It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

More loss of health services in UK because too many people

page: 4
23
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 10:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Revolution9

originally posted by: Nexttimemaybe
They are just dropping prescribing over the counter drugs unless that person cannot afford them.

For example certain pain killers cost less than one pound. But when prescribed they cost the nhs 9 pounds or whatever the prescription charge is now.

Makes complete sense.



No, they are doing a lot more than that. You are LYING and misrepresenting what the newspaper article says and what the government says. Go and read the opening post and deal with this intellectually instead of blindly.



I watched a debate about it this morning. I'm fully educated in the matter thanks.

Continue with your ridiculous ranting.




posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 10:23 AM
link   
It is not ridiculous ranting. It is "majority decision making".

Remember, the majority of people now think this way and they were right to worry and to try for something that could meet their needs better.

You are being intellectually thuggish. If you check what is being rationed it includes gluten free products. That means poor people will become ill just for not starving.

The food prices are so ridiculous now I am skinny because of it.

I hope that is cool for you because it isn't cool for me.


edit on 28-3-2017 by Revolution9 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 10:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: uncommitted
a reply to: Revolution9

And you don't think with the now ready availability of gluten free food at costs less than a prescription that the tax payer shouldn't be funding the provision of it on the NHS? What about sun tan cream?

Or is this just a thread to say how much you hate foreigners, especially if they are 'non-white'?


You are being abusive. Please


I don't hate foreigners. I told you I am half foreign myself in blood.

I am concerned with resources and opportunities versus population. That is what the government has told me today in an official statement as to why the are making certain cuts that will heavily impact the health and welfare of particularly poor people with a health condition. If you accuse m of racism then you must accuse the government also.

It is a simple question of mathematics and common sense. Most British people now see this, do you see? MOST!


edit on 28-3-2017 by Revolution9 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 10:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nexttimemaybe

originally posted by: Revolution9

originally posted by: Nexttimemaybe
They are just dropping prescribing over the counter drugs unless that person cannot afford them.

For example certain pain killers cost less than one pound. But when prescribed they cost the nhs 9 pounds or whatever the prescription charge is now.

Makes complete sense.



No, they are doing a lot more than that. You are LYING and misrepresenting what the newspaper article says and what the government says. Go and read the opening post and deal with this intellectually instead of blindly.



I watched a debate about it this morning. I'm fully educated in the matter thanks.

Continue with your ridiculous ranting.


I have done a lot more than watch a debate about it. I have had to SUFFER it since 2006.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Revolution9

It's just a rant with you isn't it? If you don't hate foreigners than why on Earth use a Telegraph article that is not only wrong (the proposed removal of some items from being available via prescription is currently just that - a proposal) and outright suggesting that the issue is 'non white' foreigners?

Go on, enlighten me, or are you just going to keep up with your me me me rant?



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: uncommitted
a reply to: Revolution9

It's just a rant with you isn't it? If you don't hate foreigners than why on Earth use a Telegraph article that is not only wrong (the proposed removal of some items from being available via prescription is currently just that - a proposal) and outright suggesting that the issue is 'non white' foreigners?

Go on, enlighten me, or are you just going to keep up with your me me me rant?


The Telegraph is my morning paper right now.

I am expressing my concerns about my access to health care because it is being rationed. The government have officially stated why that is so. I believe they are telling me the truth.

That is all.

I don't want to communicate with you any longer. I have made my point and the thread has served its purpose as far as I am concerned.

I'm flushing it down the loo now as I move on to other things. Hey, down there...it's coming your way.

Ciao. I'll see you on the other side of hell on earth!



edit on 28-3-2017 by Revolution9 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 10:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Revolution9

originally posted by: uncommitted
a reply to: Revolution9

It's just a rant with you isn't it? If you don't hate foreigners than why on Earth use a Telegraph article that is not only wrong (the proposed removal of some items from being available via prescription is currently just that - a proposal) and outright suggesting that the issue is 'non white' foreigners?

Go on, enlighten me, or are you just going to keep up with your me me me rant?


The Telegraph is my morning paper right now.

I am expressing my concerns about my access to health care because it is being rationed. The government have officially stated why that is so. I believe they are telling me the truth.

That is all.

I don't want to communicate with you any longer. I have made my point and the thread has served its purpose as far as I am concerned.

I'm flushing it down the loo now as I move on to other things. Hey, down there...it's coming your way.

Ciao. I'll see you on the other side of hell on earth!




If you want to read newspapers like the Telegraph then you will always feel like you are in a hell on earth - that's your choice. You are just ranting with no actual basis and then acting like a child when challenged.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Revolution9

originally posted by: ScepticScot
The UK has never been in the schengen area. How does anyone pursuit of it affect you?


Are you joking?

Don't even think about sliding out of my fury that way.

The EU sets quotas and decides what immigrants go where. Brussels decides how many the Uk should take and the UK takes them or finds its ass in the courts and fined for it.

www.telegraph.co.uk...


Britain will be 'forced' by Brussels to accept Mediterranean migrants The plan, driven by Jean-Claude Juncker, head of the European Commission, is “practically seen as a declaration of war”, senior EU official says


This is largely the reason why we pulled out of the EU. You can't fool the people that LESS resources can provide for MORE people.

In the UK we were put under the burden of austerity and in the next breath dictated to that we must accept millions more refugees, however many Brussels decides we should take, to our utter detriment socially, opportunity and resources wise. That is what the newspapers told us and so we voted on that information and made our decision.

Even a number idiot like me can do that sum, Boss!

It is like saying here is a fish. It is is a smaller fish than we ate yesterday and there are more people who will be eating the fish, but you will actually be eating as much if not more.

Eat your fishy heart out, George Orwell. Doublespeaking forked tongued serpents jump for joy like jack in the box!


Pointing out a fact is sliding out of your fury??

Please explain what impact you believe the schengen area has had on the NHS?



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

You pay taxes all your working life only to be told there is no money to look after everyone!!!!!

Yeah and it makes old folk like me bitter. Rightly or wrongly, it causes contention.

I am still fighting with Social Security over a decrease in my payments, and it did not help one bit that in the next booth I could hear a State paid translator, helping someone newly arrived in the country, that did not speak English, get benefits.

When I asked the clerk where the money was coming from to give to those newly arrived in our country. She sheepishly replied, from all of our paychecks.

When I asked her why she thought it was okay to take money from me that I have paid into the system, and give it to someone that has not, her response was, “I don't make the rules, I just follow them".

So yes, you will pay until your dying day, and then some.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 04:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Revolution9

So that big BREXIT win didn't improve the finances of Britain and its citizens? I thought that enhanced prosperity was one of the benefits of breaking away from the European Union.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 04:21 PM
link   
The fact people immediately blame immigrants or even the old (ageing population etc) is sad and dis-heartening. You would really believe people would be able to speak out against a government that refuses to care for its own people, instead all people do is echo the divisive messages of the media.

Between 2000 and 2009 spending on the NHS from 6.6% of GDP to 8.8%, which was still lower than the 10.1% EU average, but getting nearer...


Since then, however, the gap has started to widen (particularly against countries that weathered the global financial crisis better than the UK) and looks set to grow further. UK GDP is forecast to grow in real terms by around 15.2 per cent between 2014/15 and 2020/21. But on current plans[2], UK public spending on the NHS will grow by much less: 5.2 per cent. This is equivalent to around £7 billion in real terms – increasing from £135 billion in 2014/15 to £142 billion in 2020/21. As a proportion of GDP it will fall to 6.6 per cent compared to 7.3 per cent in 2014/15. But, if spending kept pace with growth in the economy, by 2020/21 the UK NHS would be spending around £158 billion at today's prices – £16 billion more than planned.

