BoE Chief Economist: Brexit Prediction Was Our 'Michael Fish Moment'

[Crimson Dynamo]

well well....:idc:


http://e3.365dm.com/17/01/640x380/23f6a1b7047495bff2a22ff17b3909a21d1c6c41400abf3daa 786ff865971521_3865258.jpg

The Bank had issued dire warnings against a vote to leave the European Union, with governor Mark Carney even saying the country could slip into recession.

Instead, the FTSE 100 closed on a record high for the sixth consecutive time on Thursday, the same day figures were released suggesting Britain was the fastest-growing of the advanced economies last year, with the services sector hitting a 17-month high.

BoE chief economist Andy Haldane said criticism of economists for failing to predict the financial crisis and the impact of the Brexit vote were a "fair cop", adding that the economics profession was "to some degree in crisis".

http://www.lbc.co.uk/news/uk/boe-chief-economist-admits-brexit-criticism-w/

------------------

In other words they got it spectacularly wrong with their doom-mongering and i think our Nigel may well have called that one as well..

[arista]

Yes Blame Poor Old Fish LT


Pathetic Haldane fella

[MB.]

That's because absolutely nothing has happened in regards to Brexit yet

[arista]

That's because absolutely nothing has happened in regards to Brexit yet


Well the pound changed
but bounced back

After March this year
we may get some changes
as we start LEAVING the Corrupt EU

[Northern Monkey]

You have to remember that these so called 'expert economists' are renowned for getting it wrong.They hardly ever predict anything right.There were dire predictions for June 24th and none of it happened.They are to be taken with a huge pinch of salt.
Even the FT thinks they're useless.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/14e323ee-e602-11e3-aeef-00144feabdc0?client=safari

[user104658]

We're still in the EU though :joker:

[Crimson Dynamo]

We're still in the EU though :joker:

yes and I believe that was the response from every tibb brexiteer for weeks after the vote when faced with the silly scare-mongering




you

could

not

make

it

up

[user104658]

yes and I believe that was the response from every tibb brexiteer for weeks after the vote when faced with the silly scare-mongering




you

could

not

make

it

up
My point is more that the Brexitkru have been insistent that the economy is stifled and can't improve because of EU laws and red tape... And yet now crowing about economic improvements like its down to Brexit, when in fact we are still bound by exactly the same EU "laws and red tape" as we ever were :think:.

So all you can actually say is that some people were wrong about the consequences of the vote itself / financial confidence etc... Which is fair enough... But it has absolutely zero bearing on the actual effect of Brexit in practice, which we are still years away from :shrug:. Surely, LT, you're not one of the thick chavs I get ranting at work about how we're "out of Europe now!" since the day after the vote...

[Crimson Dynamo]

My point is more that the Brexitkru have been insistent that the economy is stifled and can't improve because of EU laws and red tape... And yet now crowing about economic improvements like its down to Brexit, when in fact we are still bound by exactly the same EU "laws and red tape" as we ever were :think:.

So all you can actually say is that some people were wrong about the consequences of the vote itself / financial confidence etc... Which is fair enough... But it has absolutely zero bearing on the actual effect of Brexit in practice, which we are still years away from :shrug:. Surely, LT, you're not one of the thick chavs I get ranting at work about how we're "out of Europe now!" since the day after the vote...

just pointing out that most of the tibb remainers were wrong

[user104658]

just pointing out that most of the tibb remainers were wrong
About what? You can't possibly claim to know whether Brexit will be good or bad for the economy, because it hasn't happened yet. No one has been proven right or wrong :shrug:.

[Tom4784]

The results of the Brexit alone had an negative impact, it's not exactly sometihng to celebrate that we only recovered because we're still in the EU.

This makes me think of people who deny Global Warming is a thing, you can convince yourself all you want that things are all rosy but that won't change the reality of what's going to happen.

The financial issue isn't even the worst part of it though, Brexit only went through because the government's under investigation for Human Rights' abuse by the EU due to the welfare cuts that the Tories proposed a while back. After we leave I'd bet those proposals will resurface.

It's sad how easy it is to get people to sign away their rights the second you mention immigrants.

[jaxie]

That's because absolutely nothing has happened in regards to Brexit yet

The point is they forecast doom would begin immediately on the result of a leave vote and it didn't happen.

[jaxie]

The results of the Brexit alone had an negative impact, it's not exactly sometihng to celebrate that we only recovered because we're still in the EU.

This makes me think of people who deny Global Warming is a thing, you can convince yourself all you want that things are all rosy but that won't change the reality of what's going to happen.

The financial issue isn't even the worst part of it though, Brexit only went through because the government's under investigation for Human Rights' abuse by the EU due to the welfare cuts that the Tories proposed a while back. After we leave I'd bet those proposals will resurface.

It's sad how easy it is to get people to sign away their rights the second you mention immigrants.

It's a shame the rest of the EU aren't doing as well as we are.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11735609/Greece-news-live-Crucified-Tsipras-capitulates-to-draconian-measures-after-17-hours-of-late-night-talks.html

"The terms are harsher by a full order of magnitude than those rejected by Greek voters in a landslide referendum a week ago, and therefore can never command democratic assent. They must be carried through by a Greek parliament still dominated by MPs from Left and Right who loathe every line of the summit statement, the infamous SN 4070/15, and have only agreed – if they have agreed – with a knife to their throats." EU :nono:

"In doing so they reverted to the nationalist European power struggles of the 19th and early 20th century. They demoted the eurozone into a toxic fixed exchange-rate system, with a shared single currency, run in the interests of Germany, held together by the threat of absolute destitution for those who challenge the prevailing order. The best thing that can be said of the weekend is the brutal honesty of those perpetrating this regime change.

We will soon be asking ourselves whether this new eurozone, in which the strong push around the weak, can be sustainable. Previously, the strongest argument against any forecasts of break-up has been the strong political commitment of all its members. If you ask Italians why they are in the eurozone, few have ever pointed to the economic benefits. They wanted to be part of the most ambitious project of European integration undertaken so far." Written by German economic commentator Wolfgang Munchau EU :nono:

A eurozone official is quoted as saying in the Financial Times: "They crucified Tsipras in there. Crucified.”

Not sure what rights you think people are signing away. :shrug: Blaming it on immigration is just ignorance based on Tabloid sensationalism.

Brexit only went through because the government's under investigation for Human Rights' abuse by the EU due to the welfare cuts that the Tories proposed a while back. This sentence doesn't make sense to me. Brexit hasn't 'gone through' yet but if you are referring to this investigation being the reason people voted for Brexit I can't see where you have evidence of that and it rather contradicts your statement about immigration. Lost me.

[user104658]

Brexit only went through because the government's under investigation for Human Rights' abuse by the EU due to the welfare cuts that the Tories proposed a while back. This sentence doesn't make sense to me. Brexit hasn't 'gone through' yet but if you are referring to this investigation being the reason people voted for Brexit I can't see where you have evidence of that and it rather contradicts your statement about immigration. Lost me.

It only doesn't make sense if you still believe in the integrity of democracy, rather than it being fairly evident that democratic votes in the "information age" are largely decided via mass media manipulation and a form of viral advertising.

Powerful people with vested interests decided that Brexit was the best path for them to achieve the things they are seeking to achieve, therefore Brexit happened. The same goes for Trump, now quite obviously. He ran a campaign that placed a large emphasis on "draining the swamp" in Washington; instead it already looks like the Washington Swamp is going to be declared a national park, and all of the corrupt ****ers in it will be a protected species. Such surprised.

[jaxie]

It only doesn't make sense if you still believe in the integrity of democracy, rather than it being fairly evident that democratic votes in the "information age" are largely decided via mass media manipulation and a form of viral advertising.

Powerful people with vested interests decided that Brexit was the best path for them to achieve the things they are seeking to achieve, therefore Brexit happened. The same goes for Trump, now quite obviously. He ran a campaign that placed a large emphasis on "draining the swamp" in Washington; instead it already looks like the Washington Swamp is going to be declared a national park, and all of the corrupt ****ers in it will be a protected species. Such surprised.

Do you know "Big Brother" personally TS? :hehe:

[user104658]

Do you know "Big Brother" personally TS? :hehe:

We all do Jaxie, some of us are just more acutely aware of him :suspect:

[jaxie]

We all do Jaxie, some of us are just more acutely aware of him :suspect:

What's his favourite colour?

[jaxie]

If the government is under investigation by the EU for being thoroughly bad sorts, (I nearly typed sots there). Who is investigating the EU for their disgusting treatment of Greece, overriding their democracy, the voice of their people through referendum and for bringing down yet another Greek government?

[user104658]

What's his favourite colour?

Green of course, the colour of $$$MONEY$$$

[Tom4784]

If the government is under investigation by the EU for being thoroughly bad sorts, (I nearly typed sots there). Who is investigating the EU for their disgusting treatment of Greece, overriding their democracy, the voice of their people through referendum and for bringing down yet another Greek government?

And none of that changes the fact that our government are under investigation for Human Rights abuse against disabled people.

The act of trying to distract somebody from focusing on something bad by saying 'that thing over there is also bad so that somehow vindicates this bad thing for some reason!' is foolishness.

[jaxie]

And none of that changes the fact that our government are under investigation for Human Rights abuse against disabled people.

The act of trying to distract somebody from focusing on something bad by saying 'that thing over there is also bad so that somehow vindicates this bad thing for some reason!' is foolishness.

