THE FOURTH OF JULY

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unfortunately she appears to be scientifically illiterate and largely ignores Climate Change. She's not alone!
Wealth creation is a trivial issue, a daydream, compared to the changes coming our way.
Just keeps getting swept under the rug doesn't it?

This petty little election of grifters all vying for their place in the limelight and the wealth that brings, will all be a moot point pretty soon if we don't get our act together
 
In 1960, the net personal wealth of top 1% in the UK was 35%. It declined to 18% by 1996, and has remained at 20% or a little over since 2006. The UK is below that of Norway, Austria, Denmark, Portugal, Estonia, and the Netherlands, and half that of America, where the top 1% possess 40% in net Household wealth.

Rachel Reeves has introduced the rather novel concept into the Labour party of wealth creation rather than wealth redistribution, but then unlike the 'us 'n them' class warrior dinosaurs, she isn't intellectually illiterate and she does have a solid background in economics. Unfortunately, the anticipated as yet to be generated new 'wealth stream' has already been spent, at least on paper, on ambitious manifesto plans.

In a matter of days now, they'll have the keys to No 10 (and she to No 11). It will be interesting to see how long it takes for 'mission creep' to set in.

I do hope when Starmer takes over he'll come to realise that the term 'hard working families' and 'ordinary people' are meaningless. What constitutes a family these days? It used to be a married couple with 2.4 children on average. What about single people? And among the electorate many people are far from being 'hard-working', but are being propped up by taxes paid by people who are hard working.

What is an 'ordinary person', and when do they cease to be 'ordinary'?

As to the Labour's workers rights plan:

Quote:

"Labour's plan will make work pay. We'll boost wages, make work more secure and support working people to thrive – delivering a genuine living wage, banning exploitative zero hour contracts, and ending fire and rehire".

Unquote.

Can't argue with the sentiments, but boosting wages - for example in the fragile hospitality sector, will not 'make work more secure'. The current living wage is £11.44 per hour = £457.60 for a 40 Hr week, plus all the other overheads for an employer to pay (holidays, sickness absence, maternity/paternity leave, statutory bank holidays) . How much more would be a 'genuine' living wage be? In the UK, almost 60% of small businesses fail in their first three years of life.

I do wonder if Sir Keir Starmer has looked at the size of companies in the private sector and the proportion who are employed in SMEs (Small to Medium Enterprises). A few facts:

The UK private sector comprises largely of non-employing businesses and small employers. SMEs (small and medium-sized enterprises) account for 99.9% of the business population. The government's statistics show that in 2023 SMEs employed 16.7 million people in the UK, 61% of the total number of people employed by private sector companies

There were estimated to be 5.6 million UK private sector businesses.

1.4 million (26%) businesses had employees and 4.1 million (74%) did not employ anyone aside from the owner(s)

There were 5.51 million small businesses (with 0 to 49 employees), 99.2% of the total business population
There were 36,900 medium-sized businesses (with 50 to 249 employees), 0.7% of the total business population
A further 8,000 businesses were large businesses (with 250 or more employees), 0.1% of the total business population

The odious practice of 'fire and re-hire' has been by large firms such as P&O Ferries and Compass:

https://corporatewatch.org/broken-compass-the-scandals-of-compass-group/

https://www.peoplemanagement.co.uk/...code-practice-fire-rehire-employers-need-know

But of 5.6 million private sector companies, only 8,000 (0.1% of the total) employ 250 people or more, and threequarters of private sector companies employ no-one but the proprietor, (many of who would probably be only to pleased to be making £457 and to only have to work 40 Hrs a week).

Those are the facts of life which any incoming government will have to face.
But those figures selectively hide the poor working practices of the likes of sports direct, Amazon, and many unknown firms who exploit their workers.
 
Jacob Rees Mogg.

He's such a charlatan isnt he. Did you know that despite him being one of the main architects of brexit, when we did actually leave, he moved his investments(estimated in the tens of millions) from the UK to the EU.

Far as im concerned these scumbags have committed treason against the people of Britain. I only wish they were able to meet the same fate as the treasonous faced up until the early 19th century.
 
