Exactly, and on top of that, services provided by private/profit-driven providers, which usually end up running just as badly or worse, usually also end up costing far more.
9 Likes
But it costs more next quarter, meaning that profits this quarter can be inflated (at the expense of the people being served, but they aren’t shareholders). 
6 Likes
Absolutely.
Pay the state, the state spends the money. The state hides the debts and
liabilities off the books and the escalate.
The state’s only solution is to default.
This is just another example of governments who have run up debts doing the
dirty on the public.
Research what’s a financial liability.
In financial accounting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_accounting,
a liability is defined as the future sacrifices of economic benefits that
the entity is obliged to make to other entities as a result of past
transactions or other pastevents,[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liability_(financial_accounting)#cite_note-1
the
settlement of which may result in the transfer or use of assets
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assets, provision of services or other
yielding of economic benefits in the future.
Ask why the state is leaving off its liabilities from the accounts?
It’s because they are so large people would realize they have been conned
and behaviour like this is going to get far far worse.
If a private system is forced by mandate to serve middle income/poor
people,
I’ll give you one. The Swiss health system.
Universal coverage - yes.
Number 2 in the world.
Cheaper than the UK’s NHS. Do the cash numbers.
What happens is that insurers are allowed to refuse to insure people. Then
what happens is an insurer’s name is pulled out of a hat on the basis of
market share, and the insurer has to insure for the standard price.
That works because people know they will be insured. Insurers know they
will get a fair share of the bad risks and not be picked off.
For those with no income, its the same as for their food and housing.
Everyone else pays for them.
2 Likes
Remember that the DWP is just a bunch of fraudsters anyway.
They have hidden a £10,000 bn debt off the books because they can’t pay it.
and they’ve hidden it so well that no search engine will find anything about it.
4 Likes
One does what one must to maintain a healthy level of insanity
Which is why I would argue the problem isn’t bureaurocracy. The problem is the intentional maintenance and reinforcement of information disparity between the experts and the non-experts in any sufficiently complex rule system. This is just as true of the US health insurance systems as it is of the DWP. I will add from personal experience that it’s true of the FDA, where inspectors, when asked head-on about specific FDA regulations, will reply with “I don’t have to tell you that.”
So long as the interests of the experts/insiders is not aligned with those of the non-expert users/clients of the system, this will keep happening. The DWP isn’t there to distribute benefit moneys. The for-profit health insurance firms aren’t there to make sure their customers get the best possible quality of care. And so on and so forth.
3 Likes
I took a tour of the Southwell Workhouse a couple of weeks ago. Founded in 1824, it became a model for a new method of “poverty relief”, in the UK, written into the “New Poor Law”, a decade later, leading to numerous such workhouses across the land. They were meant to replace or alleviate the increasing burden on the state of giving direct financial assistance to the poor, and were only phased out with the rise of the modern welfare state, post WWII. This particular workhouse was still serving as temporary accommodations for otherwise homeless women and children, into the 1990s.
But the reason I bring it up is that I was most struck by the explicit imperative that residing at the workhouse be made apparent to all as not a pleasant way of life. What few families wound up there were split, man, woman, and child. Food was gruel, work was hard, breaks were few, privacy nil, and punishments involved harder work still–tell one, tell all! I mean, these people were poor and homeless, and this was a way to get fed and housed, but it had to be made known, far and wide, that there was nothing to enjoy about life in the workhouse, lest ever more poor dare avail themselves of it.
2 Likes
This never would have happened under Henry V.
1 Like
And how many of those shit jobs are the only job someone could get? If folks were a bit less likely to cop getting shat on, it’d be harder for arseholes to find folks to shit on.
Depends if you know where to look.
In summary, the estimates in the new supplementary table indicate a total
Government pension obligation, at the end of December 2010, of £5.01
trillion,
That was 6 years ago. Obsourne has doubled the debt.
If you look in the same paper, you have the number for 2005. In just over 5
years, Gordon Brown and Labour quadrupled the pensions debts.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
