kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,240
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Feb 11, 2019 11:25:22 GMT
If I won euro millions then I’d help many other people. I wouldn’t get involved with football. I would set up trusts that will benefit those who have nothing and are starving and would find ways to help those who truly need help. Given that I only got my treatment due to the just giving page and shaming the top dogs in the NHS, ironically their acronym is N.I.C.E or national institute for clinical excellence. I would place funds that would be available to those who, like me, were refused the only drug that works. The older I get, the less I need. I’d buy myself a singer Porsche and move out of Bristol. As my dear old dad used to say, you can only wear one pair of trousers. So many of his saying just don’t translate well into the English language. I’d maybe make a decent donation to helpline and the FFSC but I’d not give one single penny to our owners. I’ve lost trust and faith in them.
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,240
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Feb 11, 2019 11:31:13 GMT
Smoking causes approx 25k deaths per year in UK, while approx 40k die as a direct result of air pollution. Nicotine in itself, while highly addictive is relatively harmless. It's the other s***e in tobacco that's the problem. As you were... ;-) Cancer research UK have UK deaths as a direct result of smoking at over 110,000 PA. WHO have it globally at 5.4 million a year. That's more than were killed each year during WWI. Based on population trends, they are saying that their estimate is that smoking will kill 1 billion people. This is being done for profit. Utterly disgusting. I understand why you feel as you do but this is by choice. No one is making people smoke. You cannot just make them pariahs. It’s a dangerous path to walk when you start to tell people what they are and aren’t allowed to do. We must live and let live. We must practice tolerance and not make people feel social outcasts, in my opinion
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2019 11:49:38 GMT
Cancer research UK have UK deaths as a direct result of smoking at over 110,000 PA. WHO have it globally at 5.4 million a year. That's more than were killed each year during WWI. Based on population trends, they are saying that their estimate is that smoking will kill 1 billion people. This is being done for profit. Utterly disgusting. I understand why you feel as you do but this is by choice. No one is making people smoke. You cannot just make them pariahs. It’s a dangerous path to walk when you start to tell people what they are and aren’t allowed to do. We must live and let live. We must practice tolerance and not make people feel social outcasts, in my opinion I agree, but there's a 'however'. The problem is that the actions of these selfish individuals has a consequence for others. Over 1000 people die in the UK each year from passive smoking. The burden on the NHS from smoking is huge. It's far in excess of the tax yield. That adversely affects the care available to others. That's before you even consider lost productivity etc. As said above, sat behind this are companies making vast fortunes from selling a product that they know is harming people. It's immoral.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2019 11:56:18 GMT
Good news, I actually won Euromillions on Friday and will be investing the whole amount in the club by buying a sausage roll.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Feb 11, 2019 12:38:43 GMT
If I won Euromillions I’d shut my mouth and not tell anyone. I'd pose in the paper with my Rovers shirt on just to piss off all the other fans off as I say I ain't putting a penny into the club
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2019 12:57:56 GMT
If I won Euromillions I’d shut my mouth and not tell anyone. I'd pose in the paper with my Rovers shirt on just to piss off all the other fans off as I say I ain't putting a penny into the club Why not do it on the pitch at a home game? But pretend that you had a plan to invest in the club, that would seriously p1ss us all off.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2019 13:20:06 GMT
I'd pose in the paper with my Rovers shirt on just to piss off all the other fans off as I say I ain't putting a penny into the club Why not do it on the pitch at a home game? But pretend that you had a plan to invest in the club, that would seriously p1ss us all off. Wouldn't be the first person to pose on the pitch in a shirt pretending to invest in the club...
