Are those opposed to Trump simply half-wits, fishwives?

[cyprusgrump]

Those nasty Tories are quite clever eh...?

Making 'savage cuts' while increasing government spending year on year...?

And racking up eye watering levels of debt...?

Hmmmm...

[Cogs123]

How many more times does it have to be explained that immigrants, ( who, in the main ) come here to work!
During the referendum it was stated many times that they paid approximately 2 Billion MORE into the coffers than they took out.
The Benefits bill would be a lot less if the Tax Payer didn't have to subsidize the wages of working families with Tax credits, it's about time a ' living wage ' was implemented.
Regardless of statements from the Government, the NHS in reality has been underfunded for years, the savage cuts to local authorities has led to another crisis in social care...a rise in the number of the elderly requiring social care where there is none,
Has led to the ' bed blocking ' saga in the NHS.
the housing crisis has been caused by consecutive Governments building insufficient levels of housing for DECADES, whilst selling off social housing stock & not replacing it.
Oh yes, the Tories have brought in a few ' advantageous policies...reducing inheritance tax & giving themselves a pay rise

[keving]

^
Good post Cogs

[cyprusgrump]

How many more times does it have to be explained that immigrants, ( who, in the main ) come here to work!
During the referendum it was stated many times that they paid approximately 2 Billion MORE into the coffers than they took out.
The Benefits bill would be a lot less if the Tax Payer didn't have to subsidize the wages of working families with Tax credits, it's about time a ' living wage ' was implemented.
Regardless of statements from the Government, the NHS in reality has been underfunded for years, the savage cuts to local authorities has led to another crisis in social care...a rise in the number of the elderly requiring social care where there is none,
Has led to the ' bed blocking ' saga in the NHS.
the housing crisis has been caused by consecutive Governments building insufficient levels of housing for DECADES, whilst selling off social housing stock & not replacing it.
Oh yes, the Tories have brought in a few ' advantageous policies...reducing inheritance tax & giving themselves a pay rise

Serious question for you...

1) the NHS budget is ~£120 Billions.... Given that you say 'the NHS in reality has been underfunded for years', how high do you think it should be...?

...and my supplemental question.

2) Given that the National Debt stands at £2 Trillions and the country has a huge deficit, where would the extra money come from...?

[Jimgym]

How many more times does it have to be explained that immigrants, ( who, in the main ) come here to work!
During the referendum it was stated many times that they paid approximately 2 Billion MORE into the coffers than they took out.
The Benefits bill would be a lot less if the Tax Payer didn't have to subsidize the wages of working families with Tax credits, it's about time a ' living wage ' was implemented.
Regardless of statements from the Government, the NHS in reality has been underfunded for years, the savage cuts to local authorities has led to another crisis in social care...a rise in the number of the elderly requiring social care where there is none,
Has led to the ' bed blocking ' saga in the NHS.
the housing crisis has been caused by consecutive Governments building insufficient levels of housing for DECADES, whilst selling off social housing stock & not replacing it.
Oh yes, the Tories have brought in a few ' advantageous policies...reducing inheritance tax & giving themselves a pay rise

So basically you are blaming everything on the Tories? Tell me, what did Labour do to reverse these apparently savage cuts? What council housing did Labour build? I understand it's easy to blame to the Tories for absolutely everything that has ever happened which is bad in the UK, sort of a one size fits all answer for those who are blinkered. Oh and heres another interesting fact for you, council houses and flats passed into private ownership at a far greater rate in Brown and Blair’s 13 years than under two decades of Thatcher, Major and Cameron premierships. Now, tell me again about those nasty Tories and the housing crisis.......

[keving]

How many more times does it have to be explained that immigrants, ( who, in the main ) come here to work!
During the referendum it was stated many times that they paid approximately 2 Billion MORE into the coffers than they took out.
The Benefits bill would be a lot less if the Tax Payer didn't have to subsidize the wages of working families with Tax credits, it's about time a ' living wage ' was implemented.
Regardless of statements from the Government, the NHS in reality has been underfunded for years, the savage cuts to local authorities has led to another crisis in social care...a rise in the number of the elderly requiring social care where there is none,
Has led to the ' bed blocking ' saga in the NHS.
the housing crisis has been caused by consecutive Governments building insufficient levels of housing for DECADES, whilst selling off social housing stock & not replacing it.
Oh yes, the Tories have brought in a few ' advantageous policies...reducing inheritance tax & giving themselves a pay rise

Serious question for you...

