Re: Brexit Anyone? (2) : Tue Jan 09, 2018 6:30 pm  

Backwoodsman wrote:

To make matters worse due to an influx of people from Europe we have seen a huge increase in patient numbers. None of these have payed much into the system but are receiving the full benefits.

Are you saying that the figures showing that immigrants from Eastern Europe are net contributors to the economy are wrong ?
It would be more accurate to say that any increases in NHS spending have not kept up with the growing population, which is nothing like the picture that you are trying to paint.
The % increases in spending dont take into account any increase in population and again, if you believe our unemployment figures, at the lowest for decades, then someones sums dont add up, unless all of the "new" employment is on minimum wage or zero hours contracts

Re: Brexit Anyone? (2) : Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:15 am  

wrencat1873 wrote: Are you saying that the figures showing that immigrants from Eastern Europe are net contributors to the economy are wrong ? What the hell has that got to do with the demand immigrants place on the NHS? Does their highly debatable net contribution increase the number of beds to account for their numbers? Oh they might pay in, but unless the NHS is operationally able to immediately absorb the impact their numbers bring, it's largely irrelevant. As for non-EU immigrants, that's another story on a different scale entirely - a negative impact of £118 billion 1995-2011 as even the Indy acknowledges. Fact is, every government has closed facilities and reduced the number of beds due to the NHS being an massively unwieldy beast. Labour reduced beds by around 52k during their last tenure. Since the 2010 GE beds have dropped by around 14k. It would be more accurate to say that any increases in NHS spending have not kept up with the growing population, which is nothing like the picture that you are trying to paint. The % increases in spending dont take into account any increase in population... And how is spending supposed to keep up if you have no idea how how much your population might increase by in any given year? NHS spending has risen and risen year on year to try and keep pace with a growing and aging population, and the increasing costs of healthcare and wages. That, and that closure of too many facilities alongside institutionalised legacy inefficiencies have taken their toll. Fact is, we have an increasingly aging population together with population growth boosted by immigration. The UK population grew by 513,000 in 2016, of which 335,000 was net migration - so don't try to tell me immigration isn't a factor in the NHS overload (and housing, and other public services). It absolutely is, and 20 years of the idiot liberal left vilifying anyone who dare say otherwise was a big factor in Brexit, and the rise of UKIP and 'populist' tendencies. I am friends with 2 x midwives, a hospital theatre manager and a couple of nurses - and in private all of them bemoan the impact and strain immigration places on their services (the midwives in particular!). But if they opened their mouths in public they'd be sacked. The liberals in charge don't stand for that sort of thing. ...and again, if you believe our unemployment figures, at the lowest for decades, then someones sums dont add up, unless all of the "new" employment is on minimum wage or zero hours contracts What's that you say? The bottom end of the jobs market is trashed? Low cost labour is being taken advantage of? Wonder what might have influenced that...

wrencat1873 wrote: Are you saying that the figures showing that immigrants from Eastern Europe are net contributors to the economy are wrong ? What the hell has that got to do with the demand immigrants place on the NHS? Does their highly debatable net contribution increase the number of beds to account for their numbers? Oh they might pay in, but unless the NHS is operationally able to immediately absorb the impact their numbers bring, it's largely irrelevant. As for non-EU immigrants, that's another story on a different scale entirely - a negative impact of £118 billion 1995-2011 as even the Indy acknowledges. Fact is, every government has closed facilities and reduced the number of beds due to the NHS being an massively unwieldy beast. Labour reduced beds by around 52k during their last tenure. Since the 2010 GE beds have dropped by around 14k. It would be more accurate to say that any increases in NHS spending have not kept up with the growing population, which is nothing like the picture that you are trying to paint. The % increases in spending dont take into account any increase in population... And how is spending supposed to keep up if you have no idea how how much your population might increase by in any given year? NHS spending has risen and risen year on year to try and keep pace with a growing and aging population, and the increasing costs of healthcare and wages. That, and that closure of too many facilities alongside institutionalised legacy inefficiencies have taken their toll. Fact is, we have an increasingly aging population together with population growth boosted by immigration. The UK population grew by 513,000 in 2016, of which 335,000 was net migration - so don't try to tell me immigration isn't a factor in the NHS overload (and housing, and other public services). It absolutely is, and 20 years of the idiot liberal left vilifying anyone who dare say otherwise was a big factor in Brexit, and the rise of UKIP and 'populist' tendencies. I am friends with 2 x midwives, a hospital theatre manager and a couple of nurses - and in private all of them bemoan the impact and strain immigration places on their services (the midwives in particular!). But if they opened their mouths in public they'd be sacked. The liberals in charge don't stand for that sort of thing. ...and again, if you believe our unemployment figures, at the lowest for decades, then someones sums dont add up, unless all of the "new" employment is on minimum wage or zero hours contracts What's that you say? The bottom end of the jobs market is trashed? Low cost labour is being taken advantage of? Wonder what might have influenced that...

