afford it. Many many people in the US have no insurance and would not be able to get an mri tomorrow. The system there is geared solely towards making profits for the healthcare corporations, not the well being of the populace.

Its widely acknowledged, and proven by available statistics, that the US system is one of the worst in the western world for outcomes and costs for a supposedly wealthy nation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Harry said:

NHS funding has been a problem since it came into being in 1948. 
The 1944 white paper estimated the annual cost at £132m. 
In the first full year in 1948, the actual cost was £248m. 
By 1951 it had increased to £384m. 

The system has been playing catch-up since day 1. 

It's worth bearing in mind that the 1944 white paper envisaged a less extensive service than Labour created in 1947. Nye Bevan went beyond Beveridge and extended the NHS into areas like dentistry, free glasses etc etc. Hence the wartime estimate, which also didn't allow for peacetime inflation, was highly inaccurate.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes 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.

 

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

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Stortz said:

Public Finance Initiatives were introduced by John Major's Tory Government in 1992.

They proliferated under Blair, but he didn't invent them.

 

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".

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not posted to scaremonger, however it explains how serious this situation is.

Good read from an immunologist at Johns Hopkins University

Not really feeling sick and do not want to be..but if you are feeling confused as to why Coronavirus is a bigger deal than Seasonal flu? Here it is in a nutshell. I hope this helps. Feel free to share this to others who don’t understand...

It has to do with RNA sequencing.... I.e. genetics.

Seasonal flu is an “all human virus”. The DNA/RNA chains that make up the virus are recognized by the human immune system. This means that your body has some immunity to it before it comes around each year... you get immunity two ways...through exposure to a virus, or by getting a flu shot.

Novel viruses, come from animals.... the WHO tracks novel viruses in animals, (sometimes for years watching for mutations). Usually these viruses only transfer from animal to animal (pigs in the case of H1N1) (birds in the case of the Spanish flu). But once, one of these animal viruses mutates, and starts to transfer from animals to humans... then it’s a problem, Why? Because we have no natural or acquired immunity.. the RNA sequencing of the genes inside the virus isn’t human, and the human immune system doesn’t recognize it so, we can’t fight it off.

Now.... sometimes, the mutation only allows transfer from animal to human, for years it’s only transmission is from an infected animal to a human before it finally mutates so that it can now transfer human to human... once that happens..we have a new contagion phase. And depending on the fashion of this new mutation, thats what decides how contagious, or how deadly it’s gonna be..

H1N1 was deadly....but it did not mutate in a way that was as deadly as the Spanish flu. It’s RNA was slower to mutate and it attacked its host differently, too.

Fast forward.

Now, here comes this Coronavirus... it existed in animals only, for nobody knows how long...but one day, at an animal market, in Wuhan China, in December 2019, it mutated and made the jump from animal to people. At first, only animals could give it to a person... But here is the scary part.... in just TWO WEEKS it mutated again and gained the ability to jump from human to human. Scientists call this quick ability, “slippery”

This Coronavirus, not being in any form a “human” virus (whereas we would all have some natural or acquired immunity). Took off like a rocket. And this was because, Humans have no known immunity...doctors have no known medicines for it.

And it just so happens that this particular mutated animal virus, changed itself in such a way the way that it causes great damage to human lungs..

That’s why Coronavirus is different from seasonal flu, or H1N1 or any other type of influenza.... this one is slippery AF. And it’s a lung eater...And, it’s already mutated AGAIN, so that we now have two strains to deal with, strain s, and strain L....which makes it twice as hard to develop a vaccine.

We really have no tools in our shed, with this. History has shown that fast and immediate closings of public places has helped in the past pandemics. Philadelphia and Baltimore were reluctant to close events in 1918 and they were the hardest hit in the US during the Spanish Flu.

Factoid: Henry VIII stayed in his room and allowed no one near him, till the Black Plague passed...(honestly...I understand him so much better now). Just like us, he had no tools in his shed, except social isolation...

And let me end by saying....right now it’s hitting older folks harder... but this genome is so slippery...if it mutates again (and it will). Who is to say, what it will do next.

Be smart folks... acting like you’re unafraid is so not needed right now.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes 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.

 

We will need real statesmen like we had after the Second World War, and that really took 10 years and a lot of money across most of Europe. Nationalism is of little use when dealing with worldwide situations like this.

Unfortunately our current crop of leaders (Johnson, Trump) do not compare well with those of the past. Their failings to recognise the seriousness of this situation quickly enough will have consequences for everyone. And as much as I think things will be very bad in the UK, I expect them to be far worse in other parts of the world without the ability to organise their health services appropriately. And that’s not just the developing world. The US stands out as being at significant risk. Fortunately some of their state politicians understand the peril, but many do not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes 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?

 

Hopefully in the emergency measures, we can just cancel all those PFI contracts as being in the public interest. They have already had to renationalise the railways in all but name. Many policies previously deemed too difficult or too left wing may actually be needed to deal with this crisis.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, daored said:

Anybody seen the video of the complete bell end who has gone into a Supermarket and licked the products?

Seriously needs an absolute kicking 

If this is true, then they need holding down and their tongue cutting out.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes 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?