1) the NHS budget is ~£120 Billions.... Given that you say 'the NHS in reality has been underfunded for years', how high do you think it should be...?

...and my supplemental question.

2) Given that the National Debt stands at £2 Trillions and the country has a huge deficit, where would the extra money come from...?

1) £125bn

2) incresase basic rate tax by 1%

[Jim B]

Maybe more people could afford to do it under Brown and Blair than can under the present regime.
Jim

[cyprusgrump]

How many more times does it have to be explained that immigrants, ( who, in the main ) come here to work!
During the referendum it was stated many times that they paid approximately 2 Billion MORE into the coffers than they took out.
The Benefits bill would be a lot less if the Tax Payer didn't have to subsidize the wages of working families with Tax credits, it's about time a ' living wage ' was implemented.
Regardless of statements from the Government, the NHS in reality has been underfunded for years, the savage cuts to local authorities has led to another crisis in social care...a rise in the number of the elderly requiring social care where there is none,
Has led to the ' bed blocking ' saga in the NHS.
the housing crisis has been caused by consecutive Governments building insufficient levels of housing for DECADES, whilst selling off social housing stock & not replacing it.
Oh yes, the Tories have brought in a few ' advantageous policies...reducing inheritance tax & giving themselves a pay rise

Serious question for you...

1) the NHS budget is ~£120 Billions.... Given that you say 'the NHS in reality has been underfunded for years', how high do you think it should be...?

...and my supplemental question.

2) Given that the National Debt stands at £2 Trillions and the country has a huge deficit, where would the extra money come from...?

1) £125bn

2) incresase basic rate tax by 1%

So the savage cuts and 'years of under funding' have knocked just £5bn off the budget?

Well, they are going to increase it to over £130bn so there are no issues then...? No need to raise taxes on the poor...

The budget for the NHS in England for 2015/16 is £116.4 billion.

The increase in spending announced in the 2015 Spending Review will see the NHS budget increase to £133.1 billion by 2020/21. This amounts to a real increase of £4.5 billion. Nearly half this amount is earmarked for 2016/17, leaving the remaining increase spread over the next four years.

This means that between 2009/10 and 2020/21, spending on the NHS in England will rise by nearly £35 billion in cash terms – an increase of 35 per cent. But much of this increase will be swallowed up by rising prices. In fact, around £24 billion will be absorbed by inflation, leaving a real increase of just £11 billion (a 10 per cent rise over eleven years; equivalent to an average annual increase of just 0.9 per cent).

[Pete G]

How many more times does it have to be explained that immigrants, ( who, in the main ) come here to work!
During the referendum it was stated many times that they paid approximately 2 Billion MORE into the coffers than they took out.
The Benefits bill would be a lot less if the Tax Payer didn't have to subsidize the wages of working families with Tax credits, it's about time a ' living wage ' was implemented.
Regardless of statements from the Government, the NHS in reality has been underfunded for years, the savage cuts to local authorities has led to another crisis in social care...a rise in the number of the elderly requiring social care where there is none,
Has led to the ' bed blocking ' saga in the NHS.
the housing crisis has been caused by consecutive Governments building insufficient levels of housing for DECADES, whilst selling off social housing stock & not replacing it.
Oh yes, the Tories have brought in a few ' advantageous policies...reducing inheritance tax & giving themselves a pay rise

Everything you said here is absolutely true, but perhaps requires a little nuance to put it into context.

Most immigrants do indeed come to the to work, however it is not useful to clump all immigrants into one group. For example regarding 'official' employment [i.e. excluding black market jobs] the Polish rate of unemployment is as close zero as makes no difference, the Indian community is also very low, however the rate in the Bangladeshi community is around 48%. It generally goes to the Lefts misrepresentation of the rights position on immigration which is not that all immigration is bad [who, in their right mind, could claim anything but the migration of Ugandan Asians into the UK had a massive positive effect on the economy, at a time we desperately needed it] , but that the unqualified immigration forced on the UK by EU regs and, more importantly the moronically suicidal mass immigration policy concocted by Campbell and Bliar with the sole intent of increasing the Labour voting base has been a disaster and needs fixing. Would you say that having immigrants to do jobs that British people won't do is good, because it allows British people free to take up more fulfilling, higher paid jobs, or that it is in fact a disaster because the British people who 'choose' not to do these low paid jobs then go onto benefit which means that this 'cheap labour for menial jobs' is actually a massive drain on the exchequer?

