Article in the Telegraph

Moderator: dromia

Message
Author
User avatar
GeeRam
Posts: 1160
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 9:58 pm
Home club or Range: PSC, Bisley
Location: Berks
Contact:

Re: Article in the Telegraph

#21 Post by GeeRam »

Pete wrote:So, the holiday will soon be over, then?
Not for those of us that no longer have a job...... 8-)
User avatar
Pete
Past Supporter
Posts: 2950
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 8:48 am
Home club or Range: NRA Bisley
Contact:

Re: Article in the Telegraph

#22 Post by Pete »

Londonreal TV: Looks like they really could be dodgy.............

https://www.scamguard.com/londonrealtv/

Pete
"Tantum religio potuit suadere malorum" Lucretius
You're offended? Please explain why your inability to control your emotions translates into me having to censor my opinions....
TRG-22
Posts: 365
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:41 pm
Home club or Range: Make me an offer.
Location: West London

Re: Article in the Telegraph

#23 Post by TRG-22 »

MistAgain wrote:I class him as an alien , along with Chris Packham , Mike Yardley and Greta Thunberg .
So basically anybody who has views with which you disagree.

Still, I suppose it saves you the bother of trying to counter their arguments with reasoned ones of your own.
Tory voters. Next election. Stay at home. Protect the NHS. Save lives.
MistAgain
Posts: 720
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2016 7:12 am
Contact:

Re: Article in the Telegraph

#24 Post by MistAgain »

TRG-22 wrote:
MistAgain wrote:I class him as an alien , along with Chris Packham , Mike Yardley and Greta Thunberg .
So basically anybody who has views with which you disagree.

Still, I suppose it saves you the bother of trying to counter their arguments with reasoned ones of your own.
It is not impossible to counter an argument when it is either evidence based or even has the slightest bit of fact about it .
David Icke's ramblings verge on being alcohol or drug induced so are best ignored . Chris Packham is selective in his comments and to date has not accepted that he could be the smallest bit wrong . Mike Yardley would change his opinions if hewas paid . And what can be said about Greta other than she believes she is right and everyone else is wrong if they dont agree with her . And that makes haveing a reasoned argument somewhat difficult .

But perhaps we should look in depth at your suggestion that if all conservative voters stay at home and dont vote , the NHS wiill be saved !
MistAgain
Posts: 720
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2016 7:12 am
Contact:

Re: Article in the Telegraph

#25 Post by MistAgain »

TRG-22 wrote:
MistAgain wrote:I class him as an alien , along with Chris Packham , Mike Yardley and Greta Thunberg .
So basically anybody who has views with which you disagree.

Still, I suppose it saves you the bother of trying to counter their arguments with reasoned ones of your own.
Liverpool Royal Infirmary . Included A & E .Closed
Liverpool Northern Hospital . Included A & E .Closed
Liverpool Southern Hospital . Included A & E .Closed
Liverpool Eye Hospital . Included A & E .Closed
Sefton General Hospital . Included A & E .Closed
E.N. T. Hospital . Closed .
Childrens Hospital . Included A & E .Closed .
Womans Hospital. Included A & E .Closed .
Maternity Hospital . Closed .

All the above were closed while the Labour Party controlled Liverpool Council ,or were the largest single party, or controlled committee's ,
or had members sitting on the local and regional health services committee .

So we had the wonderful situation of public pronouncements from the Labour Party saying how sad it was that these hospitals had to close , while they worked behind the scenes to speed the closure.

Sefton and the Southern had over 1600 beds including the mental health wards.
The Old Royal had just on 1000 , although some came under the School of Tropical Medicine control .

The old Royal was closed because it was “not fit for purpose” , required vast sums of money to update it , so we were told . Its still standing and still in use today.

The New Royal , around 750 beds , and less than 50 years old is in poor repair,sections of concrete falling off or seperating from the building frame .

The New New Royal wont open for a couple of years will only have 650 beds and parts of it have had to be knocked down and rebuilt .

The Womans and Maternity got a nice new building a few years back , a lot less beds of course . And until recently the managers wanted to close it and relocate to the New New Royal ! .

