Whats stopped you voting Labour

  • Thread starter Deleted member 294929
  • Start date
My first house purchase was £33000 many years ago, a 2 bed terrace, we saved hard and had work done when we could afford it, the area over a few years went downhill to the point of many of them were boarded up, the local Labour council decided to compulsory purchase and demolish them and give homeowners first choice at a reduced price of one of the new properties being built in their place, we had a newborn baby so decided to sell and move elsewhere, the council paid us £6000 leaving us owing about £25000 and struggling to get a mortgage, we spent many years and tears paying off this debt as well as a new mortgage, we spoke to the Labour MP and local councillors, not one helped at all, all they kept saying was we could move into this lovely new estate being built.
I found out a nearby Tory council done something similar, but made sure nobody was left with negative equity when their home was bought, the new estate that was promised was built 18 years later, so this working class bricklayer has never voted for Labour since, and never will.
 
Sponsored Links
US health care system costs more than here. Nhs costs are increasing faster than inflation as people get older, demand for services and technology increase. There is a simple solution which is to pay more tax.

Blup
 
demand for services and technology increase
I was listening to a podcast a while ago, about repairing tech. rather than binning it.
An African company bought up "broken" medical scanners and suchlike from "developed" countries, fixed them, and sold it on to African hospitals that couldn't afford brand-spanking new gear. IIRC, for less than $50k a pop.

Whereas we'll just drop anything from £300k to a £1m+ on one (hopefully though, we'll recycle the box it arrived in ;) )



There is a simple solution which is to pay more tax.
Simplistic, rather than simple.
 
Whereas the idea that you can have good quality public services, without paying for them, is that of a simpleton.

Tories still focus on tax cuts and service cuts. And pretend this will achieve the improvement we need.

While the rich dodge the taxes the rest of us pay.
 
Sponsored Links
Don't vote anymore, gave up on labour when Kinnock deserted the working class to chase the middle class vote, and Blair, the pink tory, did much the same.
 
US health care system costs more than here. Nhs costs are increasing faster than inflation as people get older, demand for services and technology increase. There is a simple solution which is to pay more tax.

Blup
Agree on the USA system of medical care - expensive and selfish. As for the UK I'd happily see a a penny on income tax for that to go directly into the NHS funding.

I'm not particularly Labour minded but do think the present emphasis on Tax cuts is not good after the last 3 years.
 
An African company bought up "broken" medical scanners and suchlike from "developed" countries, fixed them, and sold it on to African hospitals that couldn't afford brand-spanking new gear. IIRC, for less than $50k a pop.

Whereas we'll just drop anything from £300k to a £1m+ on one

I think part of the reason there will be that new scanners will be more advanced and will give better outcomes.

When I've seen family being treated over recent years what has struck me is the amount of single use stuff. Maybe that's how it has to be for H&S but the sheer volume of waste was huge.
 
This discussion has made me think about the early 2000s when Tony Blair announced a huge increase in NHS spending, to bring us nearer to the EU average. I think at that time we were spending about 60% of the EU average on health as a proportion of GDP. As part of that agreement to increase funding, there was a review which included looking (shock horror!!) at whether there were more effective health models for the UK than the NHS. Anyway, I've tracked it down. It seems to be known the Wanless report. I always thought it was a stitch up but I've quoted the main finding on the model anyway.

https://www.yearofcare.co.uk/sites/default/files/images/Wanless.pdf

C.22 My conclusion is that there is no evidence that any alternative financing method to the UK’s would deliver a given quality of health care at a lower cost to the economy. Indeed other systems seem likely to prove more costly. Nor do alternative balances of funding appear to offer scope to increase equity.
 
Angela Raynor is becoming increasingly side lined in favour of Rachel reeves

Angela is probably a bit to working class for the leadership / front bench

Gearge osbourne the X Tory chancellor is a bit of a fan of Racheal ???

Meanwhile Corbyn is still excluded from the party

Corbyn is the X party leader him and his fellow momentum friends are deemed (?) to be a bit of a liability ???
 
The only nanny state we have is Jacob reesmogg

Blup
 
Windy is telling outright lies.
No, it's you who's talking rubbish. Some actual figures, rather than Labour party guff...


NHS.jpg


The dark blue bars are actual spending, light blue is planned spending, basically a wish. I think we all know that it's extremely unlikely that 2022/23's actual spending will be less than the previous year, as they're currently having some kind of crisis drama, and haven't made any efficiency improvements.

So actual recorded spending is higher than it's ever been in the entire history of the NHS, therefore the Labour party knowingly tell outright lies to the public, which some halfwits blindly believe.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top