Off Topic Politics Thread

The problems GP surgeries are having are because of a combination of different factors: first of all the population is increasing, secondly a greater and greater proportion of the population is over 65, and thirdly, their funding hasn't increased to reflect these trends. Practices have to cope with more people making more demands with no more resources, that's why it's often so difficult to get an appointment these days. Long term, we need more GP's and more surgeries, as well as more practice nurses and support staff, but don't hold your breath.

 

Also doesn't help when some GPs have a monopoly. My GP owns 3 surgies now and he doesn't give a **** about patients.

 

And that, I am afraid, is a direct consequence of Tory policies in the 1980's, which turned GP practices into small businesses, because it would be better for the patients. It wasn't.

 

It was a great idea...

 

Like plenty of us said it wouldn't be.

 

That's how it works. Have a bonkers idea which those working in the NHS say is, well, bonkers. Then when it fails you can blame the very people who warned you about it in the first place. There was so much wrong with the NHS which needed reform in the 80s and 90s but tory, liberal and labour politicians have all chosen areas for political gain instead.

 

Sure each political party does their thing for their own base political reason. The Conservative Party starts out to roll back the State, simply because, from their point of view, the better off owe little to society. In fact, Thatcher actually said there was no society. Which means that the better off owe nothing to anyone else. So under Margaret Thatcher, Britain started to return to a state where the rich became richer and the poor started to tug their forelocks gratefully again. Under that regime the country is obviously going to disassemble its NHS and start to put sections of it, where money can be made, into private hands.

Indeed, it's possibly even a good idea in parts, but the trouble is that the Conservative Party cannot stop themselves from going too far. With every iteration of Con Govt they contemplate what little bit more they can remove from the lower classes just shy of causing riots in the streets. It's a poor way to run a country, in my opinion.

 

Don't completely agree with this, TSS - remember the state the country was in during the Wilson/Callaghan years (and I voted Labour in those days) when the unions were hell-bent on destroying British industry (and did a mighty fine job of it in terms of car, motorbike, mining, steel, etc) even though it was "their" government who were in. Sadly, if Maggie (and I'm no fan, believe me) hadn't stood up to them and finally got them in some kind of order (and if they'd actually thought ahead instead of the usual "soak the rich ba$tards, we deserve everything ...." attitude, we might well of slid into a 3rd world state. Yet, before that, we had the workforce, creativity and know-how to lead the world in many fields. That has mainly gone now - replaced by a kind of hierarchy of the incredibly rich who seem to own everything and get away with most things, the middle class who work their butts off, pay their taxes and generally get screwed by every government and the "under-class" (I hate that term) who either sponge off benefits because they and their families know how to milk the system and the genuinely poor who are seriously suffering - again under every single government.
I, for one, don't know how to get out of that without some people getting even more hurt. We need to close the gap, close the tax loopholes that the "rich" take advantage of, but make sure that by doing some hard work, one feels the benefit. Stop the benefit cheats, but ensure that true benefits go to those who need it, not to those who are on benefits, but have a massive TV, Sky subscription, smoke and drink to excess, have the latest iPhone, laptop, etc and manage to go on expensive holidays.
If anyone has a solution to the above, I'd love to hear it - because I reckon 90% of the population would vote for someone who could do all that .................

 

It's about getting the balance right davegc; between private enterprise and the common good, between government and the governed, between employers and their staff, between the powerful and the weak. Not sure how it's done, but probably not by abondoning all sense of community in favour of every man for himself.

 

TBF Dave, neither do I. I was first eligible to vote in 1979 and I voted for Mrs Thatcher. That was the last time. Her first words outside 10 Downing St as PM were:

"Where there is discord, may we bring harmony. Where there is error, may we bring truth. Where there is doubt, may we bring faith. And where there is despair, may we bring hope."

4 years later, Neil Kinnock said this to finish off a long speech:

"...If Margaret Thatcher wins on Thursday, I warn you not to be ordinary. I warn you not to be young. I warn you not to fall ill. I warn you not to get old."
Full speech here: http://www.owen.org/blog/326

Who was right?

 

Mrs T got in again on the back of the Falkland Isles, just as Blair turned Saddam's fall to electoral advantage. They were both chancers.

 

Neil Kinnock was a good politician, as was Jim Callaghan (my MP when I was at uni - I met him and he made a lot of sense) - they just had the bad luck to be around at the wrong times, I think.
There's too much inequality now, but there's also too much taking benefits for granted ............. As Archers says, it's all about getting the balance right. Cameron will give too much to the wealthy and Corbyn will have us with rampant inflation and huge government costs .......... I don't know who is worse .........

 

An old saying comes to mind when you are talking about policies of all the political parties. " There is none so blind as those that don't want to see." Who ever is in power do things because they believe it is right for the country. However no matter what the idea is the opposition parties seem to always disagree and say it won't work and in my eyes do their damndest to see it doesn't work.
To my mind that narrow thinking is what has got this country into the trouble it is in today. In some ways we still have the mentality that we are some sort of super power and have great influence around the world. Those days have definitely gone. We give billions of £s around the world in so called aid to support the pretence. We get involved in wars and disagreements again to maintain this pretence.
Don't get me wrong I understand the need for some aid and interference but not on the scale we are doing things latterly.
A few years back we had a scheme going called something like" put Briton first" or some such. But like all schemes either didn't take off or at best just fizzled out.
Why can't we as a country just work together and get this country back on its feet, not just ordinary people but polititions as well.? Political gain is what is taking us down!!

 

I would suggest that it is a combination of the old British diseases of short-termism and trying to do things on a shoe-string budget that undermines us most. All of that comes from the top down. It makes it worse when half-baked schemes get the go ahead because they are so economically estimated and afterwards the proposed costs double every 6 months. We just don't seem to have the skill there. Schemes that require a defined infrastructure, like Railways, you think we'd manage to get right, but no. One gets the idea that there are awful lot of *** packets and table napkins in the Treasury records office.

 

the best way to cut rising levels of immigration is to make other parts of the world better.
That either involves trying to bring peace or providing aid/investment so people can live prosperous lives in more locations across the world.

The wealth Gap in this country is often called criminal, but the bigger crime is the wealth Gap across the world

 

This why David Cameron, to his credit, ring fenced the overseas aid budget as well as the total spend on the NHS; out of enlightened self interest. Money spent on projects in the third world helps those countries to support their own populations so they are less likely to beat a desperate path to our door. No man is an island unto himself alone, and despite being surrounded by water, the same is true of countries. There's no cutting ourselves off from the world and it's people.

 

But they don't spend the aid on helping the poor. They spend it on getting into space...

 

She would have got in again even if the Falklands War never happened. The press would have ensured a Tory victory by putting the Labour leader in a very bad light. As it was there was no need to be negative about Labour at the time.

 

The polls at the time said otherwise. She was, just before the Falklands, easily the 20th century's most unpopular PM.