Hockey_saint

If you consider the gdp percentage spent on healthcare BEFORE that Labour government got in to what it spent creating the system as opposed to essentially keeping the status quo (which is essentially what this government have done....aside from a costly and unneeded reorganisation...which has cost far far too much or the dispute with doctors they also currently have concerning 7-day week contracts) then nope, I wouldn't consider them socialists.

Shocking I know, but in this spirit of "we're not all a bunch of cvnts" I thought I'd contribute ;p

Since the Labour party until the 70's called each other "comrade" in party meetings, then I'd say yes, they were pretty darn socialist. The NHS itself is a pretty socialistic ideal.

Yes, you are right Colinjb. Please forgive me, I do get a bit OTT on this.

The ones who created the NHS were pretty darn good.

You should also remember the many examples where those that have, have lorded it over those that have not and the resultant effects. Let them eat cake eh? If people really are so bad, why bother living in a world like this after all? People act like socialism or being of the left is a bad word, well after another decade of these lovely fellas and their mates, privatising everything, removing the assistance from the poor and the needy and people still being taxed to the hilt and prices sky rocketing as well as the conservatives doing their usual and fighting amongst themselves....then trust me, people will return to the left.

I just saw this and thought "what a great speech" but either way, perhaps she's right, perhaps the SNP are only the Labours supporters up north disgusted with their veer to the right. I suppose if you consider there were Tory leaders lefter than labour are now, perhaps she's correct. Either way, I'd prefer to think that most people are inherently good and not heartless b$stards who'd sell their own mothers down the river if she cost them some tax pennies. In any case, if you want my honest opinion , I think that if you are not well-off or a sociopath and voted for these heartless buffoons you may be lacking a few things. https://fbstatic-a.akamaihd.net/rsrc.php/v2/y4/r/-PAXP-deijE.gif

That sounds like a very cynical view of what human nature is!

But should people who are actually ill really pay the price for those that are not? shouldn't the system be fairer than that? My point was really that if you are going to create a system to judge these things, do it correctly and don't shirk by paying peanuts to monkeys because you want to save some money in the name of austerity. I should say that I don't really have many views on tax credits though but again, it's more for me about doing a correct job.

I think old Tarzan Hessletine put it best when he said that British industry cannot compete now and it wouldn't matter what government were in as to compete with places like India and China, we'd need robots and not people. You know, I never actually liked him as a politician but I really wish today's Conservatives would listen to his moderate views than the woman he ousted. It just seems to me both parties are currently going around in a circle (and to veer a bit off course) I thought on news night yesterday when the tory MP said the conservatives had viable alternatives to David Cameron in George Osbourne and Boris Johnnson.....well, I thought she'd smoked something (Although I do see Boris about as left as Heath...which is more than Blair ever was).

I'll put it like this: people make mistakes but I would prefer someone who has trained for years and years and is in the system to judge me than someone who has about as much medical knowledge as I who is pushing a few buttons. Coventry is in the midlands and you know as well as I that the north tend to be more of a tradional labour stamping ground. People don't forget the way industry was slaughtered up there; it's not something most of us down south where, aside from shipping have we had much experience with...that's only a guess but I'll be honest, I think a lot of people would rather turn from labour to UKIP than to the tories. Also, way to go on the left wing generalisation there!......Also, remember, "fair" is a very subjective word.

How's it being funded better than before? Labour ineffectively threw a lot more money at it than the current government have and not a lot changed but again; it's the way in which you target areas of the NHS I suppose, like I said before instead of just throwing one solution at it. Also, they may have spent a lot on the NHS....But a lot of that has gone on this MASSIVE and unneeded restructuring job and a god-awful IT system that is not fit for purpose and not actually patients. Waiting times are up and shortages are abound. I'll give you one example actually, my nan, who's 85 and suffers from alzhiemers and is cared for by my 90 year old grandad had a fall in her upstairs bathroom the other week and obviously my grandad couldn't help much and they called an ambulance....any idea how long that ambulance took? 6 hours to arrive which is frankly disgusting.

I think the best solution would have been to actually trust the highly paid GP's to provide an accurate view on disabled people's needs and not rely on a checkbox system with untrained staff simply because they're cheap. Politicians are like the sith; they're either right or wrong; there is no middle ground. To answer the question about if I think the tories would like to get rid of the NHS...well, it's a facit of big government and they've got some lovely friends in charge of private medical companies willing to offer them places on their boards so yes, of course they would. Either way; I think every case needs to be taken into consideration and the problem is that this costs when it's cheaper to lump loads of people into one group and chuck one solution at them so that's what's happening.