|
|
|
Post by badbloodash on Feb 11, 2019 14:18:41 GMT
If I won euro millions then I’d help many other people. I wouldn’t get involved with football. I would set up trusts that will benefit those who have nothing and are starving and would find ways to help those who truly need help. Given that I only got my treatment due to the just giving page and shaming the top dogs in the NHS, ironically their acronym is N.I.C.E or national institute for clinical excellence. I would place funds that would be available to those who, like me, were refused the only drug that works. The older I get, the less I need. I’d buy myself a singer Porsche and move out of Bristol. As my dear old dad used to say, you can only wear one pair of trousers. So many of his saying just don’t translate well into the English language. I’d maybe make a decent donation to helpline and the FFSC but I’d not give one single penny to our owners. I’ve lost trust and faith in them. From what I’ve heard the new owner don’t need your winnings 😉😉
|
|
Rex
Predictions League
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,287
|
Post by Rex on Feb 11, 2019 15:19:09 GMT
It pisses me off how a couple of my mates have won the 50/50 more than once, so with my euromillions winnngs I will be buying every 50/50 ticket I can.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Feb 11, 2019 18:48:50 GMT
If I won euro millions then I’d help many other people. I wouldn’t get involved with football. I would set up trusts that will benefit those who have nothing and are starving and would find ways to help those who truly need help. Given that I only got my treatment due to the just giving page and shaming the top dogs in the NHS, ironically their acronym is N.I.C.E or national institute for clinical excellence. I would place funds that would be available to those who, like me, were refused the only drug that works. The older I get, the less I need. I’d buy myself a singer Porsche and move out of Bristol. As my dear old dad used to say, you can only wear one pair of trousers. So many of his saying just don’t translate well into the English language. I’d maybe make a decent donation to helpline and the FFSC but I’d not give one single penny to our owners. I’ve lost trust and faith in them. From what I’ve heard the new owner don’t need your winnings 😉😉 Is this the Winsor based man? Duke of Edinburgh. Im calling it
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2019 19:09:44 GMT
I would buy a season ticket. Just need to decide which club.
|
|
|
Post by badbloodash on Feb 11, 2019 19:14:45 GMT
From what I’ve heard the new owner don’t need your winnings 😉😉 Is this the Winsor based man? Duke of Edinburgh. Im calling it Maybe you’ve heard the same as me time will tell prettygood info from two different sources perhaps Hani is just waiting for the right time to tell his sibling to find a new hobby 😊
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on Feb 11, 2019 19:50:05 GMT
I understand why you feel as you do but this is by choice. No one is making people smoke. You cannot just make them pariahs. It’s a dangerous path to walk when you start to tell people what they are and aren’t allowed to do. We must live and let live. We must practice tolerance and not make people feel social outcasts, in my opinion I agree, but there's a 'however'. The problem is that the actions of these selfish individuals has a consequence for others. Over 1000 people die in the UK each year from passive smoking. The burden on the NHS from smoking is huge. It's far in excess of the tax yield. That adversely affects the care available to others. That's before you even consider lost productivity etc. As said above, sat behind this are companies making vast fortunes from selling a product that they know is harming people. It's immoral. Sorry pal but you are bang wrong on the tax yield. That data was set up to assume an identical life expectancy for smokers and non smokers. What it fails to point out is smokers die a lot younger. In fact, who do you think is costing society more? People who have asthma in their lives then die of a heart attack at 70? Or healthy folks who live to 95 with all the associated costs. Note: they get cancer too. They get all the same issues smokers get, they just get them 15 years later. What do you think. They die of? Old age? They get strokes, they get cancer and all sorts. The tax take from smokers is enormous and more than pays for their costs when you factor in the fact they die younger. Issue is, the NHS needs a scapegoat and by its nature, wants to limit the demand for its service. Can’t take it out on women, who proportionality use a health services a lot more than men, even when you take childbirth out of it (funnily enough medicine is female dominated). Can’t take it out on runners having hip operations at 35. Can’t take it out on people who decide to have kids at 39 and need 3 goes at IVF. Can’t take it out on certain communities who intermarry and have birth defects at a hugely higher rate than British people. Can’t take it out on drinkers. I’m not saying take it out on anyone, but there are plenty of groups we can single out of we want to. Smokers are just the most convenient.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2019 19:59:27 GMT
The pension costs of the dead are zero, too.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2019 21:26:06 GMT
I agree, but there's a 'however'. The problem is that the actions of these selfish individuals has a consequence for others. Over 1000 people die in the UK each year from passive smoking. The burden on the NHS from smoking is huge. It's far in excess of the tax yield. That adversely affects the care available to others. That's before you even consider lost productivity etc. As said above, sat behind this are companies making vast fortunes from selling a product that they know is harming people. It's immoral. Sorry pal but you are bang wrong on the tax yield. That data was set up to assume an identical life expectancy for smokers and non smokers. What it fails to point out is smokers die a lot younger. In fact, who do you think is costing society more? People who have asthma in their lives then die of a heart attack at 70? Or healthy folks who live to 95 with all the associated costs. Note: they get cancer too. They get all the same issues smokers get, they just get them 15 years later. What do you think. They die of? Old age? They get strokes, they get cancer and all sorts. The tax take from smokers is enormous and more than pays for their costs when you factor in the fact they die younger. Issue is, the NHS needs a scapegoat and by its nature, wants to limit the demand for its service. Can’t take it out on women, who proportionality use a health services a lot more than men, even when you take childbirth out of it (funnily enough medicine is female dominated). Can’t take it out on runners having hip operations at 35. Can’t take it out on people who decide to have kids at 39 and need 3 goes at IVF. Can’t take it out on certain communities who intermarry and have birth defects at a hugely higher rate than British people. Can’t take it out on drinkers. I’m not saying take it out on anyone, but there are plenty of groups we can single out of we want to. Smokers are just the most convenient. You need to argue this with Policy Exchange, they seem pretty certain that there's a nett cost to the exchequer, even after adjustments for reduced life expectancy. Of course, if there was another couple of billion quid there would be plenty of competition for the money, so the NHS probably wouldn't get the £. Moats and duck houses have been under-funded for many years now....
