Topic: Brexit. the Con continues

[TSC]

Presumably the EU would have no problem with a state owned renewable energy company?  I believe France have nationalised EDF so can't see there being a problem.  Ah well 4 years on and something but blue passports seem still seem to be the only benefit.

There’s a distinct difference over the application of ‘state aid’ to a failing private company that is against EU regs, although I think there are likely examples where same is allowed in exceptional circumstances ie bank bail outs post 2008 etc which in effect nationalised or part nationalised said banks.

Nationalising a failing company/industry sits outside the application of state aid generally I think.

[Craig S]

LNER was nationalised while we were still in the EU (post vote, but pre actually leaving). It is not against any EU regs.

[thaddeus]

An economist and economics professor - Mariana Mazzucato- on the radio now made the point that the withdrawn rise in NI wasn't really for Health/Social Care but was the "project fear" Brexit tax that Osborne talked about.  She said that's how it was seen by financial analysts and meant that the ongoing costs of Brexit were covered, at least in the short-term.

More than anything else announced in the mini-budget she thinks that was the one that landed most badly with the markets as it suggested the UK wasn't willing to make the financial sacrifices that came from leaving a large free-trade bloc.  As she put it "it shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation of the UK since 2020" - or something along those lines.

She also said the markets have little interest in pandemic or pandemic spending as it was all put on the never-never, as long as that long-term debt was serviceable.  Also, the UK has little exposure to the Russian invasion beyond the rise in commodity prices that are being experienced by most countries.  Neither of those would have rocked the UK were it not for deep seated structural problems.  She wouldn't commit when asked if those structural problems included a reliance on City of London for handling Russian money.

It seems like the UK pension funds were a target for investors making money from short positions.  The BoE intervention effectively turned the table on those and cost them a lot of money.  Some good news at least.

[Machae]

Won't link the article as its The Fail, however Brexit loving c*nt Tim Martin is forced to close 32 of his pubs due to the harsh economic climate

JD Wetherspoon announced it will sell off 32 pubs across UK due to rising costs. Owner Tim Martin built his empire with cheap cost and clever marketing tactics, however the pub giant made the announcement after earlier warning it faced £30m loss

[BarryCrocker]

Won't link the article as its The Fail, however Brexit loving c*nt Tim Martin is forced to close 32 of his pubs due to the harsh economic climate

JD Wetherspoon announced it will sell off 32 pubs across UK due to rising costs. Owner Tim Martin built his empire with cheap cost and clever marketing tactics, however the pub giant made the announcement after earlier warning it faced £30m loss

Same story in the Indy.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/wetherspoons-pub-closure-2022-tim-martin-b2177057.html

[sheepfest]

Won't link the article as its The Fail, however Brexit loving c*nt Tim Martin is forced to close 32 of his pubs due to the harsh economic climate

JD Wetherspoon announced it will sell off 32 pubs across UK due to rising costs. Owner Tim Martin built his empire with cheap cost and clever marketing tactics, however the pub giant made the announcement after earlier warning it faced £30m loss

Shame. 
My heart weeps but only for the staff.

[PaulF]

The giga factory built on Germany instead of the UK due to brexit has had a huge fire. Locals calling for it to be closed while investigations take place.  See there are brexit wins!

[TSC]

Brexit ‘hard man’ Baker apologised to EU and Ireland over Brexit

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/tory-minister-steve-baker-apologises-to-eu-for-his-behaviour-during-brexit/ar-AA12vIt8

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-63111685

https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/i-am-really-sorry-relations-with-ireland-are-not-where-they-should-be-ni-minister-apologises-to-ireland-and-eu-over-brexit-42034100.html

[thaddeus]

Brexit ‘hard man’ Baker apologised to EU and Ireland over Brexit

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/tory-minister-steve-baker-apologises-to-eu-for-his-behaviour-during-brexit/ar-AA12vIt8

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-63111685

https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/i-am-really-sorry-relations-with-ireland-are-not-where-they-should-be-ni-minister-apologises-to-ireland-and-eu-over-brexit-42034100.html

All well and good but I'm not sure how Baker showing some "humility" is going to resolve the issue that a permanent border is needed either between Republic and Northern Ireland or between Northern Ireland and Great Britain.

