The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[Sir Ralph]

53 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

What was the growth in 2023 (0.3%)? How was 2018 and 2019 (1.4%)? Very similar to Labour was it not? 

Not sure this is the victory lap you think it is, employers NI is a far bigger barrier to employment than minimum wage.

I agree the Tories economic record towards the end of their time in government was poor. They prioritised infighting and politics over the general good. They were criticised and rightly voted out as a result. I had enough of them. I thought Labour was going to improve the economy though rather than match the performance of the back end of a poor Tory government. The general decline in employment and hiring would start to suggest an unfortunate trajectory.

 

Bringing it back to the point. It appears that high unemployment, specifically youth unemployment, has been exacerbated by government policy. They often end up harming those they are trying to help. 

Edited 5 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[Farmer Saint]

12 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

I agree the Tories economic record towards the end of their time in government was poor. They prioritised infighting and politics over the general good. They were criticised and rightly voted out as a result. I had enough of them. I thought Labour was going to improve the economy though rather than match the performance of the back end of a poor Tory government. The general decline in employment and hiring would start to suggest an unfortunate trajectory

And yet the FTSE is smashing it, so large businesses are doing well (as they use technology to replace people).

I'm not sure why you thought a Labour government would necessarily improve the economy greatly - we had/have broken public services after years of managed decline from the Conservatives. You couldn't genuinely have thought they would not put more money into public services? It's a Labour government. Either way the economy has improved, just maybe not as much as you had hoped.

Who did you vote for at the last election?

[Lord Duckhunter]

15 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

People who regularly slag off Davey and Polanski suddenly agree with them when they say something they agree with.

If that a bad thing now? 
 

I presume you think they should disagree on the basis of who said it, rather than the substance. 
 

For example, someone who defends labour illegally delaying elections but would be complaining  if Tories did so. 
 

 

[Dr. Kucho]

28 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

I agree the Tories economic record towards the end of their time in government was poor. They prioritised infighting and politics over the general good. They were criticised and rightly voted out as a result. I had enough of them. I thought Labour was going to improve the economy though rather than match the performance of the back end of a poor Tory government. The general decline in employment and hiring would start to suggest an unfortunate trajectory.

 

Bringing it back to the point. It appears that high unemployment, specifically youth unemployment, has been exacerbated by government policy. They often end up harming those they are trying to help. 

Not a single party in the UK is going to improve the economy. Improving the economy means making difficult decisions and no one wants to do that because it will make them unpopular.

Improving the UK economy and living standards would mean you have to,

- Rejoin EU and admit Brexit was a failure.

- Spending billions on infrastructure 

- abolishing the NHS

And so on.

[Lord Duckhunter]

How is abolishing the NHS going to improve the economy? 

[Farmer Saint]

9 minutes ago, Dr. Kucho said:

Not a single party in the UK is going to improve the economy. Improving the economy means making difficult decisions and no one wants to do that because it will make them unpopular.

Improving the UK economy and living standards would mean you have to,

- Rejoin EU and admit Brexit was a failure.

- Spending billions on infrastructure 

- abolishing the NHS

And so on.

Not sure about abolishing the NHS improving the economy - it would obviously allow us to spend elsewhere though.

[Gloucester Saint]

48 minutes ago, Dr. Kucho said:

Not a single party in the UK is going to improve the economy. Improving the economy means making difficult decisions and no one wants to do that because it will make them unpopular.

Improving the UK economy and living standards would mean you have to,

- Rejoin EU and admit Brexit was a failure.

- Spending billions on infrastructure 

- abolishing the NHS

And so on.

Agree with 90% of your post bar the NHS - would need to be a clear plan to replace it.

[hypochondriac]

Not sure I agree with most of that but what we should be doing with the NHS is stop it being all things for all people. Concentrate on the things that matter the most and have excellent care in the most important things. Stop wasting NHS money on ridiculous things that shouldn't be covered on the NHS. It was never designed for half the things it covers now and it's a bloated mess.

[iansums]

17 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

People who regularly slag off Davey and Polanski suddenly agree with them when they say something they agree with.

Not your best post badger 😀

[iansums]

7 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Not sure I agree with most of that but what we should be doing with the NHS is stop it being all things for all people. Concentrate on the things that matter the most and have excellent care in the most important things. Stop wasting NHS money on ridiculous things that shouldn't be covered on the NHS. It was never designed for half the things it covers now and it's a bloated mess.

Saw something on GMB the other day where a load of women who had botched plastic surgery were expecting the NHS to put it right.

