This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Spiderman Horsham 25 Jan 23 8.37pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mapletree
Simple deflection. What else do you unilaterally decide it doesn’t need? Ever worked in healthcare? Very diverse. Ever been responsible for managing such a diverse workforce? It takes effort. You keep on simply parroting the Daily Mail and the Sun. There’s a good chap. What deflection?It was an opinion about diversity officers being employed at over inflated salaries, when the NHS is underfunded, apparently. I commented about the problems BF have in trying to recoup costs, unless of course you don’t think they should? Edited by Spiderman (25 Jan 2023 8.43pm) Edited by Spiderman (25 Jan 2023 8.44pm)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Spiderman Horsham 25 Jan 23 8.38pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow
This is bloody brilliant - we are now 13 years in Tory leadership and I must have read 100s of times on here about the economy they inherited and the little note that was left and that's why they're so incapable of doing anything. I honestly don't know how some people square off their own biases. I just stated it will be a readymade excuse, are you confident Labour or their supporters will not use this excuse?
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Mapletree Croydon 25 Jan 23 11.46pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Spiderman
What deflection?It was an opinion about diversity officers being employed at over inflated salaries, when the NHS is underfunded, apparently. I commented about the problems BF have in trying to recoup costs, unless of course you don’t think they should? Edited by Spiderman (25 Jan 2023 8.43pm) Edited by Spiderman (25 Jan 2023 8.44pm) The deflection is saying the NHS is wasting money on diversity managers. It is very tricky to manage, so I can believe there is a need. But, like the right wing media, you seem to believe that because a small amount of money is spent on something you don’t understand, ergo the NHS is useless at budgeting and/or managing. The next step is then we should not give it additional funds as it would only waste them. You are fed this nonsense by people that use private health and who just want to have more money by screwing over anyone that isn’t in the same position. And that, in a nutshell, is Conservatism. Devil take the hindmost. Don’t contribute to the general good as only those that are rich are really worth bothering with. If you aren’t rich then probably you are feckless.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Mapletree Croydon 25 Jan 23 11.49pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Spiderman
What deflection?It was an opinion about diversity officers being employed at over inflated salaries, when the NHS is underfunded, apparently. I commented about the problems BF have in trying to recoup costs, unless of course you don’t think they should? Edited by Spiderman (25 Jan 2023 8.44pm) No, I’ve never worked for the Border Force. Yes, we should charge those who don’t contribute to the NHS and who don’t habitually live here. In advance except under exceptional circumstances. Yes we should collect fees for anyone from whom we didn’t recover in advance.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Teddy Eagle 26 Jan 23 12.03am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mapletree
The deflection is saying the NHS is wasting money on diversity managers. It is very tricky to manage, so I can believe there is a need. But, like the right wing media, you seem to believe that because a small amount of money is spent on something you don’t understand, ergo the NHS is useless at budgeting and/or managing. The next step is then we should not give it additional funds as it would only waste them. You are fed this nonsense by people that use private health and who just want to have more money by screwing over anyone that isn’t in the same position. And that, in a nutshell, is Conservatism. Devil take the hindmost. Don’t contribute to the general good as only those that are rich are really worth bothering with. If you aren’t rich then probably you are feckless. Not me. I'm as rich as feck.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
EverybodyDannsNow SE19 26 Jan 23 9.30am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Spiderman
I just stated it will be a readymade excuse, are you confident Labour or their supporters will not use this excuse? Of course they will, as supporters of every new government do - it's just a moot point. It's particularly amusing in the context of the current government and the length of time they have been using the line.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
The Dolphin 26 Jan 23 10.04am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Mapletree
The deflection is saying the NHS is wasting money on diversity managers. It is very tricky to manage, so I can believe there is a need. But, like the right wing media, you seem to believe that because a small amount of money is spent on something you don’t understand, ergo the NHS is useless at budgeting and/or managing. The next step is then we should not give it additional funds as it would only waste them. You are fed this nonsense by people that use private health and who just want to have more money by screwing over anyone that isn’t in the same position. And that, in a nutshell, is Conservatism. Devil take the hindmost. Don’t contribute to the general good as only those that are rich are really worth bothering with. If you aren’t rich then probably you are feckless. Maple - are you saying that you think that the billions of pounds the NHS is given is spent wisely by them?
