Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

[beninho]

First topic message reminder :

https://officiating.worldrugby.org/?module=3&section=36&subsection=129&language=en

"It is not mandatory for the team receiving the challenge to face it."

How many effing times. If they don't face it up silently and respectfully they get massive media criticism.

No they don't!

This is getting crazy!

[beninho]

If you believe that the nhs has got better over the past 9 years of cutbacks then fine. Strange, but fine.

Think recent figures showed hospitals at worse level ever for targets.

But again, if you think its improved. Then fine.

[super_realist]

I didn't say it had got better at all, but let's not pretend it was great under Labour either, who incidentally privatised parts of the NHS.

We need to stop treating the NHS as if it's amazing, and that all it needs is more funding. It needs root and branch reform, and it deserves a population who doesn't take the piss out of it the way we do.
It may be that some of it requires private input, it may be that we have to pay for certain elements, what is true is that it can't go on under the same system run by Labour or Tories.

[beninho]

All I said waa that a kid with pneumonia was sleeping on a floor due to a lack.of beds in a hospital. This is an issue caused mainly by the underfunding in the nhs. Considering we have gad a conservative government for this whole time,its hard to put the blame on anyone else.

Ectra funds may not magically chamge tbe nhs, but it will make it a damn site better after years of cuts.

[beninho]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/09/numbers-public-ownership-uk-utilities-nationalisation?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1UGpSx_x-RRW8BNDRx0kDr29-JiBUb0LX9cGRDt-yHtf5mF9C8DRfQCOM#Echobox=1575909790

Quite interesting

[super_realist]

Are you telling me that in Labour times there was never a kid sleeping on a floor or something similar that could be reported? I seem to recall people dying in corridors under Labour too, so let's not get too precious shall we?

The NHS is full of hellish stories because it's not the service that people claim. Some of that is due to lack of funding, some of that is due to mismanagement, some of that is due to undue strain caused by the population draining the services through preventable illnesses and diseases.
It's never been great, so let's stop pretending that its bad service is entirely due to one party, because it's not. It's all of them ever since its inception.

[super_realist]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/09/numbers-public-ownership-uk-utilities-nationalisation?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1UGpSx_x-RRW8BNDRx0kDr29-JiBUb0LX9cGRDt-yHtf5mF9C8DRfQCOM#Echobox=1575909790

Quite interesting

I'll trust the financial experts rather than The Graudian's terribly vague report on the matter.

You haven't valued the firms yet or gone through all the legal rigmarole. A government can't just buy back a company at market rates just because they want them. Like any "hostile takeover" which this would effectively be, they'd have to pay well over the odds. Is it even legal for a government to do this when companies are operating fine? I can't think of a precedent of a government buying a company that wasn't already failing, like a rail franchise.

It's also assuming that the Government would run these companies well, and there's no evidence though would, given that they didn't before.

WHo wants to live under monopoly conditions anyway? Competition is good for prices, efficiency and innovation. Public industries are not.

[beninho]

Ok realist, I get you have issues with the nhs. You've mentioned it, a lot.

Luckily, you can.probably afford some form of private medical care, or have it with your work.

I also get your issues state owned companies, but why are you ok with other state owned companies being heavily involved in our own train network.

c2c: Italian state

Chiltern: German state

Caledonian sleeper: PRIVATE

CrossCountry: German state

East Midlands: Dutch state

Eurostar: French state

Gatwick Express: French state

Grand Central: German state

Great Northern: French state

GWR: PRIVATE

Greater Anglia: Dutch state

Heathrow Express: PRIVATE

Hull Trains: PRIVATE

LNER: British state

London Northwestern Railway: Dutch state

London Overground: German state

London Underground: British state

Merseyrail: Dutch state

Northern: German state

Northern Ireland Railways: British state

Scotrail: Dutch state

South Western Railway: Hong Kong state

Southeastern: French state

Southern: French state

Stansted Express: Dutch state

TfL rail: Hong Kong state

Thameslink: French state

TransPennine Express: PRIVATE

Transport for Wales: French state

West Coast: Italian state

West Midlands Railway: Dutch state

[super_realist]

Ok realist, I get you have issues with the nhs. You've mentioned it, a lot.

Luckily, you can.probably afford some form of private medical care, or have it with your work.  