Same with your perfectly valid argument on mimium wage, it's perfectly true that the Government should not be subsidising people however it misses out some fairly important points. Employers can only pay an employee the amount that the employee adds to the business. If I have a barista who costs me 15 pounds an hour after overheads, but only brings in 12 pounds an hour extra revenue, am I going to employ them to do that extra work? Minimum wage also makes the business case for automation much easier, especially for big companies do you think it is coincidence that just as the Democrats make a target of a $15 minimum wage, McDonalds announce a massive push for automated service. Finally, of course national minimum wage pushes national prices up, and those same people pushing for a national minimum wage hike are exactly the same people who will Chinese T-shirts because they are so much cheaper without considering if it was in fact not them that caused the price differential in the first place. Ask yourself this; why not set the minimum wage at 1000 pounds an hour and make everyone rich. All of the reasons that you have just thought of that make that a lunatic idea apply to a minimum wage generally.

It is indeed true that the NHS had been underfunded since its inception, but that is because it is not possible to fully fund the NHS. It will always want more. Witness when the [despicable] Tories did increase NHS funding. The NHS immediate reaction? Revise their 10 year budget forecast upward to maintain the extra services they could now fund. The only way the NHS will ever be fully funded is if it returns to its roots, which is to offer high quality, effective, basic ESSENTIAL healthcare for those who could not otherwise afford it, and control demand accordingly. Unfortunately the left has made such a sacred cow out of the NHS I doubt this is now possible

[cyprusgrump]

How many more times does it have to be explained that immigrants, ( who, in the main ) come here to work!
During the referendum it was stated many times that they paid approximately 2 Billion MORE into the coffers than they took out.
The Benefits bill would be a lot less if the Tax Payer didn't have to subsidize the wages of working families with Tax credits, it's about time a ' living wage ' was implemented.
Regardless of statements from the Government, the NHS in reality has been underfunded for years, the savage cuts to local authorities has led to another crisis in social care...a rise in the number of the elderly requiring social care where there is none,
Has led to the ' bed blocking ' saga in the NHS.
the housing crisis has been caused by consecutive Governments building insufficient levels of housing for DECADES, whilst selling off social housing stock & not replacing it.
Oh yes, the Tories have brought in a few ' advantageous policies...reducing inheritance tax & giving themselves a pay rise

Everything you said here is absolutely true, but perhaps requires a little nuance to put it into context.

Most immigrants do indeed come to the to work, however it is not useful to clump all immigrants into one group. For example regarding 'official' employment [i.e. excluding black market jobs] the Polish rate of unemployment is as close zero as makes no difference, the Indian community is also very low, however the rate in the Bangladeshi community is around 48%. It generally goes to the Lefts misrepresentation of the rights position on immigration which is not that all immigration is bad [who, in their right mind, could claim anything but the migration of Ugandan Asians into the UK had a massive positive effect on the economy, at a time we desperately needed it] , but that the unqualified immigration forced on the UK by EU regs and, more importantly the moronically suicidal mass immigration policy concocted by Campbell and Bliar with the sole intent of increasing the Labour voting base has been a disaster and needs fixing. Would you say that having immigrants to do jobs that British people won't do is good, because it allows British people free to take up more fulfilling, higher paid jobs, or that it is in fact a disaster because the British people who 'choose' not to do these low paid jobs then go onto benefit which means that this 'cheap labour for menial jobs' is actually a massive drain on the exchequer?

Same with your perfectly valid argument on mimium wage, it's perfectly true that the Government should not be subsidising people however it misses out some fairly important points. Employers can only pay an employee the amount that the employee adds to the business. If I have a barista who costs me 15 pounds an hour after overheads, but only brings in 12 pounds an hour extra revenue, am I going to employ them to do that extra work? Minimum wage also makes the business case for automation much easier, especially for big companies do you think it is coincidence that just as the Democrats make a target of a $15 minimum wage, McDonalds announce a massive push for automated service. Finally, of course national minimum wage pushes national prices up, and those same people pushing for a national minimum wage hike are exactly the same people who will Chinese T-shirts because they are so much cheaper without considering if it was in fact not them that caused the price differential in the first place. Ask yourself this; why not set the minimum wage at 1000 pounds an hour and make everyone rich. All of the reasons that you have just thought of that make that a lunatic idea apply to a minimum wage generally.

