"Over By Christmas"?

[yorksrob]

I'm lucky to have a very good GP practice who will see me when I need them.

 

[gazzaa2]

Usually for conditions being sold rather than just “because”… You’ll find “inflationary” also means something rather different to “at or above the rate of inflation”.



Except that revenues are increasing again. The current issues are strangling that growth and preventing more passengers from returning, so that approach is penny wise pound foolish, to say the least.

I also notice GPs are doing very well, thanks very much, despite the fact I’ve been unable to get an appointment for much of the last couple of years. Who pays for that? Oh yes that would be me as a 40% tax payer.

Oh and I notice benefits claimants have had a rise…

The demand is there but there's far less trains running than 2019 (factoring in cancellations and reduced timetables). When the service levels go back to normal then so will revenues.

 

[yorksrob]

The demand is there but there's far less trains running than 2019 (factoring in cancellations and the like).

Indeed, so the austerity cuts will be stifling revenue growth.

 

[21C101]

Also not exactly “conservative”, is it!?

Indeed. It is political suicide. I think the technocratic wets that have taken over think that because Lib and Lab have the same policies with knobs on when it comes to policies Tory voters dislike, they can get away with it.

Its clear that all they care about is propping up the house price bubble which suits them as property investors and buy to let landlords but is ruinous to ordinary workers (incidentally that explains their sudden conversion to supporting benefits - a 10% increase in housing benefit passes through its recpients hands into the hands of their landlords, doing it enables rents to be raised).

Farage is mobilising and the split vote will slaughter the tories to an extent that makes 1997 look like a vicarage tea party.

 

[Bungle73]

Barristers got 15% having not had any increase for most of the preceding decade.

And some of whom were on below minimum wage.

 

[21C101]

An ex of mine was a GP and I got a bit of an insight. Apparently the receptionists ask you what’s wrong to “triage” patients and get an idea how long an appointment you will need. But I agree why on earth would I want to tell a doctors’ receptionist personal information? There are many other issues: there is a tendency for practices to take on too many patients, also hypochondriacs (and general idiots) who go to the doctors with non problems, but still have to be entertained so take up valuable time. It’s a mess.

Perhaps people should have to pay £10 to see a GP - at least they’d think twice about whether they needed to go - but that would cause uproar!

Apologies off topic - but the NHS certainly rivals the railway in terms of structural incompetence, and more than eclipses it in terms of waste.

Apparently when Cyprus had their economic implosion they introduced a £30 fee for the first appointment for a new condition. So if you turn up with diabetes, £30, then all follow up appointments free for the rest of your life.

Turn up every week with a different minor ailment , £30 a go. Result, the hypochondriacs vanished and the service was revolutionised.

 

[Need2]

Apparently when Cyprus had their economic implosion they introduced a £30 fee for the first appointment for a new condition. So if you turn up with diabetes, £30, then all follow up appointments free for the rest of your life.

Turn up every week with a different minor ailment , £30 a go. Result, the hypochondriacs vanished and the service was revolutionised.

And those who are genuinely ill, like my wife (4 new illnesses within 12 months), have to pay?
I get your point though.

 

[DanNCL]

My own view, which has changed over the past few months, is that the 10% being given to benefit claimants should also be what everyone on the government payroll gets offered, be that civil servants or people who have their salaries controlled by government departments such as railway staff. The only exceptions should be MPs and ministers who should be having a pay freeze.

Oh and I notice benefits claimants have had a rise…

They say pay must be limited to 2% to keep inflation down and tax allowances frozen for six years, but are happy to increase benefits and non contributory civil service pensions by 10.1%.

One could argue the difference is that not increasing benefits would send millions more people to food banks - not providing the same increase to railway staff wouldn't apart from some people in the lowest paid roles. Certainly if anyone who's already on a £40k+ annual salary is contemplating going to a food bank if they don't get a pay rise something's seriously wrong with their budgeting skills.

I'm not defending the 2% pay offer as it's appalling, but I feel the implied criticism of benefits being increased by 10% is unjust.

I also notice GPs are doing very well, thanks very much, despite the fact I’ve been unable to get an appointment for much of the last couple of years. Who pays for that? Oh yes that would be me as a 40% tax payer.

Same here. I've not seen a GP for over two years, despite having needed one several times in that period. My GP sends people to A&E when they ring up as they have no available appointments, which of course makes A&E even more overwhelmed than it would have been otherwise as people are being sent there for the most minor of issues.

there is a tendency for practices to take on too many patients

Sometimes, as is the case with my GP, it's down to there being a lack of any other GP practices in the area. We have one GP practice with less than 10 doctors to cover a population of in excess of 20k.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Perhaps people should have to pay £10 to see a GP - at least they’d think twice about whether they needed to go - but that would cause uproar!

Aware I'm getting off topic so this is the last I'll say about GPs, but I genuinely very much like this idea. I'd expect no moaning or sarcasm from the receptionist though - not that it's acceptable even when it's a free service.

 

[DanNCL]

Aware I'm getting off topic so this is the last I'll say about GPs, but I genuinely very much like this idea. I'd expect no moaning or sarcasm from the receptionist though - not that it's acceptable even when it's a free service.

£10 deposit, refundable if you attend your appointment. It'd make people think twice before booking an appointment and not bothering to turn up!

 

[yorksrob]

Or just contract the GP's to do what they're supposed to do. Set a key performance indicator on face to face visits or receive less funding.

 

[Mag_seven]

OK folks can we ditch the discussion about GPs and get back to discussing the developments in the RMT dispute.

 

[21C101]

My own view, which has changed over the past few months, is that the 10% being given to benefit claimants should also be what everyone on the government payroll gets offered, be that civil servants or people who have their salaries controlled by government departments such as railway staff. The only exceptions should be MPs and ministers who should be having a pay freeze.

You need to put benefits (for those able to work) up by at least 1% below wages (more if tax bands are being frozen) otherwise you end up creating what the financial industry call "moral hazard" ie you disincentivise people from working.

For those with children and renting, working part time 16 hours and claiming Universal Credit pays out so much that it is not worth the hassle of working full time.

This also suits certain employers as they can pay five people 16 hours, minimum wage and pay not a penny of national insurance. If they employ two people full time they pay employer NI and have to pay them a higher wage as it is their only income and they will also pay tax on it. Hence a lot of places only offer part time for many jobs. This is the other dirty secret of Tax Credits/Universal Credit. It is a monstrous subsidy to corporates who pay low wages.

Of course if you are single you are stuffed. £70 job seekers allowance and enough housing benefit to almost rent a bedsit plus can often only get part time work due to the above

The other issue is that when the last kid turns 18 it all stops overnight by which time you have no career record and little chance of a decent job as employers want to employ younger people with kids part time who get the generous benefits, so it is a monstrous poverty trap too.

 

[Iskra]

Indeed, so the austerity cuts will be stifling revenue growth.

The revenue evaporated before any cuts came. That chronology is quite important.

 

[yorksrob]

The key is to concentrate on reducing imported inflation, and boost domestic sectors that can divert value back into the British economy.

 

[21C101]

The revenue evaporated before any cuts came. That chronology is quite important.

The revenue evaporated because the government ordered everybody to stay at home. This (by dusrupting supply chains) is also what caused the inflation.

 

[yorksrob]

The revenue evaporated before any cuts came. That chronology is quite important.

Yes, but you've sod all chance of generating additional revenue if you're cutting the service to the bone.

 

[Iskra]

The revenue evaporated because the government ordered everybody to stay at home. This (by dusrupting supply chains) is also what caused the inflation.

Supply chains are international so British lockdowns are irrelevant.

 

[yorksrob]

Supply chains are international so British lockdowns are irrelevant.

Not at all, the pandemic generated lockdowns all over the world, including import sources such as China.

 

[21C101]

The key is to concentrate on reducing imported inflation, and boost domestic sectors that can divert value back into the British economy.

Reopening our coal mines, fracking, encouraging North Sea oil and gas development and a rapid and large nuclear power station would do that - and also increase rail freight significantly.

Pigs might fly though.

 

[Iskra]

Yes, but you've sod all chance of generating additional revenue if you're cutting the service to the bone.

I think the resources are about right, it’s the way they are distributed that is the issue, plus outdated contracts that are preventing an appropriately resourced service being delivered to the customer at the times they need it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Nov 2022 ==

Not at all, the pandemic generated lockdowns all over the world, including import sources such as China.

Yes, that’s what I was saying, so the supply chain would have been disrupted regardless of any lockdown occurring in Britain…

 

[21C101]

Not at all, the pandemic generated lockdowns all over the world, including import sources such as China.

I agree you cant escape international effects but, there was an awful lot of domestic supply chain distruption too and still is as so many left the workforce and didn't come back.