I also get your issues state owned companies, but why are you ok with other state owned companies being heavily involved in our own train network.

c2c: Italian state

Chiltern: German state

Caledonian sleeper: PRIVATE

CrossCountry: German state

East Midlands: Dutch state

Eurostar: French state

Gatwick Express: French state

Grand Central: German state

Great Northern: French state

GWR: PRIVATE

Greater Anglia: Dutch state

Heathrow Express: PRIVATE

Hull Trains: PRIVATE

LNER: British state

London Northwestern Railway: Dutch state

London Overground: German state

London Underground: British state

Merseyrail: Dutch state

Northern: German state

Northern Ireland Railways: British state

Scotrail: Dutch state

South Western Railway: Hong Kong state

Southeastern: French state

Southern: French state

Stansted Express: Dutch state

TfL rail: Hong Kong state

Thameslink: French state

TransPennine Express: PRIVATE

Transport for Wales: French state

West Coast: Italian state

West Midlands Railway: Dutch state

Why would I care who ran it as long as they're doing a decent job? I'm not saying they are all run well after all, how could anyone run a modern system on a Victorian infrastructure? Rail is no worse than it was under public ownership, but it's certainly much safer. I don't see any evidence that the UK government, especially with Corbyn in charge could run a rail service. However, given that the French, German, Italian railways are all better than ours, why wouldn't I want them running it?

The whole point is that Britain has a terrible record of running state owned companies. That's not really the case with foreign states and their railways. Just because one country (Britain) is terrible at public ownership, doesn't mean other countries aren't. Have you ever been on a Swiss, German, Austrian, Norwegian, Danish train? Compared to ours they are fantastic.

I don't have "issues" with the NHS, I just say it as it is. It's not the "jewel in the crown", it's a half decent idea that lags behind the services of many if not most North European countries. There's much more to that than simply "funding", as the way the current system is set up, most of the extra "funding" would simply disappear into one of the other reasons the NHS isn't as good as it could be: the terrible management.

[beninho]

I will also add, that probably the busiest travel network in the uk, tfl, is state owned. And, generally, it is very good, considering the numbers who use, the trains and bus network.

[super_realist]

I will also add, that probably the busiest travel network in the uk, tfl, is state owned. And, generally, it is very good, considering the numbers who use, the trains and bus network.

Wow, you find one  decent operation in a sea of dozens and dozens of poor ones. Doesn't mean we should trust the government to run a national service does it, or an energy company, or a telecommunications one, or water companies or car companies?

There's also a private element to the Underground in terms of maintenance. So it's not all "public"

[beninho]

I would have no issues in nationalising further parts if the rail lines.

[super_realist]

I would have no issues in nationalising further parts if the rail lines.

Fine, doesn't mean they'll be any better or provide more income for the government though does it?

Wouldn't you be concerned that nationalising industries would piss off the potential investors to the UK? Namely those countries who run those railways? That's the sort of thing that Corbyn doesn't think about.

[beninho]

I think Brexit will have a bigger impact in putting off investors in the uk, then nationalising the train network.

[super_realist]

Well it might do, but that's not what we are talking about is it?

Corbyn wants nationalisation AND he'll have Brexit too. Fantastic.
If people wanted Cameron to take the blame for Brexit, they should be charging Corbyn for keeping us under a Tory government. If they can hide Thornberry and Abbott away, you'd think they should have done the same for Corbyn.

[beninho]

Corbyn is liked by left wingers. Left wingers have taken over chunks of the labour party.  

Johnson is liked by right wingers, right wingers have taken over the tories.

Both leaders are not great.

This is a terrible election.

I honestly think you scots are better going alone.

[super_realist]

Corbyn is liked by left wingers. Left wingers have taken over chunks of the labour party.  

Johnson is liked by right wingers, right wingers have taken over the tories.

Both leaders are not great.

This is a terrible election.

I honestly think you scots are better going alone.

Well you're right on that. Can't imagine how Scotland would be better off though. Crippling national debt, hence poor credit rating, rate of debt too high for EU entry and no real source of revenue.

[pedro]

Corbyn wants nationalisation AND he'll have Brexit too. Fantastic.

Who says it should make sense? It’s ideology.

[super_realist]

Corbyn wants nationalisation AND he'll have Brexit too. Fantastic.

Who says it should make sense? It’s ideology.

Corbyn and his lickspittle minions have made a career of making no sense, so I shouldn't be surprised.

[beninho]

So, this child who was on.the hospital floor as omly had chairs available. The hospital has apologised, yet 100s of Facebook posts, all exactly the same, have been posted claiming to know someone at the hospital.

That just stinks.

[I'm never wrong]

So, this child who was on.the hospital floor as omly had chairs available. The hospital has apologised, yet 100s of Facebook posts, all exactly the same, have been posted claiming to know someone at the hospital.

That just stinks.

Was those the posts saying it was all a set up Ben? I saw one, and then another, and did wonder.

[super_realist]

Reports are that it was the mother who put the kid on the ground and took a photograph.
Kid has to wait in hospital shocker. Newsflash. Everyone does.

[super_realist]

Surprised the climate morons aren't blaming the NZ volcano on climate change.

[beninho]

. There are a number of tweets and posts saying the exactly same thing about being a set up. Literally exactly the same, but under different names, all saying they have a friend at leeds hispital. The hospital have apologised that they had no beds, the child had to lie on the floor.