[hypochondriac]

Just now, iansums said:

Saw something on GMB the other day where a load of women who had botched plastic surgery were expecting the NHS to put it right.

There's all sort of stuff that the NHS pays for now that should have no chance of public funding in a normal society. 

[Sir Ralph]

5 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

There's all sort of stuff that the NHS pays for now that should have no chance of public funding in a normal society. 

It’s a reflection of a society that expects government and taxpayers to solve their own problems. As @Dr. Kucho said it needs a party who will make hard decisions and, in my opinion,  ignore the votes of those in society who are unreasonably reliant on the state. The question is which party is going to do that?

[hypochondriac]

16 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

It’s a reflection of a society that expects government and taxpayers to solve their own problems. As @Dr. Kucho said it needs a party who will make hard decisions and, in my opinion,  ignore the votes of those in society who are unreasonably reliant on the state. The question is which party is going to do that?

The issue is that the hordes of people on welfare or those who want the state to provide everything for everyone get the same vote as everyone else so no one is going to get into power without pandering to a certain extent to groups who want support for their faction. 

[whelk]

25 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

There's all sort of stuff that the NHS pays for now that should have no chance of public funding in a normal society. 

Do you have any statistics? I expect it’s a bit like when Reform get rid of all of Kent’s diversity programmes there will be a council tax rebate for all the voters.

Biggest burden for NHS is the shocking lifestyle of so many

[hypochondriac]

18 minutes ago, whelk said:

Do you have any statistics? I expect it’s a bit like when Reform get rid of all of Kent’s diversity programmes there will be a council tax rebate for all the voters.

Biggest burden for NHS is the shocking lifestyle of so many

Also true but that's pretty hard to combat. Quite easy to say the NHS is going to concentrate more on the vital things with the nice to haves an exception rather than a rule. 

[AlexLaw76]

5 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Also true but that's pretty hard to combat. Quite easy to say the NHS is going to concentrate more on the vital things with the nice to haves an exception rather than a rule. 

I was with a family member in a major A&E unit last week. A few things stuck out...

The staff were completely overwhelmed (it was an average of about 13 hours to be sorted).

The staff were fairly vocal that at least 1/3 of those initially triaged had no business being in the Emergency Department (failed GP capacity and such like).

When they called a departmental emergency, the person announcing it was pretty open about encouraging people to return home/out of ED and maybe come back another day.

the vast majority of the patients did not have English as their first langue

 

If that is the 'shop window' into the NHS, it is fucked.

[Sir Ralph]

3 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

I was with a family member in a major A&E unit last week. A few things stuck out...

The staff were completely overwhelmed (it was an average of about 13 hours to be sorted).

The staff were fairly vocal that at least 1/3 of those initially triaged had no business being in the Emergency Department (failed GP capacity and such like).

When they called a departmental emergency, the person announcing it was pretty open about encouraging people to return home/out of ED and maybe come back another day.

the vast majority of the patients did not have English as their first langue

 

If that is the 'shop window' into the NHS, it is fucked.

It often appears that those who contribute the least are those that use / abuse it the most. I have a family member who works in the NHS in London and regularly talks about the abuse of the system. To make it sustainable and accessible for those who work and pay into the system, there needs to be some sort of control of this type of overuse and abuse.

Edited 3 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[tdmickey3]

50 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

It’s a reflection of a society that expects government and taxpayers to solve their own problems. As @Dr. Kucho said it needs a party who will make hard decisions and, in my opinion,  ignore the votes of those in society who are unreasonably reliant on the state. The question is which party is going to do that?

How is that going to work then, do we have separate ballot boxes or ban everyone on a state benefit from voting?

You do come up with some nonsense 

[Sir Ralph]

5 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

How is that going to work then, do we have separate ballot boxes or ban everyone on a state benefit from voting?

You do come up with some nonsense 

I’ll leave it to others to work out who has a brain or not. The wording I used in my post was specific. Im surprised you understood my post in that way but to drip feed you, what I’m saying a party that doesn’t pander to the requirement of these people and doesn’t worry about their vote. Instead a party that focuses on those who contribute to the system. I assume you agree with increased welfare spending based on your previous posts, even higher than the current rate?

Edited 2 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[Gloucester Saint]

Patient activation is important as well - losing the weight needed prior to operations as appropriate, too many sedentary lifestyles, not taking 30 seconds to actually assess whether A&E is the right place to go in the first instance. 

