General Chat

And we're back to with those in charge all band together for the good of the country?
Looking at the last few days I'd say no too many ego's too much party politics...election is done get over it do the best of a bad situation.

Why do people think she should be given a go? she screwed up what SHOULD have been the easiest win ever following in the wake of the referendum.

I don't think disapproving of the direction the country is going in ( my perception admittedly, and that's really irrespective of which party I support) is actually not liking or even loving this country...if you don't care about a place it doesn't matter to you what happens to it does it?

Supercrutch,


Yes I have the same option of moving countries if Labour get in which will be my last option.

I have to agree with Sue's comment.

We live in the UK so have to get on with whatever problems arise.

It is absolutely of no benefit to keep banging on about Brexit and how catastrophic it will be for the UK, only in the fullness of time will the true outcome be revealed.

I have the option of moving abroad, that will only come to pass if Labour ever get into power.

Rollo.

If you think so little of the UK why don't you move out and go to the EU and live there,seeing as you are so fond of running the Country and Government down.

As I wrote on 9 June, 18:37, Rollo, country first, but I am not at all sure that some MPs have a mature-enough outlook to do so.

I am not at all sure what you mean about Brexit being a dead duck because in my book it has to happen regardless of how soft or hard it is. That's the way the vote went. It did not go my way but I am not one for childish tantrums and stamping of feet when my way doesn't prevail.

In the same way, although TM did not reach the magical 326 figure, neither did JC and he was far behind her.

Time to dig for Britain, I think, instead of bleating on as some have been doing.

I post 'piffle'???
I can Google just as well as you can.

In fact, as you've resorted to your inevitable childish behaviour - I can only assume I do it better :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D

Trouble is with all parties they're all out for personal glory...not the good of the country.

I see George Osborne has spat out his dummy and said publicly that TM is a dead woman walking. Sour grapes, certainly, self-first and childish. Corbyn supporter really? He feels what he feels but I would have thought that someone who calls himself a Conservative would not have voiced out loud those sentiments at this time, certainly not a man who was not a brilliant Chancellor and, in my opinion, got that post because of his friendship with DC.

Anna Soubry has had something to say too.

What is wrong with these people? With Brexit negotiations on the horizon I would have expected no public outburst against their party leader. It's time they were supporting her, not doing her down.

Give her a go, for gawd's sake!

...so drug companies are overcharging for drugs then?
As I said.
Whoever owns the patent, and sells the drug - they're still a drug company - I never mentioned drug developers.

But why bother reading what anyone else says (apart from to correct their grammar) when you are (in reality) just having a conversation with yourself in the mode of 'educating' everyone else! ('cos apparently no-one else can Google). :-S

Well this a good talking point but our government ?needs to get a majority & A stable economy to cover all issues Policing .immigration. NHS. Housing .. defence.overseas aid *Still in talks with DUP * at the moment wouldn't be PM for a £million a week .I don't now about your area were you live but we get ten minutes with the GP .our surgery amalgamated .with another village & the service has gone down the pan .reception staff not as friendly ,GP show you the door before you even sit down properly Oh well think I have said my bit now .Sun has come out so try & get my gardening done .not doing much Bye Folks Barbra :-)

Not sure anyone said the NHS was ever funded solely from contributions.
But I'm sure if anyone thought that, they've been corrected.
Thanks (yawn) for the history lesson.

As for your correcting people on their grammar/typos - pot/kettle/black.
Quote:
"The doctors were at first v much against" - variably? vocally?

"are very lax with birder controls" ? ...so birds are using the NHS are they?

By the same token, Kay, not so many things could be cured, and, actually, fewer women worked.

The advancement in medicine has been amazing - but it costs money - not helped by drug companies over charging for drugs.

It's like saying the advancement in medicine and medical equipment has outstripped Government funding, therefore, as the NHS costs more we should go back to only 'certain people' deserving medical treatment. :-S

Whats being forgotten is when the NHS was set up the head count was by far lower than later years and almost every workable man had a job and many many women for that matter who was paying into the system and people were less inclined to visit doctors unless at near deaths door for fear of wasting a doctors time for something trivial such as a boil. :-D.

"1954 – smoking and cancer link established

In the 1940s, the British scientist Sir Richard Doll begins research into lung cancer after incidences of the disease rise alarmingly. He studies lung cancer patients in 20 London hospitals and expects to reveal that the cause was fumes from coal fires, car fumes or tarmac. His findings surprise him and he publishes a study in the British Medical Journal, co-written with Sir Austin Bradford Hill, warning that smokers are far more likely than non-smokers to die of lung cancer. Doll gives up smoking two-thirds of the way through his study and lives to be 92. "

Craven 'A' - good for the throat :-D :-D

.......and some more :-D

http://www.healthcare-administration-degree.net/10-evil-vintage-cigarette-ads-promising-better-health/

Doctors smoked in the surgery along with their patients up until the late 70s

That was probably the hope yes, as diagnosis became available free of charge they could also catch things earlier to save long term treatment. ( of the 'no it's not just a cough it's TB we can treat it before long term damage is done' type ) Given the advances in medicine that would have seemed probable.

I certainly wouldn't want to go back to my grandmother's day when you couldn't call a Dr or go to see him even for a serious condition because you couldn't afford to.

Didn't I read somewhere though that; maybe it was naive; they honestly thought after a while people wouldn't get so sick so the cost wouldn't sky rocket?

I'm sure they never envisaged paying for sex change operations; helping people stop smoking; have babies etc etc

"July 5 1948 – The NHS is born

When health secretary Aneurin Bevan (image right) launched the NHS at Park Hospital in Manchester (today known as Trafford General Hospital), it is the climax of a hugely ambitious plan to bring good healthcare to all. For the first time, hospitals, doctors, nurses, pharmacists, opticians and dentists are brought together under one umbrella organisation to provide services that are free for all at the point of delivery.
The central principles are clear: the health service will be available to all and financed entirely from taxation, which means that people pay into it according to their means. "