Cameron: "Cuts will change our way of life"

[RedRazor]

This isn't the 80's anymore. Calls in our place are monitored for quality. You can get warnings for speaking out of turn to a customer. Just because

Customer service was shit 20-30 years ago before they were privatised shouldn't have any bearing on the conversation now.

I disagree. The final bastions of state run monopoly functions still exhibit precisely the same traits they did in days of yore. Inland Revenue, Job Centres, NHS and so on being the most common examples. They may have glossed it up a bit with some 21st century business-speak but it is still the same underlying attitude of "you don't have an option so you'll get what you're given". I can give you an example. A few years back I complained to Aintree hospitals about the delay in getting x-ray results back to my doctor. It would take ten days I was told - and ten days it did take. Anyway I got a letter back from them saying that that was the agree SLA but they were committed to continual improvement etc etc. More recently I had to have another x-ray and they have clearly improved the process so that it now takes 11 days. Fucking clueless.

 

I have a couple of friends who work in other civil service functions included in my list and the fuckwittery they witness and have to participate in is unbelievable.

[Sugar Ape]

Right, so the NHS is shit because of some anecdotal evidence related to you. Nothing to do with the fact funding is being cut in real terms and staff are getting laid off all over the place. Do you really think the staff in Aintree hospital are sitting there twiddling their thumbs rather than do you X-ray results? I've had the misfortune of spending a lot of time there over the last 18 months with someone receiving treatment and have had an excellent service despite the staff clearly being under massive pressure.

 

Your previous argument that nationalising a company would fail because customer service levels were shit 30 years ago is something I can't even be arsed debating. If you really believe that then I'm happy for you to go on believing it and we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

Vast swathes of the public sector are under funded and under staffed so it's no surprise they are failing is it? Of course, when they fail the answer will be to privatise it, not to supply the right levels of money and management required to make it work.

[RedRazor]

Can't be state owned Dog, otherwise it would clearly be massively inefficient when compared to the other big five companies that are privately run. Dur.

EDF made a £44m loss on domestic electricity supply in 2012 and a £48m loss on domestic gas supply in the same period.

[Section_31]

Stu is right, the caricature of the public/private sectors is tedious.

 

I've no problem with the private sector, I just don't think money and profit should ever be a factor in something which governs life and death, whether that's health or utilities, or whatever.

 

The private sector itself isn't dangerous, what is dangerous is the philosophy which underpins it in this country.

 

In the past we had banks, but the people who worked in them were encouraged to act in a 'proper' fashion, but now they're encouraged to act like gamblers and fuck everyone.

 

As a society, we've embraced that culture wholeheartedly. Business is not run or governed by people who have any measure of restraint, it's governed by people who want to fuck the opposition and earn maximum profit at all costs, very often for a shareholder.

 

There are good and bad ways to do business, in the USA and the UK we do it the wrong way, which is why the high street is fucked, why towns are all dying on their arse, why the financial system nearly collapsed and why it probably will do again.

[RedRazor]

Right, so the NHS is shit because of some anecdotal evidence related to you. Nothing to do with the fact funding is being cut in real terms and staff are getting laid off all over the place. Do you really think the staff in Aintree hospital are sitting there twiddling their thumbs rather than do you X-ray results? I've had the misfortune of spending a lot of time there over the last 18 months with someone receiving treatment and have had an excellent service despite the staff clearly being under massive pressure.

 

Your previous argument that nationalising a company would fail because customer service levels were shit 30 years ago is something I can't even be arsed debating. If you really believe that then I'm happy for you to go on believing it and we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

Vast swathes of the public sector are under funded and under staffed so it's no surprise they are failing is it? Of course, when they fail the answer will be to privatise it, not to supply the right levels of money and management required to make it work.

You are reading too much into my comments. It wasn't intended as a criticism of the staff rather the culture. My view on the NHS, as I've stated in various threads, is that it should the brightest jewel in this nation's crown. The problem with it is, as you stated, is that it is now and always has been grossly underfunded. We pay for a Skoda and expect a Rolls Royce.

 

That said please apply some logic to my comment about the x-ray. I'm not a radiographer so don't know precisely how much time will be spent examining an x-ray but I would guess that it can be measured in minutes. So, for most of the ten/eleven days, the x-ray is sat somewhere waiting for someone to do something. So why is it waiting? If I was looking to improve this process I would be looking at ways to reduce the wait time between each action - not increase it. Sadly, we can't even hang this on Tory cuts as the most recent x-ray was about two years ago.

[Sugar Ape]

You are reading too much into my comments. It wasn't intended as a criticism of the staff rather the culture. My view on the NHS, as I've stated in various threads, is that it should the brightest jewel in this nation's crown. The problem with it is, as you stated, is that it is now and always has been grossly underfunded. We pay for a Skoda and expect a Rolls Royce.