So who investigates the EU abuse? :shrug:

[Tom4784]

So who investigates the EU abuse? :shrug:

It's irrelevant for reasons I've stated in the last post that you chose to ignore (and probably didn't read, given how you just proved what I was saying right).

[jaxie]

It's irrelevant for reasons I've stated in the last post that you chose to ignore (and probably didn't read, given how you just proved what I was saying right).

It's ok if you can't answer. You can just say.

[Tom4784]

It's ok if you can't answer. You can just say.

You are trying to distract from the issue I've raised because you can't argue against it hence the pointless attempts to vindicate Human Rights abuse (which is disgusting in itself) by bringing in an unrelated subject to confuse the issue.

You voted against human rights, you've got to accept that. You weren't voting against free borders or voting for an extra £350m for the NHS or anything else, you voted to get the government out of a Human Rights debacle and, in the process, gave them the means to try it again with reprisal.

That's what the referendum essentially came down to and no amount of sticking your fingers in your ears and going 'lalalalalala!' is going to change that fact.

[jaxie]

You are trying to distract from the issue I've raised because you can't argue against it hence the pointless attempts to vindicate Human Rights abuse (which is disgusting in itself) by bringing in an unrelated subject to confuse the issue.

You voted against human rights, you've got to accept that. You weren't voting against free borders or voting for an extra £350m for the NHS or anything else, you voted to get the government out of a Human Rights debacle and, in the process, gave them the means to try it again with reprisal.

That's what the referendum essentially came down to and no amount of sticking your fingers in your ears and going 'lalalalalala!' is going to change that fact.

I just can't be bothered. It's like talking to a brick wall.

[Tom4784]

I just can't be bothered. It's like talking to a brick wall.

Thanks for playing! :thumbs:

[jaxie]

Thanks for playing! :thumbs:

Is having the last word some sort of compulsion?

[Brillopad]

It's irrelevant for reasons I've stated in the last post that you chose to ignore (and probably didn't read, given how you just proved what I was saying right).

Your idea of 'proof' leaves a lot to be desired. Stating something as fact does not make it so. Simply opinion and supposition, nothing more however much you try to convince others otherwise.

[smudgie]

Any long term forecasts should be taken with a pinch of salt, either good or bad.
The economy will go up and down whatever we do.:shrug:

[Tom4784]

Your idea of 'proof' leaves a lot to be desired. Stating something as fact does not make it so. Simply opinion and supposition, nothing more however much you try to convince others otherwise.

Your reading comprehension skills could also do with a bit of a touch up tbh.

When did I ever say my opinion was fact? Do I have to state the obvious and say 'in my opinion' at the end of every sentence for your benefit?

It's a qualified opinion. Most of the benefits that the leave campaign relied on have been been debunked FACT. The UK was under investigation for Human Rights Abuse and leaving the EU has put the kibosh on that (and any future attempts by the EU of preventing severe cuts for social funds for disabled people) FACT. Therefore it's fair to say that most Leave was basically a campaign against Human Rights masked as something else.

It's looking likely that we will have a soft brexit which means things won't change except we likely won't be beholden to those 'pesky' Human Rights laws that the EU enforces.

If you have something USEFUL to add besides inane jabs then by all means, go ahead.

[Tom4784]

Is having the last word some sort of compulsion?

You tell me, you said you had enough yet you keep replying? If you wanna play again then I'm game.

[Kizzy]

The NHS has been deemed to be a 'humanitarian crisis' if that's not an indicator of a failing on a monumental scale I don't know what is.
The one pledge that the UK got behind for brexit is that it would be safe, and it isn't... they lied.

You would think that would make millions very angry... but it hasn't, personally I don't understand that. Is the failure to act on their promises being excused? Are out voters too embarrassed to admit they were duped? Don't they care anymore?... :/

[jaxie]

The NHS has been deemed to be a 'humanitarian crisis' if that's not an indicator of a failing on a monumental scale I don't know what is.
The one pledge that the UK got behind for brexit is that it would be safe, and it isn't... they lied.

You would think that would make millions very angry... but it hasn't, personally I don't understand that. Is the failure to act on their promises being excused? Are out voters too embarrassed to admit they were duped? Don't they care anymore?... :/

NHS disagrees.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/07/nhs-denies-red-cross-claims-humanitarian-crisis-uk-hospitals/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38538637

:shrug:

[user104658]

NHS disagrees.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/07/nhs-denies-red-cross-claims-humanitarian-crisis-uk-hospitals/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38538637

:shrug:

Chair of the health select committee, Sarah Wollaston MP, said: "There is a crisis in social care provision but the term 'humanitarian crisis' is too strong.

Not really disagreeing is it?

[jaxie]

Not really disagreeing is it?

Well yeah the statement was a humanitarian disaster and two articles say the NHS disagree. You're quoting one political source but that doesn't mean the NHS don't disagree. I can only pass on the information, if you have a problem with the content or any conflicting comments in it, take it up with the author.

The NHS is expensive to run, it always has been.

[Brillopad]

The NHS has been deemed to be a 'humanitarian crisis' if that's not an indicator of a failing on a monumental scale I don't know what is.
The one pledge that the UK got behind for brexit is that it would be safe, and it isn't... they lied.

You would think that would make millions very angry... but it hasn't, personally I don't understand that. Is the failure to act on their promises being excused? Are out voters too embarrassed to admit they were duped? Don't they care anymore?... :/

We are is this crisis because of immigration and too many taking out of it and not enough putting in. Vast amounts of Money is also being wasted on non-essential services such as interpreters for people who make no effort to learn the language of the country they are living in. You support unlimited immigration so what do you expect. Consequences.

Why would voters be embarrassed as Brexit has not yet occurred and we are still paying millions to the EU. People who, like you, don't want Brexit also keep interfering in the Brexit process in an attempt to stop it or water it down to such a degree that Brexit won't even be the Brexit people voted for which has of course delayed the process even further. Maybe you should look closer to home with your finger pointing.

[Kizzy]

well well....:idc:


http://e3.365dm.com/17/01/640x380/23f6a1b7047495bff2a22ff17b3909a21d1c6c41400abf3daa 786ff865971521_3865258.jpg

The Bank had issued dire warnings against a vote to leave the European Union, with governor Mark Carney even saying the country could slip into recession.

Instead, the FTSE 100 closed on a record high for the sixth consecutive time on Thursday, the same day figures were released suggesting Britain was the fastest-growing of the advanced economies last year, with the services sector hitting a 17-month high.

BoE chief economist Andy Haldane said criticism of economists for failing to predict the financial crisis and the impact of the Brexit vote were a "fair cop", adding that the economics profession was "to some degree in crisis".

http://www.lbc.co.uk/news/uk/boe-chief-economist-admits-brexit-criticism-w/

------------------

In other words they got it spectacularly wrong with their doom-mongering and i think our Nigel may well have called that one as well..

The service industry... Like servants and such? Who would have ever thought we'd need more of those? :/

The economics profession isn't in crisis, the fact that the govt makes up it's own stats means they are no longer required unless they toe the party line on anything, including brexit.

[Kizzy]

NHS disagrees.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/07/nhs-denies-red-cross-claims-humanitarian-crisis-uk-hospitals/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38538637

:shrug:

The chair of the health select committee Sarah wollaston is not the NHS.

[Kizzy]

Well yeah the statement was a humanitarian disaster and two articles say the NHS disagree. You're quoting one political source but that doesn't mean the NHS don't disagree. I can only pass on the information, if you have a problem with the content or any conflicting comments in it, take it up with the author.

The NHS is expensive to run, it always has been.

The NHS was in profit until quite recently when profit generating portions were sold off.

[Kizzy]

We are is this crisis because of immigration and too many taking out of it and not enough putting in. Vast amounts of Money is also being wasted on non-essential services such as interpreters for people who make no effort to learn the language of the country they are living in. You support unlimited immigration so what do you expect. Consequences.

Why would voters be embarrassed as Brexit has not yet occurred and we are still paying millions to the EU. People who, like you, don't want Brexit also keep interfering in the Brexit process in an attempt to stop it or water it down to such a degree that Brexit won't even be the Brexit people voted for which has of course delayed the process even further. Maybe you should look closer to home with your finger pointing.

What have I done to interfere in the brexit process?

[Kizzy]

We are is this crisis because of immigration and too many taking out of it and not enough putting in. Vast amounts of Money is also being wasted on non-essential services such as interpreters for people who make no effort to learn the language of the country they are living in. You support unlimited immigration so what do you expect. Consequences.

Why would voters be embarrassed as Brexit has not yet occurred and we are still paying millions to the EU. People who, like you, don't want Brexit also keep interfering in the Brexit process in an attempt to stop it or water it down to such a degree that Brexit won't even be the Brexit people voted for which has of course delayed the process even further. Maybe you should look closer to home with your finger pointing.

What was the brexit people voted for, what is being watered down?

[Withano]

We are is this crisis because of immigration and too many taking out of it and not enough putting in.
Migrants put in more than they take out

Vast amounts of Money is also being wasted on non-essential services such as interpreters for people who make no effort to learn the language of the country they are living in. You support unlimited immigration so what do you expect. Consequences.
Why would any less be spent post-brexit, you give off the impression that you think brexit means no, or less immigration? It does not? Lol. I think its time to google what you voted for.

Why would voters be embarrassed as Brexit has not yet occurred and we are still paying millions to the EU.
Looking likely that we're gonna be paying in to them forever regardless, and receive less benefits in doing so

People who, like you, don't want Brexit also keep interfering in the Brexit process in an attempt to stop it or water it down to such a degree that Brexit won't even be the Brexit people voted for which has of course delayed the process even further.
Because barely any politicians who voted leave or remain wants any part of the process, if leavers keep stepping down, remainers have to pick up their mess, because someone bloody has to. If we left it to leavers to get us out, literally nothing would have happened yet.