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on Feb 11, 2019 21:31:29 GMT
Sorry pal but you are bang wrong on the tax yield. That data was set up to assume an identical life expectancy for smokers and non smokers. What it fails to point out is smokers die a lot younger. In fact, who do you think is costing society more? People who have asthma in their lives then die of a heart attack at 70? Or healthy folks who live to 95 with all the associated costs. Note: they get cancer too. They get all the same issues smokers get, they just get them 15 years later. What do you think. They die of? Old age? They get strokes, they get cancer and all sorts. The tax take from smokers is enormous and more than pays for their costs when you factor in the fact they die younger. Issue is, the NHS needs a scapegoat and by its nature, wants to limit the demand for its service. Can’t take it out on women, who proportionality use a health services a lot more than men, even when you take childbirth out of it (funnily enough medicine is female dominated). Can’t take it out on runners having hip operations at 35. Can’t take it out on people who decide to have kids at 39 and need 3 goes at IVF. Can’t take it out on certain communities who intermarry and have birth defects at a hugely higher rate than British people. Can’t take it out on drinkers. I’m not saying take it out on anyone, but there are plenty of groups we can single out of we want to. Smokers are just the most convenient. You need to argue this with Policy Exchange, they seem pretty certain that there's a nett cost to the exchequer, even after adjustments for reduced life expectancy. Of course, if there was another couple of billion quid there would be plenty of competition for the money, so the NHS probably wouldn't get the £. Moats and duck houses have been under-funded for many years now.... Most estimates I’ve read put the cost of smoking 5-6 BN and the tax charge £10bn
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2019 22:16:06 GMT
You need to argue this with Policy Exchange, they seem pretty certain that there's a nett cost to the exchequer, even after adjustments for reduced life expectancy. Of course, if there was another couple of billion quid there would be plenty of competition for the money, so the NHS probably wouldn't get the £. Moats and duck houses have been under-funded for many years now.... Most estimates I’ve read put the cost of smoking 5-6 BN and the tax charge £10bn That ignores all of the other costs to the country. What value to you place on 1000 deaths per-year due to passive smoking? But it doesn't matter in terms of your original problem with the NHS as I understood it. I think you are arguing against yourself here. You've identified the high cost of providing health care to an aging population, so 2 things are needed, we all need to pay more and the thing needs to be better organised. I'm happy to pay more, later in life I'll be glad it's there and it's always been brilliant in terms of providing critical care for everybody I've known. You brought the problem up, so why not get in touch with Jeremy Hunt (I think he's the Health Secretary in charge of this stuff?) with your ideas about how it can be better run?