Realistically if the UK was outside the EU in 1998 there wouldn't have been a Good Friday Agreement.  Baker and his fellow Brexit blowhards sabotaged it.

Still, at least Baker and his supporters can claim that he tried to be reasonable but the bad men didn't want to negotiate with him.

[TSC]

All well and good but I'm not sure how Baker showing some "humility" is going to resolve the issue that a permanent border is needed either between Republic and Northern Ireland or between Northern Ireland and Great Britain.

Realistically if the UK was outside the EU in 1998 there wouldn't have been a Good Friday Agreement.  Baker and his fellow Brexit blowhards sabotaged it.

Still, at least Baker and his supporters can claim that he tried to be reasonable but the bad men didn't want to negotiate with him.

Reading between the lines the DUP may be nervous.  Well they’ve been chucked under the Brexit bus a couple of times so what’s another time between ‘friends’.  The Brexit punchbag = DUP.

[thejbs]

Reading between the lines the DUP may be nervous.  Well they’ve been chucked under the Brexit bus a couple of times so what’s another time between ‘friends’.  The Brexit punchbag = DUP.

The DUP knew exactly what Brexit would mean and campaigned (probably illegally) for it.

[thaddeus]

The DUP knew exactly what Brexit would mean and campaigned (probably illegally) for it.

I suspect they thought it would force a hard border between the two Irelands and therefore weaken the Republican argument.  Never trust a Tory though and they've learnt that by the border effectively being made between N.Ireland and GB, therefore strengthening the Republican argument.

[thejbs]

David Davis, who campaigned for Brexit on the £350m lie, is now saying the only way to ‘save’ the nhs is a privatisation/insurance model. They’re really breaking cover now. 

[Indomitable_Carp]

I suspect they thought it would force a hard border between the two Irelands and therefore weaken the Republican argument.  Never trust a Tory though and they've learnt that by the border effectively being made between N.Ireland and GB, therefore strengthening the Republican argument.

The DUP are utterly laughable. Their backing of Brexit will have to go down as one of the biggest own goals of any political party in British history. Up there with David Cameron putting himself in the position of calling the referendum in the first place to appease a minority of backbench MPs (c*nt!!).

[PaulF]

David Davis, who campaigned for Brexit on the £350m lie, is now saying the only way to ‘save’ the nhs is a privatisation/insurance model. They’re really breaking cover now. 

I kind of assumed the theory was a bit foul hat stuff, but I'm getting quite scared now .

[Nobby Reserve]

I kind of assumed the theory was a bit foul hat stuff, but I'm getting quite scared now .

The number of Tory MPs with links to private healthcare companies is ridiculous

[KillieRed]

The number of Tory MPs with links to private healthcare companies is ridiculous

Perhaps there should be a question in the House: who would vote for the privatisation of the NHS if members of that house (and their families) were barred from having investments in private medical companies.

[Red Raw]

David Davis, who campaigned for Brexit on the £350m lie, is now saying the only way to ‘save’ the nhs is a privatisation/insurance model. They’re really breaking cover now.

No one has yet been able to explain to me how private insurance provision can be cheaper than a national insurance system. We have seen that artificially created competition in the NHS does little or nothing for efficiency and ends up with poorer coverage. Unless you restrict entry to a private scheme on the basis of age or health profile, premiums will naturally be higher for schemes with fewer members.

This 2017 ONS study on healthcare spending in OECD countries shows us that the US spends double what we do. I believe this is based on public and private spending - in the UK 80% of health spending is public while in the US it is 50%.



American healthcare costs a fortune in comparision. People risk bankrupcy from appendicitis or a car accident. God knows what happens if you need long term treatment.

In the US Katie Porter neatly illustrated the extent to which private insurance companies in the US waste money and profiteer from healthcare (costing about 17 times as much as medicare). This is what really gets Tory juices flowing.

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/4hjpq4FNuQA" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/4hjpq4FNuQA</a>

[KissThisGuy]

I suspect they thought it would force a hard border between the two Irelands and therefore weaken the Republican argument.  Never trust a Tory though and they've learnt that by the border effectively being made between N.Ireland and GB, therefore strengthening the Republican argument.

Either way it strengthens the Republican argument. I'd venture to say that a Hard Border in Ireland would've actually made an United Ireland an inevitability within a decade of the Brexit vote.