 

[yorksrob]

Reopening our coal mines, fracking, encouraging North Sea oil and gas development and a rapid and large nuclear power station would do that - and also increase rail freight significantly.

Pigs might fly though.

Well, I think a bit of North sea gas - but only if we own it and don't give it to someone else to inflate on the international market, otherwise why bother.

But certainly nuclear is needed.

 

[21C101]

Well, I think a bit of North sea gas - but only if we own it and don't give it to someone else to inflate on the international market, otherwise why bother.

But certainly nuclear is needed.

Yes our existing supplies would have been good for a few more decades if we hadn't wasted them by selling it internationally and generating electricity with it.

As to supply chains, recent events have demolished the Just In Time philosophy of keeping minimal stocks.

 

[yorksrob]

I think the resources are about right, it’s the way they are distributed that is the issue, plus outdated contracts that are preventing an appropriately resourced service being delivered to the customer at the times they need it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Nov 2022 ==


Yes, that’s what I was saying, so the supply chain would have been disrupted regardless of any lockdown occurring in Britain…

Overall the resources might be right, but I think that revenue is being chased. The South East is presenting less revenue and Northern (and soon to be Western) services are being cut to cover the cost.

I agree you cant escape international effects but, there was an awful lot of domestic supply chain distruption too and still is as so many left the workforce and didn't come back.

There was a lot of domestic supply chain disruption and government can do a lot more to encourage the domestic supply chain

 

[Iskra]

Overall the resources might be right, but I think that revenue is being chased. The South East is presenting less revenue and Northern (and soon to be Western) services are being cut to cover the cost.

There was a lot of domestic supply chain disruption and government can do a lot more to encourage the domestic supply chain

I don’t disagree with you there, but won’t comment further to avoid opening a whole new can of worms

 

[yorksrob]

Yes our existing supplies would have been good for a few more decades if we hadn't wasted them by selling it internationally and generating electricity with it.

As to supply chains, recent events have demolished the Just In Time philosophy of keeping minimal stocks.

Well, that was a "free market" idea. It's about time the country became less free market orientated and more concerned with national self-sufficiency.

 

[21C101]

Overall the resources might be right, but I think that revenue is being chased. The South East is presenting less revenue and Northern (and soon to be Western) services are being cut to cover the cost.

The problem is that it was the premiums on the "Network South East" and "Inter City" TOCs that were funding the "provincial services" TOCs.

Result peak hour extras get reduced on the likes of Thameslink and provincial services get heavily pruned.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Nov 2022 ==

Well, that was a "free market" idea. It's about time the country became less free market orientated and more concerned with national self-sufficiency.

Free Market on competing products is one thing. Free market on finite and irreplaceable resources is another matter entirel

 

[yorksrob]

The problem is that it was the premiums on the "Network South East" and "Inter City" TOCs that were funding the "provincial services" TOCs.

Result peak hour extras get reduced on the likes of Thameslink and provincial services get heavily pruned.

So we're told, but our subsidy profiles have generally been less publically funded than our European neighbours, so perhaps we just need to fall into line.

Its always been a political decision, and perhaps that decision was wrong.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Nov 2022 ==

The problem is that it was the premiums on the "Network South East" and "Inter City" TOCs that were funding the "provincial services" TOCs.

Result peak hour extras get reduced on the likes of Thameslink and provincial services get heavily pruned.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Nov 2022 ==


Free Market on competing products is one thing. Free market on finite and irreplaceable resources is another matter entirel

So why have we tarted out our natural resources on the international free market for the last four decades ?

 

[muz379]

I really hope that there is a breakthrough and resolution this side of Christmas , devolved administrations resolving their transport disputes certainly will apply some pressure , but even if the national dispute with the RMT & ASLEF is resolved unless the treasury unlock the funds required to make rest day working agreements then I suspect little will change on the front of non strike day chaos .

One could argue the difference is that not increasing benefits would send millions more people to food banks - not providing the same increase to railway staff wouldn't apart from some people in the lowest paid roles. Certainly if anyone who's already on a £40k+ annual salary is contemplating going to a food bank if they don't get a pay rise something's seriously wrong with their budgeting skills.

I think its a bit off the mark so suggest that people cannot be struggling just because they have what without any context sounds like a decent salary .

I mean they might be on £40k but be the sole income in the household . They might have had a mortgage that has just gone up £500+ a month and already been running a tight budget . Impossible to say . People who cut their cloth accordingly on high salaries will still be struggling when energy bills and mortgages have gone up way above what they may have planned for .