The growing gap between us and our European neighbours should give pause for thought. Tony Blair’s commitment was partly an appeal to ‘keeping up with the Schmidts and Lefebvres’. But it also emphasised that spending more on health care was affordable: if the Danes, Swedes, French and Germans can spend more on health care without apparently bankrupting the rest of their economy, why can’t we?


The answer is easy, the current government aren't interested. Jeremy Hunt wrote a book on privatising the NHS, and that process is underway already. Yet the country continues to vote for them.

Link



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 03:41 AM
link   
a reply to: uncommitted

We need to stop referring to Blairs New Labour, and the Labour Party, as being the same thing.

They are not. One is Red Tories, the other is genuine Labour.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 03:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Revolution9

So that big BREXIT win didn't improve the finances of Britain and its citizens? I thought that enhanced prosperity was one of the benefits of breaking away from the European Union.


Hmm, lovely bit of remoaner subterfuge here. Or maybe the only people who are pro EU are those that lack the smallest understanding of anything?



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 08:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: uncommitted

We need to stop referring to Blairs New Labour, and the Labour Party, as being the same thing.

They are not. One is Red Tories, the other is genuine Labour.


Indeed, and it was Labour under Jim Callaghan that was under threat of a nurses strike at the time of the general election from which Thatcher came into power.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 08:36 AM
link   
a reply to: uncommitted

And clearly, if he had been doing his job right, nurses and doctors and so on, would have had no reason to strike, because money from less socially relevant sectors of governance should have been reallocated. His failures are not in question here, having as they do, nothing to do with this period in history.

Put simply, there is a massive difference between a Tory government screwing the civil service and the medical profession, which they have ALWAYS done, and a Labour government just simply dropping the ball on a trade union matter occasionally, and in a manner out of character with their normal behaviour. A massive difference.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 08:40 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

It is self-medication. This entire country is being crushed by the outrageous crap going on every day, the insecurity, the slow-mo demise of civil society. And Ryan wanted to cut Mental Health Care and addiction treatment with his replacement bill.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 09:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: uncommitted

And clearly, if he had been doing his job right, nurses and doctors and so on, would have had no reason to strike, because money from less socially relevant sectors of governance should have been reallocated. His failures are not in question here, having as they do, nothing to do with this period in history.

Put simply, there is a massive difference between a Tory government screwing the civil service and the medical profession, which they have ALWAYS done, and a Labour government just simply dropping the ball on a trade union matter occasionally, and in a manner out of character with their normal behaviour. A massive difference.


Hmmm, an interesting reposte, if Callaghans actions are not appropriate then why are your comments about Thatcher?



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 09:19 AM
link   
a reply to: uncommitted

Because Thatcher and Theresa May have precisely the same private devotion behind their actions. In principle, they believe in gutting the workers and the poor, denuding them of the right to challenge the actions of the wealthy, denying them access to legal representation, denying them the right to access gainful employment, and supporting the right of businesses to SCREW their employees while making profits that they have not bloody well earned, while destroying any public service they can lay their hands on, again at the expense of the vulnerable, the sick, the poor, the unemployed and anyone else who seems even remotely weak.

In short, their principles are in unison, in that they both created or helped create circumstances where the people were weakened, then began to prey on them like animals.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:20 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

You are of course entitled to your view.

What about the point of the OP which was about a proposal (not something that has actually happened which the link from the Telegraph claimed) that some items today available for prescription should no longer be as the off the shelf cost for such items (I give you gluten free bread as an example) is far lower than not only the prescription, but the cost to the NHS of procuring and storing said items?

Personally I think it's a no brainer but then again I may be someone who likes to prey on people like animals.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: uncommitted

Might be far lower than prescription but remember many people are excempt from prescription charges.

I can see both arguments but it is unarguable that we will be making people pay for stuff they previously got as a health treatment from the NHS.




top topics



 
23
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join