Maybe you should look closer to home with your finger pointing.
Not yet, I'm treating brexit as guilty until proven innocent, I will happily eat my words in March if the remainers pull it out of the bag and make a great brexit deal for us.

[jaxie]

The chair of the health select committee Sarah wollaston is not the NHS.

I quoted the news I'd recently seen. I didn't write it or choose who to quote. How you interpret it is your choice.

[Kizzy]

I quoted the news I'd recently seen. I didn't write it or choose who to quote. How you interpret it is your choice.

You were the one who took the headline at face value, it has nothing to do with interpretation, one conservative MP is not the NHS.

[DemolitionRed]

We are is this crisis because of immigration and too many taking out of it and not enough putting in. Vast amounts of Money is also being wasted on non-essential services such as interpreters for people who make no effort to learn the language of the country they are living in. You support unlimited immigration so what do you expect. Consequences.

Why would voters be embarrassed as Brexit has not yet occurred and we are still paying millions to the EU. People who, like you, don't want Brexit also keep interfering in the Brexit process in an attempt to stop it or water it down to such a degree that Brexit won't even be the Brexit people voted for which has of course delayed the process even further. Maybe you should look closer to home with your finger pointing.

Good grief man, where the hell do you get this sort of information from?

[Brillopad]

Migrants put in more than they take out


Why would any less be spent post-brexit, you give off the impression that you think brexit means no, or less immigration? It does not? Lol. I think its time to google what you voted for.


Looking likely that we're gonna be paying in to them forever regardless, and receive less benefits in doing so


Because barely any politicians who voted leave or remain wants any part of the process, if leavers keep stepping down, remainers have to pick up their mess, because someone bloody has to. If we left it to leavers to get us out, literally nothing would have happened yet.


Not yet, I'm treating brexit as guilty until proven innocent, I will happily eat my words in March if the remainers pull it out of the bag and make a great brexit deal for us.

Brexit will mean taking some control over our borders and not letting in people with nothing to offer our coutry, those that just take. Sore losers need to keep out of it whilst those in control of getting the best deal get on with it. If they can't get the deal they want then it should just be a hard Brexit, that's what people voted for not all this hesitation and delaying tactics.

So far we have not seen the disaster predicted by the doom and gloom remainers and many who made such predictions are now eating their words. Britain is a strong country - we don't need the EU, it's a mess anyway. Other countries will probably do the same as Britain as there seems to be a lot of dissatisfaction with the EU all round. We are just the first country brave enough to make the first move.

[Brillopad]

That's because absolutely nothing has happened in regards to Brexit yet

Yes, but it was said that there would be an immediate effect with companies from overseas panicking and removing their business from Britain based on the knowledge that Brexit and leaving the EU was what the British people had voted for. That has not happened.

[Brillopad]

The results of the Brexit alone had an negative impact, it's not exactly sometihng to celebrate that we only recovered because we're still in the EU.

This makes me think of people who deny Global Warming is a thing, you can convince yourself all you want that things are all rosy but that won't change the reality of what's going to happen.

The financial issue isn't even the worst part of it though, Brexit only went through because the government's under investigation for Human Rights' abuse by the EU due to the welfare cuts that the Tories proposed a while back. After we leave I'd bet those proposals will resurface.

It's sad how easy it is to get people to sign away their rights the second you mention immigrants.

The welfare cuts by the government were a reaction to the increased amount being spent on benefits - much of which is going to immigrants who sponge off our system.

[Kizzy]

cEClY4IhVOE

I listened to this for 5 minuets and in that time farage explains his first meeting as an MEP he states that it was his intention at that time to break up the EU, he suggests that it should be the duty of ambassadors to bend to the will of government as a soldier would.... but this was in 1999 :/

[Withano]

Brexit will mean taking some control over our borders and not letting in people with nothing to offer our coutry, those that just take. Sore losers need to keep out of it whilst those in control of getting the best deal get on with it. If they can't get the deal they want then it should just be a hard Brexit, that's what people voted for not all this hesitation and delaying tactics.

So far we have not seen the disaster predicted by the doom and gloom remainers and many who made such predictions are now eating their words. Britain is a strong country - we don't need the EU, it's a mess anyway. Other countries will probably do the same as Britain as there seems to be a lot of dissatisfaction with the EU all round. We are just the first country brave enough to make the first move.

Sore losers are doing the jobs that the bad winners have stepped down from / are incapable of doing. Your other points are wishywashy repitition that I dont feel the need to expand on much

[Brillopad]

And none of that changes the fact that our government are under investigation for Human Rights abuse against disabled people.

The act of trying to distract somebody from focusing on something bad by saying 'that thing over there is also bad so that somehow vindicates this bad thing for some reason!' is foolishness.

Most of the Tory government were remainers, including Osborne and Cameron, so don't understand how your hypothesis that the government wanted a Brexit works.

Also if the government are being investigated for human rights abuse and you offer this up as a reason why they can't be trusted then why should we be more concerned about that than the hypocrisy of the EU who are supposed to be the experts on human rights. I think is it very relevant. Why would we want to be in the EU based on that? Supporters of human rights only when it suits it seems. No thanks.

[Brillopad]

Sore losers are doing the jobs that the bad winners have stepped down from / are incapable of doing. Your other points are wishywashy repitition that I dont feel the need to expand on much

The government are simply doing their job - that is what we are paying them for.

[Kizzy]

The whole reason we are briexitting is to remove ourselves from under the EU law umbrella... That way this govt can do what it likes with everyone, as in any marginalised group, including the disabled.

[Withano]

The government are simply doing their job - that is what we are paying them for.

Then stop your whining :shrug:

[Brillopad]

The whole reason we are briexitting is to remove ourselves from under the EU law umbrella... That way this govt can do what it likes with everyone, as in any marginalised group, including the disabled.

But the government were largely against Brexit including Cameron. That makes no sense to me. We are Brexiting because the leavers got the vote and the government are reluctantly obliged to follow it through.

[Brillopad]

Then stop your whining :shrug:

Ditto.

[Withano]

Ditto.

I havent? I just lead you down a path so you can realise how silly it is to whine about remainers hesitation tactics when theyre simply filling in for the leavers who have stepped down - its their job, thats what they're payed to do. Thats what your whine came down to, you said this yourself.

[Withano]

But the government were largely against Brexit including Cameron. .

Stop and ask yourself why :joker: and whilst youre at it, ask yourself why everyone (leavers and remainers) seem to be stepping down from their brexit-related post. Get back to me if you come to a conclusion.

[Kizzy]

But the government were largely against Brexit including Cameron. That makes no sense to me. We are Brexiting because the leavers got the vote and the government are reluctantly obliged to follow it through.

I don't truly believe they were 100% behind remain, there would've been more made of the benefits and the govt would've worked harder to stop the lies of the leave campaign had they been serious imo.
The govt don't appear that reluctant though do they? May was a remainer though you would never know now would you?
If anyone thinks this is due to the will of the people or a democratic process I think that's rubbish, personally I think as heard in farages monologue regarding his early days as an MEP this has been a long time coming from the centre right faction of both the labour and conservative camps.

[Brillopad]

I havent? I just lead you down a path so you can realise how silly it is to whine about remainers hesitation tactics when theyre simply filling in for the leavers who have stepped down - its their job, thats what they're payed to do. Thats what your whine came down to, you said this yourself.

Farage wasn't in the Tory government, what has him stepping down got to do with the government doing their job and putting the process of leaving the EU into gear. You led me nowhere dear.

[Withano]

Farage wasn't in the Tory government, what has him stepping down got to do with the government doing their job and putting the process of leaving the EU into gear. You led me nowhere dear.

I wasnt even thinking about Farage. Although good point, he left the sinking ship asap too. Maybe we need a longer think about why everybody (leavers and remainers) are stepping down, we havent got too far yet.

[Withano]

Leavers step down for unknown reasons
Remainer fills in
Remainer picks up leavers mess and doesnt know what to do with it
Remainers are ruining everything that leavers have worked for

Good logic m8888

[Brillopad]

I wasnt even thinking about Farage. Although good point, he left the sinking ship asap too. Maybe we need a longer think about why everybody (leavers and remainers) are stepping down, we havent got too far yet.

Remind me then who exactly are you talking about?

[Brillopad]

Leavers step down for unknown reasons
Remainer fills in
Remainer picks up leavers mess and doesnt know what to do with it
Remainers are ruining everything that leavers have worked for

Good logic m8888

Remainers are trying to negotiate a deal more suited to their plan. The words 'soft/hard' Brexit had never been uttered until after the vote and the government got a chance to 'influence' the process.

[jaxie]

You were the one who took the headline at face value, it has nothing to do with interpretation, one conservative MP is not the NHS.

Sounds you didn't read it but I could say the same to you, how much does one statement by someone in the red Cross really mean and how factual is it. You choose to believe what you wish, so will I.

[jaxie]

The NHS was in profit until quite recently when profit generating portions were sold off.

The NHS has never been in 'profit'. Not sure where you are getting that from. There were reports in the 80s of people dying in trollies. Nothing has changed really, it needs more cash it always has. It's probably the shining star of our society but it's expensive to run and the drug companies Rob us blind.

It needs some sort of extra boost similar to the way sport has benefitted from the lottery IMO.