[Nobby Reserve]

No one has yet been able to explain to me how private insurance provision can be cheaper than a national insurance system. We have seen that artificially created competition in the NHS does little or nothing for efficiency and ends up with poorer coverage. Unless you restrict entry to a private scheme on the basis of age or health profile, premiums will naturally be higher for schemes with fewer members.

This 2017 ONS study on healthcare spending in OECD countries shows us that the US spends double what we do. I believe this is based on public and private spending - in the UK 80% of health spending is public while in the US it is 50%.



American healthcare costs a fortune in comparision. People risk bankrupcy from appendicitis or a car accident. God knows what happens if you need long term treatment.

In the US Katie Porter neatly illustrated the extent to which private insurance companies in the US waste money and profiteer from healthcare (costing about 17 times as much as medicare). This is what really gets Tory juices flowing.

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/4hjpq4FNuQA" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/4hjpq4FNuQA</a>

I'm sure with some wealthier people it's the case of feeling like they pay too much for the NHS. The US-style insurance system doesn't differentiate for income. If person A is on $20k/year and person B $200k, if they want the same level of healthcare cover, they both pay the same insurance premium. Obviously for person A, it'd be a much greater proportion of their income than for person B.

To fund it via tax works the opposite way. Nothwithstanding things like allowances and different tax rates for different incomes, by using tax, the person earning 10x the other would pay 10x more tax, and therefore 10x more for healthcare provision.

Many Tories and wealthy people hate that. They also know they can buy private healthcare, but still have to pay that chunk of tax to fund the NHS (conveniently forgetting that they would also need the NHS for emergencies or for many treatments for serious illnesses)



You also have to remember that in the US, for many people medical insurance comes with the job. It's a tool used by employers to keep workers compliant and working hard - you get fired, you lose not just your income but access to medical care for you and your family.

I'm sure there's plenty of right wingers in the UK and the US who view the principle of the NHS - free for all at the point of delivery - as a 'moral hazard'.

[PaulF]

Without wanting to appear to defend the US system. I simply can't believe in a '1st world' country, where if you got hit by a car and needed life saving surgery that the state wouldn't pay for it if you were uninsured.
SURELY, there's some sort of minimum bottom line? Which ,even without any privatisation , is where we are headed as the NHS is more and more underfunded.
Even, cynically, surely it's purely financially sensible to keep most citizens alive and paying taxes!

[KillieRed]

It’s ideological: everything should be for profit. The American Way, The Frontier Spirit, Freedom from governance.

[BarryCrocker]

SURELY, there's some sort of minimum bottom line? Which ,even without any privatisation , is where we are headed as the NHS is more and more underfunded.
Even, cynically, surely it's purely financially sensible to keep most citizens alive and paying taxes!

The Tories probably see it as taxpayers who can afford to pay private insurance and want to beat the que to get well as they have mortgages, kids education and careers that need to be maintained. The poor, unemployed and those on social welfare are just going to use the NHS to maintain their ability to stay alive a keep on leaching off the system. The NHS is a benefit for people to keep being on benefits.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Without wanting to appear to defend the US system. I simply can't believe in a '1st world' country, where if you got hit by a car and needed life saving surgery that the state wouldn't pay for it if you were uninsured.
SURELY, there's some sort of minimum bottom line? Which ,even without any privatisation , is where we are headed as the NHS is more and more underfunded.
Even, cynically, surely it's purely financially sensible to keep most citizens alive and paying taxes!

If uninsured, you will get the cheap option. For example, a 'simple' amputation instead of  complicated, expensive reconstructive surgery to save leg following a car accident. Hospitals dumping patients before they are fit leave the hospital. No meaningful access to preventive medicine. Etc., etc. Being uninsured in the US is a terrible predicament. Then, if you have assets (such as a cheap home), you will lose it to pay the hospital.

[gazzalfc]

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/port-liverpool-jobs-lost-extremely-25202913#source=breaking-news

Jobs will be lost at the Port of Liverpool due to  "an increasing decline in the movement of containerised cargo for Liverpool over the last few months"

Could also be down to the continued strike action at the port but also brexit

[redbyrdz]

Without wanting to appear to defend the US system. I simply can't believe in a '1st world' country, where if you got hit by a car and needed life saving surgery that the state wouldn't pay for it if you were uninsured.
SURELY, there's some sort of minimum bottom line? Which ,even without any privatisation , is where we are headed as the NHS is more and more underfunded.
Even, cynically, surely it's purely financially sensible to keep most citizens alive and paying taxes!

I'm on a few forums for cyclists where there are a lot of Americans. There are frequent gofundme calls for when someone got hit by a car. Even if you have health insurance in the US, it might not cover the costs if you end up in hospitalnin a different state, or if the hospital doesn't belong to a certain company.
Also costs are insanely high in the US, many times more what you'd pay privately in the UK. I read one story of a guy whose twins were born a bit prematurely, and one of them had Down's. He was billed $1.2 million for the birth.

That being said, the US healthcare system is surely the worst out there, and its maybe not a fair comparison. Countries like Germany and Japan have mixed public/private systems, and have more affordable costs. But then again, France has fully public healthcare afaik (my French colleague keeps saying how its the best in the world), and would probably the best comparison for the NHS. By that, its clear the NHS is massively underfunded. (As if we didn't know that.)

[reddebs]

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/port-liverpool-jobs-lost-extremely-25202913#source=breaking-news

Jobs will be lost at the Port of Liverpool due to  "an increasing decline in the movement of containerised cargo for Liverpool over the last few months"

Could also be down to the continued strike action at the port but also brexit

There's been far fewer boats at anchor in the bay we overlook this summer compared to last.

[thaddeus]

I'm on a few forums for cyclists where there are a lot of Americans. There are frequent gofundme calls for when someone got hit by a car. Even if you have health insurance in the US, it might not cover the costs if you end up in hospitalnin a different state, or if the hospital doesn't belong to a certain company.
Also costs are insanely high in the US, many times more what you'd pay privately in the UK. I read one story of a guy whose twins were born a bit prematurely, and one of them had Down's. He was billed $1.2 million for the birth.

That being said, the US healthcare system is surely the worst out there, and its maybe not a fair comparison. Countries like Germany and Japan have mixed public/private systems, and have more affordable costs. But then again, France has fully public healthcare afaik (my French colleague keeps saying how its the best in the world), and would probably the best comparison for the NHS. By that, its clear the NHS is massively underfunded. (As if we didn't know that.)

The French system is a mix of public and private but it's better integrated than the UK.  The private is supposed to compliment the public rather than compete with it.  The way it was explained to me by my wife is that patients may get referred to private services if that's the most appropriate thing to do but that they wouldn't necessarily know the difference.

They spend about 1% of GDP more on healthcare than the UK (11% against 10%) but arguably get very good value for that extra 1%.

The US system is utterly dysfunctional for everyone bar shareholders and those with full insurance coverage (i.e. high earners).  Nobody really would advocate that system based on evidence unless they had a vested interest.

[Red Raw]

...
I'm sure there's plenty of right wingers in the UK and the US who view the principle of the NHS - free for all at the point of delivery - as a 'moral hazard'.

Indeed - if supporters of private healthcare want to come out and say 'look I don't want my taxes to pay for someone else's treatment' that would at least be honest, but arseholes like DDavis shouldn't kid themselves or us that it will be cheaper or better value.

As Thaddeus says the potential for gains remains the preserve of those with vested interests, the Covid PPE contracts and Branson's involvement have shown precisely what happens when unchecked tories make public money available to private providers.

[Red Raw]

The French system is a mix of public and private but it's better integrated than the UK.  The private is supposed to compliment the public rather than compete with it.  The way it was explained to me by my wife is that patients may get referred to private services if that's the most appropriate thing to do but that they wouldn't necessarily know the difference.

They spend about 1% of GDP more on healthcare than the UK (11% against 10%) but arguably get very good value for that extra 1%.

The US system is utterly dysfunctional for everyone bar shareholders and those with full insurance coverage (i.e. high earners).  Nobody really would advocate that system based on evidence unless they had a vested interest.

According to the graph above (admittedly 2017 figures) the French also spend about 25% more per head than we do.

[PaulF]

According to the graph above (admittedly 2017 figures) the French also spend about 25% more per head than we do.

Does that mean France have a much higher GDP per head?

[thaddeus]

Does that mean France have a much higher GDP per head?

UK is slightly higher and has been now for almost a decade.  France's economy has been stagnant - even compared to the UK - for a long time now.  I'm going to caveat the next statement by saying I don't think it's necessarily a good thing to do but France have loads of scope to boost their GDP if they choose to by following many of the practices the UK has enacted over the past 30 years (Sunday opening is still rare in France, for example).

I suspect Red Raw and I are not comparing apples with apples when I say France spend 1% more of their GDP and RR says they spend 25% more per head.

[Kenny's Jacket]

Ive often wondered why getting private health insurance isnt pushed more in UK.

If those that can afford it go private, doesnt it free up  the NHS?

[TSC]

Ive often wondered why getting private health insurance isnt pushed more in UK.

If those that can afford it go private, doesnt it free up  the NHS?

If anything it dilutes NHS provision as a reasonable amount of private provision is delivered via NHS resources

[Red Beret]

If anything it dilutes NHS provision as a reasonable amount of private provision is delivered via NHS resources

Isn't basically the same Doctors and equipment for the most part? Going private is essentially a fast track system that bumps everyone else down the queue.

How many genuine, self contained private hospitals are there in the UK anyway?

[TSC]

Isn't basically the same Doctors and equipment for the most part? Going private is essentially a fast track system that bumps everyone else down the queue.

How many genuine, self contained private hospitals are there in the UK anyway?

Generally yes to your first point.  For example a consultant over a 5day working week May work 3days privately and 2 days on NHS work.

I don’t know numbers of private facilities across country that are sufficient without using NHS infrastructure and facilities.  The likes of BUPA has facilities dotted across country but if private health provision is via another more generic ‘insurance’ type provider said provider will often use NHS facilities.

[BarryCrocker]

Generally yes to your first point.  For example a consultant over a 5day working week May work 3days privately and 2 days on NHS work.

I don’t know numbers of private facilities across country that are sufficient without using NHS infrastructure and facilities.  The likes of BUPA has facilities dotted across country but if private health provision is via another more generic ‘insurance’ type provider said provider will often use NHS facilities.

How about incentivising doctors to do more days in the public health system by making that income tax free?

I went to an orthopedic surgeon years ago to get some knee surgery done with a referral from my GP. When I asked when could he do the surgery he asked if it was private or public. Public was 8 months, private was 5 days. I was lucky I had the cover to get it done straight away. What I'd love to know is, if he hadn't taken my op or another private patient would he just take the day off or bring forward someone on the public waiting list. I reckon he would have gone and played golf.

[TSC]

How about incentivising doctors to do more days in the public health system by making that income tax free?

I went to an orthopedic surgeon years ago to get some knee surgery done with a referral from my GP. When I asked when could he do the surgery he asked if it was private or public. Public was 8 months, private was 5 days. I was lucky I had the cover to get it done straight away. What I'd love to know is, if he hadn't taken my op or another private patient would he just take the day off or bring forward someone on the public waiting list. I reckon he would have gone and played golf.

Not sure what provision was in place to your point when Labour was in power but whatever it was it worked as NHS waiting lists hit targets generally. 

I had reconstructive surgery on a knee in 2006.  Time between seeing the GP to having the op was 4 months with appointments with the consultant surgeon taking place in between.

Ironically I required same op on the other knee about 18months ago.  and NHS waiting list estimate was c 18months to 2 years.  I was lucky as I had private cover via work so had it done in about 3 months.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Ive often wondered why getting private health insurance isnt pushed more in UK.

If those that can afford it go private, doesnt it free up  the NHS?

If fewer people make use of the NHS, do you expect that the NHS budget will not be proportionately reduced?

If anything it dilutes NHS provision as a reasonable amount of private provision is delivered via NHS resources

This too. We've only to think about A&E closures to save money. If there are fewer people using any particular NHS service, economics dictate that there will be pressure to rationalise those services. And this will result in decreased access. Of course, these things are always a balance, but there will be negative consequences from a smaller population of NHS 'customers'.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Isn't basically the same Doctors and equipment for the most part? Going private is essentially a fast track system that bumps everyone else down the queue.

How many genuine, self contained private hospitals are there in the UK anyway?

This is surely correct.