 

That said please apply some logic to my comment about the x-ray. I'm not a radiographer so don't know precisely how much time will be spent examining an x-ray but I would guess that it can be measured in minutes. So, for most of the ten/eleven days, the x-ray is sat somewhere waiting for someone to do something. So why is it waiting? If I was looking to improve this process I would be looking at ways to reduce the wait time between each action - not increase it. Sadly, we can't even hang this on Tory cuts as the most recent x-ray was about two years ago.

 

 

 

That's pretty relevant to your argument though isn't it? I had an X-ray on my knee there last year, think it took about 10 days to get the results. There were about 12 people waiting for X-rays when I was there. Multiply that by 8 hours a day, 5 days a week then yeah, I'd guess they are pretty busy and probably have other things on their workload. And will no doubt be understaffed.

[Stu Monty]

EDF made a £44m loss on domestic electricity supply in 2012 and a £48m loss on domestic gas supply in the same period.

 

The news related that EDF had made £903m profit in July so if the point you're trying to make (in response to my sarcasm) is that they are significantly inefficient when compared to the privately owned companies then I fail to see it standing up to scrutiny.

 

I'd also be very interested to see how the dynamic between generation and retail works given these hard pushed, loss making companies managed to give £7bn in dividends last year.

[Stu Monty]

That's pretty relevant to your argument though isn't it? I had an X-ray on my knee there last year, think it took about 10 days to get the results. There were about 12 people waiting for X-rays when I was there. Multiply that by 8 hours a day, 5 days a week then yeah, I'd guess they are pretty busy and probably have other things on their workload. And will no doubt be understaffed.

 

Deliberately.

 

So they can be seen to be struggling.

 

So then they can be sold off to companies that the MPs have shares in.

[Sugar Ape]

Deliberately.

 

So they can be seen to be struggling.

 

So then they can be sold off to companies that the MPs have shares in.

 

Of course Stu. If they are taking ages to do X-ray results then they are either understaffed, which is obviously deliberate, or they can get it done quicker but just choose not to. Why they would do the latter just makes no sense.

 

If they aren't delivering the service required it's got fuck all to do with them being publically run and everything to do with them not having the resources to deliver them.

[RedRazor]

Stu is right, the caricature of the public/private sectors is tedious.

 

I've no problem with the private sector, I just don't think money and profit should ever be a factor in something which governs life and death, whether that's health or utilities, or whatever.

 

The private sector itself isn't dangerous, what is dangerous is the philosophy which underpins it in this country.

 

In the past we had banks, but the people who worked in them were encouraged to act in a 'proper' fashion, but now they're encouraged to act like gamblers and fuck everyone.

 

As a society, we've embraced that culture wholeheartedly. Business is not run or governed by people who have any measure of restraint, it's governed by people who want to fuck the opposition and earn maximum profit at all costs, very often for a shareholder.

 

There are good and bad ways to do business, in the USA and the UK we do it the wrong way, which is why the high street is fucked, why towns are all dying on their arse, why the financial system nearly collapsed and why it probably will do again.

Sec - you start off with a statement about caricatures then immediately launch into your own caricature of private business.

 

Private business is about profit - if there is no profit there is no business. All business is a risk and anyone who invests their money in that risk expects a return that reflects the level of risk taken.

 

Businesses will only suceed if they are providing their customers/markets with the products that they want and can afford. They will only attract the best staff if they offer conditions and rewards that are competitive.

 

There are some excellent businesses in this country that are extremely well run - and there are some extremely shit businesses. Generally, people will not keep using a shit business if there is an alternative and the shit business will either change or disappear.

 

So the balance is to make a profit while attracting good staff and maintaining a quality service or profit. Some businesses manage all three but many don't. This exists across all business sectors.

 

As for your comments on banking you need to make a distinction between retail banking and investment banking. The casino-like activities are the domain of the investment banks who employ relatively small numbers of (very high earning) staff. The retail banks employ large numbers of staff with very unremarkable earnings. The mentality of both groups is entirely different.

[RedRazor]

That's pretty relevant to your argument though isn't it? I had an X-ray on my knee there last year, think it took about 10 days to get the results. There were about 12 people waiting for X-rays when I was there. Multiply that by 8 hours a day, 5 days a week then yeah, I'd guess they are pretty busy and probably have other things on their workload. And will no doubt be understaffed.

So they have had a ten day backlog for about 10 years and nobody has thought to do anything about it?  How much time during the ten days you waited do you think someone was actually doing something with your x-ray and how much time was it just waiting in a queue?

[Sugar Ape]

Of course it's sitting in a queue. There is a ten day wait for a reason. What do you think the reason is? I think it's because they are underfunded, and have been for years, and can't employ enough radiographers to do it quicker. It's not solely because it's a public organisation.

 

You would get it done faster privately simply because you would pay more money and they have less clients. Increase the funding to the NHS and maybe they will be able to do it quicker as well.

[RedRazor]

The news related that EDF had made £903m profit in July so if the point you're trying to make (in response to my sarcasm) is that they are significantly inefficient when compared to the privately owned companies then I fail to see it standing up to scrutiny.

