The 2015 Popularity Contest (aka UK General Election )

[sd_1992]

I explained that above. Go back to the bit about profit.

Which bit was that? The bit where you objected to a private company doing the same job as the NHS because they would make a profit out of it? Or maybe the bit where you linked an article completely unrelated to the awarding of private contracts to try and make out that they were reducing services (the article is about overall cuts to the NHS not awarding private contracts)

 

[Black Belt Jones]

Read what I said again. You said:

"Well no it isn't pointless since the money being paid to the private companies includes an element of profit for them.

I fundamentally object to these companies making money out of human suffering."

In the context of a private company making a profit of the treatment of sick people. Explain to me how that is any different to a Pharma company developing a drug to make someone healthy and selling it at a profit, because it is exactly the same thing.

Developing drugs to treat disease requires scientific innovation, breakthroughs that advance knowledge and understanding, to the glory of the collective intellect of mankind. Nobel prizes have been awarded for pharmaceutical drug discovery - e.g. James Black, John Vane, Marshall and Warren. One's in the post to Jurg Zimmerman for gleevec. And you think that's the same thing as a private company getting an NHS contract? You obv don't, as you're not a moron, so suggest you fall back and rephrase your argument.

 

[sd_1992]

Developing drugs to treat disease requires scientific innovation, breakthroughs that advance knowledge and understanding, to the glory of the collective intellect of mankind. Nobel prizes have been awarded for pharmaceutical drug discovery - e.g. James Black, John Vane, Marshall and Warren. One's in the post to Jurg Zimmerman for gleevec. And you think that's the same thing as a private company getting an NHS contract? You obv don't, as you're not a moron, so suggest you fall back and rephrase your argument.

Given that my field is Pharmaceutical chemistry I clearly don't. However I never once mentioned the development side of the industry, just the retail, but don't let that get in the way of a cheap hit to ignore the point.

 

[Coach]

Read what I said again..

Sigh.

So you would like the closure of all Pharmacuetical companies, any company who make bandages etc... on the grounds that they make profit from illness...?

Where have I said I want to see these companies closed?

 

[sd_1992]

Sigh.

Where have I said I want to see these companies closed?

I will repost in the hope you might actually respond instead of trying to run this in circles.

"Well no it isn't pointless since the money being paid to the private companies includes an element of profit for them.

I fundamentally object to these companies making money out of human suffering."

In the context of a private company making a profit of the treatment of sick people. Explain to me how that is any different to a Pharma company developing a drug to make someone healthy and selling it at a profit, because it is exactly the same thing.

 

[Coach]

Which bit was that? The bit where you objected to a private company doing the same job as the NHS because they would make a profit out of it? Or maybe the bit where you linked an article completely unrelated to the awarding of private contracts to try and make out that they were reducing services (the article is about overall cuts to the NHS not awarding private contracts)

Sigh. This bit,

And there is absolutely no reducing of services,

so in order to refute this I gave you a link to an article detailing major cuts to services. Whether or not these cuts are down to the awarding of contracts to private companies is immaterial (although a likely contibutory factor) - the cuts are real.

 

[Coach]

I will repost in the hope you might actually respond instead of trying to run this in circles.

"Well no it isn't pointless since the money being paid to the private companies includes an element of profit for them.

I fundamentally object to these companies making money out of human suffering."

In the context of a private company making a profit of the treatment of sick people. Explain to me how that is any different to a Pharma company developing a drug to make someone healthy and selling it at a profit, because it is exactly the same thing.

Firstly, reposting the exact same wordage doesn't prevent going round in circles, rather, it ensures it.

Secondly, haranguing me for not attempting the impossible task of explaining the difference between your two identical situations is frankly pointless.

Lastly, in relation to your desired explanation, once again, read what I said, pay particular attention to the thing I object to and see if you can tell the difference between that and the closure of companies.

 

[sd_1992]

so in order to refute this I gave you a link to an article detailing major cuts to services. Whether or not these cuts are down to the awarding of contracts to private companies is immaterial (although a likely contibutory factor) - the cuts are real.

You genuinely don't think that it matters that an article you posted to try and show that awarding contracts to private companies leads to a reduction in services has absolutely nothing to do with awarding contracts to private companies?

Firstly, reposting the exact same wordage doesn't prevent going round in circles, rather, it ensures it.

Secondly, haranguing me for not trying to explain the difference in your impossible comparison of two identical situations is frankly pointless.

