ElizabethofYork
Old Crone
What sort of abuse do you mean?Eta: I believe in the principle of healthcare free at the point of delivery- with the caveat that GP appointments should have a nominal charge to prevent widespread abuse of the system.
What sort of abuse do you mean?Eta: I believe in the principle of healthcare free at the point of delivery- with the caveat that GP appointments should have a nominal charge to prevent widespread abuse of the system.
Using private medicine is queue-jumping, in my view, and therefore wrong.Let face it, that's a great perk. I wish my employer offered private medical provision. It's ghastly having to rely on the NHS nowadays.
DNAs mainlyWhat sort of abuse do you mean?
Good luck with thatUsing private medicine is queue-jumping, in my view, and therefore wrong.
little shit?
Great, deter people even more from going to the Doctor.It’s not just ghastly, it’s increasingly frequently life threateningly dangerous. I work in the nhs and I don’t trust it
My kids have private health insurance at the not for profit: Affordable Private Healthcare Provider | Benenden Health
That’s a public service announcement btw. That’s the most widely used one by other consultants that I know. My advice to you all is to protect your loved ones and ensure they can access timely healthcare.
Eta: I believe in the principle of healthcare free at the point of delivery- with the caveat that GP appointments should have a nominal charge to prevent widespread abuse of the system.
There is but one queue.Good luck with that
Makes no sense tho. You’re actually removing yourself from the queue. But cba to argue it here it’s another thread.
If the NHS was properly funded it wouldn't be necessary. But if I was waiting for a hip or knee replacement and in pain, I'd much rather go private.Using private medicine is queue-jumping, in my view, and therefore wrong.
What am I reacting to?Why does anyone pretend that Edie is anything other than a reactionary little shit?
You're the one that raised the subject, not me. If you've no interest, why raise it?Would it matter if I offered views on it if it came up as a thread or is that not permitted any more? Unbelievably that’s a genuine question there appeared to be literally no dissent from the trans ideology and very few women contributing when I looked previously.
(I’ve no interest or intention on commenting on Cloos kids thread, which appears to be the only active one, as that’s too personal. It’s not my business what her kid does plus I like Cloo and I care about her kids.)
Seriously Elizabeth, take a look at the not for profit link I posted. It’s affordable but works on a graded approach- more benefits the longer you are a member.If the NHS was properly funded it wouldn't be necessary. But if I was waiting for a hip or knee replacement and in pain, I'd much rather go private.
However, I can't afford to go private so it won't happen.
It was an example of how debate gets closed down in an authoritarian way by accusations of offence.You're the one that raised the subject, not me. If you've no interest, why raise it?
No it wasn't You couldn't even contain yourself to a non trans thread before making it about that.It was an example of how debate gets closed down in an authoritarian way by accusations of offence.
You're ignoring the way going private can erode the ability of the nhs in certain areas eg cataract operations Eye doctors say private cataract operations have hurt the NHS by going private you encourage the decline of the nhs. But as the auld Irish saying goes its easy to lie on another man's woundSeriously Elizabeth, take a look at the not for profit link I posted. It’s affordable but works on a graded approach- more benefits the longer you are a member.
I too wish the NHS worked. But it doesn’t. Provision even for 2ww cancer is an absolute roulette now I’m afraid. Maternity services are dire. CAMHS non-existent except via A&E or crisis care. Ortho you’ll wait literally years in pain. Patients now dying in A&E waiting rooms. Paeds still holding on I find.
It’s desperately sad. I find it desperately sad.
But I don’t think anyone should ignore the reality anymore and out of self preservation should find alternative options.
I respect that’s your definition and your experience as a white British person who lives and works in London.
It’s not however a definition or experience shared by everyone. And you specifically asked me what I meant by it so I clarified.
No I meant your experience of society and immigration within society will be as a white person.Sorry but I'm not clear.
I didn't say anything about colour. Yes I'm white but didn't say that in my post. I said British.
Your definition of people born and raised here being "our own" does that mean white British people?
As white has slipped in here
No I meant your experience of society and immigration within society will be as a white person.
The kids my sons grew up with (predominantly British Pakistani, black and white working class) are as British as them.
Our own is those born and raised in Britain.
Your definition does exclude those who were born and raised elsewhere and went through the process of becoming a British citizen.
To tell someone whose gone through the long process of becoming a British citizen that they aren't :
.
To someone whose done all the effort to get British citizenship it might be a bit annoying to be told yes your British but you aren't "ours".