[Withano]

Remainers are trying to negotiate a deal more suited to their plan. The words 'soft/hard' Brexit had never been uttered until after the vote and the government got a chance to 'influence' the process.

Honestly, its got to the point where most news is good news because any news is progress. Whining about remainers who arent doing a good job of brexit is the most mindless whine i can imagine from anyone really where brexit is concerned - the leavers have done a ****storm job of it too and it was their bloody idea. The hard/soft/black/white words also pisses me off, I think its just a way for the government to say - i dont ****ing know - and get away with it, then in march - when whatever happens happens, they'll just be all like "oh yeh, we were always aiming for a fluffy navy brexit with yellow stripes, that way we can still work towards improving it in the future" There wasnt a plan, but a planless idea won, perhaps this should have been made clearer to voters to lessen the post-brexit "youre mucking everything up" whines (you cant muck up a plan that never existed, its like me giving you a set of drawers from ikea but shredding up the instructions, and then getting in a hissy when i find it isnt finished the way the ikea salesman told me it should have been - thats how mindless your whine is)... now we have to let people attempt to make a plan and do it well by March, its possible. Probably?

[jaxie]

I don't truly believe they were 100% behind remain, there would've been more made of the benefits and the govt would've worked harder to stop the lies of the leave campaign had they been serious imo.
The govt don't appear that reluctant though do they? May was a remainer though you would never know now would you?
If anyone thinks this is due to the will of the people or a democratic process I think that's rubbish, personally I think as heard in farages monologue regarding his early days as an MEP this has been a long time coming from the centre right faction of both the labour and conservative camps.

It was arrogance, Cameron and Osborne didn't think they could lose.

For 30 years politicians had been avoiding letting public vote on anything EU related because they were afraid the public would vote against. I think so much time has passed without giving us any say that Cameron either forgot that or thought we'd just vote remain because we were so used to being in. He seriously miscalculated.

[Brillopad]

Honestly, its got to the point where most news is good news because any news is progress. Whining about remainers who arent doing a good job of brexit is the most mindless whine i can imagine from anyone really where brexit is concerned - the leavers have done a shotstorm job of it too and it was their bloody idea. The hard/soft/black/white words also pisses me off, I think its just a way for the government to say - i dont ****ing know - and get away with it, then in march - when whatever happens happens, they'll just be all like "oh yeh, we were always aiming for a fluffy navy brexit with yellow stripes, that way we can still work towards improving it in the future" There wasnt a plan, but a planless idea won, perhaps this should have been made clearer to voters to lessen the post-brexit "youre mucking everything up" whines... now we have to let people attempt to make a plan and do it well by March, its possible. Probably?

I am simply pointing out that the leavers, most of which were not in the government, are not involved in seeing the process through for that reason. Unfortunately that job is in the hands of a predominantly remain government.

[jaxie]

Remind me then who exactly are you talking about?

I'd quite like to hear who all the leavers deserting the process and resigning are too. Not holding breath for a straight answer though! :shrug:

[Withano]

I am simply pointing out that the leavers, most of which were not in the government, are not involved in seeing the process through for that reason. Unfortunately that job is in the hands of a predominantly remain government.

David Davis, Liam Fox and Boris Johnson all voted leave.. Granted theyre all a bit thick, who would you prefer? - There isnt a good predominantly leave government, all of the main 9 are predominantly remain.

[Brillopad]

David Davis, Liam Fox and Boris Johnson all voted leave.. Granted theyre all a bit thick, who would you prefer? - There isnt a good predominantly leave government, all of the main 8 are predominantly remain.

They are certainly brighter than the other 8 in my book. Lets not be too hasty though in underestimating the power of the righteous!

[Withano]

They are certainly brighter than the other 8 in my book.

Then stop your whining :shrug:

[jaxie]

Then stop your whining :shrug:

You need to stop the personal remarks to users and the argument goading. :nono:

[Brillopad]

Then stop your whining :shrug:

When you stop yours.:shrug:

[Withano]

You need to stop the personal remarks to users and the argument goading.

I'll take it down a notch, im just really struggling to follow this particular argument. Im pretty sure there isnt one, im trying to find out.

[Withano]

When you stop yours.:shrug:

You genuinely just asked for brexit to be lead by leavers and in response to learning or remembering that the main three in charge of negotiations were brexiteers you said they were all very intelligent. What is your argument? i feel like youre just arguing for the sake of arguing!

[Brillopad]

I'll take it down a notch, im just really struggling to follow this particular argument. Im pretty sure there isnt one, im trying to find out.

Sorry to hear You're struggling to follow the argument. Il'll try to simplify it for you in future, although no promises. :bawling:

[Withano]

Sorry to hear You're struggling to follow the argument. Il'll try to simplify it for you in future, although no promises. :bawling:

Perhaps just think it through yourself first. Not the first time youve contradicted yourself multiple times on news and debates.

[Brillopad]

You genuinely just asked for brexit to be lead by leavers and in response to learning or remembering that the main three in charge of negotiations were brexiteers you said they were all very intelligent. What is your argument? i feel like youre just arguing for the sake of arguing!

Please don't put words in my mouth as I stated I was just pointing out that the process of exiting the EU was mainly in the hands of the remainers which is true. Point out what part of that statement is wrong if you can.

[Brillopad]

Perhaps just think it through yourself first. Not the first time youve contradicted yourself multiple times on news and debates.

Ditto. If you are constantly going to attempt to undermine those with an opposing view then your posts need to be better informed and more accurate.

[Kizzy]

Sounds you didn't read it but I could say the same to you, how much does one statement by someone in the red Cross really mean and how factual is it. You choose to believe what you wish, so will I.

No, you couldn't say that to me because I did read it that's how I know it was Sarah Wollaston that refutes the claim by the Red Cross not 'the NHS'.

The chief executive of the British red cross reiterates their response to the humanitarian crisis here....

“The British Red Cross is on the front line, responding to the humanitarian crisis in our hospital and ambulance services across the country,” said Red Cross chief executive Mike Adamson in a statement.'

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-nhs-humanitarian-crisis-sky-interview-hospitals-red-cross-justine-greening-jeremy-hunt-a7515801.html

[Kizzy]

The NHS has never been in 'profit'. Not sure where you are getting that from. There were reports in the 80s of people dying in trollies. Nothing has changed really, it needs more cash it always has. It's probably the shining star of our society but it's expensive to run and the drug companies Rob us blind.

It needs some sort of extra boost similar to the way sport has benefitted from the lottery IMO.


Wrong

'NHS hospitals will end the financial year in the red for the first time in eight years, according to official figures, with 26 loss-making trusts reporting a combined deficit of £456.8m.

The University Hospitals of Leicester NHS trust has run up the largest deficit: £39.8m.'


'Exclusive The joint venture between a private company and the Department of Health that processes payments to GP practices has dramatically improved its finances last year, with an 88% boost in profits.

Annual accounts seen by Pulse show that NHS Shared Business Services grew its profits from £4.2m in 2011 to £7.8m in 2012, with the organisation citing the ‘successful launch’ of a national payment system for the NHS a key driver behind the healthy balance sheet.

The growth in annual profits came on the back of a 30% rise in revenues from £62.4m to £81.1m, and after CCGs were mandated to use the company to process payments as a condition for authorisation.
The large jump in profits compares with an 11% increase in profits last year,'

http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/your-practice/practice-topics/practice-income/nhs-shared-business-services-profits-up-88/20004002.article

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/mar/20/nhs-hospitals-annual-loss-first-time-eight-years

[Tom4784]

The welfare cuts by the government were a reaction to the increased amount being spent on benefits - much of which is going to immigrants who sponge off our system.

This is what happens when you take the comments section of the Daily Mail as gospel.

You are proving me right, the mere mention of immigration has caused you to gloss over the Human Rights abuse in an attempt to blame them for our current issues. Just like I said in the post you quoted.

The only thing you and any Leaver achieved by voting Leave was making our Human Rights more open to abuse. Immigration won't change, we won't get more funds for public services but the Government won't have to worry about Eu interference if they decide to go after the most vulnerable people in our society again.

[Kizzy]

This is what happens when you take the comments section of the Daily Mail as gospel.

You are proving me right, the mere mention of immigration has caused you to gloss over the Human Rights abuse in an attempt to blame them for our current issues. Just like I said in the post you quoted.

The only thing you and any Leaver achieved by voting Leave was making our Human Rights more open to abuse. Immigration won't change, we won't get more funds for public services but the Government won't have to worry about Eu interference if they decide to go after the most vulnerable people in our society again.

Bingo.

[Tom4784]

Most of the Tory government were remainers, including Osborne and Cameron, so don't understand how your hypothesis that the government wanted a Brexit works.

Also if the government are being investigated for human rights abuse and you offer this up as a reason why they can't be trusted then why should we be more concerned about that than the hypocrisy of the EU who are supposed to be the experts on human rights. I think is it very relevant. Why would we want to be in the EU based on that? Supporters of human rights only when it suits it seems. No thanks.

Most of the politicians that were in the Leaver camp have jumped ship now that it's come to pass. Allignments and Alliances in politics are rarely set in stone. Most of the government were on the remain side of things so, if they really WANTED to remain it would have been easy to whip the votes to stop Brexit when it went to the floor recently but it still went through. That's telling in itself.

The conversation is about the UK's Human Rights abuse and the EU investigation, Greece is a separate issue that has little to nothing to do with it and mentioning doesn't change the facts of the UK case, it's just an attempt to muddy a debate that you can't win.