Arbeit macht frei eh? No, not at all. It's how you judge these things I suppose. You should understand that taking an all-encompassing view that everyone should not be dependent on the state is also a noble one but unfortunately it is not realistic. You have to understand that there are people in this society that will need help for the rest of their lives and just throw them essentially out on the street and say "hey, we're all in this together" is pretty bad. The problem with such cuts is the use of a sledgehammer to crush a peanut. You can say "ooooh but the actual sick will be ok" but they wont and they haven't been so please, I just think a more tactful approach is needed other than hiring some French IT contractor to shave a certain figure off the benefit bill is wrong whilst you allow your media friends to publish how they're all pulling a sicky.

If the right-wing press can do as good a job at suggesting to the British public that the NHS is unsustainable and that we should, step-by-step sleepwalk into a privatised health care system as they have making everyone think that people on benefites are scroungers then hell yes, they'd jump at the chance. Fist bumping when celebrating removing people's working tax credits is an excellent example of the lovely people we have in government today.

Did I say they didn't want to destroy it? If they could, they probably would. How can caring for your fellow man be outdated Lord Duckhunter? Because that's what socialism is and if what you are saying is true, that we've all turned into a bunch of "me first sod the other guy" capitalists then sod it, why bother existing at all? Why don't we all just give our freedom back to the rich landowners and have a feudal society again? And I mean, as JohnBoy says up there, we all know that essentially Jesus Christ was a socialist, but please stop invoking him.

I would suggest that I am speculating that it's something that is diametrically opposed to their very idea of a low tax, low government intervention state. So I would suggest they are uneasy with it and the only reason they keep it alive is because the public would go mad if they did what UKIP suggested and create an insurance-based system. Also, Jack Frost, the reason large numbers of labour supporters abstained (because I do not believe the figures support such a wholesale move to a party diametrically opposed to what most believe in) is because currently labour are a sham as the right-wing media have turned being left into something intrinsically evil (which it isn't) so they are scrambling to the middle ground and have essentially become a tory-light party.

And? Something offend your right wing sensibilities there or do you dislike reality?

Since they did put in countless official objections to it's very creation it's not a myth. But I think you'll find it comes back to popularism. Creaping privatisation of services is happening all the time; they wouldn't dare just flat out kill it as that would be incredibly unpopular indeed (it's been their view to go with the populace but slowly, bring in their "market forces idea") and if you think they love the NHS and want to keep it, you are very deluded. Just don't ever think that a party who object to spending their tax-payers money on thing like the sick, the poor and the needy are in any way champions or founders of such a system as you would be wrong.

Those examples are good ones of an over-arching nanny state hitting the poverty problem with a huge and uneeded "welfare mallet" but on the other hand, you'd probably not know as your views suggest you are unaware that similarly a "lets kick all these shirkers mallet" is essentially doing similar in the name of austerity. A lot of people need help and are not dole-bludgers, dont have massive Sky TVs or appear on the Jeremy Kyle show but they are going to be hit by this just like those that are. A lot of people struggle in this country and are not the stereotype the right wing papers would want you to believe just maybe people should think about these things before they shoot off on how everyone on the dole or on a low wage is like a Jeremy Kyle guest because they are not. It just seems to me that the government have taken this popularist view and ran with it.

The problem is the TUC source is perhaps a little biased. Our lives are evidently wealthier than most third world countries but a lot of these cuts are quite disproportionate sadly. Really, that gif of IDS is really quite bad, who'd fist bump these kinds of cuts? does the man not have any sense?

So you think the number of poor and disabled people have "downsized" in the UK What's the point in arguing? Conservatives have a nice little lead (it'll go when they start the infighting...they always do) and labour are a shambles. All the while a great many people are going to be worse off under this budget. Tax credits were not the solution but this isn't a living wage but then just please realise that the future will not be as rosey as a lot of you blue noses on here seem to think it will be for you.

Lord Duckhunter, you have your opinions but you know, us lefties do get a bit upset with the desctruction of the welfare state, the national health service and generally a safety net incase, you know, the worst happens and you get sick and can't work.

That is the most horrific video I've seen in years. Let's all cheer taking shedloads of money from the working class! Either way, you get the government you vote for...So, you know, never mind I don't think there's any way back from this.

Sounds about right to be fair. I just look at the streets of places like Shirley Warren and think "this can't be helping the lower end". It is very much like the Mexican situation in the US I suppose. Unfortunately, articles like this (In the Guardian!) don't help: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/02/poles-dont-want-immigrants-they-dont-understand-them-dont-like-them