This is very fair. I'd include all British citizens as "our own," plus all the people who were born or brought up here but aren't British citizens due to immigration rules that are largely part of the hostile environment (Windrush generation, children of EU citizens, etc). And TBH I'd also include most non-citizens who came here as adults, are settled here and only aren't citizens due to the cost of getting citizenship.
One of my daughter's friends isn't a British citizen despite being born here and having lived all but a year of her life here. It wasn't applied for for her before she was an adult, when it would have been relatively straightforward and cheap due to fee waivers, because her Mum didn't think it was important - their citizenship is Italian. Brexit happened when she was an adult (by a matter of months), and then it became important, but she can't afford it. It would be, IMO, bizarre not to count her as "our own." Especially since said friend's sister, younger by two years, got British citizenship relatively cheaply due to being under 18 and eligible for the fee waiver. She's not actually more British than her sister, they're both "our own."
Due to that "quirk" of citizenship and age, only one of them gets to vote in general elections.
(Plus the fee waiver rules for under-18s are fairly tight and it's a lot of admin, so I expect a fair few kids slip through the gaps).
TBF, Edie's definition would include both of them (and Windrush, etc) but some people - people in general, not on this thread - focus on citizenship alone. Some also focus on birthplace alone, which excludes huge numbers of people who were brought up in the UK.
Same for one of my closest friends who wasn't born or brought up here, but has lived in the UK for over 30 years - she just can't afford the fees. I'd reject any definition that didn't include her as "our own."
The UK is, of course, not the only country that has citizenship rules that rule out a lot of people who really are part of this country, and it's actually better than some, but that doesn't mean we can't advocate for improvements.
FWIW, I apologise that this post is a bit of a mess and probably difficult to read.
Not defending the DDR but I've known a few people from East Germany over the years and their view on it is much more nuanced than this. I find in particular they dislike their story being told by West Germans in the terms you described. A German friend told me views on East Germany are pretty evenly split, about a third idealise the DDR, a third think it was awful, and another third are apolitical/ neutral.I’ll question whatever I want Danny. Including the State. Because, thank God, currently that doesn’t get you locked up. Imagine living under the East German communist regime when they had an actual Stasi. Terrible thing. I remember the Wall coming down when I was a kid and the sheer joy and freedom. Never again eh.
Hoyer feels that the GDR story has been largely mistold, dismissed as simply the losing side of a Manichaean divide, placing drab, gray, socialist East Germany on one side of the Wall and vibrant, free West Germany on the other. Instead, Hoyer wants to present the GDR in living color. This is part of the power of the book, especially for readers from the West who might wonder: if it was so awful, why do so many people feel (n)ostalgic for it?
The excellent social services and women's participation in the workforce don't mean a thing to you then. I was in Germany several times shortly after reunification and heard about discontent because of it being an effective swallowing of east Germany by the west rather than the best of both systems being kept. Things like women crane drivers / operators losing their jobs - perfectly fine in the ddr, banned in the west, where only men could do the job. Sure, there were lots of things wrong with the ddr. But there were and are many things wrong with west Germany too, but none of these were addressed in the process by which east rejoined westI’ll question whatever I want Danny. Including the State. Because, thank God, currently that doesn’t get you locked up. Imagine living under the East German communist regime when they had an actual Stasi. Terrible thing. I remember the Wall coming down when I was a kid and the sheer joy and freedom. Never again eh.
And yet we have, even comparing our Gen X to our boomer parents, become increasingly wealthier, had a better quality of life, more further education, more travel, and a bigger middle class. So yunno it’s not all bad. Maybe the rich getting richer doesn’t matter. Maybe the only thing that matters is the reduction in absolute poverty. The rest is all to play for.
Wrt the thread topic; nobody who's not a complete fucking idiot should be unconcerned about immigration.
how easily the peruvian government of juan velasco alvarado is forgotten, as is that of chavez in venezuela - not to mention the famous cuban government of castro (albeit perhaps not in s. america)I would have thought the biggest threat to freedom is now the right / far right.
If one is Spanish or South American the memory of authoritarian states is that they are from the right. Not the left.
Watching US news and the liberal/ Democrat side of US for example see a Trump election as a threat to democracy.
…. in doing so you're suggesting that immigrants in general are probably rapists, racists etc. That is pretty vile, and btw straight out of the EDL dogwhistle code book so well done.
you don't need a weatherman to tell you which way the wind's blowingJohn Kettley is a weatherman....