|
|
|
Post by badbloodash on Feb 12, 2019 5:53:23 GMT
You need to argue this with Policy Exchange, they seem pretty certain that there's a nett cost to the exchequer, even after adjustments for reduced life expectancy. Of course, if there was another couple of billion quid there would be plenty of competition for the money, so the NHS probably wouldn't get the £. Moats and duck houses have been under-funded for many years now.... Most estimates I’ve read put the cost of smoking 5-6 BN and the tax charge £10bn Ignoring the real cost millions of lives cut short by smoking and the impact this has had lost both my parents by the time I was 24 to smoking related illness changing my life forever
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on Feb 12, 2019 8:35:05 GMT
Most estimates I’ve read put the cost of smoking 5-6 BN and the tax charge £10bn That ignores all of the other costs to the country. What value to you place on 1000 deaths per-year due to passive smoking? But it doesn't matter in terms of your original problem with the NHS as I understood it. I think you are arguing against yourself here. You've identified the high cost of providing health care to an aging population, so 2 things are needed, we all need to pay more and the thing needs to be better organised. I'm happy to pay more, later in life I'll be glad it's there and it's always been brilliant in terms of providing critical care for everybody I've known. You brought the problem up, so why not get in touch with Jeremy Hunt (I think he's the Health Secretary in charge of this stuff?) with your ideas about how it can be better run? I would not be happy to pay another £5,000 a year in tax so a consultant can be a millionaire by age 34 instead of 33, or prop up the GP pension fund which gives a million pounds to every doctor and change after their £100k ish salary for 40 years. Doctors around the world don’t cost that. We can buy in cheaper from abroad, like we’ve done with hotel staff and cafe workers. Why can’t we reap that benefit in the medical profession? I’d give free settlement to any foreign doctor who can speak English from anywhere outside Europe and willing to work for £60k and a £10k annual defined contribution pension contribution. They would be just doing jobs british people don’t want to do, of course! Reasoning is I see a lot of incredible wealth being generated. Examples I’ve seen is of GPs earning £380,000 per year from private and nhs. Magnify that across the UK. That’s more than most company directors make in their best year. Nobody sees it. There are no shareholders questioning it, and most GPS I’ve seen are less than enthusiastic about their work and just want you out the door. Granted, yes, if you are dying the care is good. But you can’t get a check up. You only go there once you have overt signs of a serious illness - and if you want a check you’re branded “the worried well” and demonised as some barrier to the health service. Open the doors to doctors from Africa, the Far East, Russia. Provided the education is compatible (and it is) we can deliver a bit of competition into the health service instead of just having it for the working classes. See how quickly they’ll be voting UKIP!!!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2019 9:20:26 GMT
That ignores all of the other costs to the country. What value to you place on 1000 deaths per-year due to passive smoking? But it doesn't matter in terms of your original problem with the NHS as I understood it. I think you are arguing against yourself here. You've identified the high cost of providing health care to an aging population, so 2 things are needed, we all need to pay more and the thing needs to be better organised. I'm happy to pay more, later in life I'll be glad it's there and it's always been brilliant in terms of providing critical care for everybody I've known. You brought the problem up, so why not get in touch with Jeremy Hunt (I think he's the Health Secretary in charge of this stuff?) with your ideas about how it can be better run? I would not be happy to pay another £5,000 a year in tax so a consultant can be a millionaire by age 34 instead of 33, or prop up the GP pension fund which gives a million pounds to every doctor and change after their £100k ish salary for 40 years. Doctors around the world don’t cost that. We can buy in cheaper from abroad, like we’ve done with hotel staff and cafe workers. Why can’t we reap that benefit in the medical profession? I’d give free settlement to any foreign doctor who can speak English from anywhere outside Europe and willing to work for £60k and a £10k annual defined contribution pension contribution. They would be just doing jobs british people don’t want to do, of course! Reasoning is I see a lot of incredible wealth being generated. Examples I’ve seen is of GPs earning £380,000 per year from private and nhs. Magnify that across the UK. That’s more than most company directors make in their best year. Nobody sees it. There are no shareholders questioning it, and most GPS I’ve seen are less than enthusiastic about their work and just want you out the door. Granted, yes, if you are dying the care is good. But you can’t get a check up. You only go there once you have overt signs of a serious illness - and if you want a check you’re branded “the worried well” and demonised as some barrier to the health service. Open the doors to doctors from Africa, the Far East, Russia. Provided the education is compatible (and it is) we can deliver a bit of competition into the health service instead of just having it for the working classes. See how quickly they’ll be voting UKIP!!! Glad you've conceded the points on smoking. Jeremy will be delighted to hear from you with your views for reforming the NHS. I guess it's possible to get your first / 2:1 or Masters, do the 2 years work to become a Consultant and earn £1m after tax by the age of 34, but it would be unusual. Salary for a Consultant is £120,000. Yes that's high, however, it's a competitive market place. The reality is that there is competition for highly skilled people. OK, bring your people from abroad, they'll do exactly as British Consultants do and split their time between the NHS and private work, just as you would. You'll need to flood the labour market, but be careful, you don't want clinical standards to slip, do you. Good luck.
|
|