Re: Brexit Anyone? (part 4) : Thu Sep 19, 2019 10:06 am  

wrencat1873 wrote:

Sal, you seem to have deliberately missed the last part of my post.
Like you, my own personal experience of the NHS has been excellent. I think that it's the UK's best "asset" and something that maost of the world truly envies about our country.

However, on Mental Health, it's bloody woeful and desperately short on resource, which believe me, is causing/allowing young people to take their lives due to an abject lack of support for those in crisis.

As I said 3 MONTHS WAITING TIME FOR A REFERAL FOR URGENT CASES, usually people who have talked about or actually attempted suicide and if they go from child to adult (ie turn 18) during treatment, they go to the back of the queue.

This is not being political it's just a statement of fact.

"well it was alright when I grazed my knee" doesnt change the above

The NHS is far from perfect but on the whole it offers a good service. Mental health is a difficult one because for one our understanding of the brain is so limited compared to the rest of the body. If you have angina because of a blocked artery easy, if you have depression multiple reasons more difficult - stress how much harder is that to diagnose and treat than a broken leg. Physical injuries are quick and easy to treat. Mental health can take years to treat. How much of mental illness will resolve itself with a change of inputs. You are depressed but you meet a new partner, you get a new job etc. If you have a blocked artery it needs treating or it will get worse.

I go back to my earlier point the NHS has a finite amount of money - new treatments come along, we are all living longer, we are more aware of conditions etc. So how do you spend the money in the most constructive manner. All teenagers go through times of self doubt etc. its really tough their peer group lack the sensitivity to behave in an adult fashion its brutal. Most find a way and I would suggest a lot more would find a way if encouraged and supported without the need for the NHS.

How do you fund it and to what level and what services do you expect it to offer. If we put another £20bn in where does it get spent, my view is training and equipment not huge increases in pay for existing personnel.

Re: Brexit Anyone? (part 4) : Thu Sep 19, 2019 10:18 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

50% of the investment in the NHS simply went on increasing the salaries of the people already in post. The lack of real investment by Labour has been a lack of trained doctors and nurses

Over Labour’s 13 years in power from 1997 to 2010, healthcare budgets grew by 5.6 per cent a year on average. They grew by 1.3 per cent a year under the Conservatives between 2010 and 2016. I am not in a position to dispute your statement; not that I have a problem with adequately rewarding those who do such a vital job. I am sure attracting & retaining the best staff should be a priority.

Devolution - should have included it both ways i.e. why do we have the SNP in Westminster - they have absolutely nothing to do but cause trouble. They don't represent anyone as these people are represented in their own parliament

Because England, Westminster still has reserved powers over Scotland's Benefits and social security, Taxes, Pensions, Immigration, Defence, Foreign policy, Employment, Nuclear energy, oil, coal, gas and electricity.

Re: Brexit Anyone? (part 4) : Thu Sep 19, 2019 10:22 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

The NHS is far from perfect but on the whole it offers a good service. Mental health is a difficult one because for one our understanding of the brain is so limited compared to the rest of the body. If you have angina because of a blocked artery easy, if you have depression multiple reasons more difficult - stress how much harder is that to diagnose and treat than a broken leg. Physical injuries are quick and easy to treat. Mental health can take years to treat. How much of mental illness will resolve itself with a change of inputs. You are depressed but you meet a new partner, you get a new job etc. If you have a blocked artery it needs treating or it will get worse.

I go back to my earlier point the NHS has a finite amount of money - new treatments come along, we are all living longer, we are more aware of conditions etc. So how do you spend the money in the most constructive manner. All teenagers go through times of self doubt etc. its really tough their peer group lack the sensitivity to behave in an adult fashion its brutal. Most find a way and I would suggest a lot more would find a way if encouraged and supported without the need for the NHS.

How do you fund it and to what level and what services do you expect it to offer. If we put another £20bn in where does it get spent, my view is training and equipment not huge increases in pay for existing personnel.

Again, you miss the point.
A young person attempting suicide has to wait 3 MONTHS FRO A REFERAL due to lack of resource.
I suppose if they are successful in their attempt, it save the taxpayer some money FFS

The funding for this, as an absolute minimum, needs to allow as close to an instant referral, to try and prevent the loss of life.
Yes, the issues can be extremely complex but, the cuts under the Tory regime, especially in mental health have decimated this part of the NHS.
Yes, when certain Royals jumped on the mental health bandwagon, their was lip service towards dealing with the issue but, the current change doesn't even begin to replace what has been cut.
On a related subject, one of the reasons for some hospital wards being full is the lack of care available outside of the hospitals.
Again, social care under this government has been butchered but, hey, let's have some more tax cuts, especially for those paying the top level of tax.
It's fundamentally disgusting that ANYONE, let alone those "running" the country should think this way.

Re: Brexit Anyone? (part 4) : Thu Sep 19, 2019 10:58 am  

wrencat1873 wrote:

Again, you miss the point.
A young person attempting suicide has to wait 3 MONTHS FRO A REFERAL due to lack of resource.
I suppose if they are successful in their attempt, it save the taxpayer some money FFS

The funding for this, as an absolute minimum, needs to allow as close to an instant referral, to try and prevent the loss of life.
Yes, the issues can be extremely complex but, the cuts under the Tory regime, especially in mental health have decimated this part of the NHS.
Yes, when certain Royals jumped on the mental health bandwagon, their was lip service towards dealing with the issue but, the current change doesn't even begin to replace what has been cut.
On a related subject, one of the reasons for some hospital wards being full is the lack of care available outside of the hospitals.
Again, social care under this government has been butchered but, hey, let's have some more tax cuts, especially for those paying the top level of tax.
It's fundamentally disgusting that ANYONE, let alone those "running" the country should think this way.

Until a government, of whichever leaning, makes multi-national corporates pay the tax they should owe then things will not change. You can't blame the likes of Google, FlynScare, Appleetc for playing the rules as they stand, but you can blame successive governments fornot changing the rules. I would pay moretax if I didn't see so much being wasted. The EU is a prime example of a waste of money.

Re: Brexit Anyone? (part 4) : Thu Sep 19, 2019 11:07 am  

wrencat1873 wrote:

Again, you miss the point.
A young person attempting suicide has to wait 3 MONTHS FRO A REFERAL due to lack of resource.
I suppose if they are successful in their attempt, it save the taxpayer some money FFS

You miss the point FFS - there is a finite amount of money so where do you spend it - do you treat a car crash victim who will definitely die if you don't treat or on a youngster who may or may not commit suicide - these are hideous choices. There are only so many trained professionals so how do you allocate their time. It takes years to train these people so just throwing money at increased salaries isn't the answer IMO - training more is.

I am not arguing that it is not needed but the NHS has to make judgement calls on how it spends its money.

How would you spend it

Re: Brexit Anyone? (part 4) : Thu Sep 19, 2019 11:24 am  

IR80 wrote:

I would pay moretax if I didn't see so much being wasted.

Of course you would.

The EU is a prime example of a waste of money.

Compared to UK Government it is extremely efficient. Feel free to copy & paste a Daily Express article or expand on your latest glib soundbite with a bit of personal insight to back it up.

Re: Brexit Anyone? (part 4) : Thu Sep 19, 2019 11:44 am  

tigertot wrote:

Of course you would.
Compared to UK Government it is extremely efficient. Feel free to copy & paste a Daily Express article or expand on your latest glib soundbite with a bit of personal insight to back it up.

Attempted insults, how very you.

why don't you go back to the 70's when your lot were messing up our country with walkouts, strikes etc.

Re: Brexit Anyone? (part 4) : Thu Sep 19, 2019 11:54 am  

IR80 wrote:

Attempted insults, how very you.

why don't you go back to the 70's when your lot were messing up our country with walkouts, strikes etc.

Glib. Answer the question.

Re: Brexit Anyone? (part 4) : Thu Sep 19, 2019 11:59 am  

tigertot wrote:

Glib. Answer the question.

You believe the EU to be efficient, that is your malaise, not mine.

Re: Brexit Anyone? (part 4) : Thu Sep 19, 2019 12:06 pm  

IR80 wrote:

You believe the EU to be efficient, that is your malaise, not mine.

I said compared to the UK it is. I can back up my statement. Over to you.