Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Si1

Members
  • Posts

    45,728
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Si1

  1. you have a partial point, half the problem was generational, the tories were seeking the same marginal votes as labour at the time, and actually the period out of office was very good for the tory party, and in the end, after 15 years in the wilderness, some of them finally got the plot with Labour, I'm not sure any of them have ever got it, at any time in their history
  2. there are other opinions and indicators that suggest the opposite (not compared to the USA tho!) , as you fairly said earlier in the thread, I am sure the stats are a minefield. [edit - the liberal-to-right-wing press, even the serious stuff that cites its sources, appears to strongly disgree with your position here, particuarly with respect to how the current system will handle future demands] yes, much of what I see, as an outsider, suggests that we end up with a fudge; nevertheless, decentralisation does seem to be occurring and in the long run this strikes as an improvement
  3. that's an interesting take, I am grateful for it, your assertion that the NHS is the most efficient system in the western world is rather loaded, and even the previously quoted study does not support it very well, with rather opaque stats; i would rather see something from the formal research literature presumably in medical economics or management journals?? and as to the specifics of space-sharing, your point about staff costs is rather inspecific, the NHS would appear [from previous online debates etc] to spend more on staff than they need to, the pay scales, as have been argued quite a bit, have been rather generous in international terms, and besides, in any organisation, some of the staff costs are fixed and infrastructure related so don't linearly rise with increased resource utilisation, some will, of course; but although I do not know the specifics, I do feel that it is unlikely to be as simple as saying the biggest costs are staff therefore you should not expand resource utilisation - if it works, an internal market is all about this; in some cases you migght expect it to work, in some cases not, and it is down to the abilities of the staff body (minus, hopefully, bloated management) to promote it where it helps finally, tho I am no admirer of top down behemothian organisations, you still go on to say how efficient the NHS is despite previously criticising the amount of management - surely you can't have it both ways?
  4. 'Analysis' tho I believe your motivation is candid, which is fair play on any discussion baord, firstly I have not seen a single quoted 'fact' from you that beards any kind of analysis, and secondly I have seen no 'analysis' either from you that is worthy of the name, which is one of those little ironies on discussion boards when someone's moniker seems to bear no resemblance to their behaviour.
  5. I really enjoy these kind of posts and it goes to highlight how poor many are on both sides of the debate financial expoitation of facilities' downtime appears to be a superb efficiency drive, and surely a good reason for a market in healthcare providers so this kind of thing can be maximised, why shouldn't heathcare be a UK export? I wonder what the odds are on treatment facilities being used 24/7, time being divied out on a commercial and even export basis, all for the betterment of return on capital, much of which is originally from the taxpayer?
  6. and every paper asset may be cancelled by debt, which is where the pain lies
  7. you greedy sh*ts in the NHS squealing that you have a right to earn an unreasonably large sum of money (OK not all NHS contributors on this thread), no better than the scum in the London financial sector squealing how important they are for the country [when in the long run they're not] whilst everyone else suffers to pay for you and your entitlement
  8. that will explain the amount of experienced and able chartered engineers, lawyers and accountants earning 30k on account of the fact that some areas just don't pay so well you really do not understand the jobs market, money, economics or morals
  9. the simple fact is that he was constrained to tight public spending limits as a condition promised in order to win the 1996 General Election following the 2001 General Election win he had no such constraints and let both the deficit and the debt spiral out of control in order to feather the nests of the public sector so he could become PM FACT
  10. "However, following Labour's election victory in 2001, he lost interest in 'prudence' and let public spending get completely out of hand: this Budget - marked the beginning of the rot. Embarking on a sort of 'Rake's Progress', Brown gradually plunged Britain ever deeper into debt, and after 2005 threw caution to the wind and boosted public spending in the most irresponsible manner, saddling the nation with today's massive structural deficit." indeed, and also led to previously affable and decent public sector workers becoming the nouveaux riches and enacting Animal Farm in real life with disturbing attention to detail
  11. ANOTHER bailout? they're already recipients of a rolling bailout - however it is true that the govt will not allow such large nominal falls
  12. and if you invest intelligently elsewhere then you will also be quite rich
  13. I intuitively feel that this is true - at the same time the true final bottom may be in 20+ years time after a mini boomlet cycle between 2017 and 2035, this macro credit cycle we are experiencing now could take that long to unwind in an underlying sense
  14. comeon mate, once the scale of the credit crunch was upon us and the resolve of the PWTB to preserve some kind of macro national stability in order to preserve govt electability, did you ever really expect severe annual falls? really? you need to get real and get used to renting, like me, I'm afraid. The annual falls are going to float around the low single digits for years, whilst we have 4% inflation, and come 2017 that will be 35% off house prices, and longer term they won't go up much for a long time to come, and that's that. no fireworks. no capitulation (well there will be a stealth one). no blood on the streets.
  15. jeesus! further argument as to why there is something wrong in the system, this is ridiculous!
  16. I've met them (and the reason Analysis is not called a troll is because for all the world he comes across as genuine, I think everyone can see that)
  17. the above just goes to show how you simply do not understand management or markets the suggestion has not been made that front line staff should replace management on a one to one effort basis, you simply emphasise your own misunderstanding by saying that you think they will and if you think they can't, then ask yourself how many management decisions are required in order for you to get your car serviced, and by whom (including non managerial staff such as supervising engineers), and then you will begin to understand markets
  18. agreed, but this only serves to emphasise that the NHS in its current form is flawed, as socialism (which the NHS embodies) presumes that this human trait does not exist
  19. you would think that the UK cannot possibly turn towards other industries - at the end of the day, Saudi Arabia simply cannot swap oil for another industry, Iceland (or wherever) simply cannot swap its fisheries resources for something else; but thde UK CAN swap it's badly diversified financial brains out into engineering and commerce, in fact it must for future stability; a financial firm of course WOULD query this as they have so much to lose as an institution
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information