 

I am sure those costs are somewhere to be found. Be interesting to see people attempting to pin the blame elsewhere other than Labour. No doubt saying it's all Boris' fault simply for breathing.

43 minutes ago, Harry said:

NHS funding has been a problem since it came into being in 1948. 
The 1944 white paper estimated the annual cost at £132m. 
In the first full year in 1948, the actual cost was £248m. 
By 1951 it had increased to £384m. 

The system has been playing catch-up since day 1. 

It will forever be thus considering the continuingly ageing demographic. And there will continue to be an ongoing argument or debate of more tax vis a vis a continuing free 'at point of delivery' service. There are no easy answers. Many people think there are and that simply throwing more money at it will give the optimal result. If only life were that simple.

Edited by havanatopia
  • Hmmm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes 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 agree with you, they were used far too liberally under Blair, I'm just pointing out that they're not his creation.

The 'point also being' that certain posters are desperate to cover up for the unnecessary acts of societal and economic vandalism inflicted on this country since 2010 which now leaves our NHS and councils unable to respond to major threats anything like as effectively as they could have in 2009. And you still want to blame someone who left power in 2007?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Coupon said:

This is not posted to scaremonger, however it explains how serious this situation is.

Good read from an immunologist at Johns Hopkins University

Not really feeling sick and do not want to be..but if you are feeling confused as to why Coronavirus is a bigger deal than Seasonal flu? Here it is in a nutshell. I hope this helps. Feel free to share this to others who don’t understand...

It has to do with RNA sequencing.... I.e. genetics.

Seasonal flu is an “all human virus”. The DNA/RNA chains that make up the virus are recognized by the human immune system. This means that your body has some immunity to it before it comes around each year... you get immunity two ways...through exposure to a virus, or by getting a flu shot.

Novel viruses, come from animals.... the WHO tracks novel viruses in animals, (sometimes for years watching for mutations). Usually these viruses only transfer from animal to animal (pigs in the case of H1N1) (birds in the case of the Spanish flu). But once, one of these animal viruses mutates, and starts to transfer from animals to humans... then it’s a problem, Why? Because we have no natural or acquired immunity.. the RNA sequencing of the genes inside the virus isn’t human, and the human immune system doesn’t recognize it so, we can’t fight it off.

Now.... sometimes, the mutation only allows transfer from animal to human, for years it’s only transmission is from an infected animal to a human before it finally mutates so that it can now transfer human to human... once that happens..we have a new contagion phase. And depending on the fashion of this new mutation, thats what decides how contagious, or how deadly it’s gonna be..

H1N1 was deadly....but it did not mutate in a way that was as deadly as the Spanish flu. It’s RNA was slower to mutate and it attacked its host differently, too.

Fast forward.

Now, here comes this Coronavirus... it existed in animals only, for nobody knows how long...but one day, at an animal market, in Wuhan China, in December 2019, it mutated and made the jump from animal to people. At first, only animals could give it to a person... But here is the scary part.... in just TWO WEEKS it mutated again and gained the ability to jump from human to human. Scientists call this quick ability, “slippery”

This Coronavirus, not being in any form a “human” virus (whereas we would all have some natural or acquired immunity). Took off like a rocket. And this was because, Humans have no known immunity...doctors have no known medicines for it.

And it just so happens that this particular mutated animal virus, changed itself in such a way the way that it causes great damage to human lungs..

That’s why Coronavirus is different from seasonal flu, or H1N1 or any other type of influenza.... this one is slippery AF. And it’s a lung eater...And, it’s already mutated AGAIN, so that we now have two strains to deal with, strain s, and strain L....which makes it twice as hard to develop a vaccine.

We really have no tools in our shed, with this. History has shown that fast and immediate closings of public places has helped in the past pandemics. Philadelphia and Baltimore were reluctant to close events in 1918 and they were the hardest hit in the US during the Spanish Flu.

Factoid: Henry VIII stayed in his room and allowed no one near him, till the Black Plague passed...(honestly...I understand him so much better now). Just like us, he had no tools in his shed, except social isolation...

And let me end by saying....right now it’s hitting older folks harder... but this genome is so slippery...if it mutates again (and it will). Who is to say, what it will do next.

Be smart folks... acting like you’re unafraid is so not needed right now.

 

 

Someone has already posted this and it's spot on until he gets to the Henry VIII bit which is bollocks. But then, Americans probably think his son was Henry IX.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry for the multiple quotes but I wanted to make a couple of points. 
 

The US system is multi-faceted. They have Medicare, which offers state-funded healthcare for the over 65’s and for the disabled. 
They have Medicaid which offers state-funded healthcare based on means testing. 
Then they have Private Healthcare for those who are deemed to be able to “afford it”. 
 

What many people don’t realise is that the state funded programme covers 64% of treatment and makes up 17.1% of their GDP. Compare that to ours at 9%. 
So the US spend nearly twice as much in terms of GDP than we do. 
We are also the 13th ranked in Europe for spending vs GDP. 
 