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Badger11 Beckenham 26 Jan 23 12.29pm | |
---|---|
I hope we can all agree that this is just plain crazy and what the NHS management need to address ByLaura Donnelly, HEALTH EDITOR
One more point |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Badger11 Beckenham 26 Jan 23 12.35pm | |
---|---|
To add to my above post last night I called 999 for my neighbour who yet again had fallen over. I have done this many times before. She was not in serious danger and the ambulance turned up in about 30 minutes which considering she was not critical was pretty good. 2 lovely female ambulance staff sorted her out and were there about 2 hours. Apart from when they both lifted her off the floor (she is very frail) one of the staff spent most of the time on a tablet filling in forms. No criticism of the staff but she was complaining about the amount of paperwork she had to do. They do a great job and some paperwork has to be done but Jesus that would have driven me up the wall, join the Ambulance service and make a difference (by filling in bleedin forms). As Churchill said to the armament manufacturers during WWII "Give us the tools and we'll finish the job".
One more point |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Spiderman Horsham 26 Jan 23 12.44pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
To add to my above post last night I called 999 for my neighbour who yet again had fallen over. I have done this many times before. She was not in serious danger and the ambulance turned up in about 30 minutes which considering she was not critical was pretty good. 2 lovely female ambulance staff sorted her out and were there about 2 hours. Apart from when they both lifted her off the floor (she is very frail) one of the staff spent most of the time on a tablet filling in forms. No criticism of the staff but she was complaining about the amount of paperwork she had to do. They do a great job and some paperwork has to be done but Jesus that would have driven me up the wall, join the Ambulance service and make a difference (by filling in bleedin forms). As Churchill said to the armament manufacturers during WWII "Give us the tools and we'll finish the job". Having to do ridiculous amount of paperwork, which deflects from actually doing the job, seems to be rife in the Oubkic Sector
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Mapletree Croydon 26 Jan 23 1.21pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by The Dolphin
Maple - are you saying that you think that the billions of pounds the NHS is given is spent wisely by them? No organisation gets every investment decision right every time. Any organisation dependent upon recent Government whims is worse off than most. A big issue is that pre-emptive investment can't be made due to lack of Government, not NHS, foresight. As a result we do little to address the root causes of poor health and we are unable to put in longer term investments. As an example, we were promised 40 new hospitals by the Government. Since then the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) sent out guidance to NHS trusts on "key media lines" to use when responding to questions about the pledge. It defined a "new" hospital in three ways: A whole new hospital on a new site or current NHS land It said there was a variety of schemes but they "must always be referred to as a new hospital". And even then, when the definition has been reduced to one new clinical building, since the 2019 promise 5 new hospitals have been started, 12 new wings and 9 rebuilds. So not much more than half what we were promised. We should note that the NHS is not responsible for Public Health initiatives. They fall to The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) and The Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID). Another way to look at this is that we spend US$5,387 per capita on health in the UK. We are outspent by most developed economies (Ireland for example) and the US spends $12,318. As I am sure you know, we are viewed variously as 10th or 13th worldwide for our health outcomes (the scandinavians tend to be best) and the US around 18th. Yet when I worked for United Health (largest US health insurer and operator) they were totally convinced that at some point they would be given a big slice of the NHS to run. I myself was responsible for supporting a decent sized chunk in Lincolnshire for them. So how about you rethink your 'opinion' in the light of the above facts?
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Mapletree Croydon 26 Jan 23 1.27pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Spiderman
Having to do ridiculous amount of paperwork, which deflects from actually doing the job, seems to be rife in the Oubkic Sector It is rife in any healthcare setting, because getting stuff right is a matter of life or death. For example everyone in a care home should have a care plan, medicines management is critical, CQC requires data and judges sites upon it etc. Do you really think the private sector has less? If so, in my experience you would be wrong. And by the way, I have run two private hospitals and loads of care homes. Furthermore, the alternative to a centrally run system which requires data to operate is a privately run system which... requires data to operate. From Reuters Over one third of all healthcare costs in the U.S. were due to insurance company overhead and provider time spent on billing, versus about 17% spent on administration in Canada, researchers reported in Annals of Internal Medicine. Cutting U.S. administrative costs to the $550 per capita (in 2017 U.S. dollars) level seen in Canada could save more than $600 billion, the researchers say. Edited by Mapletree (26 Jan 2023 1.30pm) As a matter of interest, according to The Kings Fund, best estimates suggest that the NHS spends roughly £8 billion of its £100 billion budget on management and administration. Edited by Mapletree (26 Jan 2023 2.53pm) Edited by Mapletree (26 Jan 2023 2.55pm)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.