If anyone believes the rubbish being posted, they are being brainwashed. Its terrible.

As much as the journos who believed soneone was punched at the hospital, when no such thing happened. They then spread it aroubd, so enough people accepted it without proof.

[super_realist]

You don't know it was or wasn't a set up Beninho.
Just because you're passionate about the NHS doesn't mean that a woman didn't put her child on the floor.
Why is this even a story? Everyone waits in hospital.

If there's no beds there's no beds. Blame the triage for prioritising wrongly. It's their job to manage the in patients in order of need.

[beninho]

There is nothing to indicate it is a setup. The hospital apologised for not having a bed, they declared it the busiest day since a day in 2016. Check out the tweets from the journalist at the yorkshire post who wrote the story.

We know she put her child on the floor, there was no beds available, which has been confirmed.

The problem, is tge flooding of social media with the exact same message trying to muddy the situation. And people are therefore believing this over the actual known information.

[super_realist]

So what are you moaning about? Just that people spin stories? It's an election period, haven't you noticed they're all at it?

[beninho]

https://twitter.com/marcowenjones/status/1204184650144473088?s=19

[beninho]

What other party has done this? This isn't spin, this is targeted lies. And people then believe it, yourself being case in point. As you've mentioned reports of it being a setup. These numerous reports are lies.

[super_realist]

What other party has done this? This isn't spin, this is targeted lies. And people then believe it, yourself being case in point. As you've mentioned reports of it being a setup. These numerous reports are lies.

Who says it's a party?
I'm not saying I believe it, I said I don't really see a story in a child sleeping on the floor. He wasn't forced to, and it wasn't whilst he was undergoing treatment. He was waiting to be seen/get a bed.  Everyone waits in hospital. Do you expect a bed in the waiting area?

[beninho]

Im not a 4 (?) Year old child with pneumonia.

So, you think its just a random group of people, sendibg out the exact same message 100s of times on social media? Witjout any party allegiance, on the day the prine minister, gets shown up about the child on a hospital floor?

Do you also believe a punch was thrown at Hancocks aide?

[super_realist]

Im not a 4 (?) Year old child with pneumonia.

So, you think its just a random group of people, sendibg out the exact same message 100s of times on social media? Witjout any party allegiance, on the day the prine minister, gets shown up about the child on a hospital floor?

Do you also believe a punch was thrown at Hancocks aide?

I dont care about the message. I haven't seen it, I'm not stupid enough to believe everything I read and see.
Of course I don't believe Hancocks aide was punched. Why are you going off your head about this? I don't see you crying so much when Labour supporters lie.

Remember Corbyn lying there were no seats on the train when he sat on the ground?

[beninho]

If you haven't seen it, what were you basing your early view that there had been reports of it being staged?

I've not seen anything from labour that comes close to this, and the misinformation to the journalists to report the punch.

But some people accept this as part of politics. I think its all pretty poor.

[super_realist]

If you haven't seen it, what were you basing your early view that there had been reports of it being staged?

I've not seen anything from labour that comes close to this, and the misinformation to the journalists to report the punch.

But some people accept this as part of politics. I think its all pretty poor.

I said there had been reports it had been staged. I didn't say it had.
What about Labour constantly making up that the NHS is for sale, when it was them who gave more contracts to private companies than any other party.

[pedro]

Surprised the climate morons aren't blaming the NZ volcano on climate change.

So let’s just blame Trump in stead.

[Davie]

I blame Brexit

[dynamark]

I blame Diggers he would have sorted this.
I would be very interested to see the outcome of the childs hospital visit/treatment for suspected pneumonia(got that right first time)but I doubt we will see that.
Ashcroft is such a stupid boy stand in the naughty corner son.

[super_realist]

I wonder what ever happened to Diggers. Hpoe he's alright.

I heard on the radio today that the boy initially had a bed, but someone in more need came along and the boy had to wait, so his condition couldn't have been seen as too serious. As a kid of that age I was always on the ground. I think people are jumping to the wrong conclusion that the boy is being made to lie on the ground to undergo treatment, when in reality he's still waiting to be seen. Hardly a story when you consider that potential position.

There's always more to a story than what you see in a photo.

[beninho]

https://twitter.com/LeedsHospitals/status/1204339353838870528?s=19

[beninho]

Whats more to the story?

4 year old goes to hospital because he is not well. He is referred from the emergency room to another section. Neither had a bed. He was a sick 4 year old and needed to lie down. He had to lie on the floor.

It's really black and white. Not sure why people are looking for shades of grey or listening to people on the radio when the hospital have confirmed it.

[super_realist]

Whats more to the story?

4 year old goes to hospital because he is not well. He is referred from the emergency room to another section. Neither had a bed. He was a sick 4 year old and needed to lie down. He had to lie on the floor.

