Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
The UK has done nothing to address the fact that energy bills are loaded between 17% and 28% with levies
I’ve long been of the opinion that were the “green levy” amounts charged explicitly itemised and stated on domestic energy bills, there may be rather less support for those policies.
 
I agree. But any politician who does what is required to 'sort' the NHS , or even threatens to properly sort out the NHS will suffer the same fate as any politician in the USA who advocates 100% gun control.

We all know gun ownership in the USA is completely out of control just as (in my opinion) how the people running the NHS are out of control. But who is brave enough to get the job done .

I actually take exception to when Boris and co say we must do all we can to save 'our' NHS ...It's not mine Boris ...it's yours . Sort it out.
 
just as (in my opinion) how the people running the NHS are out of control. But who is brave enough to get the job done .
I suspect that the only chance would be for a cross-party commission to be set up with responsibility to undertake root and branch reform.

But the chance of that happening is about as good as a snowball's chance of survival in Hell, as there’s too much political capital to be made from arguing that any reform would “destroy the NHS”.
 
I think the elephant in the room should be addressed properly. That being that ever adult in the country be they employed, retired or on benefits do not pay enough towards a system everyone demands.
Personally I’d like to see everyone pay 50p-£1 per week for every £10k a year they earn. Not a lot of money individually but a massive contribution to the NHS.
The idea we can provide a world class health system for free is madness
 
I think the elephant in the room should be addressed properly. That being that ever adult in the country be they employed, retired or on benefits do not pay enough towards a system everyone demands.
Personally I’d like to see everyone pay 50p-£1 per week for every £10k a year they earn. Not a lot of money individually but a massive contribution to the NHS.
The idea we can provide a world class health system for free is madness
As I understand it the NHS is well funded but poorly managed.
 
Perhaps we get the NHS we deserve-- by that I mean the gradual ascendancy over the years of the politics of self [ an introspection encouraged by social media] as opposed to the politics of society in general. Of course self-preservation is an integral part of the human psyche, but in an increasingly complex interdependant society if that instinct becomes too dominant it can ultimately become self destructive. The decline of the NHS reflects the gradual erosion of altruism on both sides of the political spectrum and society in general.
 
The idea we can provide a world class health system for free is madness

The NHS is world class.

We tend to forget that systems in other developed countries don't necessarily deliver. We tend to cherry pick what we see as the good bits of other systems rather than hearing about some of the issues.

Where the UK is changing is that the NHS has been parameterised to an ever greater degree. This actually means that in some ways it is better managed - butb it also means that in some respects it's also more like an IT support system with first/second/third tier support where you can get trapped by the call centre scripts never getting to the solution you need.
 
The NHS is world class.
There are undoubtedly things that the NHS is good at in comparison to healthcare in other developed countries, such as providing good financial protection to the public against the consequences of ill health and at managing some long-term conditions and we should recognise that, but compared to other wealthy countries it consistently performs poorly in terms of illnesses directly causing death - which we should also recognise.

Of the top 12 lethal diseases its relative performance is poor for 8 of them: Breast cancer, Colorectal cancer, Lung cancer, Pancreatic cancer, Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Lower respiratory tract infection*, Stroke and Heart attack.

So unless you're unfortunate enough to contract one of the most commonly lethal diseases maybe it is world class, but if you do then your chances of survival are better in almost every other wealthy country. Hardly a ringing endorsement.

*As an aside, bearing in mind that the ongoing pandemic illness that we cannot mention is a lower respiratory tract infection, maybe the NHS's historic poor relative performance in keeping people alive with that type of illness has had a bearing on mortality rates in the UK over the last couple of years?
 
The NHS is world class.

We tend to forget that systems in other developed countries don't necessarily deliver. We tend to cherry pick what we see as the good bits of other systems rather than hearing about some of the issues.

Where the UK is changing is that the NHS has been parameterised to an ever greater degree. This actually means that in some ways it is better managed - butb it also means that in some respects it's also more like an IT support system with first/second/third tier support where you can get trapped by the call centre scripts never getting to the solution you need.

I used to think the HHS was world class. Then we moved to France.

O.K. it was expensive until we reached retirement age and we have a top-up insurance for Mrs Swotty as she is the one who tends to need hospital appointments. My diabetes treatment is covered by the state 100%.

To us, it's an over-complicated system whereby you pay and then are reimbursed. They have now introduced a similar system in A&E. The French love bureaucracy but, if you strip that away, they have a pay and reimbursement system. The level of reimbursement ranges from around 20% up to 100%.

Hospital care is second-to-none. They are also spotless. GPs do not seems as widely trained as in the UK and the French are reknowned hypochondriacs.

Based on this experience of over 14 years now, the problem with the NHS model is the fundamental "free at the point of care" mantra. Fine for the 1940s but not fit for purpose 3/4 of a century later.

Paying up front for treatment (e.g. €26 to see a GP) will concentrate the mind as to whether it is really necessary. There can be safeguards for people on low incomes.

I saw a report several months ago about A&E serviced being overrun in places like Tower Hamlets. Apparently, people who are not registered with a GP (for whatever reason) go to A&E for all their medical needs.

The free system is broken ... but God knows how to change that to a pay and reclaim on.
 
I used to think the HHS was world class. Then we moved to France.

O.K. it was expensive until we reached retirement age and we have a top-up insurance for Mrs Swotty as she is the one who tends to need hospital appointments. My diabetes treatment is covered by the state 100%.