[Sir Ralph]

Just now, Gloucester Saint said:

Patient activation is important as well - losing the weight needed prior to operations as appropriate, too many sedentary lifestyles, not taking 30 seconds to actually assess whether A&E is the right place to go in the first instance. 

I agree - isn’t this related to education and the populations understanding of how to look after themselves, get involved in sport, eating properly etc?

[Farmer Saint]

27 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

It often appears that those who contribute the least are those that use / abuse it the most. I have a family member who works in the NHS in London and regularly talks about the abuse of the system. To make it sustainable and accessible for those who work and pay into the system, there needs to be some sort of control of this type of overuse and abuse.

Based on what Alex posted, why are you assuming that those in A&E contribute the least?

[Farmer Saint]

31 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

I was with a family member in a major A&E unit last week. A few things stuck out...

The staff were completely overwhelmed (it was an average of about 13 hours to be sorted).

The staff were fairly vocal that at least 1/3 of those initially triaged had no business being in the Emergency Department (failed GP capacity and such like).

When they called a departmental emergency, the person announcing it was pretty open about encouraging people to return home/out of ED and maybe come back another day.

the vast majority of the patients did not have English as their first langue

 

If that is the 'shop window' into the NHS, it is fucked.

I think this changes authority by authority. I had to take one of my daughters friends to A&E in early December after a broken arm in a skating accident, and she was in a cast and back at the skate park within 80 minutes. We were amazed and told another parent who had a similar experience two weeks earlier with a broken wrist.

Maybe they were just good at doing arms.

[Gloucester Saint]

25 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

I agree - isn’t this related to education and the populations understanding of how to look after themselves, get involved in sport, eating properly etc?

Across the population, logically that has to be a factor.

But also there’s a more affluent group who drink considerably to excess - Telegraph had an article this morning where GPs and dentists saying they knew what the tells were when people lied about their intake. Fairly educated professionals also seemingly not knowing the difference between individual drinks and units of consumption eg I drink 14 alcoholic drinks a week, therefore I’m under the government limit of 14 per week (their real consumption will be at least 28 units and probably more if some of the drinks had a higher Abv.

The result is frequently serious liver and organ problems, weight gain, poor skin, insomnia. Friend of mine who is a very senior figure in the tourism industry got himself in a pickle this way.

Edited 2 hours ago by Gloucester Saint

[Sir Ralph]

15 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Across the population, logically that has to be a factor.

But also there’s a more affluent group who drink considerably to excess - Telegraph had an article this morning where GPs and dentists saying they knew what the tells were when people lied about their intake. Fairly educated professionals also seemingly not knowing the difference between individual drinks and units of consumption eg I drink 14 alcoholic drinks a week, therefore I’m under the government limit of 14 per week (their real consumption will be at least 28 units and probably more if some of the drinks had a higher Abv.

The result is frequently serious liver and organ problems, weight gain, poor skin, insomnia. Friend of mine who is a very senior figure in the tourism industry got himself in a pickle this way.

Agree with you - that’s also about education as I think that people that may be more educated on the surface aren’t aware of the real damage they are doing to themselves. Maybe if more money was spent on education it might reduce costs, who knows. The upside is the younger generation seem to be more aware of the impacts of excessive alcohol consumption 

[sadoldgit]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

I was with a family member in a major A&E unit last week. A few things stuck out...

The staff were completely overwhelmed (it was an average of about 13 hours to be sorted).

The staff were fairly vocal that at least 1/3 of those initially triaged had no business being in the Emergency Department (failed GP capacity and such like).

When they called a departmental emergency, the person announcing it was pretty open about encouraging people to return home/out of ED and maybe come back another day.

the vast majority of the patients did not have English as their first langue

 

If that is the 'shop window' into the NHS, it is fucked.

Would that be people who don’t start a new sentence with a capital letter or didn’t know how to spell “language?”

Seriously, why is it an issue if people in A & E didn’t  have English as a first language? How do you know that “most” of them didn’t? Did you talk to them all or were they just dressed funny?

[Lord Duckhunter]

New Broom update…

 

NEW: Keir Starmer’s housebuilding promise is unravelling, with completions on new homes falling to their lowest level in more than a decade 

During Labour’s first 15 months in office, just 175,290 homes were completed in England, according to new ONS data

That falls well short of the 300,000 homes a year needed to meet the government’s target

It marks a 14% decline from the previous five quarters

The slowdown has worsened in recent months, with completions in the three months through September dropping to 30,880, the weakest quarter since the depths of the pandemic

[Lord Duckhunter]

[tdmickey3]

2 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Just like the tory 14 years and if the racist reform get in... they are all the same

Edited 1 hour ago by tdmickey3

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

I was with a family member in a major A&E unit last week. A few things stuck out...