Re: Brexit Anyone? (2) : Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:09 am  

Cronus wrote: Fact is, we have an increasingly aging population together with population growth boosted by immigration. The UK population grew by 513,000 in 2016, of which 335,000 was net migration - so don't try to tell me immigration isn't a factor in the NHS overload (and housing, and other public services). It absolutely is<snip> It absolutely is - in a tiny, almost statistically insignificant way - as explained here. The ageing population is a much bigger factor - and the NHS gets a double blow in that regard, because Social Care services have been slashed to the bone, meaning that elderly people don't get the care they need in their own homes to prevent hospital admissions - and when they do get admitted, the services to support them in the community aren't there, so they can't be discharged. The announcement that Jeremy Hunt will retain Health and also pick up Social Care does not give me any comfort that things will improve on that front any time soon. You're dead right about non EU migration too - we absolutely did have the ability to control that, and successive governments, including one Mrs T May as longstanding Home Secretary, utterly failed to do so. That said, we also had an ability to control EU migration, despite the scare tactics used by the Leave campaign, but didn't do that either. So I agree that the rise of right wing, xenophobic rhetoric that people have got behind, was enabled by a series of failures on both sides of the political spectrum - and this is where we've ended up.

Cronus wrote: Fact is, we have an increasingly aging population together with population growth boosted by immigration. The UK population grew by 513,000 in 2016, of which 335,000 was net migration - so don't try to tell me immigration isn't a factor in the NHS overload (and housing, and other public services). It absolutely is<snip> It absolutely is - in a tiny, almost statistically insignificant way - as explained here. The ageing population is a much bigger factor - and the NHS gets a double blow in that regard, because Social Care services have been slashed to the bone, meaning that elderly people don't get the care they need in their own homes to prevent hospital admissions - and when they do get admitted, the services to support them in the community aren't there, so they can't be discharged. The announcement that Jeremy Hunt will retain Health and also pick up Social Care does not give me any comfort that things will improve on that front any time soon. You're dead right about non EU migration too - we absolutely did have the ability to control that, and successive governments, including one Mrs T May as longstanding Home Secretary, utterly failed to do so. That said, we also had an ability to control EU migration, despite the scare tactics used by the Leave campaign, but didn't do that either. So I agree that the rise of right wing, xenophobic rhetoric that people have got behind, was enabled by a series of failures on both sides of the political spectrum - and this is where we've ended up.

Re: Brexit Anyone? (2) : Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:05 pm  

bren2k wrote:

The ageing population is a much bigger factor

And it raises some serious moral dilemmas. Is the population living longer purely through healthier lifestyles, or are the unhealthy living longer via expensive medicine, treatment and care? Do we keep relying on immigration to solve the problem of caring for the ageing population, knowing too that they will expand their families, and in turn, get old and require care themselves?

It would also be worth looking at the infant mortality rate. The infant mortality rate has reduced by over 10 times since Victorian times. I seem to remember reading somewhere that around half of children born in Victorian times didn't make it to their 1st birthday. The problems encountered then haven't gone away entirely, it's just that we now have a better ability to treat and care for, or in the recent Charlie Gard case, prolong the suffering of the ones that didn't used to make it.

By 2035 the UK population is estimated to be around 73.2 million with just over two-thirds of the projected increase from 2010 to 2035 either directly or indirectly due to migration. If the population explosion carries on at this rate, it won't just be healthcare that will be in crisis. Housing, infrastructure, travel, employment will too take centre stage. Sooner or later there are going to be some very uncomfortable questions, and I don't trust anyone currently in power to provide an answer.

Re: Brexit Anyone? (2) : Wed Jan 10, 2018 2:35 pm  

Cronus wrote: What the hell has that got to do with the demand immigrants place on the NHS? Does their highly debatable net contribution increase the number of beds to account for their numbers? Oh they might pay in, but unless the NHS is operationally able to immediately absorb the impact their numbers bring, it's largely irrelevant. As for non-EU immigrants, that's another story on a different scale entirely - a negative impact of £118 billion 1995-2011 as even the Indy acknowledges. Fact is, every government has closed facilities and reduced the number of beds due to the NHS being an massively unwieldy beast. Labour reduced beds by around 52k during their last tenure. Since the 2010 GE beds have dropped by around 14k. And how is spending supposed to keep up if you have no idea how how much your population might increase by in any given year? NHS spending has risen and risen year on year to try and keep pace with a growing and aging population, and the increasing costs of healthcare and wages. That, and that closure of too many facilities alongside institutionalised legacy inefficiencies have taken their toll. Fact is, we have an increasingly aging population together with population growth boosted by immigration. The UK population grew by 513,000 in 2016, of which 335,000 was net migration - so don't try to tell me immigration isn't a factor in the NHS overload (and housing, and other public services). It absolutely is, and 20 years of the idiot liberal left vilifying anyone who dare say otherwise was a big factor in Brexit, and the rise of UKIP and 'populist' tendencies. I am friends with 2 x midwives, a hospital theatre manager and a couple of nurses - and in private all of them bemoan the impact and strain immigration places on their services (the midwives in particular!). But if they opened their mouths in public they'd be sacked. The liberals in charge don't stand for that sort of thing. What's that you say? The bottom end of the jobs market is trashed? Low cost labour is being taken advantage of? Wonder what might have influenced that... Thanks for the lecture, always much appreciated. The lack of sufficient funding for a growing and more importantly ageing population should not just be blamed on immigration, which the poster that I replied to actually inferred, the problems are far deeper and you know this. THe % increase in NHS spending barely cover inflation and this is without the other many and varied reasons why the service needs more funds. The elephant in the room is the need to address just what the NHS should be used for and more importantly how the hell to cope with the increasing demands put on the service by an ever more "needy" ageing population. But, we'll ignore that and just blame immigration. It's quite laughable that non EU immigration, which we "control" was higher in the last 12 months than EU immigration. Perhaps when we have "full control" this figure may even grow ??

Cronus wrote: What the hell has that got to do with the demand immigrants place on the NHS? Does their highly debatable net contribution increase the number of beds to account for their numbers? Oh they might pay in, but unless the NHS is operationally able to immediately absorb the impact their numbers bring, it's largely irrelevant. As for non-EU immigrants, that's another story on a different scale entirely - a negative impact of £118 billion 1995-2011 as even the Indy acknowledges. Fact is, every government has closed facilities and reduced the number of beds due to the NHS being an massively unwieldy beast. Labour reduced beds by around 52k during their last tenure. Since the 2010 GE beds have dropped by around 14k. And how is spending supposed to keep up if you have no idea how how much your population might increase by in any given year? NHS spending has risen and risen year on year to try and keep pace with a growing and aging population, and the increasing costs of healthcare and wages. That, and that closure of too many facilities alongside institutionalised legacy inefficiencies have taken their toll. Fact is, we have an increasingly aging population together with population growth boosted by immigration. The UK population grew by 513,000 in 2016, of which 335,000 was net migration - so don't try to tell me immigration isn't a factor in the NHS overload (and housing, and other public services). It absolutely is, and 20 years of the idiot liberal left vilifying anyone who dare say otherwise was a big factor in Brexit, and the rise of UKIP and 'populist' tendencies. I am friends with 2 x midwives, a hospital theatre manager and a couple of nurses - and in private all of them bemoan the impact and strain immigration places on their services (the midwives in particular!). But if they opened their mouths in public they'd be sacked. The liberals in charge don't stand for that sort of thing. What's that you say? The bottom end of the jobs market is trashed? Low cost labour is being taken advantage of? Wonder what might have influenced that... Thanks for the lecture, always much appreciated. The lack of sufficient funding for a growing and more importantly ageing population should not just be blamed on immigration, which the poster that I replied to actually inferred, the problems are far deeper and you know this. THe % increase in NHS spending barely cover inflation and this is without the other many and varied reasons why the service needs more funds. The elephant in the room is the need to address just what the NHS should be used for and more importantly how the hell to cope with the increasing demands put on the service by an ever more "needy" ageing population. But, we'll ignore that and just blame immigration. It's quite laughable that non EU immigration, which we "control" was higher in the last 12 months than EU immigration. Perhaps when we have "full control" this figure may even grow ??

Re: Brexit Anyone? (2) : Wed Jan 10, 2018 3:06 pm  

Cronus wrote:

I am friends with 2 x midwives, a hospital theatre manager and a couple of nurses - and in private all of them bemoan the impact and strain immigration places on their services (the midwives in particular!). But if they opened their mouths in public they'd be sacked. The liberals in charge don't stand for that sort of thing.

To state the strain on the health service is down to immigration just shows your xenophobia. A far bigger strain is due to the lifestyles of the native population. Crap food, alcohol, cigarettes, drugs, lack of exercise, over work, stress.

My recent experiences of hospitals is I am struggling to remember one overseas patient, unless you are classing second & third generation immigrants. Numerous overseas nurses, doctors & specialists committed to caring though.

I know a fair number of people who work in health & social services. None of them bemoan immigration.

The liberals aren't in charge. Where've you been?

Re: Brexit Anyone? (2) : Wed Jan 10, 2018 6:12 pm  

tigertot wrote:

To state the strain on the health service is down to immigration just shows your xenophobia. A far bigger strain is due to the lifestyles of the native population. Crap food, alcohol, cigarettes, drugs, lack of exercise, over work, stress.

My recent experiences of hospitals is I am struggling to remember one overseas patient, unless you are classing second & third generation immigrants. Numerous overseas nurses, doctors & specialists committed to caring though.

I know a fair number of people who work in health & social services. None of them bemoan immigration.

The liberals aren't in charge. Where've you been?

:

Daily Mail 0 Common sense 1

Re: Brexit Anyone? (2) : Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:43 pm  

tigertot wrote:

To state the strain on the health service is down to immigration just shows your xenophobia. A far bigger strain is due to the lifestyles of the native population. Crap food, alcohol, cigarettes, drugs, lack of exercise, over work, stress.

My recent experiences of hospitals is I am struggling to remember one overseas patient, unless you are classing second & third generation immigrants. Numerous overseas nurses, doctors & specialists committed to caring though.

I know a fair number of people who work in health & social services. None of them bemoan immigration.

The liberals aren't in charge. Where've you been?

Reading not your strong point? I said it's a factor. Which it is. Or do you think 335,000 extra people each year make absolutely zero demands on the NHS?

BTW did you ask everyone in those waiting rooms their origins? No, didn't think so. In fact, you're making it up, aren't you. Just as you're lying about your ailing memory of overseas patients.

I could tell you my experience of EVERY NHS waiting room I've been in containing a significant proportion of foreign-speakers. Hospitals, GPs and drop-in centres. Every single one. I don't know where you live (cloud cuckoo land?), but I could take you to Fairfield Hospital, Rochdale Infirmary, North Manchester Hospital, Trafford Hospital, Royal Oldham, Royal Bolton, and you would witness this at any given time. You can deny this all you like but just pause for a moment and think about the demographics of those areas. First, second or third generation I don't know (or care).

Any NHS workers you know probably don't feel comfortable telling you how they feel as you'll probably accuse them of lying and go into some blinkered leftist rant.

Xenophobic? I've lived in Europe for several years, I'm half non-British European and I'm surrounded by Europeans at work, mainly Germans a but a real broth of nationalities. Another typical loony trait - throw insults at anyone who simply understands the numbers coming in are unsustainable. Because that's all it is - a numbers game. Your insults don't wash with me sonny jim. Go back to your British-only waiting room.

Re: Brexit Anyone? (2) : Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:50 pm  

bren2k wrote: It absolutely is - in a tiny, almost statistically insignificant way - as explained here. I'm not talking about contribution in financial terms (which is debatable) - but rather the impact on resources. If 335,000 immigrants arrive in any given year, their contributions aren't in the coffers for some time and more importantly given we don't know how many might arrive, there is no increase in facilities to account for the demands they place on the system. Same goes for schools, housing, etc. All are feeling the squeeze. The ageing population is a much bigger factor - and the NHS gets a double blow in that regard, because Social Care services have been slashed to the bone, meaning that elderly people don't get the care they need in their own homes to prevent hospital admissions - and when they do get admitted, the services to support them in the community aren't there, so they can't be discharged. The announcement that Jeremy Hunt will retain Health and also pick up Social Care does not give me any comfort that things will improve on that front any time soon. Agree with all of the above. Vast changes are needed sooner rather than later, changes which will have to cost us all much more. You're dead right about non EU migration too - we absolutely did have the ability to control that, and successive governments, including one Mrs T May as longstanding Home Secretary, utterly failed to do so. That said, we also had an ability to control EU migration, despite the scare tactics used by the Leave campaign, but didn't do that either. So I agree that the rise of right wing, xenophobic rhetoric that people have got behind, was enabled by a series of failures on both sides of the political spectrum - and this is where we've ended up. Yes, we could have put temporary transitional controls on EU migration in 2004 - but a Mr Anthony Charles Lynton Blair chose not to, for political and ideological reasons. The thing is, you don't get a second opportunity whenever you feel like it so saying we could still have limited immigration is incorrect - something backed up by the EU itself, who have repeatedly stated freedom of movement is entirely non-negotiable. One of the reasons I voted leave.

bren2k wrote: It absolutely is - in a tiny, almost statistically insignificant way - as explained here. I'm not talking about contribution in financial terms (which is debatable) - but rather the impact on resources. If 335,000 immigrants arrive in any given year, their contributions aren't in the coffers for some time and more importantly given we don't know how many might arrive, there is no increase in facilities to account for the demands they place on the system. Same goes for schools, housing, etc. All are feeling the squeeze. The ageing population is a much bigger factor - and the NHS gets a double blow in that regard, because Social Care services have been slashed to the bone, meaning that elderly people don't get the care they need in their own homes to prevent hospital admissions - and when they do get admitted, the services to support them in the community aren't there, so they can't be discharged. The announcement that Jeremy Hunt will retain Health and also pick up Social Care does not give me any comfort that things will improve on that front any time soon. Agree with all of the above. Vast changes are needed sooner rather than later, changes which will have to cost us all much more. You're dead right about non EU migration too - we absolutely did have the ability to control that, and successive governments, including one Mrs T May as longstanding Home Secretary, utterly failed to do so. That said, we also had an ability to control EU migration, despite the scare tactics used by the Leave campaign, but didn't do that either. So I agree that the rise of right wing, xenophobic rhetoric that people have got behind, was enabled by a series of failures on both sides of the political spectrum - and this is where we've ended up. Yes, we could have put temporary transitional controls on EU migration in 2004 - but a Mr Anthony Charles Lynton Blair chose not to, for political and ideological reasons. The thing is, you don't get a second opportunity whenever you feel like it so saying we could still have limited immigration is incorrect - something backed up by the EU itself, who have repeatedly stated freedom of movement is entirely non-negotiable. One of the reasons I voted leave.

Re: Brexit Anyone? (2) : Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:53 pm  

wrencat1873 wrote:

Thanks for the lecture, always much appreciated.

The lack of sufficient funding for a growing and more importantly ageing population should not just be blamed on immigration, which the poster that I replied to actually inferred, the problems are far deeper and you know this.
THe % increase in NHS spending barely cover inflation and this is without the other many and varied reasons why the service needs more funds.

The elephant in the room is the need to address just what the NHS should be used for and more importantly how the hell to cope with the increasing demands put on the service by an ever more "needy" ageing population.

But, we'll ignore that and just blame immigration.
It's quite laughable that non EU immigration, which we "control" was higher in the last 12 months than EU immigration.
Perhaps when we have "full control" this figure may even grow ??

Another one who can't read. Show me where I 'just' blamed immigration.