Jump to content

General Politics Thread


Granny Danger

Recommended Posts




If it privatisation wasn't better value for money then surely no government would even risk propose it. No matter how bad you think the Tories are, creating a worse NHS with poorer pay would surely see them spend decades out of government

Well it hasn't so far, has it?
Link to comment
Share on other sites




If it privatisation wasn't better value for money then surely no government would even risk propose it. No matter how bad you think the Tories are, creating a worse NHS with poorer pay would surely see them spend decades out of government

Which is why they have been doing it piecemeal since the sixties!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Am Featha *****h Nan Clach said:

 

 


If it privatisation wasn't better value for money then surely no government would even risk propose it. No matter how bad you think the Tories are, creating a worse NHS with poorer pay would surely see them spend decades out of government

 

 

That would be true if we didn't have friends and family benefiting massively from some of the Tory policies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Am Featha *****h Nan Clach said:

 

 


If it privatisation wasn't better value for money then surely no government would even risk propose it. No matter how bad you think the Tories are, creating a worse NHS with poorer pay would surely see them spend decades out of government

Not so sure, the railways are awful and apparently eating up more tax money than when they were under national control.

Certainly, the PFI schools and hospitals in Scotland are equally awful.

Let's keep the important stuff - education, health, utilities and public transport under the control of those who paid for it all in the first place. Private enterprise is fine elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be true if we didn't have friends and family benefiting massively from some of the Tory policies.

 

This is the reason.

 

Back-handers and second and third jobs on the boards of healthcare firms. Corruption incorporated.

 

The idea that it can be done more efficiently without shafting people is simply bogus. And the people getting shafted would be the same people as always; namely the most vulnerable.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Am Featha *****h Nan Clach said:

I cannot get my head around the fact people believe a Tory government would shaft enough people to cause a certain, catastrophic election defeat, just to please a few fat cat friends

Bit by bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot get my head around the fact people believe a Tory government would shaft enough people to cause a certain, catastrophic election defeat, just to please a few fat cat friends

You're quite right, they'd never be bold enough to announce wholesale privatisation but they are doing it via the backdoor, slowly and surely with whatever they can get away with at the time. Whilst painting themselves as the saviors of the system they are fucking up the bum sex.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Am Featha *****h Nan Clach said:

 


If it was a dreadful policy, there would come a point people said 'enough is enough'

 

They will, when it's too late.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They will, when it's too late.


Surely the new government, presuably Labour, would then Nationalise it again?
I have no idea if privatisation would be better but get the feeling people are against it because they just are, rather than any rational reason.

My views on various issues swing from right wing to left wing and would welcome any solution to a problem
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Am Featha *****h Nan Clach said:

 


Surely the new government, presuably Labour, would then Nationalise it again?
I have no idea if privatisation would be better but get the feeling people are against it because they just are, rather than any rational reason.

My views on various issues swing from right wing to left wing and would welcome any solution to a problem

 

Privatisation of any public service, NHS, utilities etc....is selling something that you and I have a stake in, that we and our ancestors funded the building of, to the private sector.  It is a straight transfer of public assets into private hands and very often not for the correct value.  See the Royal Mail for an example.  It serves to make the rich very much richer.

There is also the tried and tested method of defunding, making it - or a part of it - not work very well and presenting privatisation as the answer.  Who can argue, quite clearly something has to be done.  People like answers and they like "something being done!".

Privatisation can efficiently provide profit but be very inefficient for the public it is supposed to serve.  A rail service, for example, that is not used very much will be run down and the station might end up closed.  Because it is un-profitable.  So the bottom line for the corporation will improve but the local economy of a far flung village will suffer.

Privatisation of education becomes beholden to the sponsors and the institutions are pushed to teach what the investors want teached.  This has happened widely in the USA where on campuses it was at one point tech companies, and R&D used its resources here, now it is pharmaceuticals - because that's where the huge profits are.

The problem with privatisation is simply the need for profit and the demands for more and more profit for a very small, in proportionate terms, number of people.  The customer base suffers and these utilities and services are supposed to be for everyone.

Edited by Shades75
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for that.
I cannot believe a completely private or completely state run operation to be the be the best solution. Do you not feel a mixture, dependent on needs and requirements of individual sectors may be the best bet?


When there's a mix then the private companies take the profitable bits, and leave the rest. (See the post office for a good example of this).

Profit should never, ever come into decisions over folk's healthcare.
Link to comment
Share on other sites



When there's a mix then the private companies take the profitable bits, and leave the rest. (See the post office for a good example of this).

Profit should never, ever come into decisions over folk's healthcare.

It is, quite simply, immoral to profit from others' misfortune. Be it prisons, hospitals, hospital car parks, or any service which society needs to function- like the forensics services, profit should never, ever, be the driving force.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple of points
The NHS as it stands is in a dominant position when it comes to purchasing medical supplies and has large economies of scale

Privatisation would either mean breaking it up into smaller units that could be played off against each other by suppliers or having one giant private monopoly driven by profit and facing no serious problem competition. The former can't deliver a better service the latter had no reason too.

Secondly it should be relatively in controversial to assert that the big Thatcherite wave of privatisations started with the best ideas and finished with the worst. Some will say the went from great ideas to good ones or from bad ones to terrible ones but it's hard to suggest that British Aerospace was a worse idea than the textbook natural monopoly that is the water industry.

There may well be gains to be made from buying Laundry services from outside but similar logic will apply to the piecemeal privatisation of the NHS. By now all the best (or least bad) ideas will be used up and the next ones will be just alright (or awful).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, WhiteRoseKillie said:


It is, quite simply, immoral to profit from others' misfortune. Be it prisons, hospitals, hospital car parks, or any service which society needs to function- like the forensics services, profit should never, ever, be the driving force.

On this topic, the privatisation of prisons in the USA is quite one of the most open, and somehow legal examples of corruption of goods markets, profitisation and incentivisation of putting people in jail and a widespread program of human rights abuse.

It is a re-imagining of the slave trade.

Edited by Shades75
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On this topic, the privatisation of prisons in the USA is quite one of the most open, and somehow legal examples of corruption of goods markets, profitisation and incentivisation of putting people in jail and a widespread program of human rights abuse.
It is a re-imagining of the slave trade.

You're not wrong. I recommend watching "The House l Live In" - is on Netflix. One of the talking heads describes the system as "another Holocaust", and I thought, "hmm, that's a bit dramatic." Then they put all the ducks in a row, and, well, wow. Fucking horrific.
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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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