It is indeed true that the NHS had been underfunded since its inception, but that is because it is not possible to fully fund the NHS. It will always want more. Witness when the [despicable] Tories did increase NHS funding. The NHS immediate reaction? Revise their 10 year budget forecast upward to maintain the extra services they could now fund. The only way the NHS will ever be fully funded is if it returns to its roots, which is to offer high quality, effective, basic ESSENTIAL healthcare for those who could not otherwise afford it, and control demand accordingly. Unfortunately the left has made such a sacred cow out of the NHS I doubt this is now possible

Welcome Pete G - excellent first post!

[Jimgym]

Superb post Pete G.

[Jimgward]

Serious question for you...

1) the NHS budget is ~£120 Billions.... Given that you say 'the NHS in reality has been underfunded for years', how high do you think it should be...?

...and my supplemental question.

2) Given that the National Debt stands at £2 Trillions and the country has a huge deficit, where would the extra money come from...?

As stated, I'd increase taxes by 1%. We have the second lowest cost NHS in the Western world, with the highest ratings for most things.
(measured by an independent New York think tank)

As to the national debt.... We may owe £2trillion, but in turn, we are owed, by other countries, around 2/3rd of that....

It's a bit like saying that I have a mortgage on my house, but more money in the bank that the mortgage, therefore I am still in debt to the tune of my mortgage.... however, my NET debt is zero....

It suits the government to spin the OWED figure and not the creditors figure, as it keeps austerity firmly in mind etc.

That debt, which Cameron promised would fall and has risen, which under May is still rising....

[Jimgward]

The US owes us, $835bn..... France owes us €227bn, Spain €74.9bn, Italy €54.7bn, Ireland €104.5bn, Japan €101.8bn, Germany €141.1bn,

[cyprusgrump]

As stated, I'd increase taxes by 1%. We have the second lowest cost NHS in the Western world, with the highest ratings for most things.
(measured by an independent New York think tank)

I don't have the data to hand but i remember reading that the glowing report about the NHS was way off the mark (I can't remember the reasons now)...

A quick Google shows the NHS has the worst record on cancer in Europe...

Also...

The report uses the 2014 published assessment of population health outcomes worldwide, which looked at disability adjusted life years, health-adjusted life expectancy, life expectancy at age 60-64 and adult mortality. The UK was found to score “respectably overall, coming 23rd out of 166 countries”. However, it was lower than many other OECD countries.

Japan, Singapore and Switzerland came out on top thanks to their high life expectancy. Mediterranean countries were also higher than the UK. Some wealthier countries performed worse than UK, including Denmark, the US and Belgium. The Japanese were found to live on average three years longer than the British. The report suggests that the UK’s score may be bought down by the inequality in outcomes, despite the equity of access to NHS free care.

Clicky...

[cyprusgrump]

The US owes us, $835bn..... France owes us €227bn, Spain €74.9bn, Italy €54.7bn, Ireland €104.5bn, Japan €101.8bn, Germany €141.1bn,

How much do we owe them...?

[Firefly]

I personally don't think that the NHS us underfunded, it's all a matter of where the money goes.

Worcestershire has the worst performing hospitals in the country, so, what are they going to do about it. In it's wisdom the Worcestershire Health Authority is bringing in a team of administrators and a team of managers to handle the crisis. Well they might have been wiser to bring in a team of doctors and a team of nurses to handle what is a MEDICAL crisis. Too many chiefs, not enough Indians.

Likewise the Herefordshire Health Authority is employing an executive officer from Australia, giving her a whopping 20.000.00 relocation allowance. Such a pity that there wasn't someone in the UK that could have filled the post ! It's no good just looking a how much is spent per day on the NHS, it's where it's spent that matters. I would love to see each health authority produce a breakdown of it's expenditure, I think it would bring one or two surprises.

Jackie

[Jimgward]

As stated, I'd increase taxes by 1%. We have the second lowest cost NHS in the Western world, with the highest ratings for most things.
(measured by an independent New York think tank)

I don't have the data to hand but i remember reading that the glowing report about the NHS was way off the mark (I can't remember the reasons now)...

A quick Google shows the NHS has the worst record on cancer in Europe...

Also...

