Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

fred - there's no denying that NHS is a huge drain on resources and it is nowhere near as efficient as it should be .... further, it cannot possibly cope with a growing and ageing population

NHS should not be a political issue, but it is inevitable that it has become such

the ideal option would be to scrap it and start all over again, but for obvious reasons that is not possible
raising taxes through the roof against the so-called rich to fund NHS - and of course for all the other pet schemes of JC's - also does not work as has been shown throughout history

do i have an answer?
no, i can't say that i do, but mangling junior doctor's wages to help out NHS is also and most assuredly not the answer

http://news.sky.com/story/1561154/corbyns-speech-was-offered-to-ed-miliband

you prefer a lot with addled brains?

certainly prefer them to having mccluskey as the eminence grise

Manuel,

Or the hedge funders, or a pig farmer Ashcroft.

I suppose its "birds of a feather"!

-=-==-=-=-==

But you prefer 100 billion for Trident in order to be able to kill, or maim others than to have a decent welfare and health system in order help others.

(An outdated questionable means of "defence" at its best.)

-=-=====

At the moment, many of the medical professions are overpaid and need to think and reorganise their practices.

Which one is Tom Hanks ?.....

fred - re trident - leaving the employment factor to one side, in all honesty, i'm unsure

re medics - quite possibly, but surely mangling the pay of junior doctors is not the place to start from
are docs o'paid?
i don't think so given the 5/7 years training and exams they have to undertake + regular refreshers, though if you draw comparison with nurses, then the argument has a little more merit

I do have a little bit of my tongue in my cheek.

Both are hugely complex subjects and both are under constant review, but it is necessary that there is ongoing re-evaluation of the benefits and necessities of many "institutions" of the UK, against its position on the "world stage".

The tub-thumping of the present stunted school boys and the "up and at them brigade" little Englanders are out-moded.

Fly-weights get murdered by heavy-weights!

Another thing about employment and Trident, is moving away from Trident can take place over 20 years. The skilled jobs "could" be "transferred" to other more rewarding projects.

"up and at them brigade" in relation to what?

I see it as Cameron's inspiring responses to many problems, followed by U-turns.

Also, see many of the members of British First, UKIP, BNP and neocon branch of the present so called tory party responses in the manner of "Return to the days of Empire Philosophy."

how dull and somewhat predictable of you fred :-)

i rather hoped you'ld be backing JC on his stance on syria where, i confess, i think he's talking absolute bollocks ...... WW2 and others settled by nice talky-talkies?

Iraq.

Bloody brilliant.

Or just bloody and a precursor to some of the mess in the M.E. now.

Libya, bloody brilliant and your new next door neighbour in the Thames valley from there.

Let's go and bomb Syria with Captain Marvel in the pilot seat.

At the end of the bloodshed there is talk-talk.

Why does the name of UK and USA stink in M.E and other parts of the world.

-=-=-=-=-

Action against Assad and ground troops in Syria.

Yes, under the auspices of the UN.

Unless, of course, you want to test out British Military against Putin's

==-=-=-


But I don't suppose you will be shedding any of your or your family's blood, if Cameron goes gun-ho to bolster his failing EU negotiations.

You are both out of touch with reality.

so fred, you think syria should be left to its own devices?
or are you recommending that someone goes to play footsy with IS and/or assad?

both the above would make the augean stables smell like the sweetest of violets, but assad is probably the less vile
no question in my mind but that US (and everyone else) has formed an unholy alliance with putin (russia) which will suit ....... as often said, my enemy's enemy is my friend

i certainly don't recollect tea and cucumber sandwiches being held with the remaining leaders in germany and japan once hostilites ceased

=============

with regard to iraq, we were all gulled by "your friend" that hussain had WMDs which could be activated with minimum warning and time delay
on that basis, and albeit with reluctance, action had to be taken ...... years of talking to him yielded less than bugger all

What a lovely couple ....

If you are so certain, buy a property in Syria, have a holiday every year there, and sit back and enjoy it. Good opportunity!

-=-==--==

If action was sanctified by United Nations then I would accept, without liking it, a United Nations Force, as long as it has troops from all the major nations were included, especially troops from the ME, stepping into Syria and surrounding "area" and suppressing "Isis" and Assad and other groups.

On the understanding, that it was for a temporary period with a government made up from representatives of the major groups.

But that means feet on the ground and a possible commitment for 15-20 years.

Think how the taxpayers and little Englanders will squawk.

But I would also go for the gun suppliers and the corruption around buying and selling commodities in that area.

Also, the peripheral states would be expected to commit to the costs of the operations.


-=-=-=-=-==

Blair.

No friend of mine, didn't fancy him in 1997 and little has changed my mind.

To me, he had a detachment from reality and believed like Osborne and Cameron and others in their own but lacking superiority.

I think he was more honest than Cameron, but that is not saying much!

If you are so certain, buy a property in Syria, have a holiday every year there, and sit back and enjoy it. Good opportunity!

-=-==--==

If action was sanctified by United Nations then I would accept, without liking it, a United Nations Force, as long as it has troops from all the major nations were included, especially troops from the ME, stepping into Syria and surrounding "area" and suppressing "Isis" and Assad and other groups.

On the understanding, that it was for a temporary period with a government made up from representatives of the major groups.

But that means feet on the ground and a possible commitment for 15-20 years.

Think how the taxpayers and little Englanders will squawk.

But I would also go for the gun suppliers and the corruption around buying and selling commodities in that area.

Also, the peripheral states would be expected to commit to the costs of the operations.


-=-=-=-=-==

Blair.

No friend of mine, didn't fancy him in 1997 and little has changed my mind.

To me, he had a detachment from reality and believed like Osborne and Cameron and others in their own but lacking superiority.

I think he was more honest than Cameron, but that is not saying much!

JB.

Self-deception is an interesting phenomenon.

It seems one of your stronger attributes!