Lastly, once again, read what I said, pay particular attention to the thing I object to and see if you can tell the differnce between that and the closure of companies.

Firstly, it is your wording and you asked me for it.

Secondly, I apolgise, you don't want to close them, just stop them selling medicine then? Stop them making profit on it?

 

[Coach]

You genuinely don't think that it matters that an article you posted to try and show that awarding contracts to private companies leads to a reduction in services has absolutely nothing to do with awarding contracts to private companies?

There you go again placing your spin on things.

I posted an article to give an example which refutes your claim that "there is absolutely no reducing of services". I was quite specific on this. The article clearly demonstrates that there are cuts to services. Google it - you will find many more examples of service cuts. The reasons for these cuts are manifold.

Secondly, I apolgise, you don't want to close them, just stop them selling medicine then? Stop them making profit on it?

Apology accepted. I thought I answered this earlier (many times). In fact you have quoted my answer several times. And of course I don't want to stop them selling medicine.

 

[sd_1992]

There you go again placing your spin on things.

I posted an article to give an example which refutes your claim that "there is absolutely no reducing of services". I was quite specific on this. The article clearly demonstrates that there are cuts to services. Google it - you will find many more examples of service cuts. The reasons for these cuts are manifold.

I could post an article about the reduction of services in the paper industry... it still means absolutely nothing in the context of the awarding of contracts to private firms which was what was being discussed, and neither does the reduction of services caused by completely unrelated cuts... No one is saying that the cuts are not harmful to the areas of the NHS they affect but it really is besides the point in this case.

I thought I answered this earlier (many times). In fact you have quoted my answer several times. And of course I don't want to stop them selling medicine.

You clearly state you have a problem with profit coming from the treatment of sick people

 

[L4Everton]

Looks like Ukip have won pretty largely. It's a distinct worry, it seems there are a hysterical gang so determined to blame foreigners for everything and anything that putting a dipstick like Farage and his neo-BNP 'lets deport whoever we dont like' brigade is not only palatable but also a black eye for the Tories and the Laborious. Being alarmed by this mindset actually leads me to comparrisons with the hysterical mob that have persued Sheff Utd over Chad Evans.

In both cases the parties kicking up a stink whether against foreigners or a spolit footballer & criminal that as and when they get their respective pound of flesh and gallons of blood to satisfy their thirst - the problems in their lives will not have changed one bit.

Look at the who and the how these two bodies of people have been manipulated, what is stoking the fires of outrage, who is benefitting from focus on something(s) that wont change anyone lives but those with such orchestrated hate and ire against them.

 

[Librarian]

Every country seems to have a protest party on the rise these days. It's all a reaction to the EU, which is now a toxic brand from here to Putin's shed.

To be fair, their flag is shyte and they've no anthem

 

[McBain]

I'm calling this.

YOU will end up with the other guys who you think can do a better job than the current Clowns.
YOU will end up hating these guys within 12 months and realise you were dead set better off with the other Mob.
YOU will think it will matter, but it won't.
YOU may believe the Revolution, but he's got a book to sell.

Same happened here, and the controversial Author Mr Brand had this to say about our Boss - "I'm pretty sure he's a Lunatic"

http://www.9news.com.au/world/2014/11/20/07/59/russell-brand-takes-aim-at-world-politics-in-new-book

http://whatistherundude.wordpress.c...remind-you-why-he-shouldnt-be-prime-minister/

 

[Jib in lad]

The way things are going I can see the nightmare scenario happening a Tory UKIP coalition .

 

[Milk]

My boy did, er, ok (well, not too good really as the voters seemed determined to vote mainstream AGAIN)

Mark Reckless (UKIP) 16,867 (42.10%)
Kelly Tolhurst (C) 13,947 (34.81%, -14.39%)
Naushabah Khan (Lab) 6,713 (16.76%, -11.70%)
Clive Gregory (Green) 1,692 (4.22%, +2.69%)
Geoff Juby (LD) 349 (0.87%, -15.39%)
Hairy Knorm Davidson (Loony) 151 (0.38%)
Stephen Goldsbrough (Ind) 69 (0.17%)
Nick Long (PBP) 69 (0.17%)
Jayda Fransen (Britain 1st) 56 (0.14%)
Mike Barker (Ind) 54 (0.13%)
Charlotte Rose (Ind) 43 (0.11%)
Dave Osborn (Pat Soc) 33 (0.08%)
Christopher Challis (Ind) 22 (0.05%)