I cannot believe this thread is still rattling on. You are all concerned about and will be voting in an autocratic process called 'First Past The Post'. To make this abundantly clear; if in your constituency you have 7 candidates and all in general get voted for but one, and one alone, gets the biggest proportion of the vote ( as in the case of Blair who only achieved 21%) then that candidate becomes the MP. Taking from the example and so presuming that candidate gets 21% of the vote and none of the others get close to 21%...that means that 79% of the electorate for that constituency are not represented and all decisions made in Parliament are also always skewed towards that 21%. THIS IS NOT DEMOCRACY! It is the reason why nothing ever gets done in this country, century after century. Chuck into the equation the cesspit called the House of Lords and the apathy of a previous commentator who claimed he votes because it is 'all we have' then we will never, ever get problems sorted! Register to vote but do not vote is the only way forward until we get complete electoral and legal reform!
That is true; except that the first past the post system (FPTP) does generally result in one party getting a majority (which in theory does allow them to "get things done").

Proportional representation would be a fairer reflection of the political preferences of the nation, but as far as I understand it, countries that use such systems rarely end up with a majority government. The end result being that the largest party then has to form coalitions with smaller parties; some of whom can be on the extreme ends of the political spectrum - meaning those minor parties can exert more influence than their share of the vote deserves (because they're critical to the largest party remaining in power).

Basically, FTFP is bad. And so are all the other systems.
 
I cannot believe this thread is still rattling on. You are all concerned about and will be voting in an autocratic process called 'First Past The Post'. To make this abundantly clear; if in your constituency you have 7 candidates and all in general get voted for but one, and one alone, gets the biggest proportion of the vote ( as in the case of Blair who only achieved 21%) then that candidate becomes the MP. Taking from the example and so presuming that candidate gets 21% of the vote and none of the others get close to 21%...that means that 79% of the electorate for that constituency are not represented and all decisions made in Parliament are also always skewed towards that 21%. THIS IS NOT DEMOCRACY! It is the reason why nothing ever gets done in this country, century after century. Chuck into the equation the cesspit called the House of Lords and the apathy of a previous commentator who claimed he votes because it is 'all we have' then we will never, ever get problems sorted! Register to vote but do not vote is the only way forward until we get complete electoral and legal reform!
I agree on the whole.
This GE is particularly crazy, with a cast of scumbags and lunatics.
Maybe we should start contemplating the next one after this, it might be significant.
 
"Getting things done" appears to be the new gold standard in government.
I heard some (old) people being interviewed on the wireless the other day, and one said Thatcher was the best ever PM, because she "got things done".
Jack the ripper "got things done", Genghis Khan "got things done". It's a shame that the things themselves seem to be irrelevant now, as long as they get done.
 
"Getting things done" appears to be the new gold standard in government.
I heard some (old) people being interviewed on the wireless the other day, and one said Thatcher was the best ever PM, because she "got things done".
Jack the ripper "got things done", Genghis Khan "got things done". It's a shame that the things themselves seem to be irrelevant now, as long as they get done.
So long as things are done according to your ideals that's ok!!
 
I cannot believe this thread is still rattling on. You are all concerned about and will be voting in an autocratic process called 'First Past The Post'. To make this abundantly clear; if in your constituency you have 7 candidates and all in general get voted for but one, and one alone, gets the biggest proportion of the vote ( as in the case of Blair who only achieved 21%) then that candidate becomes the MP. Taking from the example and so presuming that candidate gets 21% of the vote and none of the others get close to 21%...that means that 79% of the electorate for that constituency are not represented and all decisions made in Parliament are also always skewed towards that 21%. THIS IS NOT DEMOCRACY! It is the reason why nothing ever gets done in this country, century after century. Chuck into the equation the cesspit called the House of Lords and the apathy of a previous commentator who claimed he votes because it is 'all we have' then we will never, ever get problems sorted! Register to vote but do not vote is the only way forward until we get complete electoral

So long as things are done according to your ideals that's ok!!
Perhaps this is more to your taste then?
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...lmed-making-racist-comments-about-rishi-sunak
 
.
it is quite infantile to propose "wealth creation" as a solution, when it is precisely the cause of the problem.
The whole economy is based upon wealth creation and has been fueled by fossil fuels so it must take the blame for climate change but we are also driving the problem with out culture of materialism and lifestyles that some people take advantage of to promote personal wealth at our expense.