And somewhere in my junk box I have a letter from the Labour Party Chief Whip telling me how a certain Labour MP ( Now the Police Commissioner) had saved Broadgreen Hospital . Not bad really as it was never due to close , just to loose A & E and certain surgical wards .

So I suppose you can say that the Labour Party saved the NHS in Liverpool .
TRG-22
Posts: 365
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:41 pm
Home club or Range: Make me an offer.
Location: West London

Re: Article in the Telegraph

#26 Post by TRG-22 »

Oh - thank you for that. I had absolutely no idea that it was Liverpool City Council who cut the funding for the hospitals in their area. Here I was thinking that it was the government who did that.
Tory voters. Next election. Stay at home. Protect the NHS. Save lives.
User avatar
dodgyrog
Site Supporter Since 2015
Posts: 4097
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:17 pm
Home club or Range: Three Counties Sporting Club & Gardners Guns
Location: Consett, County Durham
Contact:

Re: Article in the Telegraph

#27 Post by dodgyrog »

Pete wrote:Londonreal TV: Looks like they really could be dodgy.............

https://www.scamguard.com/londonrealtv/

Pete
Then again they might well be ok.
Purveyor of fine cast boolits.
All round good guy and VERY grumpy old man.
TRG-22
Posts: 365
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:41 pm
Home club or Range: Make me an offer.
Location: West London

Re: Article in the Telegraph

#28 Post by TRG-22 »

MistAgain wrote:
TRG-22 wrote:
MistAgain wrote:I class him as an alien , along with Chris Packham , Mike Yardley and Greta Thunberg .
So basically anybody who has views with which you disagree.

Still, I suppose it saves you the bother of trying to counter their arguments with reasoned ones of your own.
It is not impossible to counter an argument when it is either evidence based or even has the slightest bit of fact about it .
No, it isnt.

But it is impossible to change by reasoning opinions not arrived at by that method in the frst place.

(That must be true, as I’ve said it many times :D )

David Icke's ramblings verge on being alcohol or drug induced so are best ignored
.
Or shown by providing evidence or highlighting his inability to do so, to be ramblings verging on being alcohol or drug induced.

Chris Packham is selective in his comments and to date has not accepted that he could be the smallest bit wrong .

So he’s setting himself up for a pratfall if he can be shown to be wrong.

Mike Yardley would change his opinions if hewas paid .

TBH I can’t comment on him.

And what can be said about Greta other than she believes she is right and everyone else is wrong if they dont agree with her .
What can be said is that she clearly believes that anthropogenic climate change poses an existential threat, and that therefore urgent and drastic action must be taken to minimise the severity of the climate change and to mitigate the effects of it.

People are free to agree or disagree with her, but if they disagree then they must accept that if, as part of that disagreement, they attempt, from a position of zero expertise, to deny the facts about global warming which the hugely overwhelming number of experts agree on then they will look like complete tw*ts.

Given her position, I’m sure that if you disagree with her she will think that you are wrong, but an interesting question is what would she do? Would she adduce evidence to show the fallacy of your position, or would she brand you an alien nutjob? Would she ask you to provide evidence which proves her wrong and leave people to draw conclusions if you cannot?

And that makes haveing a reasoned argument somewhat difficult

But what is not difficult is to ask someone who says “Proposition A is true” to produce evidence to support their position.

If they are unable to do so, then that may not show that B is true instead. It may not necessarily even prove that A is false. And it certainly won’t necessarily get them to change their mind.

But what it will do is to show everybody else that they have no interest in whether what they say is true, and that therefore their opinions are de facto valueless.
But perhaps we should look in depth at your suggestion that if all conservative voters stay at home and dont vote , the NHS wiill be saved !
Perhaps we should.

