Is this real proof Tories are flogging the NHS?

[SirGalahad]

So all labour members are anti-semtic or just party members. Bold claim.

I thought the NHS was off limits. But the pharmaceutical industry is not, and in the documents it states the close link between the NHS and pharmaceutical industry in the way they interact and price drugs cost effectiveness.

The US wants to dismantle the checks and balances NICE provides.

https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-the-contract-on-corbyn-1.8192769

Corbyn is not an anti-Semite. He never was. His real sin is his staunch position against injustice in the world, including the version Israel perpetrates. Today this is anti-Semitism. The Hungarian Viktor Orban, the Austrian Freedom Party and the extreme right in Europe are not the danger to Jews. Corbyn is the enemy.

There is anti-semitism and we need to get rid of it, but it demeans the use of the word to brand it about so carelessly.

Jewish people have suffered and continue to suffer but their suffering is not improved by falsely claiming people are anti-semites - it doesn't do justice to their cause or ease their plight.

 

[JohnD]

you can look up what some products cost the NHS. You can also (with more difficulty) look up some US prices.

You will have a good laugh at what the US system costs its dumb voters.

http://gmmmg.nhs.uk/docs/cost_comparison_charts.pdf

 

[JohnD]

Unless it is your objective to either

1) Maximise the cost to the patient and the health insurance premium-payer, or

2) Maximise the profits of the drug manufacturer, distributor, pharmacy, hospital, healthcare provider, insurance company and politicians

Then there is no reason, for an out-of-patent drug, to buy a branded rather than a generic version, unless you have either objective (1) or objective (2).

The US system has objective (2) and achieves objective (1) coincidentally.

The US healthcare and pharmaceutical trade, and politicians in their employ, have great objection to profit-limiting effects of the UK system, and it is their intention to break it.

 

[SirGalahad]

you can look up what some products cost the NHS. You can also (with more difficulty) look up some US prices.

You will have a good laugh at what the US system costs its dumb voters.

http://gmmmg.nhs.uk/docs/cost_comparison_charts.pdf

The voters who do not get a formal education end up getting their news and opinion from Fox news - which pumps out falsehoods on the hour every hour. Those that get a formal education end up with mountains of debt, so University instead of becoming a place to learn, explore and widen your horizons is a place to get through so you can start a career in your chosen profession. So people become polarised at an early age. Humans have become products.

 

[SirGalahad]

Unless it is your objective to either

1) Maximise the cost to the patient and the health insurance premium-payer, or

2) Maximise the profits of the drug manufacturer, distributor, pharmacy, hospital, healthcare provider, insurance company and politicians

Then there is no reason, for an out-of-patent drug, to buy a branded rather than a generic version.

The US system has objective (2) and achieves objective (1) coincidentally.

The US healthcare and pharmaceutical trade, and politicians in their employ, have great objection to profit-limiting effects of the UK system, and it is their intention to break it.

https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/industries

Quelle surprise the biggest lobbyists in the US are the Pharmaceutical/Health Industry spending $281m in 2018.

 

[JohnD]

update

this doc shows NHS prices, alphabetically.

First you find the drug

then you choose which option (tablet, injection, whatever)

then it shows NHS prices

you may have to roam around to find the link to the price.

https://bnf.nice.org.uk/drug/#I

 

[Vinty]

Could Boris have a plan to take the UK out of the Euro Union and into a economic Union with America.
Bit like Puerto Rica.

 

[Brigadier]

That your question is based on a false premise. Then why ask it?

That's more puzzling.

I didnt know that "it was based on a false premise".
Truth is, I am still not 100% that it is.
But thanks anyway.

 

[Vinty]

So all labour members are anti-semtic or just party members. Bold claim.

I thought the NHS was off limits. But the pharmaceutical industry is not, and in the documents it states the close link between the NHS and pharmaceutical industry in the way they interact and price drugs cost effectiveness.

The US wants to dismantle the checks and balances NICE provides.

https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-the-contract-on-corbyn-1.8192769

Corbyn is not an anti-Semite. He never was. His real sin is his staunch position against injustice in the world, including the version Israel perpetrates. Today this is anti-Semitism. The Hungarian Viktor Orban, the Austrian Freedom Party and the extreme right in Europe are not the danger to Jews. Corbyn is the enemy.

There is anti-semitism and we need to get rid of it, but it demeans the use of the word to brand it about so carelessly.

Jewish people have suffered and continue to suffer but their suffering is not improved by falsely claiming people are anti-semites - it doesn't do justice to their cause or ease their plight.