Unfortunately she appears to be scientifically illiterate
I would say that politicians as a whole are both scientifically illiterate and also lack any basic understanding of engineering, this is why they come up with these schemes that are just not feasable like everyone having heat pumps or thinking that land based wind turbines are a solution when really large wind farms at sea are much better apart from the issues of connecting to the grid which could be solved by actually having a new grid with connection points at sea with only minimal connections to the landbased grid.

You are all concerned about and will be voting in an autocratic process called 'First Past The Post'.
Yes a totally outdated system that cannot be classed as representative of the population which is also compounded by the fact that voting is not a legal requirement so the FPTP system is even worse. I think that comparing the house of lords to a cesspit is doing a disservice to cesspits as they perform a very important function for people.
 
Last edited:
"Getting things done" appears to be the new gold standard in government.
I heard some (old) people being interviewed on the wireless the other day, and one said Thatcher was the best ever PM, because she "got things done".
Jack the ripper "got things done", Genghis Khan "got things done". It's a shame that the things themselves seem to be irrelevant now, as long as they get done.
I was once told that organisations with a plan perform better than those without, even if sometimes the plan is wrong. Similarly, politically one can do nothing or do something.

Doing nothing causes no stress and takes no effort. Change will be the outcome of natural evolutionary political and economic pressures which will inevitably lag the need.

The alternative is to anticipate change and initiate action to respond to changing needs. Inevitably some actions will subsequently prove wrong, and malign players may initiate malign actions.

On balance I prefer the illusion of control, rather than set sail to be driven by capricious winds over which I have no influence. The mirror image of "Getting things done" is "decay" - hardly attractive.
 
but do not vote is the only way forward until we get complete electoral and legal reform
It is a point of principle, but given millions will vote, it would never lead to electoral reform.

Labour do have a number of policies that will help including: HoL reform, stopping advocacy of lobbying and 2nd jobs, devolve more power to regions.
 
The NHS in its present form is an unsustainable money pit, which the incoming Government will struggle to turn around. Healthcare spending in the UK as a share of the gross domestic product (GDP) was 5.1 percent in 1990. By 2022, healthcare expenditure had risen to 11.3 percent of GDP. (Fourth highest in Europe:12.8% of GDP in Germany, 12.4% in France, 12.2% in Austria).

Much of the Financial burden is preventable with lifestyle changes, but that’s unlikely to change any time soon. Effort by governments (of any persuasion) no encourage and support people to follow healthy lifestyles often brings accusations of ‘Nanny State’.

Apart from the fact that younger people start work and paying taxes much later in life than in the past, though people are living much longer, they incur illnesses in later life which former generations didn't live long enough to incur and spend many more years in retirement and declining health.

Life expectancy in years at birth:

1939: The year I was born, Male 61.4. Female 65.6 so on average, I was not expected to live to retirement at age 65. I'm 85 today. I think I owe my longevity to living through the war years into the 1950s on a meagre but healthy diet. Food rationing didn't end until 1954, the year I started work aged 15. Sweets and chocolate was rationed to 7 ounces (200g) per week. No processed food, no 'junk food', no ready meals.

Life Expectancy:

1948: The year the NHS was created: Male 65.9 Female 70.3

So when the NHS was created, the likelihood was that on average, few would live beyond retirement age.

2000 Male 75.6 Female 80.

2022: Male 79.25 Female 83.12

The UK's population is both larger and older than a hundred years ago, but most of the difference in size is due to an increase in the older population. Between 1901 and 2010, the population under 40 increased only modestly, from 28.5m to 31.5m. But over the same period, the number of people aged 40 and older has more than trebled, from 9.7m to 30.8m. In 1901, around 5% of the population was aged 65 and older, compared with 17% in 2010. The proportion of the population in this age group is projected to rise to 23% by 2035.

But those extra years are beset with ill health, much of which is preventable.