Should we start with the Tories long-term aim to reduce the government spending share of GDP to levels way below other equivalent EU countries? Should we focus on inadequate funding of the NHS? How about the reduction in stocks of PPE for health and care workers?
Tory voters. Next election. Stay at home. Protect the NHS. Save lives.
MistAgain
Posts: 720
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2016 7:12 am
Contact:

Re: Article in the Telegraph

#29 Post by MistAgain »

TRG-22 wrote: Should we focus on inadequate funding of the NHS? How about the reduction in stocks of PPE for health and care workers?
Good question . Most healthcare trusts have 5 options to order anything they require .
The trust can buy directly from suppliers using National Framework Contracts Authorisations.
From the NHS Supply Chain .
From a Procurement Hub (regional multi-trust purchasing)
Local contracts managed by individual trusts
And finally , the government national framework .

If the trust wants to buy anything under £3000.00 they can accept a phone quote , after that it get difficult , all the way up to £90.000.00 , that needs invitations to tender publishing in the official journal of the EU .

Lets just look at surgical gloves . The cheapest , untreated latex has a shelf life of 2-3 years dependant on storage . Its main use is for cleaning staff and examinations by medical staff.

After that latex or nitrile gloves that are subject to some form of treatment can have a much shorter shelf life . Failure rate of natural latex gloves will increase by 9% after roughly 12 minutes of use , so hospital need a wide selection of glove types in their stores at all times .

For PPE stuff , hospital trusts and the NHS Supply chain work on a just in time basis . There would be an outcry from the public and others if it was believed that Trusts and the NHS were spending large sums of money on climate controlled storage for things that under normal circumstances would not be needed for months if not years .

If a trust ran short of PPE thats not any governments fault, covid was not expected or planned for.

Its possible that some blame could be placed on hospital trusts if they only kept a small supply of PPE but looking at a few trust board reports it does appear that they have reasonable levels of supplies in stock . The problems arose when they tried to order in large quantities at a time when they would not have normally been ordering and when hospitals across Europe were panic buying .

Thanks to a certain lady called Thatcher you can check out Hospital Board meetings to see what they said about shortages .
User avatar
Lancs Lad
Past Supporter
Posts: 218
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2018 8:27 am
Home club or Range: Diggle / Altcar and anywhere else that will have me.
Contact:

Re: Article in the Telegraph

#30 Post by Lancs Lad »

MistAgain wrote:
TRG-22 wrote: Should we focus on inadequate funding of the NHS? How about the reduction in stocks of PPE for health and care workers?
Good question . Most healthcare trusts have 5 options to order anything they require .
The trust can buy directly from suppliers using National Framework Contracts Authorisations.
From the NHS Supply Chain .
From a Procurement Hub (regional multi-trust purchasing)
Local contracts managed by individual trusts
And finally , the government national framework .

If the trust wants to buy anything under £3000.00 they can accept a phone quote , after that it get difficult , all the way up to £90.000.00 , that needs invitations to tender publishing in the official journal of the EU .

Lets just look at surgical gloves . The cheapest , untreated latex has a shelf life of 2-3 years dependant on storage . Its main use is for cleaning staff and examinations by medical staff.

After that latex or nitrile gloves that are subject to some form of treatment can have a much shorter shelf life . Failure rate of natural latex gloves will increase by 9% after roughly 12 minutes of use , so hospital need a wide selection of glove types in their stores at all times .

For PPE stuff , hospital trusts and the NHS Supply chain work on a just in time basis . There would be an outcry from the public and others if it was believed that Trusts and the NHS were spending large sums of money on climate controlled storage for things that under normal circumstances would not be needed for months if not years .

If a trust ran short of PPE thats not any governments fault, covid was not expected or planned for.

Its possible that some blame could be placed on hospital trusts if they only kept a small supply of PPE but looking at a few trust board reports it does appear that they have reasonable levels of supplies in stock . The problems arose when they tried to order in large quantities at a time when they would not have normally been ordering and when hospitals across Europe were panic buying .

Thanks to a certain lady called Thatcher you can check out Hospital Board meetings to see what they said about shortages .
Mistagain

Oh do come along now ... You really must refrain from providing sensible answers to questions otherwise people may become upset. Either behave yourself with immediate effect or it's the naughty step for you my lad ;)

:flag13: LL
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests