Nhs

[Witton Park]

Some good points there. It doesn't help that one of the most powerful lobbying groups consists of the food industry whose primary aim is to maximize profits and aren't bothered if it's at the expense of children's and adults' health, supported by swish advertising campaigns. These groups are unlikely to be challenged as they contribute funds to certain politicians and political groups (usually right-wing - listen to for example http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08n2ltq ). The present Government also has little appetite ('cuse the pun) for solving the NHS' difficulties as it's ultimate goal is to adhere ostensibly to their promise of maintaining the NHS, while also ensuring that the Service becomes the health choice of utter last resort, where only the very poor and desperate resort to it, while others are forced to take out health insurance and fund private medical provision (creating more money grabbing and controlling opportunites for the greedy 'few' £££££ ).

Don't forget the lobby groups that we have called Unions. The State sector is about all that is left for the Unions now and they cling on to it as if their whole life depends on it. They fund the Labour Party.

If we could cut out big funding of political parties by unions, business, wealthy individuals and made them survive just off membership fees then we might start to see an improvement in he quality and performance of our politicians.

[Wheeze]

Rob, your point is very important. Thats part of what I mean about a mature discussion. At the moment, we have our taxes directed to a big pot and trust the government to do the right thing with it. But in this information age, surely there is a better way. As you say, people may be willing to put an extra penny into income tax for the NHS if they KNOW that penny goes direct to NHS and not into the UK slush fund.
That information would be easy to display on a real time basis.
After all, its our money and we have a right to know how it is being spent.
I still think that the principle of universal 'free' (its not really!) healthcare needs a serious re-examination. I'm certain Aneurin would not have expected the government to fully fund nose jobs!

[Mike T]

If 1 or 2p on income tax to go to the NHS was a vote winner then surely it would have been leapt on by one of the two major parties, having been identified via their focus groups.

The hospitals and GPs do need to coordinate better. Many, if not most, of those who turn up at A+E do not need to be there, but the last thing people want is to have to wait a few days to see a doctor, or to go to their GP but then to be sent up to A+E for tests or x-rays or a second opinion. A+Es feel obliged to see all who turn up who are willing to wait, just in case they miss something. There are lots of relatively inexperienced doctors in A+E, who are slow to assess people, and order lots of tests that are not needed, then the results of those tests need to be waited for .... meanwhile really ill people in ambulances are queueing up trying to get in. Having GPs in A+E is a good approach, but there are space limitations, and GPs have their surgeries to run as well.

As to sorting out the division between health care and social care, and how the latter is paid for - good luck to the PM who grasps that nettle and expects to stay in power.

[Muddy Retriever]

If 1 or 2p on income tax to go to the NHS was a vote winner then surely it would have been leapt on by one of the two major parties, having been identified via their focus groups.

I agree with you on that point. Only the Lib Dems offered that in their manifesto and they did abysmally.

The fact is people want excellent public services but would prefer somebody else paid for it. It partly explains why Labour did much better than expected. Their £50 billion pound giveaway to be paid for by the top 5% and corporations, leaving most people unaffected was naturally wildly popular. Perhaps next time, seeing the success of this policy they will go for £100 billion and actually win!

It is only later that people will find out that nothing like this kind of money will be raised. Increasing taxes on the rich and companies leads them to change their behaviour or chasing them away completely. I am sure that soon or later we are destined to find this out the hard way. We only need to look back to the 1970's for a history lesson.

[noel]

We only need to look back to the 1970's for a history lesson.

If history teaches us anything it's that people don't learn lessons from history. Huge improvements in public spending paid for by other people? That sounds brilliant - I'll vote for that. I like the sound of a 3-day week too - presumably this is just like a really long weekend. Bring it on.

[Edit: there may be an element of sarcasm here, WP ]

[Witton Park]

If history teaches us anything it's that people don't learn lessons from history. Huge improvements in public spending paid for by other people? That sounds brilliant - I'll vote for that. I like the sound of a 3-day week too - presumably this is just like a really long weekend. Bring it on.

[Edit: there may be an element of sarcasm here, WP ]

well it's gone right over my head Noel

[Pitfall Harry]

We only need to look back to the 1970's for a history lesson.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/06/13...eral-election/

Apparently, in order to remember the 70s, you need to be in your 70s.

[Wheeze]

Great summary...but I bet it would broadly similar to pretty much every election since the 60's. Remember in 68 the universities across europe were in revolt and socialist sentiment was very high.
I remember the 70's very well but am a long way off 70 (well, 12 years is a VERY long time!!!!)
But Muddy id correct. The 'supertax' of 98% just drove those caught up in it abroad. Better to keep the wealthy here and paying a lower but collectable rate.
Mindyou, we would never have had 'Exile on Main Street' were it not for 98% tax!

[Pitfall Harry]

I'm more of a "Should 5% appear too small, be careful I don't take it all" guy myself.