The Demise of Personal Freedom.

[Finless]

Originally Posted by NotDeadYet

It all smacks of gimmick. Any attempt at denial of service due to lifestyle choices would quickly be slapped down in the courts, it's an unenforceable contract.

They already do it to some degree. A friend who recently died of cancer (not lungs) had been a heavy smoker and drinker a lot of his life. They wouldn't give him heart bypass surgery until he gave up smoking. He was dead within a year or so through cancer (of the spine) so his 'lifestyle choice' delayed his heart operation and made fuck all difference anyway apart from making the last year of his life more difficult than it need have been without being able to have a fag.

On the other hand, I don't see anything wrong in trying to change the lifestyle of people who are potentially going to be major drains on the health service.

Information is fine but twisting someone's arm is not. Who the hell are the government to tell any one person how to live their life? It's a f*ck*ng outrageous suggestion as far as I'm concerned. What the hell have I paid my taxes and stamp (if that still exists) for all (virtually) my working life? Do you think the government have been spending my NHS money on something other than the NHS?

As for people whose sporting/hobby choices also have an increased chance of big medical bills, as unpopular as it will be but I agree that some sort of insurance should be required. If you can afford to dive then you can afford £50 a year to DAN (or someone else). I'd guess the treatment for my bend cost my local NHS trust in the region of £10k. At the time I didn't live in a particularly affluent area (the nearby council estate is where Shameless is filmed) so why should my hobby cost the community, say, a part-time physio or nurse or maybe one less operation for a pensioner?

Surely it is a case of 'money from a national pot' and that the people are already there and being paid for whether they are in use or not? How did your bend stop an OAP operation? How much EXTRA did your bend cost than would have been paid if you hadn't been bent - bugger all (unless you got a chopper ride) and even they seem to be glad to come out? How much does it cost for them to do their training etc when there are no call outs?

We whinge about taxes but our NHS system, certainly for anyone who can afford to go diving regularly, costs us f*** all compared to private schemes

Don't forget the private schemes (that I have seen) are in a different league (quality wise) than the NHS (1st Class compared to 'steerage').

(consider how much it would cost if there was no local GP network) or to other countries' national schemes. The way successive governments have treated it has been pathetic too but we are still faced with an underfunded, underresourced medical service.

I don't know enough to volunteer a sensible arguement beyond recounting the experiences of some business type guru who went back to a hospital that had taken his advice on board (seen on TV recently). The amount of wastage within the NHS was frightening and, needless to say, there was plenty of scope for improvement without further extra funding. One of his big points was that continuous interference from politicians was costing money. Each change in office brought yet another review and changes based more on "being seen to be doing something" than any coherent policy.

I mean, have you seen the latest f*ck*ng genious idea? If a patient in hospital gets one of the latest superbugs then, with some variation (depending on which party), a financial penalty is going to be levied! I mean, FFS, these are publicly funded hospitals, how is finig them going to improve services for patients?

On a population-wide scale, making choices about how lives are lived makes a massive difference in health -- look at the huge improvement in health in Scotland since the smoking ban. No government is obliged to provide medical treatment for anyone, we are in an extremely lucky situation. When I lived in the US, my medical insurance was keeping enough credit on my Visa card to buy a one way ticket home. I'm paying for the NHS, like everyone on here, so I don't want that system abused by people sucking tar into their lungs or living off pies. It's not a brilliant service so if something can be done about it getting clogged up then great.

OK, well, how about leaving existing people alone and tell young couples to stop breeding so much? That's only a lifestyle choice? I and my SWMBO made the choice voluntarily so I know it's no big imposition?

I notice you didn't mention beer swilling or bacon sarnie munching?

[Richard Mason]

Originally Posted by Roger Cardy

Got to get my 4 pennys worth in on this one.

The level of high level waste estimated to be about 2 detached houses worth (Volume), has been accumulated over the last 50 years or so of nuclear power. Sure the first reactors (Windscale) were there purely for the production of Pu239, and when Calder Hall and Chappel Cross were built, electricity was a by product. Since those days however, 1962 in fact the civil nuclear programme was there for the primary purpose of producing electricity. What they did with the Pu239 after reprocessing well I'll leave you to decide. The Nuclear programme established by the C.E.G.B (Central Electricity Generating Board) set about giving the UK a balanced energy mix, with caol around 70% and Nuclear the remaining 30%. Now things have changed Nuclear will soon be below 20% with gas and coal making up the balance. We heve nearly exhausted our gas deposits, are now becoming reliant on overseas coal (we closed our own mines they were unecomonic see Maggie for detals), so where do we go next.

Nuclear power is safe, as long as it is managed well. As I work in the industry perhaps I am a little better informed than most, the scare stories in the press are just that, they are normally factually incorrect, and nearly always have an anti nuclear slant. But who wants there lights to go out, the answer I suspect is no one. The alternatives whether people agree or not is Nuclear, it's not an if but when we will start a new build programme, unless of course we leave ourselves open to ransom but our overseas suppliers ie Russia, and the middle east.

I'm a little puzzled by the anti-nuclear brigade too. It's too dangerous they say. Fine, show me that no one is being killed or injured, or environmental damage occurring, directly or indirectly by either coal or oil as a source of the energy they use, including the energy used to manufacure the imported goods we all buy made in the PRC. Compared with fossil fuels, env & health impacts from nuclear, even including Chernobyl, would be very small.