For the three years 2020–22, although male life expectancy was 78.8 years, average healthy male life expectancy was only 62.4 years – ie, 16.4 of those years (21%) would have been spent in poor health. Female life expectancy was 82.8 years, of which 20.1 years (24%) would have been spent in poor health. Although females live an average of four years longer than males, they spend a higher proportion and more years of their lives in poor health. Similarly, disability-free life expectancy is almost two decades shorter than life expectancy, and is higher among males (61.8 years) than females (60.5 years).

Much of this ill health stems from lifestyle – obesity, poor diet, processed food, foods high in fat, sugar and salt, ‘junk food’ smoking, alcohol, lack of exercise leading to cardio-vascular disease. This places a heavy burden on the NHS. (A 330ml can of fizzy drink typically contains 35 mg of sugar – seven teaspoons full, contributing to childhood obesity).

Obesity:

Britain has one of the highest obesity rates in Europe. Two in three adults are overweight or obese and the NHS spends £6bn a year treating obesity-related ill-health. That is forecast to rise to £10bn a year by 2050.

Prevalence of obesity (BMI ≥ 30kg/m²) in UK in 2022 is: Women: 28.3%, Men 26.94%. (For comparison: USA: Women 43.82%, Men 41.64%. France: Women 10.18%, Men, 9.82%).

https://data.worldobesity.org/tables/ranking-obesity-by-country-adults-1.pdf?

Hospital admissions directly attributable to obesity in 2023:

8,716 hospital admissions directly attributable to obesity, an increase of 13% on 2021/22, when there were 7,733 admissions.

Hospital admissions where obesity was a factor:

Just over 1.2 million (1,236 thousand) hospital admissions where obesity was a factor, an increase of 8% on 2021/22 when there were 1,142 million admissions, continuing a trend in increasing admissions seen over the past decade.

Type 2 Diabetes:

The number of people under 40 being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes in the UK has risen 39% in six years, fuelled by soaring obesity levels and cheap junk food.

Figures from Diabetes UK show cases of type 2 among under-40s have increased to almost 168,000 from 120,000 in 2016/17. Diagnoses are rising at a significantly faster pace than among over-40s, for whom the increase was 25% in six years. Many cases go undiagnosed.

Smoking is a leading cause of preventable illness and death.

In 2023, there were 408,700 hospital admissions in England attributable to smoking, 5% higher than 2021/22 when it was 389,800. 74,600 deaths in 2023 were attributable to smoking, a decrease of 3% from 2018 (77,000) and 9% from 2009 (82,000). 710,000 prescription items to help people stop smoking were dispensed, a decrease of 4% from 2018/19 (740,000) and 71% from 2009/10 (2.48 million).

The most recent figures show that women in England are amongst the most likely to smoke during pregnancy with 10% still lighting up at the time of their baby’s delivery, which doubles the risk of stillbirth, substantially increases the likelihood of miscarriage and triples the chances of sudden infant death. Across the country, there’s significant variation in the number of pregnant women who smoke, ranging from 2% in Kensington & Chelsea to over one in five in Blackpool.

Alcohol related illness:

Alcohol-related illness costs the NHS a substantial amount each year. The most recent estimates indicate that alcohol-related harm amounts to approximately £3.5 billion annually in England1. This figure has increased from around £2.7 billion in 2006/7. The impact includes expenses related to hospital admissions, emergency services, and other healthcare resources

Heart Bypass operations:

The first heart bypasses were done in the 1960s. In the UK, the first coronary angioplasty was done in 1980, followed by the first coronary stent insertion in 1988. Angioplasty is a minimally invasive method of widening a coronary artery.

It diverts blood around narrowed or clogged parts of the major arteries to improve blood flow and oxygen supply to the heart. Around 20,000 coronary artery bypass grafts are carried out in England every year. Most of these are carried out in men, and around 80% are used to treat people who are at least 60 years of age.

Hip & Knee Operations:

Knee replacement has become one of the most common major surgical procedures, with almost 35,000 operations performed each year in the United Kingdom.

In 2019 There were 93,911 knee replacement procedures and almost all patients were 50 years old or older (97.4%). Patients aged 50-69 accounted for 49.6% whereas 51.8% for those over 70 years old. 59.4% of all hip replacements were carried out on female patients 40.5% were male patients.

NHS performs over 30,000 total hip replacements each year, reducing pain and increasing mobility, at a total cost to the NHS of £140 million a year.

It behoves the incoming government to ensure that money poured into the leaking bucket of the NHS is spent more efficiently, as well as for all of us in this unfit nation to take some responsibility for our own health. Better to prevent people from getting ill, than simply getting more and more doctors, nurses, beds ad infinitum to treat self induced chronic ill health. Or so it seems to me.
 
The NHS in its present form is an unsustainable money pit, which the incoming Government will struggle to turn around. Healthcare spending in the UK as a share of the gross domestic product (GDP) was 5.1 percent in 1990. By 2022, healthcare expenditure had risen to 11.3 percent of GDP. (Fourth highest in Europe:12.8% of GDP in Germany, 12.4% in France, 12.2% in Austria).

Much of the Financial burden is preventable with lifestyle changes, but that’s unlikely to change any time soon. Effort by governments (of any persuasion) no encourage and support people to follow healthy lifestyles often brings accusations of ‘Nanny State’.

Apart from the fact that younger people start work and paying taxes much later in life than in the past, though people are living much longer, they incur illnesses in later life which former generations didn't live long enough to incur and spend many more years in retirement and declining health.

Life expectancy in years at birth:

1939: The year I was born, Male 61.4. Female 65.6 so on average, I was not expected to live to retirement at age 65. I'm 85 today. I think I owe my longevity to living through the war years into the 1950s on a meagre but healthy diet. Food rationing didn't end until 1954, the year I started work aged 15. Sweets and chocolate was rationed to 7 ounces (200g) per week. No processed food, no 'junk food', no ready meals.

Life Expectancy:

1948: The year the NHS was created: Male 65.9 Female 70.3

So when the NHS was created, the likelihood was that on average, few would live beyond retirement age.

2000 Male 75.6 Female 80.

2022: Male 79.25 Female 83.12

The UK's population is both larger and older than a hundred years ago, but most of the difference in size is due to an increase in the older population. Between 1901 and 2010, the population under 40 increased only modestly, from 28.5m to 31.5m. But over the same period, the number of people aged 40 and older has more than trebled, from 9.7m to 30.8m. In 1901, around 5% of the population was aged 65 and older, compared with 17% in 2010. The proportion of the population in this age group is projected to rise to 23% by 2035.

But those extra years are beset with ill health, much of which is preventable.

For the three years 2020–22, although male life expectancy was 78.8 years, average healthy male life expectancy was only 62.4 years – ie, 16.4 of those years (21%) would have been spent in poor health. Female life expectancy was 82.8 years, of which 20.1 years (24%) would have been spent in poor health. Although females live an average of four years longer than males, they spend a higher proportion and more years of their lives in poor health. Similarly, disability-free life expectancy is almost two decades shorter than life expectancy, and is higher among males (61.8 years) than females (60.5 years).

Much of this ill health stems from lifestyle – obesity, poor diet, processed food, foods high in fat, sugar and salt, ‘junk food’ smoking, alcohol, lack of exercise leading to cardio-vascular disease. This places a heavy burden on the NHS. (A 330ml can of fizzy drink typically contains 35 mg of sugar – seven teaspoons full, contributing to childhood obesity).

Obesity:

Britain has one of the highest obesity rates in Europe. Two in three adults are overweight or obese and the NHS spends £6bn a year treating obesity-related ill-health. That is forecast to rise to £10bn a year by 2050.

Prevalence of obesity (BMI ≥ 30kg/m²) in UK in 2022 is: Women: 28.3%, Men 26.94%. (For comparison: USA: Women 43.82%, Men 41.64%. France: Women 10.18%, Men, 9.82%).

https://data.worldobesity.org/tables/ranking-obesity-by-country-adults-1.pdf?

Hospital admissions directly attributable to obesity in 2023:

8,716 hospital admissions directly attributable to obesity, an increase of 13% on 2021/22, when there were 7,733 admissions.

Hospital admissions where obesity was a factor:

Just over 1.2 million (1,236 thousand) hospital admissions where obesity was a factor, an increase of 8% on 2021/22 when there were 1,142 million admissions, continuing a trend in increasing admissions seen over the past decade.

Type 2 Diabetes:

The number of people under 40 being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes in the UK has risen 39% in six years, fuelled by soaring obesity levels and cheap junk food.

