New political party

[rhodes76]

what you think of this?

http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/29/8000-uk-v ... s-6742304/

[2HeadsBetter]

"No matter how you look at it, the British forces are the only forces in the world to have never lost a war." - Our cousins from across the pond may beg to differ.

[SKB]

The 1776 Declaration was only a petition to the King, not the birth of a new country.

The resulting conflict was an offshore civil war between colonials and embedded British army, which neither side wanted to fight and became stalemated towards its end. The colonials also did not fight it alone, they had a lot of training and hardware provided by the French. (Why do you think there's a street in NYC called Lafayette Street?!)

The stalemate was settled in 1783 by the signing of The Treaty Of Paris. America did not "win" independence in 1776, it was granted it in 1783.

[RetroSicotte]

As with any minor startup party, the greatest influence they can aim for is to get enough traction to push the government in a direction to retain their own voters. While I don't agree with the outcome, thats exactly what UKIP did. They effectively accomplished their aim.

However as with UKIP, while there's a lot in there that sounds "great", it's the devil in the details and the odd 'out there' suggestion. The death penalty won't get you many places in today's politics...

[ArmChairCivvy]

the greatest influence they can aim for is to get enough traction to push the government in a direction to retain their own voters

Well, regardless of who "they" might be, that kind of sounds coming out of the Tory party
"The comments are similar in tone to those of former Business Minister Anna Soubry, who said earlier this month that “it is not impossible” that she could “see myself joining with like-minded people who want to save our country” from a hard Brexit.

When those points were put to Altmann, she replied: “I am on a similar page to that.”["]

... and Tony Blair said he would provide an alternative to Labour voters; not that he has made the headlines that much lately.

[RichardIC]

I'm all for a new political party to capture the centre ground which has been abandoned by both Labour and Tories... as long as it's not totally fixated with Brexit.

However I won't be joining the UK Veterans Party. I'm not one. Neither are most others.

Bringing back the death penalty now lies purely in looney territory.

And the bloke clearly hasn't got the foggiest about the NHS. "It used to work perfectly"!? FFS

It's never been perfect, and the problem isn't moving matrons out of wards or even (and this is a very broad statement that should be qualified in a million ways) privatisation. It's the massive increase in the number of people living longer with complex long-term conditions meaning that while resources have risen they can't keep up with demand.... and loads of other stuff too.... but not matrons.

FIx that Mr Fixer.

[WhitestElephant]

It's never been perfect, and the problem isn't moving matrons out of wards or even (and this is a very broad statement that should be qualified in a million ways) privatisation. It's the massive increase in the number of people living longer with complex long-term conditions meaning that while resources have risen they can't keep up with demand.... and loads of other stuff too.... but not matrons.

The NHS spends more on fatties, smokers and alcoholics than it does on the emergency services. I think that is obscene. If people want to deliberately harm their bodies, then I shouldn't have to pay to keep them alive. Spend that money where it is really needed within the NHS.

People should face the consequence of poor decision making.

[RichardIC]

The NHS spends more on fatties, smokers and alcoholics than it does on the emergency services. I think that is obscene. If people want to deliberately harm their bodies, then I shouldn't have to pay to keep them alive. Spend that money where it is really needed within the NHS.

LIfestyle has a lot to do with health. But I was thinking more along the lines of dementia and non-smoking related cancers. A third of us will now get cancer at some stage and not all are fatties, smokers and alcoholics.

My Dad (79) has Parkinson's Disease and Lewy Body dementia and costs the NHS a freakin fortune. He is none of those.

My mum (80) has osteoporosis and keeps breaking bones. She costs the NHS a fortune and is none of those.

Do you get where I' m coming from?

And Casualty isn't a documentary.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Labour in Scotland seems to be splitting in the "middle":
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/d ... 1287202_uk

[WhitestElephant]

The NHS spends more on fatties, smokers and alcoholics than it does on the emergency services. I think that is obscene. If people want to deliberately harm their bodies, then I shouldn't have to pay to keep them alive. Spend that money where it is really needed within the NHS.

LIfestyle has a lot to do with health. But I was thinking more along the lines of dementia and non-smoking related cancers. A third of us will now get cancer at some stage and not all are fatties, smokers and alcoholics.

My Dad (79) has Parkinson's Disease and Lewy Body dementia and costs the NHS a freakin fortune. He was none of those.

My mum (80) has osteoporosis and keeps breaking bones. She costs the NHS a fortune and was none of those.

Do you get where I' m coming from?

And Casualty isn't a documentary.

Watching loved ones go through the same things in their old age, this is my point. I'd rather see more NHS spend in those areas, than on people who deliberately chose to destroy their bodies and are now dying / have major health complications in their 40s an 50s.

[Timmymagic]

Watching loved ones go through the same things in their old age, this is my point. I'd rather see more NHS spend in those areas, than on people who deliberately chose to destroy their bodies and are now dying / have major health complications in their 40s an 50s.

In the case of smokers they contribute more than enough through taxation to fund treatment or end of life care. There have been reports that have examined this and have found that smoking is actually beneficial to the UK in terms of government spending. Not just in health but the reduced life expectancy's of smokers help out pension payments for both state and private provision.

Alcohol is less clear cut as care isn't just concentrated at end of life like smokers, and there are other significant costs associated with alcohol misuse. Clearly the amount of duty paid for alcohol is significantly lower per death as a result (as most alcoholics tend to drink the cheaper stuff).

When it comes to obesity though no argument, the costs are colossal. Bariatric treatment costs to the NHS both in treatment and the necessary labour and equipment are enormous and only getting worse. We can blame the people, but a fair amount of blame must be laid at governments door who have resisted a decent food labelling scheme under industry pressure. The increasing numbers of manufacturers reducing salt and sugar volumes in foodstuffs with no ill effect on sales should be a lesson to all on how damaging lobbying can be.

[ArmChairCivvy]

blame must be laid at governments door who have resisted a decent food labelling scheme under industry pressure. The increasing numbers of manufacturers reducing salt and sugar volumes in foodstuffs with no ill effect on sales should be a lesson to all on how damaging lobbying can be.

Try to find one label that talks about transfats (they are cheap!) that are a real killer - a fact known by now for twenty years. OK, "The cola wars" was written in 1980, so a tad earlier. But I would still choose Coke over Diet Coke, whereas there is zero consumer benefit from transfats... and the industry marches on, unhindered in this regard.