To us, it's an over-complicated system whereby you pay and then are reimbursed. They have now introduced a similar system in A&E. The French love bureaucracy but, if you strip that away, they have a pay and reimbursement system. The level of reimbursement ranges from around 20% up to 100%.

Hospital care is second-to-none. They are also spotless. GPs do not seems as widely trained as in the UK and the French are reknowned hypochondriacs.

Based on this experience of over 14 years now, the problem with the NHS model is the fundamental "free at the point of care" mantra. Fine for the 1940s but not fit for purpose 3/4 of a century later.

Paying up front for treatment (e.g. €26 to see a GP) will concentrate the mind as to whether it is really necessary. There can be safeguards for people on low incomes.

I saw a report several months ago about A&E serviced being overrun in places like Tower Hamlets. Apparently, people who are not registered with a GP (for whatever reason) go to A&E for all their medical needs.

The free system is broken ... but God knows how to change that to a pay and reclaim on.
Rightly said, in the 21st century and with our constantly burgeoning population, having to operate a ‘free at the point of care‘ system is staggeringly difficult, if not impossible to manage or sustain. It is astonishing to me that it is still operating as well as it does today.
 
Rightly said, in the 21st century and with our constantly burgeoning population, having to operate a ‘free at the point of care‘ system is staggeringly difficult, if not impossible to manage or sustain. It is astonishing to me that it is still operating as well as it does today.

It maybe requires a bit of honesty when ot comes to population numbers - rather than playing them down or not discussing.

The mass immigration since the 90s caused an uplift in the economy but behind that comes liabilities and costs.

So statements like 'spending 10% more on the NHS in real terms' don't mean an increase in real per capita services when the population increases by 10%. It means at best you are standing still.

This fundamental needs to be recognise to make progress in the way we deal with the NHS and pubic services.
 
Rightly said, in the 21st century and with our constantly burgeoning population, having to operate a ‘free at the point of care‘ system is staggeringly difficult, if not impossible to manage or sustain. It is astonishing to me that it is still operating as well as it does today.

Thanks - on reviewing the post, there are several typos. Sorry about that.

It was done before the sun was over the yardarm ... perhaps there's a lesson there! 😄
 
Returning to the question of burgeoning energy costs, the BBC have included a great graphic in this article identifying how an "average" fuel bill is broken down:

6hVNH9C.jpg


Key takeaways are that:
  1. The government takes roughly ten times as much in VAT and "Social & Environmental Schemes" as the supplier does in profit
  2. The government scoops up just over 17 pence from every pound you spend on domestic energy
 
Returning to the question of burgeoning energy costs, the BBC have included a great graphic in this article identifying how an "average" fuel bill is broken down:

6hVNH9C.jpg


Key takeaways are that:
  1. The government takes roughly ten times as much in VAT and "Social & Environmental Schemes" as the supplier does in profit
  2. The government scoops up just over 17 pence from every pound you spend on domestic energy
That ignores over 2.5 times the VAT, or nearly 7x the suppliers profits on schemes. So really the Gov't takes over 9.5 times the supplier profits.

Would the significant 'Other' represent inducements? it seems rather a lot to be written off as unimportant.

Then to make it more understandable I question the use of the typical £1,277. Demonstrating a breakdown in % would apply to all but a minimal number who might be close to that annual cost, that will be out of date soon enough anyway.
 
Well done the BBC for trying to explain a complex subject but they fall short on some aspects. It can be worse than indicated depending on the proportions of gas vs electricity that you use. For example the levy on Gas is only 2.54% but the levy on electricity is 25.48% ! Vat then applies to both fuels on top. By the way they are or were planning to more than double the gas levy.

These figures from the horses mouth as it were:

Infographic: Bills, prices and profits

Energy2.JPG

As I said earlier, Luxembourg aside we are the only country in Europe that has done nothing to provided relief by reducing these energy levies or taxes. The public aren't being made aware of this and the BBC obviously don't know either otherwise they would have raised it in the article. You also have to wonder how incompetent the Labour party are to have not raised this in the house. I hate to help out Labour but someone should tell them. How could Boris then stand up to such a fact if challenged ?

The truth will come out eventually.
 
I must say that I'm really quite envious of No10's office culture: they seem to party harder than most Spanish islands!

It does tend to explain why nothing ever seems to get done in government, though...
 
I must say that I'm really quite envious of No10's office culture: they seem to party harder than most Spanish islands!

The damage keeps building. Even the most ardent Conservative voters must be acknowledging the clear evidence that there was one rule imposed on the plebs which the elite considered themselves well above. When I think back to the first lock down I'm disgusted by some of the hard line actions of police over very minor infringements of the rules. Of course the police were only doing what they were told so I imagine they are now embarrassed and equally disgusted with their political masters. Someone should ask Boris if all the fines imposed for these infringements will now be refunded.
 
Even the most ardent Conservative voters must be acknowledging the clear evidence that there was one rule imposed on the plebs which the elite considered themselves well above.
The fundamental mistake was using the law to interfere in basic human interactions. All subsequent problems fall from that one decision.
 
The scales fell from the eyes of many following the COP and G7 get-togethers.

I put up a cartoon in the Joke section with Boris saying there is not one rule for us and one for everyone else ... there are no rules for "us" ... but it was taken down, so be careful what you say on this. 🙄
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom