Mr. Dazzle wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 1:18 pm
Interesting how they don't put figures on how much these grand plans cost, but they quote savings.
I'm sure they've thought about it though
You can promise the moon on a stick when you know you'll never have to deliver it. As the radio just uttered 'It's Liz Truss on steroids'.
It'll steal votes from the Conservatives though. It's his revenge for not getting a knighthood.
It might steal some votes from the Conservatives, but I reckon most will be people who would otherwise not vote. I.e. those small c conservatives who want government to do small c conservative things. You know, low taxes, small government etc. We've given up waiting for the Conservative party to act like conservatives.
Institute for Fiscal Studies wrote:
An assessment of the tax and spending changes proposed in the 2024 Reform UK general election manifesto.
Carl Emmerson, deputy director at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said: “Reform UK proposes tax cuts that it estimates would cost nearly £90 billion per year, and spending increases of £50 billion per year. It claims that it would pay for these through £150 billion per year of reductions in other spending, covering public services, debt interest and working-age benefits.
This would represent a big cut to the size of the state. Regardless of the pros and cons of shrinking the state, or of any of their specific measures, the package as a whole is problematic. Spending reductions would save less than stated, and the tax cuts would cost more than stated, by a margin of tens of billions of pounds per year. Meanwhile the spending increases would cost more than stated if they are to achieve their objectives.
A reduction in tax of £90 billion a year, while sizeable, would still see tax revenues higher as a share of the economy than in 2019–20. But in reality the package of tax cuts proposed would, if and when fully implemented, cost tens of billions of pounds a year more than that. For example, Reform UK plans to cut the rate of corporation tax from 25% to 20% immediately, and then to 15% at the end of the parliament. The manifesto’s costings assess these measures only over the course of the next parliament, meaning that about half of the long-run annual cost is excluded.
Of the proposed spending increases, the largest is for the NHS (£17 billion per year). However, this would not be nearly enough to meet Reform’s incredibly ambitious commitment to eliminate waiting lists within two years. Eliminating the waiting list entirely is a feat that has not been achieved in the history of the NHS and seems near impossible within two years.
The cost-saving measures would save less than set out. There is a respectable argument for changing the extent to which the Bank of England pays interest to commercial banks, and indeed some other central banks don’t pay interest on all the reserves they hold. But whether a good idea or not, it would raise a lot less than £35 billion per year. Reform also propose to reduce “wasteful” spending by £50 billion per year across all government departments, quangos and commissions. But saving this sum would require much more than a crackdown on waste; it would almost certainly require substantial cuts to the quantity or quality of public services.
Even with the extremely optimistic assumptions about how much economic growth would increase, the sums in this manifesto do not add up. Whilst Reform’s manifesto gives a clear sense of priority, a government could only implement parts of this package, or would need to find other ways to help pay for it, which would mean losers not specified.”
eliminate waiting lists within two years. Eliminating the waiting list entirely is a feat that has not been achieved in the history of the NHS and seems near impossible within two years.
Also, there will be a promise that if you can't get a GP appointment in 3 days, you get a voucher to go private.
I'm intrigued as to where all the extra staff and resources will come from.
Reform also propose to reduce “wasteful” spending by £50 billion per year across all government departments, quangos and commissions. But saving this sum would require much more than a crackdown on waste; it would almost certainly require substantial cuts to the quantity or quality of public services.
Haven't we just had a decade of austerity and cutbacks?
eliminate waiting lists within two years. Eliminating the waiting list entirely is a feat that has not been achieved in the history of the NHS and seems near impossible within two years.
Also, there will be a promise that if you can't get a GP appointment in 3 days, you get a voucher to go private.
I'm intrigued as to where all the extra staff and resources will come from.
Quite funny watching people who think that British politics is shit diss a party which wants to Reform [sic] British politics in a way which is not on the traditional Left-Right spectrum. A third way if you wish.
A vote for Conservative, Labour, LibDem, Green, WHY is a vote for more of the same shit we've had to endure for the last 30 years.
"Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people." - Giordano Bruno
irie wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 6:19 pm
Quite funny watching people who think that British politics is shit diss a party which wants to Reform [sic] British politics in a way which is not on the traditional Left-Right spectrum. A third way if you wish.
A vote for Conservative, Labour, LibDem, Green, WHY is a vote for more of the same shit we've had to endure for the last 30 years.
Pretty much where I'm at. We need to break the same old 2 party cycle. What I am surprised at, is some of the Labour voters I know have jumped to RUK!
irie wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 6:19 pm
Quite funny watching people who think that British politics is shit diss a party which wants to Reform [sic] British politics in a way which is not on the traditional Left-Right spectrum. A third way if you wish.
A vote for Conservative, Labour, LibDem, Green, WHY is a vote for more of the same shit we've had to endure for the last 30 years.
Pretty much where I'm at. We need to break the same old 2 party cycle. What I am surprised at, is some of the Labour voters I know have jumped to RUK!
A vote for Labour (and for the Conservatives and LibDems) is a vote for the same tired old shit. They can shove it.
"Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people." - Giordano Bruno
I looked through my local candidates and the one that caught my eye is an independent who says he's never been interested in politics but stood as a he doesn't like any of the parties. There's a whiff of Trump about him so probably not.
irie wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 6:19 pm
Quite funny watching people who think that British politics is shit diss a party which wants to Reform [sic] British politics in a way which is not on the traditional Left-Right spectrum. A third way if you wish.
If that text Tiepan posted is anywhere near true, the third way is totally undeliverable unfunded promises.
Funny watching? I suppose it could be - but a very hollow laugh.
Actually, empty promises? Sounds convincingly like many other current politicians. Nothing new to see or hear.
Remind us how many of Boris' "40 new hospitals" have been built, or are even under construction.
Like I said up there ^^^ (probably) "anything but this" is a pretty poor way to make a judgement. If you can't imagine things being worse your parents probably didn't read to you as a child
Or maybe you're actually an AI. It's 2024 after all.
Reform aren't a 3rd way anyway, they're just out Torying the Tories.
Mr. Dazzle wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 8:00 pm
Like I said up there ^^^ (probably) "anything but this" is a pretty poor way to make a judgement. If you can't imagine things being worse your parents probably didn't read to you as a child
Or maybe you're actually an AI. It's 2024 after all.
Reform aren't a 3rd way anyway, they're just out Torying the Tories.
The impression i get is that Reform are just the Tories without the endearing humanitarianism, overwhelming sense of honour and rationality, and respect for the general public.
The NHS would be even less safe in Reform's hands than it has been in the hands of the Tories. Farage has consistently argued that the NHS 'needs to move to an insurance-backed model'.
But as they're only projected to win a handful of seats that isn't a problem. Yet.
mangocrazy wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 9:48 pm
The NHS would be even less safe in Reform's hands than it has been in the hands of the Tories. Farage has consistently argued that the NHS 'needs to move to an insurance-backed model'.
But as they're only projected to win a handful of seats that isn't a problem. Yet.
Blimey, this old chestnut about saving the NHS has been debated to death in other threads. The NHS model is obsolete, it is increasingly dysfunctional, it is dead just like Monty Pythons parrot sketch.
Probably doesn't matter to the likes of people like you who have houses in southern France, but to the very many far less well off it really does matter a great deal.
"Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people." - Giordano Bruno
mangocrazy wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 9:48 pm
The NHS would be even less safe in Reform's hands than it has been in the hands of the Tories. Farage has consistently argued that the NHS 'needs to move to an insurance-backed model'.
But as they're only projected to win a handful of seats that isn't a problem. Yet.
Blimey, this old chestnut about saving the NHS has been debated to death in other threads. The NHS model is obsolete, it is increasingly dysfunctional, it is dead just like Monty Pythons parrot sketch.
Probably doesn't matter to the likes of people like you who have houses in southern France, but to the very many far less well off it really does matter a great deal.
The NHS model of a health service that is free at the point of use is as valid as it ever has been, it's just that it's been treated as a political football by administrations of every stripe and has been chronically underfunded, marginalised and subject to creeping privatisation by the Tory govt of the last 14 years.
My house in France is a holiday home. I'm a UK resident, retired and the future of the NHS is of the greatest concern to me.
mangocrazy wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 9:48 pm
The NHS would be even less safe in Reform's hands than it has been in the hands of the Tories. Farage has consistently argued that the NHS 'needs to move to an insurance-backed model'.
But as they're only projected to win a handful of seats that isn't a problem. Yet.
Blimey, this old chestnut about saving the NHS has been debated to death in other threads. The NHS model is obsolete, it is increasingly dysfunctional, it is dead just like Monty Pythons parrot sketch.
Probably doesn't matter to the likes of people like you who have houses in southern France, but to the very many far less well off it really does matter a great deal.
The NHS model of a health service that is free at the point of use is as valid as it ever has been, it's just that it's been treated as a political football by administrations of every stripe and has been chronically underfunded, marginalised and subject to creeping privatisation by the Tory govt of the last 14 years.
My house in France is a holiday home. I'm a UK resident, retired and the future of the NHS is of the greatest concern to me.
The NHS model was predicated upon the use of GPs as the primary source of triage and treatment prior to making referrals to hospitals. Increasing population mobility and large scale immigration from countries that have no similar GP service have rendered this system obsolete, so people go to A&E. Times have changed rendering the system obsolete and no longer fit for the purpose. Chucking money at it will not change this. The model must change.
The Tories are not alone being responsible for the failure of the NHS, Labour are also culpable - just look at what they did with PFI's!
And as for your comment about your house in France being a holiday home, the point you missed was that if necessary you will have the money to self fund medical care, as we also can.
"Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people." - Giordano Bruno
I'm not convinced the NHS is worse, it's probably got better and better over the years at looking after people's health.
Medicine has turned into a bigger industry consuming more resources which are compounded by people living longer, so we have more people demanding a more expensive service. Maybe people are just expecting a lot more than they used to.
Mussels wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 11:08 pm
I'm not convinced the NHS is worse, it's probably got better and better over the years at looking after people's health.
Medicine has turned into a bigger industry consuming more resources which are compounded by people living longer, so we have more people demanding a more expensive service. Maybe people are just expecting a lot more than they used to.
One area where the National HEALTH Service has failed consistently is in the promotion of good health. It is a repair service and as it hasn't been true to it's original concept it is now failing as a repair service because more and more people are in the queue for repairs.
Despite it's overwhelming majority of managers compared to frontline staff is is appalingly managed. As irie says "Chucking money at it will not change this. The model must change."
I was taking people to Dalaman airport yesterday and whilst negotiating a very busy Marmaris (it's Kurban Bayramı so as well as the usual tourists the whole area is full of Turks from Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir) my passengers commented that it is easy to pick out the Brits. The majority are obese and this has got to be a huge (self inflicted) burden on the NHS simply because obesity never arrives on its own.
