Too many whites in NHS management.

[WILF 50,574]

10 hours ago, ChrisJones said:

..

To give another example the budget for the NHS is roughly £125bn. They overspent last year by roughly £1bn.

The entire budget for the US Army with the current exchange rate is £90bn and they sure as sh*t aren't using Victorian era buildings and sharing equipment.

That fact my friend is amazing !........it’s an absolute full stop to those that say the NHS is under funded.

[scothunter 12,609]

It would work if it was only exclusive to British born citizens. Excluding ex pat's from yank land and Ireland lol 

[Kerny92 1,246]

41 minutes ago, scothunter said:

It would work if it was only exclusive to British born citizens. Excluding ex pat's from yank land and Ireland lol 

Bullshit, so what about the migrants that pay their taxes? If they are paying into the system then they are allowed to use it. 

[Born Hunter 17,927]

Regarding modern attempts at improving fairness in society, which is fundamentally what these issues are about. Like in the picture below, we have to accept that some demographics and some individuals in society are born into privilege. For whatever reason, environmental, social or genetic, they have an easier time. Just like in the picture below, the individuals height is a privilege or it is a handicap. I think it's important first that every side of this modern debate accept that as a fact!

Do we really want to live in a world where everyone is perfectly equal? For instance, there are fundamental genetic (physical and psychological) differences between men and women that are probably the cause of societies naturally being patriarchal. This is basic human behaviour. How do you even approach making basic human behaviour more 'fair' to women when, for example, in a confrontation nature has evolved women to be less capable and therefore have different behaviour responses that generally are less successful in typical confrontations? So then the 'equality' movement starts handing out 'boxes', positive discrimination to force the desired equitable outcome. This isn't me protecting my 'male privilege', I think successful, confident and intelligent women are smoking hot. I'm just laying out the problem as I see it.

But that's a genetic example. Let's look at cultural ones, for instance working class culture or immigrant African cultures. Both notoriously at the lower end of society and both so obviously because of fundamental social problems (settle down Wilf! ). Those fundamental social problems that put individuals from those demographics at disadvantage can much more easily be fixed than genetic disadvantage. But still we see a desire to 'hand out boxes'. Because positive discrimination is easier for a politician and faster acting for the activists demanding action than actually fixing the problem.

I think the 'equality' movement has virtue, I just think it's lost it's way and we all need to have a reality check. Tbh I find it quite an interesting subject. 

[Kerny92 1,246]

20 minutes ago, Born Hunter said:

Regarding modern attempts at improving fairness in society, which is fundamentally what these issues are about. Like in the picture below, we have to accept that some demographics and some individuals in society are born into privilege. For whatever reason, environmental, social or genetic, they have an easier time. Just like in the picture below, the individuals height is a privilege or it is a handicap. I think it's important first that every side of this modern debate accept that as a fact!

Do we really want to live in a world where everyone is perfectly equal? For instance, there are fundamental genetic (physical and psychological) differences between men and women that are probably the cause of societies naturally being patriarchal. This is basic human behaviour. How do you even approach making basic human behaviour more 'fair' to women when, for example, in a confrontation nature has evolved women to be less capable and therefore have different behaviour responses that generally are less successful in typical confrontations? So then the 'equality' movement starts handing out 'boxes', positive discrimination to force the desired equitable outcome. This isn't me protecting my 'male privilege', I think successful, confident and intelligent women are smoking hot. I'm just laying out the problem as I see it.

But that's a genetic example. Let's look at cultural ones, for instance working class culture or immigrant African cultures. Both notoriously at the lower end of society and both so obviously because of fundamental social problems (settle down Wilf! ). Those fundamental social problems that put individuals from those demographics at disadvantage can much more easily be fixed than genetic disadvantage. But still we see a desire to 'hand out boxes'. Because positive discrimination is easier for a politician and faster acting for the activists demanding action than actually fixing the problem.

I think the 'equality' movement has virtue, I just think it's lost it's way and we all need to have a reality check. Tbh I find it quite an interesting subject. 

Yep we see it in all aspects of life, the army, sports, business. Something's are the way they are because they are. I'm not saying it's the best method as it's not, if you aren't good enough for the role you are not even if you're a toffee nosed twat!

[Born Hunter 17,927]

6 minutes ago, Kerny92 said:

Yep we see it in all aspects of life, the army, sports, business. Something's are the way they are because they are. I'm not saying it's the best method as it's not, if you aren't good enough for the role you are not even if you're a toffee nosed twat!

Yeah, some cases of unfairness can and probably should be addressed, some would ideally be addressed but are impossible and some should just be left the f**k alone because the cost to the results are unacceptable. What we're also seeing is stuff being addressed in a bad way.

[ChrisJones 7,975]

4 hours ago, WILF said:

That fact my friend is amazing !........it’s an absolute full stop to those that say the NHS is under funded.

Don't get me wrong. The US Army isn't exactly the model of government budgeting. It was a comparison of how much Congress approves for their annual budget and they're prone to excess just like the NHS is. The point is under the current system they will not allocate resources properly. I still maintain they have a spending issue, not a funding one.

[scothunter 12,609]

3 hours ago, Kerny92 said:

Bullshit, so what about the migrants that pay their taxes? If they are paying into the system then they are allowed to use it. 

No there shit skins and dirty

[Kerny92 1,246]

1 minute ago, scothunter said:

No there shit skins and dirty

I bet you wouldn't say no to being treated by one if you're at deaths door.

[scothunter 12,609]

I have done granted I wasn't at deaths door but if I was probably wouldn't be able to speak in that situation

[Kerny92 1,246]

7 minutes ago, scothunter said:

I have done granted I wasn't at deaths door but if I was probably wouldn't be able to speak in that situation

So you have done, stop playing silly beggars and be serious for a minute. If they are paying into the system then obviously they can use it. It would be interesting to know how much they put into the NHS.