Figures from Diabetes UK show cases of type 2 among under-40s have increased to almost 168,000 from 120,000 in 2016/17. Diagnoses are rising at a significantly faster pace than among over-40s, for whom the increase was 25% in six years. Many cases go undiagnosed.

Smoking is a leading cause of preventable illness and death.

In 2023, there were 408,700 hospital admissions in England attributable to smoking, 5% higher than 2021/22 when it was 389,800. 74,600 deaths in 2023 were attributable to smoking, a decrease of 3% from 2018 (77,000) and 9% from 2009 (82,000). 710,000 prescription items to help people stop smoking were dispensed, a decrease of 4% from 2018/19 (740,000) and 71% from 2009/10 (2.48 million).

The most recent figures show that women in England are amongst the most likely to smoke during pregnancy with 10% still lighting up at the time of their baby’s delivery, which doubles the risk of stillbirth, substantially increases the likelihood of miscarriage and triples the chances of sudden infant death. Across the country, there’s significant variation in the number of pregnant women who smoke, ranging from 2% in Kensington & Chelsea to over one in five in Blackpool.

Alcohol related illness:

Alcohol-related illness costs the NHS a substantial amount each year. The most recent estimates indicate that alcohol-related harm amounts to approximately £3.5 billion annually in England1. This figure has increased from around £2.7 billion in 2006/7. The impact includes expenses related to hospital admissions, emergency services, and other healthcare resources

Heart Bypass operations:

The first heart bypasses were done in the 1960s. In the UK, the first coronary angioplasty was done in 1980, followed by the first coronary stent insertion in 1988. Angioplasty is a minimally invasive method of widening a coronary artery.

It diverts blood around narrowed or clogged parts of the major arteries to improve blood flow and oxygen supply to the heart. Around 20,000 coronary artery bypass grafts are carried out in England every year. Most of these are carried out in men, and around 80% are used to treat people who are at least 60 years of age.

Hip & Knee Operations:

Knee replacement has become one of the most common major surgical procedures, with almost 35,000 operations performed each year in the United Kingdom.

In 2019 There were 93,911 knee replacement procedures and almost all patients were 50 years old or older (97.4%). Patients aged 50-69 accounted for 49.6% whereas 51.8% for those over 70 years old. 59.4% of all hip replacements were carried out on female patients 40.5% were male patients.

NHS performs over 30,000 total hip replacements each year, reducing pain and increasing mobility, at a total cost to the NHS of £140 million a year.

It behoves the incoming government to ensure that money poured into the leaking bucket of the NHS is spent more efficiently, as well as for all of us in this unfit nation to take some responsibility for our own health. Better to prevent people from getting ill, than simply getting more and more doctors, nurses, beds ad infinitum to treat self induced chronic ill health. Or so it seems to me.
And?
 
I was once told that organisations with a plan perform better than those without, even if sometimes the plan is wrong. Similarly, politically one can do nothing or do something.

Doing nothing causes no stress and takes no effort. Change will be the outcome of natural evolutionary political and economic pressures which will inevitably lag the need.

The alternative is to anticipate change and initiate action to respond to changing needs. Inevitably some actions will subsequently prove wrong, and malign players may initiate malign actions.

On balance I prefer the illusion of control, rather than set sail to be driven by capricious winds over which I have no influence. The mirror image of "Getting things done" is "decay" - hardly attractive.
The mirror image of "getting things done" could just as well be "don't screw around with stuff". Especially if you don't know what you're doing.
 
You don’t want safer streets for kids then?
I thought it entirely sensible and wish the same for where I live. However the majority seem to disagree. My point was the additional democracy of devolved government still manages to fall foul of what the majority want. And in this case the majority are wrong and seeing parties jump on the populist band wagon is frankly an indictment of their fitness to govern.
 
"Getting things done" appears to be the new gold standard in government.
I heard some (old) people being interviewed on the wireless the other day, and one said Thatcher was the best ever PM, because she "got things done".
Jack the ripper "got things done", Genghis Khan "got things done". It's a shame that the things themselves seem to be irrelevant now, as long as they get done.
Attlee, Aneurin Bevan, et al, got things done.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top