There is a lot wrong with their system, as there is with ours. But it’s important to make the point that it is not a system whereby everyone gets turned away or face huge bills if they don’t have insurance. They spend more than we do and a large part of the population DO get free healthcare. 
 

I’m not gonna get into the rights and wrongs but just want to make that point. 

A good all round balanced view @Harry 

 

Nice to see this day and age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Harry said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry for the multiple quotes but I wanted to make a couple of points. 
 

The US system is multi-faceted. They have Medicare, which offers state-funded healthcare for the over 65’s and for the disabled. 
They have Medicaid which offers state-funded healthcare based on means testing. 
Then they have Private Healthcare for those who are deemed to be able to “afford it”. 
 

What many people don’t realise is that the state funded programme covers 64% of treatment and makes up 17.1% of their GDP. Compare that to ours at 9%. 
So the US spend nearly twice as much in terms of GDP than we do. 
We are also the 13th ranked in Europe for spending vs GDP. 
 

There is a lot wrong with their system, as there is with ours. But it’s important to make the point that it is not a system whereby everyone gets turned away or face huge bills if they don’t have insurance. They spend more than we do and a large part of the population DO get free healthcare. 
 

I’m not gonna get into the rights and wrongs but just want to make that point. 

I get some of the nuances of the debates around health care and even the history of the NHS and GPs arguably still being private providers. I think the NHS puts unhealthy pressure and demands on its staff. The public’s glorification of staff is almost toxic as it must encourage them further, when it should just be a normal occupation. I get that like personal responsibility I wouldn’t mind myself paying more more into healthcare be that an extra tax or form of insurance, or even localised systems similar to before. Everyone knows the NHS is bleeding money through upper management.

I don’t mind having these discussions but only if it’s in a transparent and controlled forum. The NHS has been picked apart by private companies for decades and I don’t trust these vultures to not exploit the public if they ever get their way to break up the NHS. That’s why so many instinctively defend the NHS. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Stortz said:

I agree with you, they were used far too liberally under Blair, I'm just pointing out that they're not his creation.

The 'point also being' that certain posters are desperate to cover up for the unnecessary acts of societal and economic vandalism inflicted on this country since 2010 which now leaves our NHS and councils unable to respond to major threats anything like as effectively as they could have in 2009. And you still want to blame someone who left power in 2007?

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry for the multiple quotes but I wanted to make a couple of points. 
 

The US system is multi-faceted. They have Medicare, which offers state-funded healthcare for the over 65’s and for the disabled. 
They have Medicaid which offers state-funded healthcare based on means testing. 
Then they have Private Healthcare for those who are deemed to be able to “afford it”. 
 

What many people don’t realise is that the state funded programme covers 64% of treatment and makes up 17.1% of their GDP. Compare that to ours at 9%. 
So the US spend nearly twice as much in terms of GDP than we do. 
We are also the 13th ranked in Europe for spending vs GDP. 
 

There is a lot wrong with their system, as there is with ours. But it’s important to make the point that it is not a system whereby everyone gets turned away or face huge bills if they don’t have insurance. They spend more than we do and a large part of the population DO get free healthcare. 
 

I’m not gonna get into the rights and wrongs but just want to make that point. 

This is good insight but I suppose there is a great deal of point scoring taking place on this thread at the moment and maybe it doesn't capture the context of all the conversations that are taking place.

Ultimately, after the dust has settled from this pandemic, there will be a hell of a lot of cleaning up to do, taxes will go up and the austerity we experienced after 2008 will be looked as wistfully as a walk in the park. It took the best part of 50 years to get over WW2 (this is the best comparison I can think of for the current situation we are in) money wise for the UK, don't be surprised if it doesn't take a similar length of time to get over this pandemic. Let's hope that international conflict can be avoided and countries pull together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can guess why people were out yesterday, they are not being selfish or stupid I would guess these are the same people who have had no option during the week other than to go to work.

Apart from the fantastic NHS staff you have the supermarket workers that are taking daily abuse and keeping the shelves stocked for the same people who want a steady stream of food so they have the ability to self isolate. The lorry drivers that deliver the goods, the manufacturers of the goods right down to the makers of the cardboard boxes that pack the goods. The garage workers and tyre fitters who have to keep the transport on the roads, the fuel attendance who are keeping the pumps going. The Water workers that are keeping your taps running and the sewage workers that are making sure you can still flush all that bog roll that’s being hoarded. The bin men that are picking up all the extra rubbish being created and the landfill workers accepting it, I could go on………………. !

Slagging them off because they have gone all week keeping services going under the threat of the virus and knowing they are having to go back to work this week whilst being put under the same threat to be told they are thick/stupid/selfish for having a walk in the park on their day off is just not on.  

Yes there are some extremely selfish people out there at the moment but how many on public transport and tubes today are doing all these “key services” to allow those that can self isolate the luxury ?  My wife and I would love to self isolate (we have vulnerable relatives that we cannot see)  but it would be one less person keeping the shelves full and one less ensuring you can pull your flush so please think carefully before you judge.

Take care all.             

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour 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?

You also have to wonder how much the costs resulting from Blair's illegal war have impacted on funding of the NHS and other social services?

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...