Only the most blind or biased can't see that this anti semitic nonsense about Labour has been manufactured by the vested interests who don't want Corbyn in 10 Downing st.
The Israelis view Corbyn as an existential threat to their country, hence the totally inappropriate intervention of the chief Rabbi.
Calling someone an antisemite is a very serious charge and can damage a person socially and politically.
Maybe the law should be changed and anyone making these charges should be required to provide evidence to substantiate their charge.

 

[Lower]

So all labour members are anti-semtic or just party members. Bold claim.

I thought the NHS was off limits. But the pharmaceutical industry is not, and in the documents it states the close link between the NHS and pharmaceutical industry in the way they interact and price drugs cost effectiveness.

The US wants to dismantle the checks and balances NICE provides.

https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-the-contract-on-corbyn-1.8192769

Corbyn is not an anti-Semite. He never was. His real sin is his staunch position against injustice in the world, including the version Israel perpetrates. Today this is anti-Semitism. The Hungarian Viktor Orban, the Austrian Freedom Party and the extreme right in Europe are not the danger to Jews. Corbyn is the enemy.

There is anti-semitism and we need to get rid of it, but it demeans the use of the word to brand it about so carelessly.

Jewish people have suffered and continue to suffer but their suffering is not improved by falsely claiming people are anti-semites - it doesn't do justice to their cause or ease their plight.

Just to be clear, i didn't say all labour members or party members are anti-semitic and nor do i think that.

However, i do think that Corbyn has allowed his position against Israel to be used by those within the Labour party who do have anti-semitic views as a justification to air those anti-semitic views. It is Corbyn's failure to take decisive action and stop the growth of the problem that is why the Labour party now appears to have an anti-semetic problem. He seems to find it difficult to accept that there is a problem, probably because of his strongly held anti-Israel views are very close to what is now defined as being anti-semetic.

Its not a surprise those. Corbyn seems unwilling to take a decision on many things. Wanting an election/not wanting an election. Supporting Brexit/now being neutral on Brexit. etc etc

 

[JohnD]

anti-semitism and a crashed economy.

Would you approve of this politician:

"he also questioned the loyalty of British Jews and insisted that the country must accept that "Zionism is the problem."

"It will take a huge effort of courage and skill to win round the many thousands of British Jews who are in a similar state of alienation, and to make them see that their faith must be compatible with British values and with loyalty to Britain," he wrote."

"That means disposing of the first taboo, and accepting that the problem is Judaism. Judaism is the problem."

He added: "What is going on in these synagogues and religious schools? When is someone going to get 18th century on Judaism's medieval ass?"



I don't.

Many people do.

He is a Conservative.

 

[Ihavenojob]

Only the most blind or biased can't see that this anti semitic nonsense about Labour has been manufactured by the vested interests who don't want Corbyn in 10 Downing st.
The Israelis view Corbyn as an existential threat to their country, hence the totally inappropriate intervention of the chief Rabbi.
Calling someone an antisemite is a very serious charge and can damage a person socially and politically.
Maybe the law should be changed and anyone making these charges should be required to provide evidence to substantiate their charge.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50585278

 

[JohnD]

How about you, Hate?

Are you OK with the politician I quoted above?

He hasn't been sacked by his party, not even suspended.

Do you think its acceptable just because he's a con?

 

[Lower]

Would you approve of this politician:

"he also questioned the loyalty of British Jews and insisted that the country must accept that "Zionism is the problem."

"It will take a huge effort of courage and skill to win round the many thousands of British Jews who are in a similar state of alienation, and to make them see that their faith must be compatible with British values and with loyalty to Britain," he wrote."

"That means disposing of the first taboo, and accepting that the problem is Judaism. Judaism is the problem."

He added: "What is going on in these synagogues and religious schools? When is someone going to get 18th century on Judaism's medieval ass?"



I don't.

Many people do.

He is a Conservative.

A little bit different. We don't have a problem with Jews committing acts of terrorism in the name of their faith. We do have a problem with a section of the worldwide muslim community committing acts of terrorism in the name of their faith.

 

[Notch7]

Its not a surprise those. Corbyn seems unwilling to take a decision on many things. Wanting an election/not wanting an election. Supporting Brexit/now being neutral on Brexit. etc etc

I think you know thats a rather dishonest argument.

Corbyn has always always been clear on the election: he would agree to one when no deal was off the table. decisive.
Corbyn has a clear policy on Brexit: 2nd referendum, he would support the decision of the voters.

Boris Johnson on the other hand said last year 'no Tory government would ever agree to a border down the Irish sea
Boris Johnson in 2019 then sells a deal that does exactly that
thats worse than indecisive it is a blatant lie.