You can talk about Greece until you are blue in the face but it won't change the facts about the EU investigation into the UK's human rights abuse.

I've only spoken about the EU investigation into the UK, I'm not saying that the EU is perfect (I don't speak in absolutes) only that your argument doesn't change the facts which is true. Your unsubtle attempt to paint me as a hypocrite in your last sentence has fell on it's arse because you've misunderstood what I've been saying.

[Brillopad]

This is what happens when you take the comments section of the Daily Mail as gospel.

You are proving me right, the mere mention of immigration has caused you to gloss over the Human Rights abuse in an attempt to blame them for our current issues. Just like I said in the post you quoted.

The only thing you and any Leaver achieved by voting Leave was making our Human Rights more open to abuse. Immigration won't change, we won't get more funds for public services but the Government won't have to worry about Eu interference if they decide to go after the most vulnerable people in our society again.

I disagree - I think immigration will change. You keep stating this as fact but it is just your opinion. Mine is different. If you feel you have proof of this then feel free to present it because as far as I am aware no-one can state that as a fact at this point.

It just seems to me that you are attempting to influence the views of those who are unsure into believing there isn't/was no point in voting for Brexit as immigration won't change. Unless you claim to know those in the know and are privy to information unknown to the rest of us then it is simply speculation.

[Withano]

Ditto. If you are constantly going to attempt to undermine those with an opposing view then your posts need to be better informed and more accurate.

Better informed! I dont even think you understand what a vote to leave ever meant! Evidence
I disagree - I think immigration will change. You keep stating this as fact but it is just your opinion. Mine is different. If you feel you have proof of this then feel free to present it because as far as I am aware no-one can state that as a fact at this point.

Brexit is less EU migrants and more asian/american/australian/african migrants :facepalm: its painful that this is the first you knew of this because i feel like less migrants was at least 80% of your reasoning for wanting brexit - there will be no difference in over all mass of migrants. Just google things, honestly
Your entire posts in this thread just seems like a few confused blurts of brexit buzzwords but your odd combination of 'everything is being done wrong' and 'no boris is very clever, we're very lucky' on top of harping on about migrants and the nhs whilst whining your way through any sensical argument has just made this entire thread turn into something that it should have never been. I think a lot of your information is based on preconceived ideas, and not actual news outlets tbh, and id put a hell of a lot of money on your internet history being the definition of confirmation bias

[Brillopad]

Better informed! I dont even think you understand what a vote to leave ever meant! Evidence

Brexit is less EU migrants and more asian/american/australian/african migrants :facepalm:

Your entire posts in this thread just seems like a few confused blurts of brexit buzzwords but your odd combination of 'everything is being done wrong' and 'no boris is very clever, we're very lucky' on top of harping on about migrants and the nhs whilst whining your way through any sensical argument has just made this entire thread turn into something that it should have never been. I think a lot of your information is based on preconceived ideas, and not actual news outlets tbh, and id put a hell of a lot of money on your internet history being the definition of confirmation bias

Just about every post on here is based on personal views and related perception so you can take yourself off your self-imposed pedalstool now.

[Withano]

Just about every post on here is based on personal views and related perception so you can take yourself off your self-imposed pedalstool now.

Well I mean, a higher fact ratio, but I understand where you were going with it.

[Tom4784]

I disagree - I think immigration will change. You keep stating this as fact but it is just your opinion. Mine is different. If you feel you have proof of this then feel free to present it because as far as I am aware no-one can state that as a fact at this point.

It just seems to me that you are attempting to influence the views of those who are unsure into believing there isn't/was no point in voting for Brexit as immigration won't change. Unless you claim to know those in the know and are privy to information unknown to the rest of us then it is simply speculation.

It won't change because, despite what Theresa May says, we are likely going to have a soft brexit and forge a deal to remain in the Single Market and if that's the case then EU immigration isn't likely to change much and leaving the EU won't affect immigration from non-EU states thus my statement that immigration will not be affected by Brexit, thus voting for Brexit based on immigration was pointless.

I've not stated anything that is opinion as fact, must I sign everything with 'in my opinion' despite the fact that it should be obvious? Was I wrong to assume you could tell the difference between fact and opinion?

It doesn't matter what you believe, the people voted leave so trying to influence opinions is pointless now. You and the rest of the Leave voters have got to live with your mistakes.
I'm simply stating my opinion, some facts about the UK's Human Rights abuse and my informed thoughts on those facts which is more than the 'IMMIGRANTS ARE TO BLAME FOR EVERYTHING, THEY TOOK MY DOG AND DESTROYED MY HARVEST' stance you're taking.

[Brillopad]

Most of the politicians that were in the Leaver camp have jumped ship now that it's come to pass. Allignments and Alliances in politics are rarely set in stone. Most of the government were on the remain side of things so, if they really WANTED to remain it would have been easy to whip the votes to stop Brexit when it went to the floor recently but it still went through. That's telling in itself.

The conversation is about the UK's Human Rights abuse and the EU investigation, Greece is a separate issue that has little to nothing to do with it and mentioning doesn't change the facts of the UK case, it's just an attempt to muddy a debate that you can't win.

You can talk about Greece until you are blue in the face but it won't change the facts about the EU investigation into the UK's human rights abuse.

I've only spoken about the EU investigation into the UK, I'm not saying that the EU is perfect (I don't speak in absolutes) only that your argument doesn't change the facts which is true. Your unsubtle attempt to paint me as a hypocrite in your last sentence has fell on it's arse because you've misunderstood what I've been saying.

For the record, That very last sentence of my post you quoted was not about you but about the EU if that's what you mean by 'attempting to paint you as a hypocrite'. It was not aimed at you.

Other than Farage what other leavers have jumped ship - as I am unaware of who you mean?

Personally I don't agree that the Greece issue is irrelevant. It may not have been directly related to your points but was relevant to the general discussion as it pointed out the hypocrisy of the EU.

[Tom4784]

For the record, That very last sentence of my post you quoted was not about you but about the EU if that's what you mean by 'attempting to paint you as a hypocrite'. It was not aimed at you.

Other than Farage what other leavers have jumped ship - as I am unaware of who you mean?

Personally I don't agree that the Greece issue is irrelevant. It may not have been directly related to your points but was relevant to the general discussion as it pointed out the hypocrisy of the EU.

Most of the leadership of the Brexit ship have abandoned the issue now that their chance at Downing Street has come and gone. They didn't have a plan for Brexit despite pushing for it endlessly and as soon as it was time for them to step up they passed the buck for damage limitation purposes.

The EU is not perfect (never said it was) but comparisons like that only serve a purpose if they change the facts of the discussion and Greece doesn't do that which is why I don't see it as something worth discussing as it takes the focus off of why we were discussing Human Rights in the first place rather than enhancing the discussion as a whole.

[Brillopad]

It won't change because, despite what Theresa May says, we are likely going to have a soft brexit and forge a deal to remain in the Single Market and if that's the case then EU immigration isn't likely to change much and leaving the EU won't affect immigration from non-EU states thus my statement that immigration will not be affected by Brexit, thus voting for Brexit based on immigration was pointless.

I've not stated anything that is opinion as fact, must I sign everything with 'in my opinion' despite the fact that it should be obvious? Was I wrong to assume you could tell the difference between fact and opinion?

It doesn't matter what you believe, the people voted leave so trying to influence opinions is pointless now. You and the rest of the Leave voters have got to live with your mistakes.
I'm simply stating my opinion, some facts about the UK's Human Rights abuse and my informed thoughts on those facts which is more than the 'IMMIGRANTS ARE TO BLAME FOR EVERYTHING, THEY TOOK MY DOG AND DESTROYED MY HARVEST' stance you're taking.

If she does that she will do a lot of damage to peoples' faith in the public vote and will likely be out at the next election. People did not vote for a 'soft Brexit' and this would be a complete misrepresentation of their votes. I think it would damage politics as people will lose trust in the whole system.

Some People were trying to get a second vote and may still attempt to do this out of sheer desperation which is why I put isn't/was in case you were one of those.

And yes clearly immigration has had a considerable effect on various issues currently faced in Britain and on the Brexit vote. All the denial in the world will not change that.

[Tom4784]

If she does that she will do a lot of damage to peoples' faith in the public vote and will likely be out at the next election. People did not vote for a 'soft Brexit' and this would be a complete misrepresentation of their votes. I think it would damage politics as people will lose trust in the whole system.

Some People were trying to get a second vote and may still attempt to do this out of sheer desperation which is why I put isn't/was in case you were one of those.

And yes clearly immigration has had a considerable effect on various issues currently faced in Britain and on the Brexit vote. All the denial in the world will not change that.

I doubt she cares about a second term since it's not likely that anyone could tackle Brexit and reach a deal that satisfies enough people to stay in office. There's a reason why Downing Street was considered a poisoned chalice after Cameron left. As Brexit proved, people are ultimately controlled through their fears so their 'faith' is pointless, just mention a few buzzwords about immigrants and you'll have them back onside again so I doubt any of the realists in the government care about upsetting anyone like that.

No, I believe people should live and (hopefully) learn from their mistakes. A second referendum is dumb. The bed has been made and now people have to lie in it.

Immigration was a key motivation for people voting Brexit but that won't translate into action. Immigration won't be majorly affected even if we don't stay in the Single Market, never mind if we do.

[Kizzy]

It was arrogance, Cameron and Osborne didn't think they could lose.

For 30 years politicians had been avoiding letting public vote on anything EU related because they were afraid the public would vote against. I think so much time has passed without giving us any say that Cameron either forgot that or thought we'd just vote remain because we were so used to being in. He seriously miscalculated.