The report uses the 2014 published assessment of population health outcomes worldwide, which looked at disability adjusted life years, health-adjusted life expectancy, life expectancy at age 60-64 and adult mortality. The UK was found to score “respectably overall, coming 23rd out of 166 countries”. However, it was lower than many other OECD countries.

Japan, Singapore and Switzerland came out on top thanks to their high life expectancy. Mediterranean countries were also higher than the UK. Some wealthier countries performed worse than UK, including Denmark, the US and Belgium. The Japanese were found to live on average three years longer than the British. The report suggests that the UK’s score may be bought down by the inequality in outcomes, despite the equity of access to NHS free care.

Clicky...

See this PDF - http://www.commonwealthfund.org/~/media ... r_2014.pdf

[Jimgward]

[cyprusgrump]

As stated, I'd increase taxes by 1%. We have the second lowest cost NHS in the Western world, with the highest ratings for most things.
(measured by an independent New York think tank)

I don't have the data to hand but i remember reading that the glowing report about the NHS was way off the mark (I can't remember the reasons now)...

A quick Google shows the NHS has the worst record on cancer in Europe...

Also...

The report uses the 2014 published assessment of population health outcomes worldwide, which looked at disability adjusted life years, health-adjusted life expectancy, life expectancy at age 60-64 and adult mortality. The UK was found to score “respectably overall, coming 23rd out of 166 countries”. However, it was lower than many other OECD countries.

Japan, Singapore and Switzerland came out on top thanks to their high life expectancy. Mediterranean countries were also higher than the UK. Some wealthier countries performed worse than UK, including Denmark, the US and Belgium. The Japanese were found to live on average three years longer than the British. The report suggests that the UK’s score may be bought down by the inequality in outcomes, despite the equity of access to NHS free care.

Clicky...

See this PDF - http://www.commonwealthfund.org/~/media ... r_2014.pdf

Yes, that is the one...

As you can see from the two examples that I gave it is wide of the mark... Worst cancer outcomes, 23rd in the rankings, etc.

You only have to look at stuff you can see in the media on a daily basis to see how unrealistic it is...

NHS hospital waiting time figures worst in seven years

there is another interesting article here on the desperate state of the NHS...

It cannot by any measure have the 'highest ratings' as you (and that report obviously) claim...

[keving]

Serious question for you...

1) the NHS budget is ~£120 Billions.... Given that you say 'the NHS in reality has been underfunded for years', how high do you think it should be...?

...and my supplemental question.

2) Given that the National Debt stands at £2 Trillions and the country has a huge deficit, where would the extra money come from...?

As stated, I'd increase taxes by 1%. We have the second lowest cost NHS in the Western world, with the highest ratings for most things.
(measured by an independent New York think tank)

As to the national debt.... We may owe £2trillion, but in turn, we are owed, by other countries, around 2/3rd of that....

It's a bit like saying that I have a mortgage on my house, but more money in the bank that the mortgage, therefore I am still in debt to the tune of my mortgage.... however, my NET debt is zero....

It suits the government to spin the OWED figure and not the creditors figure, as it keeps austerity firmly in mind etc.

That debt, which Cameron promised would fall and has risen, which under May is still rising....

You make some good points Jimgward, especially the use of the national debt figure to keep austerity firmly in mind.

Referring to government debt as "national debt" can cause some confusion however, in that use of the word "national" can lead some people to incorrectly assume that the national debt is the amount that the UK nation owes other nations. This is not the case.

Total government (ie national) debt is about £1.7 trillion. This is the value of gilts issued by the government, which are bought by individuals and institutions, including private individuals; banks, building societies, insurance companies and pension funds etc; the Bank of England; and overseas buyers of UK gilts, including foreign governments.

In recent years, as apart of its quantitative easing programme, the Bank of England has bought gilts from the private sector and now holds about 30% of total government debt (ie about £0.5 trillion). You could argue that this £0.5 trillion should be netted off against the gross figure of £1.7 trillion as the interest the government pays on this £0.5 trillion goes straight back to itself.

About 45% of government debt is owned by UK individuals and UK institutions, about £0.75 trillion. The interest payments on this element of government debt is obviously retained within the UK, merely representing a transfer of wealth from the public sector to the private sector.

About 25% of government debt is gilts bought by overseas buyers, ie about £0.45 trillion. The annual cost of servicing this debt, ie the interest payments, is obviously an outflow from the UK economy, amounting to about £10bn pa.