The staff were completely overwhelmed (it was an average of about 13 hours to be sorted).

The staff were fairly vocal that at least 1/3 of those initially triaged had no business being in the Emergency Department (failed GP capacity and such like).

When they called a departmental emergency, the person announcing it was pretty open about encouraging people to return home/out of ED and maybe come back another day.

the vast majority of the patients did not have English as their first langue

 

If that is the 'shop window' into the NHS, it is fucked.

A family member spent six weeks in hospital recently because there was no capactiy to discharge them into care. They received the best care under the circumstances but what you say is true that there's just too many people and the system is stretched to breaking point. 

[sadoldgit]

5 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

Just like the tory 14 years and if the racist reform get in... they are all the same

I wouldn’t say breakfast clubs, lifting children out of poverty, those at the bottom of the food chain earning a bit more money, shorter waiting lists is nothing. But then he voted for Johnson and will vote for Farage so we know he is a turkey happy to vote for Christmas.

[Weston Super Saint]

5 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

The COVID bounce-back years that I referred to you mean? It would be useful if you read what is written.

Why the fall in 16 & 17 year old unemployment then, they are more likely to be on minimum wage than those in the slightly older bracket? Or are they choosing to employ more younger people to ensure they don't have to pay above minimum wage?

Pretty sure they can't be classified as 'unemployed' as a rule (there will presumably be some exceptions to the rule, such as apprenticeships?), as the law was changed so that post school leaving age at 16, they MUST remain in education or training until their 18th birthday.

[Lord Duckhunter]

33 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

breakfast clubs,

🤣🤣  Great achievement, feeding middle class kids for their parents. Then again you’re the bloke moaning that the state wouldn’t pay for your snap dragons second car.  

[tdmickey3]

11 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

🤣🤣  Great achievement, feeding middle class kids for their parents. Then again you’re the bloke moaning that the state wouldn’t pay for your snap dragons second car.  

🤡

[Lord Duckhunter]

I”’ll go to the coffee shop with other mums”

”Sometimes I’m so busy I be forgotten whether I’ve fed them”

Poverty 🤣🤣

 

[whelk]

24 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

I”’ll go to the coffee shop with other mum

Boost for hospitality

[whelk]

2 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Also true but that's pretty hard to combat. Quite easy to say the NHS is going to concentrate more on the vital things with the nice to haves an exception rather than a rule. 

I’m not so sure how easy it is but must confess don’t know too much about what is going on in terms of ‘nice to haves’. Aware this sort of stuff is easy bait simplifying wastage to a “well if we didn’t do this…..<insert extreme example> I do agree needs to be reform though.

[whelk]

2 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

I think this changes authority by authority. I had to take one of my daughters friends to A&E in early December after a broken arm in a skating accident, and she was in a cast and back at the skate park within 80 minutes. We were amazed and told another parent who had a similar experience two weeks earlier with a broken wrist.

Maybe they were just good at doing arms.

You must have gone to the post-Brexit A&E featured in the Leave Campaign brochure/broadcast. Remember it well

Edited 12 minutes ago by whelk

[Turkish]

1 hour ago, tdmickey3 said:

Just like the tory 14 years and if the racist reform get in... they are all the same

So they're all shit then? Glad we've finally got someone to admit it

[sadoldgit]

59 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

🤣🤣  Great achievement, feeding middle class kids for their parents. Then again you’re the bloke moaning that the state wouldn’t pay for your snap dragons second car.  

Middle class parents? Why not just call them parents?

I don’t have a “snap dragon.” I have a wife.

I did not moan that the state wouldn’t pay for a second car. I said that we gave it up because we could no longer afford to run two cars.

Apart from that, spot on. No surprise that someone who supported Johnson and currently supports Farage has such little regard for the truth.

[hypochondriac]

16 minutes ago, whelk said:

I’m not so sure how easy it is but must confess don’t know too much about what is going on in terms of ‘nice to haves’. Aware this sort of stuff is easy bait simplifying wastage to a “well if we didn’t do this…..<insert extreme example> I do agree needs to be reform though.

Yeah it's a balance isn't it. I was using it more to point out that it's one example of hard actions that no government is going to take because they don't want to lose .