I disagree I think it was a double bluff, besides how could the PM and the secretary of state of a European country be seen to personally back brexit?
It would've annihilated European confidence in the UK whichever way the vote went.

[Brillopad]

I doubt she cares about a second term since it's not likely that anyone could tackle Brexit and reach a deal that satisfies enough people to stay in office. There's a reason why Downing Street was considered a poisoned chalice after Cameron left. As Brexit proved, people are ultimately controlled through their fears so their 'faith' is pointless, just mention a few buzzwords about immigrants and you'll have them back onside again so I doubt any of the realists in the government care about upsetting anyone like that.

No, I believe people should live and (hopefully) learn from their mistakes. A second referendum is dumb. The bed has been made and now people have to lie in it.

Immigration was a key motivation for people voting Brexit but that won't translate into action. Immigration won't be majorly affected even if we don't stay in the Single Market, never mind if we do.

I don't think voters care whether so called 'realists' care about upsetting 'anyone like that' but if they are seen to disrespect voters/votes simply because they don't like the reasons for their vote they could be seen as unprofessional and incapable of doing their job properly if they allow their personal opinions to affect the decisions they make.

They are public servants after all and have a duty to respect a majority vote like it or not.

[Kizzy]

I don't think voters care whether so called 'realists' care about upsetting 'anyone like that' but if they are seen to disrespect voters/votes simply because they don't like the reasons for their vote they could be seen as unprofessional and incapable of doing their job properly if they allow their personal opinions to affect the decisions they make.

They are public servants after all and have a duty to respect a majority vote like it or not.

They are and as such have to respect the law also #supremecourt

[Brillopad]

They are and as such have to respect the law also #supremecourt

You sound very confident the court ruling will go in favour of the MP's getting their vote.

If this happens it will still undermine faith in British politics and the extent that sore losers will go to to get their own way and ignore the majority vote. Who knows what may happen in the future and such behaviour could turn full circle and bite them in the bum. Karma and all that!

[Tom4784]

I don't think voters care whether so called 'realists' care about upsetting 'anyone like that' but if they are seen to disrespect voters/votes simply because they don't like the reasons for their vote they could be seen as unprofessional and incapable of doing their job properly if they allow their personal opinions to affect the decisions they make.

They are public servants after all and have a duty to respect a majority vote like it or not.

There's as many people who would be happy with a soft Brexit as there are people who would want a complete Brexit. The was barely anything in it in the votes so you're basically going to alienate one half of the country or the other either way. If it was me, I'd choose to alienate the side that are easily won back by simply mentioning immigration. Let's face it, the public voted for four more years of the Tories after a horrific four years of a Tory led coalition. They have short memories.

As long as there is a Brexit, the government will have fulfilled their end regardless of whether it's a complete or soft Brexit.

Also remember that the referendum was just a choice of leaving or staying, not, if in the case of a Leave victory, whether or not we should completely break it off or go for the softer option.

[jaxie]

I disagree I think it was a double bluff, besides how could the PM and the secretary of state of a European country be seen to personally back brexit?
It would've annihilated European confidence in the UK whichever way the vote went.

Well I'll have to bow to your greater mystic Meg knowledge of the murky workings of Cameron's mind here. But if as you imply he really wanted Brexit, why did he cut and run so fast when the vote went his way?

[jaxie]

No, you couldn't say that to me because I did read it that's how I know it was Sarah Wollaston that refutes the claim by the Red Cross not 'the NHS'.

The chief executive of the British red cross reiterates their response to the humanitarian crisis here....

“The British Red Cross is on the front line, responding to the humanitarian crisis in our hospital and ambulance services across the country,” said Red Cross chief executive Mike Adamson in a statement.'

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-nhs-humanitarian-crisis-sky-interview-hospitals-red-cross-justine-greening-jeremy-hunt-a7515801.html

Well this was a quote from Professor Keith Willet from the top of the article 2 who apparently an NHS acute care specialist director. No mention of Sarah Wollaston from him. :shrug:

"Professor Keith Willett, medical director for acute care at NHS England, said he did not think the service was at the level of a humanitarian crisis, but admitted demand was at its highest level ever and staff were under "a level of pressure we haven't seen before"."

It's winter, we have a large aging population. It's not unreasonable to assume there will be greater pressures is it?

Another quote that has nothing to do with Sarah Wollaston. :shrug:

"The NHS has disputed claims from the Red Cross that there is a "humanitarian crisis" in its hospitals in England.
One of NHS England's specialist directors said he thought the service was not "at that point" of crisis, but admitted demand was higher than ever.
The Red Cross helps some hospitals with patient transport and provides care for patients who have returned home."

I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that the NHS needs more cash, it always does. But you seen to claim it was making a profit until this year in one breath, then claim it's under such strain it's a humanitarian crisis. I don't think the 'news' is really backing up the claims. I am not sure why you think the chief executive of the red cross knows more than the other people quoted.

[jaxie]

Wrong

'NHS hospitals will end the financial year in the red for the first time in eight years, according to official figures, with 26 loss-making trusts reporting a combined deficit of £456.8m.

The University Hospitals of Leicester NHS trust has run up the largest deficit: £39.8m.'


'Exclusive The joint venture between a private company and the Department of Health that processes payments to GP practices has dramatically improved its finances last year, with an 88% boost in profits.

Annual accounts seen by Pulse show that NHS Shared Business Services grew its profits from £4.2m in 2011 to £7.8m in 2012, with the organisation citing the ‘successful launch’ of a national payment system for the NHS a key driver behind the healthy balance sheet.

The growth in annual profits came on the back of a 30% rise in revenues from £62.4m to £81.1m, and after CCGs were mandated to use the company to process payments as a condition for authorisation.
The large jump in profits compares with an 11% increase in profits last year,'

http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/your-practice/practice-topics/practice-income/nhs-shared-business-services-profits-up-88/20004002.article

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/mar/20/nhs-hospitals-annual-loss-first-time-eight-years

I don't think the articles you have posted really explain themselves or the figures quoted or where they come from very well. I should also point out they are two and three years old so I'm not sure how they apply to this year.

As far as I am aware 98% of NHS funding comes from the state through taxes and national insurance. If it needs government funding I'm not sure how or where it can be seen as making a profit and making a profit on what? If it is making a profit, then surely to be a profit, that profit would be greater than the funding to be seen as a profit. Under that premise the NHS wouldn't have needed any state funding for the last however many years. :shrug: Unless when they say loss they mean that they have spent more than they were given. It's not specially clear where the profit and loss come from or goes to and how it relates to the budget given. There must be tons of departments and branches in the NHS. The article seems to relate to hospital trusts only and is about overspending of budgets rather than finishing the year (2 years ago) within the budget given.

Every year new medicines and treatments are developed, items, drugs, treatments, procedures get more expensive to do. The NHS needs large funding and this is not something that will ever change. It seems to me that the problem is finding the money and what Paul to rob to pay Peter.

[jaxie]

Most of the leadership of the Brexit ship have abandoned the issue now that their chance at Downing Street has come and gone. They didn't have a plan for Brexit despite pushing for it endlessly and as soon as it was time for them to step up they passed the buck for damage limitation purposes.

The EU is not perfect (never said it was) but comparisons like that only serve a purpose if they change the facts of the discussion and Greece doesn't do that which is why I don't see it as something worth discussing as it takes the focus off of why we were discussing Human Rights in the first place rather than enhancing the discussion as a whole.

Aren't Greeks humans with rights? :shrug:

Who has abandoned ship? Johnson is in the Foreign office, Davis is Minister for Brexit. Aren't they still there?
Gove wasn't given a job but he was a backstabber so you can understand May not wanting him sitting behind her.

[Brillopad]

There's as many people who would be happy with a soft Brexit as there are people who would want a complete Brexit. The was barely anything in it in the votes so you're basically going to alienate one half of the country or the other either way. If it was me, I'd choose to alienate the side that are easily won back by simply mentioning immigration. Let's face it, the public voted for four more years of the Tories after a horrific four years of a Tory led coalition. They have short memories.

As long as there is a Brexit, the government will have fulfilled their end regardless of whether it's a complete or soft Brexit.

Also remember that the referendum was just a choice of leaving or staying, not, if in the case of a Leave victory, whether or not we should completely break it off or go for the softer option.

There was no hard/soft option at that stage it was as you say basically in or out but the reason so many more voted for Brexit than was expected was because of immigration.

If a soft Brexit means public concerns over controlling our borders are ignored then these feelings will not just disappear and this issue will continue to cause massive problems and public disharmony. So actually they will not have fulfilled their end. There were over a million votes in it and if people feel cheated it could be a lot more votes for far-right parties next time.

I don't think people are as fickle as you think. What alternative is there to the Tories, Corben, he will ruin this country and people would rather vote for Shrek, so there is no real choice.

[Tom4784]

Aren't Greeks humans with rights? :shrug:

Who has abandoned ship? Johnson is in the Foreign office, Davis is Minister for Brexit. Aren't they still there?
Gove wasn't given a job but he was a backstabber so you can understand May not wanting him sitting behind her.

Yes they are and that's a separate issue that has nothing to do with the UK infringing on the human rights of Disabled people. Not sure how many times I have to repeat that in all honesty....

I wouldn't really count Boris as being involved with Brexit, a quick google search has revealed that his duties don't tend to coincide with helping with Brexit and a quick news search has turned up that he's pissed off an Israel representative and has met with Trump's people but little to say that he has any involvement with Brexit. It looks like he rode the wave to a comfy position and called it quits on being involved with Brexit.

Davis seems to be the only one who is actively involved with Brexit post referendum.

[jaxie]

Yes they are and that's a separate issue that has nothing to do with the UK infringing on the human rights of Disabled people. Not sure how many times I have to repeat that in all honesty....

I wouldn't really count Boris as being involved with Brexit, a quick google search has revealed that his duties don't tend to coincide with helping with Brexit and a quick news search has turned up that he's pissed off an Israel representative and has met with Trump's people but little to say that he has any involvement with Brexit. It looks like he rode the wave to a comfy position and called it quits on being involved with Brexit.

Davis seems to be the only one who is actively involved with Brexit post referendum.

I don't see asking who investigates the EU when the EU are investigating the UK as a separate issue and you can repeat yourself as often as you want to, to keep saying something doesn't necessarily make you right in your view.

Remember it's investigating not convicted of any crime.

The plight of Greece important in any EU conversation, particularly to those with a conscience.

I would have thought the foreign office a fairly important department in relation to Brexit.

[Tom4784]

There was no hard/soft option at that stage it was as you say basically in or out but the reason so many more voted for Brexit than was expected was because of immigration.

If a soft Brexit means public concerns over controlling our borders are ignored then these feelings will not just disappear and this issue will continue to cause massive problems and public disharmony. So actually they will not have fulfilled their end. There were over a million votes in it and if people feel cheated it could be a lot more votes for far-right parties next time.

I don't think people are as fickle as you think. What alternative is there to the Tories, Corben, he will ruin this country and people would rather vote for Shrek, so there is no real choice.

Dissatisfaction is nothing new for the government to deal with, if a soft brexit benefits us more than a hard one then they'll cast aside the wants of the Leave side and accept the deal.

Those people might complain but they'll forget about it by the next election, like I said before, a lot of voters have short memories. Some other issue will dominate the next elections and people will have moved on.

I doubt any far right parties will gain any ground, UKIP will flounder now it's core purpose is complete and Farage is gone and things will remain a two horse race between the Tories and Labour.

[jaxie]

Dissatisfaction is nothing new for the government to deal with, if a soft brexit benefits us more than a hard one then they'll cast aside the wants of the Leave side and accept the deal.

Those people might complain but they'll forget about it by the next election, like I said before, a lot of voters have short memories. Some other issue will dominate the next elections and people will have moved on.

I doubt any far right parties will gain any ground, UKIP will flounder now it's core purpose is complete and Farage is gone and things will remain a two horse race between the Tories and Labour.

I think you are wrong about the length of voters memories. I made up my mind in how I'd vote the day Maastricht was forced upon us.

[Brillopad]

Dissatisfaction is nothing new for the government to deal with, if a soft brexit benefits us more than a hard one then they'll cast aside the wants of the Leave side and accept the deal.

Those people might complain but they'll forget about it by the next election, like I said before, a lot of voters have short memories. Some other issue will dominate the next elections and people will have moved on.

I doubt any far right parties will gain any ground, UKIP will flounder now it's core purpose is complete and Farage is gone and things will remain a two horse race between the Tories and Labour.

I think that is more wishful thinking than anything.

They won't forget about it if we still have millions of migrants flooding Britain and stretching our services to breaking point. More terror attacks will also keeps these issues very fresh in their minds. It's madness to think these concerns will just fizzle-out.

Labour is no choice and if the Tories let people down on this I would not be at all surprised to see far right parties gaining ground. Things have never been this bad before and people have had enough - to underestimate the strength of feeling on this is foolhardy.

[Tom4784]

I don't see asking who investigates the EU when the EU are investigating the UK as a separate issue and you can repeat yourself as often as you want to, to keep saying something doesn't necessarily make you right in your view.

Remember it's investigating not convicted of any crime.

I would have thought the foreign office a fairly important department in relation to Brexit.

It's a question that doesn't change the facts, it just shifts the focus from an investigation that paints the UK in a bad but truthful light to gloss over an unpleasant story.

Boris doesn't seem to have much to do with Brexit beyond the occasional comment on it judging from the news or his Government profile. I'd suppose foreign matters stemming from Brexit are dealt with by Davis or someone in that department while Boris' deal with general Foreign issues.

[Tom4784]

I think that is more wishful thinking than anything.

They won't forget about it if we still have millions of migrants flooding Britain and stretching our services to breaking point. More terror attacks will also keeps these issues very fresh in their minds. It's madness to think these concerns will just fizzle-out.

Labour is no choice and if the Tories let people down on this I would not be at all surprised to see far right parties gaining ground. Things have never been this bad before and people have had enough - to underestimate the strength of feeling on this is foolhardy.

Someone else will just play the immigration card at the next election to fool people too ignorant to look at the facts to vote for them. Why would the politicians want to deal with immigration when it's a free buzzword to scare people into voting for them?

Immigrants aren't pushing us to our limits, they are just an easy scapegoat. If you want to know why things like the NHS are in a precarious position then look no further than the Government that wants to privatise it all. It's easy to turn immigrants into scapegoats when people look for reasons to hate them and won't question it.

[Brillopad]

Someone else will just play the immigration card at the next election to fool people too ignorant to look at the facts to vote for them. Why would the politicians want to deal with immigration when it's a free buzzword to scare people into voting for them?

Immigrants aren't pushing us to our limits, they are just an easy scapegoat. If you want to know why things like the NHS are in a precarious position then look no further than the Government that wants to privatise it all. It's easy to turn immigrants into scapegoats when people look for reasons to hate them and won't question it.

Ignorance is ignoring the obvious and just attempting to dismiss those that have a different point of view. Time will tell.

[Kizzy]

You sound very confident the court ruling will go in favour of the MP's getting their vote.

If this happens it will still undermine faith in British politics and the extent that sore losers will go to to get their own way and ignore the majority vote. Who knows what may happen in the future and such behaviour could turn full circle and bite them in the bum. Karma and all that!

I am, I don't believe in sovereign prerogative for parliament.
How will it undermine politics? Politicians make the laws... They shouldn't be seen to be flouting them that's tantamount to advocating anarchy, if rules are only made to be broken.
The sway of the vote is not the issue, it's the terms and who has a voice.

[Kizzy]

Well this was a quote from Professor Keith Willet from the top of the article 2 who apparently an NHS acute care specialist director. No mention of Sarah Wollaston from him. :shrug:

"Professor Keith Willett, medical director for acute care at NHS England, said he did not think the service was at the level of a humanitarian crisis, but admitted demand was at its highest level ever and staff were under "a level of pressure we haven't seen before"."

It's winter, we have a large aging population. It's not unreasonable to assume there will be greater pressures is it?

Another quote that has nothing to do with Sarah Wollaston. :shrug:

"The NHS has disputed claims from the Red Cross that there is a "humanitarian crisis" in its hospitals in England.
One of NHS England's specialist directors said he thought the service was not "at that point" of crisis, but admitted demand was higher than ever.
The Red Cross helps some hospitals with patient transport and provides care for patients who have returned home."

I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that the NHS needs more cash, it always does. But you seen to claim it was making a profit until this year in one breath, then claim it's under such strain it's a humanitarian crisis. I don't think the 'news' is really backing up the claims. I am not sure why you think the chief executive of the red cross knows more than the other people quoted.

I don't know why you feel one director overides those working within the NHS everyday who tell there is a crisis. It was in profit and no it isn't , what's so hard to understand about this? The profit generation branches have been privatised, leaving necessary but costly services. This is not 'news' it's happened you can see for yourself the profit and loss of the NHS over recent years.

Let's look at what Keith Willet actually said..

Prof Willett said that "on the international scale of a humanitarian crisis, I do not think the NHS is at that point".

He continued: "Clearly, demand is at the highest level ever.

"But also our planning is probably more comprehensive than it has ever been.

"In many ways this is a level of pressure we have not seen before and the workload that the NHS is being asked to shoulder in terms of medical treatment and personal care is very high.

"There are several reasons for that. This is the winter and many more people have breathing and heart problems, but we know it is also very difficult at the moment and social care and community services are not able to react fast enough to free up beds to keep up the flow through hospitals."

It may not be a crisis on an international scale.... but on a national one it is.

http://www.itv.com/news/story/2017-01-09/hunt-denies-nhs-humanitarian-crisis-claim/

[Kizzy]

I don't think the articles you have posted really explain themselves or the figures quoted or where they come from very well. I should also point out they are two and three years old so I'm not sure how they apply to this year.

As far as I am aware 98% of NHS funding comes from the state through taxes and national insurance. If it needs government funding I'm not sure how or where it can be seen as making a profit and making a profit on what? If it is making a profit, then surely to be a profit, that profit would be greater than the funding to be seen as a profit. Under that premise the NHS wouldn't have needed any state funding for the last however many years. :shrug: Unless when they say loss they mean that they have spent more than they were given. It's not specially clear where the profit and loss come from or goes to and how it relates to the budget given. There must be tons of departments and branches in the NHS. The article seems to relate to hospital trusts only and is about overspending of budgets rather than finishing the year (2 years ago) within the budget given.

Every year new medicines and treatments are developed, items, drugs, treatments, procedures get more expensive to do. The NHS needs large funding and this is not something that will ever change. It seems to me that the problem is finding the money and what Paul to rob to pay Peter.

How can I explain the drop in profit if I only post figures from this year?...

If you believe that 98% of NHS costs are met by the taxpayer then there's no point continuing a discussion with you, I have no idea how you think in any universe that was possible.

[jaxie]

How can I explain the drop in profit if I only post figures from this year?...

If you believe that 98% of NHS costs are met by the taxpayer then there's no point continuing a discussion with you, I have no idea how you think in any universe that was possible.

NHS web page told me so, (though I already knew that) who do you think funds it dipsy lala and poe?

http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/thenhs/about/Pages/overview.aspx

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Health_Service_(England)

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/nhs-in-a-nutshell/how-nhs-funded

[Kizzy]

NHS web page told me so, (though I already knew that) who do you think funds it dipsy lala and poe?

http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/thenhs/about/Pages/overview.aspx

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Health_Service_(England)

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/nhs-in-a-nutshell/how-nhs-funded

What is kingsfund... how do they know it is 98% tax funded?

The govt funds it, they have other income besides tax don't they? How could anyone say that it was taxpayer money specifically? :/

The trouble with getting your stats from 'think tanks' is who are they 'thinking' about?...
I wonder what dipsy, la-la and po would think to these kingsfund suggestions?...

The Kings Fund’s ideas include:

· Over 60s (except those on pension credit) to pay for prescriptions - £1.5bn

· Increase the qualifying age to 65 - £value unknown

· Raise the prescription charge to £10 - £100m.

· Or remove all prescription exemptions and charge £2.45 to all - £2bn

· Charge to visit the GP from £5-25 - £3 billion

· Charging to attend A&E £10 - £220 million

· Charge £10 for outpatient attendance - £800m

· Charge £10 for each day in hospital - £500m

· Charge £50 for each hospital 'procedure' - £900m

https://www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs/gary-walker/kings-fund-suggests-nhs-fees-but-is-it-really-independent

[jaxie]

What is kingsfund... how do they know it is 98% tax funded?

The govt funds it, they have other income besides tax don't they? How could anyone say that it was taxpayer money specifically? :/

The trouble with getting your stats from 'think tanks' is who are they 'thinking' about?...
I wonder what dipsy, la-la and po would think to these kingsfund suggestions?...

The Kings Fund’s ideas include:

· Over 60s (except those on pension credit) to pay for prescriptions - £1.5bn

· Increase the qualifying age to 65 - £value unknown

· Raise the prescription charge to £10 - £100m.

· Or remove all prescription exemptions and charge £2.45 to all - £2bn

· Charge to visit the GP from £5-25 - £3 billion

· Charging to attend A&E £10 - £220 million

· Charge £10 for outpatient attendance - £800m

· Charge £10 for each day in hospital - £500m

· Charge £50 for each hospital 'procedure' - £900m

https://www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs/gary-walker/kings-fund-suggests-nhs-fees-but-is-it-really-independent

If you read the NHS and wikipedia links both tell you the NHS is mostly funded through taxation. I don't know what else you want me to say, if you don't believe it I can't help that. :shrug:

The Kings Fund is an independent health care dedicated charity. They provide NHS leadership development and shape health and social care policies. They are also involved in analysis and statistics related to the health service.

Dipsy, Lala and Poe would think Kingsfund had probably used analysis and statistics to put forward the 'ideas' you'd like to disparage and probably know their stuff and have done their research on ways the NHS might save money. Whether it would ever be implemented or not is besides the point though there is some merit for paying for GP visits like you do the dentist or for A&E. I wouldn't mind paying a small fee for those things to help the NHS budget personally. And a lot of people time waste at A&E and indeed at the GP, I bet a lot of that would be cut if you had to pay ten pounds for the privilege.

[Kizzy]

How does wiki know it is funded solely via taxation as opposed to any other funding stream?

It's a think tank.
And what if you don't have £10?

[arista]

Kizzy your Labour Leader is Live on SkyNewsHD now


FREE to watch ONLINE


Also the Film you like
http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9139436#post9139436

[jaxie]

How does wiki know it is funded solely via taxation as opposed to any other funding stream?

It's a think tank.
And what if you don't have £10?

Because that is how the NHS is funded. How does the NHS know (the other link). Because that's the truth. How do you know it isn't? You refute everything I tell you but don't suggest how you think it is funded. I'm afraid I think you are arguing now just for the sake of disagreeing with me and that's kind of pointless.

Saying it's a think tank over and over is wasting your time and mine, and doesn't really make it so. It's a non profit charity.

As I said I can't see the suggestions being put into action, however, a lot of people would be willing to pay a bit more for the NHS, or £10 to visit the Dr or A&E, it's a vital service to most people. If you don't have £10 you are possibly on benefits and like the prescriptions you probably wouldn't have to pay, just like children and the elderly. All they are suggesting is a possible way to boost NHS funds in the part you pasted.

You can't moan about the NHS being in crisis and then complain about suggestions for raising additional funds for it. The money has to come from somewhere so it's raising tax or charging a small fee for some services. It really doesn't grow on trees.

I find it strange that you can take their suggestions so seriously and yet deny their statistics about NHS funding. I think you are cherry picking. :shrug:

[DemolitionRed]

You guys can get all the information you need here: http://www.nhsforsale.info/

The NHS is being starved by its government and anyone who works within the health sector knows this.

Oh and In a blog on the King’s Fund website, Appleby and Roberts also note that Hunt's claim that the government are giving the NHS in England an extra £3.8 billion this year is untrue with the true figure being just £1.8 billion. https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/blog/2016/05/how-does-this-years-nhs-budget-compare-historically

[jaxie]

You guys can get all the information you need here: http://www.nhsforsale.info/

The NHS is being starved by its government and anyone who works within the health sector knows this.

Oh and In a blog on the King’s Fund website, Appleby and Roberts also note that Hunt's claim that the government are giving the NHS in England an extra £3.8 billion this year is untrue with the true figure being just £1.8 billion. https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/blog/2016/05/how-does-this-years-nhs-budget-compare-historically

Thanks for the additional links Red. Also nice to see someone is actually reading what I've linked!

[Kizzy]

Because that is how the NHS is funded. How does the NHS know (the other link). Because that's the truth. How do you know it isn't? You refute everything I tell you but don't suggest how you think it is funded. I'm afraid I think you are arguing now just for the sake of disagreeing with me and that's kind of pointless.

Saying it's a think tank over and over is wasting your time and mine, and doesn't really make it so. It's a non profit charity.

As I said I can't see the suggestions being put into action, however, a lot of people would be willing to pay a bit more for the NHS, or £10 to visit the Dr or A&E, it's a vital service to most people. If you don't have £10 you are possibly on benefits and like the prescriptions you probably wouldn't have to pay, just like children and the elderly. All they are suggesting is a possible way to boost NHS funds in the part you pasted.

You can't moan about the NHS being in crisis and then complain about suggestions for raising additional funds for it. The money has to come from somewhere so it's raising tax or charging a small fee for some services. It really doesn't grow on trees.

I find it strange that you can take their suggestions so seriously and yet deny their statistics about NHS funding. I think you are cherry picking. :shrug:

You are not understanding what I am saying to you, I agree the NHS is centrally government funded what I am saying is of all those streams of income our govt has how can it be assured that it is tax money specifically that is used to fund the NHS?
It is a nonsense, when this govt took over the NHS was not in crisis as seen if you care to look (if the links I provided are not adequate) anywhere you will see that this is the case... and now it is in the red.
This would then mean by your logic that less people are working and paying tax to fund the NHS than there was even though we are regularly told that there are more people in work than ever before, certainly since this govt took over, so where is the funding?...where is all the lovely tax money that the NHS so desperately need?
I'm not cherry picking it's just common sense, if more people are working and something is directly funded via tax then they should have more than enough surely?....

[Kizzy]

Thanks for the additional links Red. Also nice to see someone is actually reading what I've linked!

I could say the same to you in fairness jaxie.

[jaxie]

You are not understanding what I am saying to you, I agree the NHS is centrally government funded what I am saying is of all those streams of income our govt has how can it be assured that it is tax money specifically that is used to fund the NHS?
It is a nonsense, when this govt took over the NHS was not in crisis as seen if you care to look (if the links I provided are not adequate) anywhere you will see that this is the case... and now it is in the red.
This would then mean by your logic that less people are working and paying tax to fund the NHS than there was even though we are regularly told that there are more people in work than ever before, certainly since this govt took over, so where is the funding?...where is all the lovely tax money that the NHS so desperately need?
I'm not cherry picking it's just common sense, if more people are working and something is directly funded via tax then they should have more than enough surely?....

You're not understanding what I've said to you or the links I gave you. You seem to be assuming that I have said that all our taxes pay solely for the NHS which isn't what I have said to you at all. The NHS is mostly funded by taxation but via a budget that isn't the sum total of all the countries taxation. I'm sure if you do some reading you'll get there if you want to. I'm not really here to educate you and you wouldn't believe anything I told you anyway. :shrug:

[Kizzy]

An interesting quote here, worth bearing in mind.

No society can legitimately call itself civilized if a sick person is denied medical aid because of lack of means.

Aneurin Bevan

[Kizzy]

You're not understanding what I've said to you or the links I gave you. You seem to be assuming that I have said that all our taxes pay solely for the NHS which isn't what I have said to you at all. The NHS is mostly funded by taxation but via a budget that isn't the sum total of all the countries taxation. I'm sure if you do some reading you'll get there if you want to. I'm not really here to educate you and you wouldn't believe anything I told you anyway. :shrug:

Oh I do understand, I just don't agree with anything you have stated.

[Crimson Dynamo]

what a horrible intolerant quote Kizzy

really vile

[Kizzy]

what a horrible intolerant quote Kizzy

really vile

ok