Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
Privatisation; so often the answer: 22:54 - Feb 18 with 794 viewsjeera

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/feb/18/patients-undelivered-nhs-mail-sa

Well it looks like a duck, it sounds like a duck. Nope, dunno what it is.
Poll: Xmas dinner: Yorkshires or not?

0

Privatisation; so often the answer: on 22:56 - Feb 18 with 788 viewsMarshalls_Mullet

There's one problem with privatisation.... It's called TUPE!!

...forced to take the deadwood into the private sector.

Poll: Would love to see one of our midfield contribute 10+ goals. Who is most likely.

-2
Privatisation; so often the answer: on 23:08 - Feb 18 with 755 viewsBlueBadger

Privatisation; so often the answer: on 22:56 - Feb 18 by Marshalls_Mullet

There's one problem with privatisation.... It's called TUPE!!

...forced to take the deadwood into the private sector.


Well, there's that, the utterly needless additional layer of management that costs upwards of £4bn a year, increased red tape, cost-cutting and its effects on efficiency and patient safetyin order to hit profit targets, a reluctance to take on anything remotely 'complicated and a total lack of transparency and willingness to share information in order to ensure joined-up care as well.
[Post edited 18 Feb 23:10]

These people are called idiots and BB is their leader.
Poll: Where does Mr Tickle's Covid-19 exclusion space start?
Blog: From Despair to Where?

5
Privatisation; so often the answer: on 23:22 - Feb 18 with 722 viewsjeera

Privatisation; so often the answer: on 23:08 - Feb 18 by BlueBadger

Well, there's that, the utterly needless additional layer of management that costs upwards of £4bn a year, increased red tape, cost-cutting and its effects on efficiency and patient safetyin order to hit profit targets, a reluctance to take on anything remotely 'complicated and a total lack of transparency and willingness to share information in order to ensure joined-up care as well.
[Post edited 18 Feb 23:10]


A few more posts like this and he'll 'beg to differ'.

Well it looks like a duck, it sounds like a duck. Nope, dunno what it is.
Poll: Xmas dinner: Yorkshires or not?

0
Privatisation; so often the answer: on 23:23 - Feb 18 with 716 viewsMarshalls_Mullet

Privatisation; so often the answer: on 23:22 - Feb 18 by jeera

A few more posts like this and he'll 'beg to differ'.


He agreed. Why would I differ?

Poll: Would love to see one of our midfield contribute 10+ goals. Who is most likely.

0
Privatisation; so often the answer: on 06:31 - Feb 19 with 633 viewsWeWereZombies

Privatisation; so often the answer: on 23:23 - Feb 18 by Marshalls_Mullet

He agreed. Why would I differ?


Because you said one problem and Badger pointed five others, which you have yet to acknowledge.
[Post edited 19 Feb 6:32]

Poll: The United Kingdom is in danger of getting relegated from the G7, what to do?

0
Privatisation; so often the answer: on 09:22 - Feb 19 with 571 viewsGuthrum

Privatisation; so often the answer: on 22:56 - Feb 18 by Marshalls_Mullet

There's one problem with privatisation.... It's called TUPE!!

...forced to take the deadwood into the private sector.


That's a dilemma of modern capitalism. You want low unemployment and a late retiring age to avoid paying state benefits, yet jobs then have to be found for the 'deadwood', who are still people requiring paid work.

Good Lord! Whatever is it?
Poll: McCarthy: A More Nuanced Poll
Blog: [Blog] For Those Panicking About the Lack of Transfer Activity

2
Privatisation; so often the answer: on 11:32 - Feb 19 with 522 viewsNthsuffolkblue

Privatisation; so often the answer: on 22:56 - Feb 18 by Marshalls_Mullet

There's one problem with privatisation.... It's called TUPE!!

...forced to take the deadwood into the private sector.


So the whole point of privatisation is to cut terms and conditions and ensure the race to the bottom.

Seems a good argument for it to me.

Poll: Should there be a second referendum?
Blog: [Blog] Ghostbusters

2
Privatisation; so often the answer: on 03:54 - Feb 20 with 408 viewsHARRY10

Privatisation; so often the answer: on 09:22 - Feb 19 by Guthrum

That's a dilemma of modern capitalism. You want low unemployment and a late retiring age to avoid paying state benefits, yet jobs then have to be found for the 'deadwood', who are still people requiring paid work.


eh ?

what on earth aree you on about !

a) 100 men make x amount of widgets - each paid £500

b) 80 men make x amount of widgets - each paid £500
the other are paid a vastly reduced amount (benefit) to retain social harmony

b) is not only cheaper but keeps the others on thwir toes as there is a ready supply of labour to replace them and those 20 also provide a pool of flexible labour

and it has nothing ro do with capitalism (ook up the work) - it is merely a means of employing people going back 1000s of years
0
Login to get fewer ads

Privatisation; so often the answer: on 07:13 - Feb 20 with 364 viewsWeWereZombies

Privatisation; so often the answer: on 09:22 - Feb 19 by Guthrum

That's a dilemma of modern capitalism. You want low unemployment and a late retiring age to avoid paying state benefits, yet jobs then have to be found for the 'deadwood', who are still people requiring paid work.



Poll: The United Kingdom is in danger of getting relegated from the G7, what to do?

0
Privatisation; so often the answer: on 19:11 - Feb 20 with 307 viewsGuthrum

Privatisation; so often the answer: on 03:54 - Feb 20 by HARRY10

eh ?

what on earth aree you on about !

a) 100 men make x amount of widgets - each paid £500

b) 80 men make x amount of widgets - each paid £500
the other are paid a vastly reduced amount (benefit) to retain social harmony

b) is not only cheaper but keeps the others on thwir toes as there is a ready supply of labour to replace them and those 20 also provide a pool of flexible labour

and it has nothing ro do with capitalism (ook up the work) - it is merely a means of employing people going back 1000s of years


Yes. But governments don't want to pay benefits, as those are economically unproductive people being supported by taxpayers. Which is bad for their ability to bribe the electorate with tax cuts while not borrowing too much.

So they seek low unemployment as a major goal and "getting everybody back into work". Which includes the 'deadwood' to which the OP was referring.

I did say modern capitalism, not the whole philosophy.

Good Lord! Whatever is it?
Poll: McCarthy: A More Nuanced Poll
Blog: [Blog] For Those Panicking About the Lack of Transfer Activity

0
Privatisation; so often the answer: on 19:25 - Feb 20 with 301 viewsHARRY10

Privatisation; so often the answer: on 19:11 - Feb 20 by Guthrum

Yes. But governments don't want to pay benefits, as those are economically unproductive people being supported by taxpayers. Which is bad for their ability to bribe the electorate with tax cuts while not borrowing too much.

So they seek low unemployment as a major goal and "getting everybody back into work". Which includes the 'deadwood' to which the OP was referring.

I did say modern capitalism, not the whole philosophy.


Capitalism is capitalism - something that has only been around for a few hundred years.

There is no more a modern version than there is a modern version of gravity.

Full employment is ectremely costly and efficient as I pointed out above - given that it costs more to produce the same goods with a greater number of employees

Which does explain why there is so wide a gap between out out per worker in France and the UK.

And the 'taxpayers' are NOT the employees but the capitalist class as a whole. Tax is not a reduction in wages but a charge on profits.

Hence 80 employed and 20 on benefits is always cheaper, all else being equal.
0
Privatisation; so often the answer: on 23:33 - Feb 20 with 262 viewsGuthrum

Privatisation; so often the answer: on 19:25 - Feb 20 by HARRY10

Capitalism is capitalism - something that has only been around for a few hundred years.

There is no more a modern version than there is a modern version of gravity.

Full employment is ectremely costly and efficient as I pointed out above - given that it costs more to produce the same goods with a greater number of employees

Which does explain why there is so wide a gap between out out per worker in France and the UK.

And the 'taxpayers' are NOT the employees but the capitalist class as a whole. Tax is not a reduction in wages but a charge on profits.

Hence 80 employed and 20 on benefits is always cheaper, all else being equal.


I think you've got the wrong end of the stick on my comment, which was more aimed at goverment policies than efficiency of production.

Capitalism - as in the investment of funds (including borrowing) to increase business or profit from trade - is as old as human civilisation. To think of the Medieval or Cassical systems as something entirely different is a typical 19th century (I'm looking at you, Marx) misappraisal of history. Plenty of Capitalism went on in those eras, too.

Good Lord! Whatever is it?
Poll: McCarthy: A More Nuanced Poll
Blog: [Blog] For Those Panicking About the Lack of Transfer Activity

0

Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© TWTD 1995-2020