 

I'd also be very interested to see how the dynamic between generation and retail works given these hard pushed, loss making companies managed to give £7bn in dividends last year.

I wasn't trying to make any point merely availing you of the facts. EDF made a loss of £92m supplying gas and lecky to UK homes in 2012.

 

EDF generate over 37% of the electricity generated in the UK but their share of the retail market (both domestic and non-domestic) is less than 18%. All of the other big six suppliers generate less electricity than they retail.

 

The UK generates only 84% of the electricity that it consumes.

[lifetime fan]

So the Tories are going to bring in a tax break for married couples that will cost more than the bedroom tax will save the exchequer.

 

Wankers.

[dennis tooth]

Sec - you start off with a statement about caricatures then immediately launch into your own caricature of private business.

 

Private business is about profit - if there is no profit there is no business. All business is a risk and anyone who invests their money in that risk expects a return that reflects the level of risk taken.

 

Businesses will only suceed if they are providing their customers/markets with the products that they want and can afford. They will only attract the best staff if they offer conditions and rewards that are competitive.

 

There are some excellent businesses in this country that are extremely well run - and there are some extremely shit businesses. Generally, people will not keep using a shit business if there is an alternative and the shit business will either change or disappear.

 

So the balance is to make a profit while attracting good staff and maintaining a quality service or profit. Some businesses manage all three but many don't. This exists across all business sectors.

 

As for your comments on banking you need to make a distinction between retail banking and investment banking. The casino-like activities are the domain of the investment banks who employ relatively small numbers of (very high earning) staff. The retail banks employ large numbers of staff with very unremarkable earnings. The mentality of both groups is entirely different.

 

Or, failing that, win a big 10 year government services contract cos you've lobbied well.

[RedRazor]

Of course it's sitting in a queue. There is a ten day wait for a reason. What do you think the reason is? I think it's because they are underfunded, and have been for years, and can't employ enough radiographers to do it quicker. It's not solely because it's a public organisation.

 

You would get it done faster privately simply because you would pay more money and they have less clients. Increase the funding to the NHS and maybe they will be able to do it quicker as well.

As stated previously imo the NHS has always been significantly underfunded but thanks to the the last government it is at least in with a chance of providing a half decent service. I can remember what it was like after John Major's government had finished with it and it was completely on it's knees.

 

But I am not sure that this can be laid at the door of funding etc. I think it is because there is no reason or incentive within the organisation to improve it.  Unless there is a government target stuck on it nothing appears to change.

[RedRazor]

Or, failing that, win a big 10 year government services contract cos you've lobbied well.

I don't think they even have to work that hard. They just flash their Bollington Club memebership card and they're in.

[RedRazor]

So the Tories are going to bring in a tax break for married couples that will cost more than the bedroom tax will save the exchequer.

 

Wankers.

mmmmmm I'm getting a definite whiff of election.

 

I can imagine Camerons checklist.....

 

- Scroungers given a good kicking - tick.

 

- Council house scum given a good kicking - tick.

 

- Strivers given childcare help - tick.

 

- Middle Englanders given a nice juicy carrot - tick.

 

The only thing he might want to wait for is if he thinks he can fuck off those pesky Scots.If not then he is good to go.

[RedRazor]

So the Tories are going to bring in a tax break for married couples that will cost more than the bedroom tax will save the exchequer.

 

Wankers.

Just had a look at the article. £200 per year.

 

I bet it will cost them nearly as much to administer this as the benefit is worth ffs.

 

If the average wedding costs around £20,000 then it will take 100 years to cover the cost.

 

ffs

 

fucking wankers.

 

time for bed

[VladimirIlyich]

Just had a look at the article. £200 per year.

 

I bet it will cost them nearly as much to administer this as the benefit is worth ffs.

 

If the average wedding costs around £20,000 then it will take 100 years to cover the cost.

 

ffs

 

fucking wankers.

 

time for bed

I think there is a lot more to it than this but not being privy to the conversations or being an accountant i cant be sure. What i suspect is that its to benefit the wealthy(the tories backers and lobbyists) by allowing the husbands to use their wives tax breaks to avoid paying the tax normal people would,and wife to husband too,of course.

They dont do anything without benefit to the better off. If it were to help the average Joe it would be just a lucky consequence,but i sincerely doubt it.

'Whats in it for me' should be the Tory election slogan.

[Bobby Hundreds]

Watching osbournes speech, its astounding millibandsp actually has far more charisma. I didn't think it possible.

[lifetime fan]

The fucks he done to his head?

[Stickman]

So if Osborne is making the long term unemployed work for their money I take it the Royal Family are going to be first out in the community pulling their weight.

[Phoenix]

You get less community service for being a criminal than being unemployed. Ridiculous idea.

[Section_31]

I imagine anyone who's been on the dole that long is probably unemployable. That being said, I have known some fucking deadbeats in my time.

 

I've got nothing against this type of welfare reform in principle, I just don't trust them to do it justly and we know their motives aren't pure, they're more interested in scapegoating than they are in genuine reform of the welfare state.