It's really black and white. Not sure why people are looking for shades of grey or listening to people on the radio when the hospital have confirmed it.

The point is that it's easy to jump to conclusions about a photograph if you don't know the story behind it.

You can easily see why someone could use it as a criticism for the state of the NHS, but you could also see how it could be used for political opportunism from the other point of view.

What is wrong with a four year old lying on the floor whilst waiting to be seen? Nobody made him. There are no beds in Casualty waiting rooms and there probably never will be,  and everyone knows that kids won't sit still for any length of time. I really do think you're reading far too much into this story. Waiting in Casualty is something we've done since the inception of the NHS. Big bloody deal.
It's was the hospital's busiest day in 3 years, what would you expect them to do? Magic up a bed and a dozen new doctors? I think they dealt with it fine, and as it turns out they were right as he was discharged the next morning. Sounds like other more deserving cases were prioritised.
Had it been a normal day it would have been fine.

[beninho]

We have different views on care. If my child was sick and needed emergency treatment would I be happy to make him or her lie on the floor in.order to feel comfortable. Obviously not, and im sure most right minded parents would feel the same.

You think its fine that kids have to do that.

We differ.

And, who's jumping to conclusions about the photo,it came from an article and had been checked before coming out. The people who have the biggest issues tend to be, people who are defending the government or more right wing.

I must also add, they had no beds in the children's section he was referred to, not just the emergency room.

But again,if you think its ok, then thats your call.

[super_realist]

We have different views on care. If my child was sick and needed emergency treatment would I be happy to make him or her lie on the floor in.order to feel comfortable. Obviously not, and im sure most right minded parents would feel the same.

You think its fine that kids have to do that.

We differ.

And, who's jumping to conclusions about the photo,it came from an article and had been checked before coming out. The people who have the biggest issues tend to be, people who are defending the government or more right wing.

Why wouldn't you? Kids spend loads of time on the floor and could practically sleep on a clothesline at that age.

The hospital was experiencing a level of demand not seen in over 1000 days. Kudos for them only having to wait 4 hours.

I'm not jumping to conclusions about the photo. I'm saying that regardless of what side you are on about the NHS, the same photo could be seen from two different perspectives and demonstrably has been.

I'm not defending the government, nor does not being an NHS flagwaver make me right wing. That's always the refrain of someone who finds someone they don't agree with. "Oh, that makes you right wing" Come on.

The tweet from the hospital backs up what I'm saying anyway, so I don't see what your problem is. They were busy, they acknowledged, they apologised for the wait and said they had plans to expand their facilities. That's it. Nothing more to be said.

[beninho]

How would you describe yourself politically?

You come across as a genuine right winger. Maybe not extreme, but definitely right of centre.

[super_realist]

You said the other day that you weren't a lefty, so if you're not a lefty, then I'm not right wing.

I'd say most people were a bit of both.

[beninho]

Im centre left. But I would say I'm more left then right.

Unfortunately, I used to be the target voter for labour. But they are gone away from the centre left.

[super_realist]

Im centre left. But I would say I'm more left then right.

Unfortunately, I used to be the target voter for labour. But they are gone away from the centre left.

I don't think I'd object much to Labour were it not being run by the idiots like Corbyn, Abbott, McDonnel etc. There's a few people I'd be happy to see lead the party were it to move closer to the centre. Purely for the survival of the party they surely have to move back there?

[beninho]

They won't move back to the centre. To may people have gone in with the leftish dreams. It doesn't win elections in the uk.

Just imagine an election betweem Starmer and Gauke.

[super_realist]

It's won more elections than Corbyn's direction has ever done. I don't think there is that many people in the hard left bracket, just as I don't think there's a big hard right side.
Labour are alienating their key voters with this particular route.

[kwinigolfer]

It's won more elections than Corbyn's direction has ever done. I don't think there is that many people in the hard left bracket, just as I don't think there's a big hard right side.
Labour are alienating their key voters with this particular route.

super,
It would probably be fair to say there's not that many hard-right in the US (not %age-wise anyway), but the soft right is enabling the hard right just to get what they want - Supreme Court, tax-cuts which will be paid for by reducing social "entitlements", Republican judges who will stay in place for generations, relaxation of regulatory controls (especially environmental), racial profiling in elections, gerrymandering, etc, etc.

It is tragic, to me anyway, that GB&NI (or England at least) is going down the same path, enabling the Johnson/ReesMogg bumholes. Pathetic, and an abdication of their responsibilities to the people.

[super_realist]

You could also say that the soft left voting Labour would enable the hard left crackpot policies of Corbyn's Labour. It's really a no win situation. THe hard left is as dangerous as the hard right, except for some reason being seen as hard left is somehow seen as "cosy and caring" by some whereas it's economic suicide.

[Sponsored content]