The approach here in Aus is even more hypocritical. We have getting on for half the world's Uranium reserves and export it all over the world, yet the current Federal govt came to power on a manifesto which included a "no, never, not ever" clause for nuclear power. Crazy.

Not only that, wwe have untold millions of square KMs of remote, arid & uninhabited outback, with ancient rocks, very stable geology and little chance of serious seismic activity and no risk of groundwater contamination. It would be an ideal place to store nuclear waste produced by the rest of the world and in all honesty a lot safer, for the whole planet and probably the right thing to do........not only that but there'd be lots of $$$ to be made too, we have a lot of expertise in digging deep holes in the ground but the merest suggestion sends most of the population frantic and State politicians into NIMBY-fitting.

Personally, I think that the longer-term answer is going to be Thorium reactors. Tricky to build but cannot do the uncontrolled chain reaction thing and they produce far less waste and it's nowhere near as long-lived as Uranium reactors.

[Finless]

Originally Posted by Richard Mason

I'm a little puzzled by the anti-nuclear brigade too. It's too dangerous they say. Fine, show me that no one is being killed or injured, or environmental damage occurring, directly or indirectly by either coal or oil as a source of the energy they use, including the energy used to manufacure the imported goods we all buy made in the PRC. Compared with fossil fuels, env & health impacts from nuclear, even including Chernobyl, would be very small.

The approach here in Aus is even more hypocritical. We have getting on for half the world's Uranium reserves and export it all over the world, yet the current Federal govt came to power on a manifesto which included a "no, never, not ever" clause for nuclear power. Crazy.

Not only that, wwe have untold millions of square KMs of remote, arid & uninhabited outback, with ancient rocks, very stable geology and little chance of serious seismic activity and no risk of groundwater contamination. It would be an ideal place to store nuclear waste produced by the rest of the world and in all honesty a lot safer, for the whole planet and probably the right thing to do........not only that but there'd be lots of $$$ to be made too, we have a lot of expertise in digging deep holes in the ground but the merest suggestion sends most of the population frantic and State politicians into NIMBY-fitting.

Personally, I think that the longer-term answer is going to be Thorium reactors. Tricky to build but cannot do the uncontrolled chain reaction thing and they produce far less waste and it's nowhere near as long-lived as Uranium reactors.

I thought he was a Norse God?

I've never heard of these things. Are you sure you don't mean 'In Theoryium reactors'?

[Richard Mason]

Originally Posted by Finless

I've never heard of these things. Are you sure you don't mean 'In Theoryium reactors'?

No mate; read and learn:

Thorium Reactors - Further Information

New age nuclear | COSMOS magazine

Thorium - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Bantam]

It always make me laugh, as a geologist, that the same people who are anti-nuclear (the green brigade) are the same people who are touting that 'man made global warming' is real (it's not - it's a cycle that the planet is going through) and that wind turbines are our future (they're not - they're too unreliable).

However, they would be the first ones complaining when they can't charge their mobile phones.

The biggest problem this planet has is not global warming, the fuel reserves we have will run out way before the planet heats up much more.....

[alrhem]

How about this for a start with regards the money/taxation issue....

make prisons like prisons...

how come they get pool tables/xbox/playstaion and sky tv?

[Finless]

Originally Posted by Richard Mason

No mate; read and learn:

Thorium Reactors - Further Information

New age nuclear | COSMOS magazine

Thorium - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why? I'll only forget. Cursed brain .

[MarkP]

Originally Posted by Sean

My take on this is if they got rid of all the middle managers that do sweet F all but drain the NHS of funds if would save a fortune, I’m lucky to be able to afford private cover and given the choice would get out of the NHS, as someone said why should I pay for those who never worked a day in their life, or those that are in the UK illegal, they are a drain on society, but we don’t live in the states and like to help everyone regardless of statues, size, habits, or hobbies.

If that total tosser Brown wants to introduce a two tier NHS then I believe that I should be given the option to get out of it and not pay. I have never used the NHS (lucky I guess) and never intend to. Its just more Labour shit.

Another thought Brown is not democratically elected not buy the general public only by the MP’s now someone is going to come along and say the MP’s are voted in to act on our behalf, anyway enough of my crap bring on the general election I say

Perhaps this sort of inarticulate rant could have been avoided, had money been taken from the NHS forty nine years ago and put into education.

As for the NHS / private thing, consider this: should something go wrong in a private hospital you'll almost certainly be shipped to a NHS intensive care unit. Feel better now?

Still, at least we agree on our PM's virtues, but probably for entirely different reasons.

[Finless]

Originally Posted by MarkP

Perhaps this sort of inarticulate rant could have been avoided, had money been taken from the NHS forty nine years ago and put into education.

As for the NHS / private thing, consider this: should something go wrong in a private hospital you'll almost certainly be shipped to a NHS intensive care unit. Feel better now?

Still, at least we agree on our PM's virtues, but probably for entirely different reasons.

I can only ustilize perceptions to back this statement but; I thought education was better 49 years ago?

Actually, it may be that the threat of corporal punishment was enough to make people learn more back then?

[MarkP]

Originally Posted by Finless

I can only ustilize perceptions to back this statement but; I thought education was better 49 years ago?

Actually, it may be that the threat of corporal punishment was enough to make people learn more back then?

I’m ambivalent about the corporal punishment thing. I mean, nanny spanking me never did me any harm. But it did make me late for work this morning...


(With apologies to Humphrey Lyttelton.)