General News Discussion

[eFestivals]

So to summarise... Virgin can charge what they want for a first class fair as I said...

no they can't. If they charged what they wanted, they wouldn't have been bailed out as they were and would have already lost the franchise before it had expired.

Beardy has to play the game to the unwritten rules, else the ball gets taken away.

Edited October 3, 2012 by eFestivals

[Essex_George]

Jesus, Barry and Mr Efest just whip your cocks out and see who is the biggest to settle this once and for all!

[eFestivals]

Jesus, Barry and Mr Efest just whip your cocks out and see who is the biggest to settle this once and for all!

who wants to measure cocks? Not me.

I just wish that people were wise enough to spot a fraudster when they see one, and not wish to add their tax money to that fraudsters fraudulent gains.

The likes of Barry is normally quick enough to moan about how much tax he pays. It seems that in this case he's quite happy to fund as many private islands with regularly mysterious burning-down of the buildings (at just about the time they need renovating) as beardy might want.

The c**t still owes VAT money from his early 70s fraud. But hey, avoiding jail and setting yourself up as hugely rich via VAT fraud that you don't have to pay back is easy when your family are judges.

[Essex_George]

who wants to measure cocks? Not me.

I just wish that people were wise enough to spot a fraudster when they see one, and not wish to add their tax money to that fraudsters fraudulent gains.

The likes of Barry is normally quick enough to moan about how much tax he pays. It seems that in this case he's quite happy to fund as many private islands with regularly mysterious burning-down of the buildings (at just about the time they need renovating) as beardy might want.

The c**t still owes VAT money from his early 70s fraud. But hey, avoiding jail and setting yourself up as hugely rich via VAT fraud that you don't have to pay back is easy when your family are judges.

[kaosmark2]

Just seems you two have been going at each other a bit recently, especially in the thread about computer problems. I think if one of you said something was black the other would argue it's white!

[eFestivals]

Just seems you two have been going at each other a bit recently, especially in the thread about computer problems. I think if one of you said something was black the other would argue it's white!

that was a laugh, eh .... I said "surely it's only a problem at compile time?", Barry said not, but another user of the same software said it was only a problem at compile time. So while Barry was haranguing me for being wrong in his eyes, his version of the world was being contradicted by another person which he didn't challenge - instead only challenging me.

So i'll leave you to work out which of us is going at the other.

[kaosmark2]

Never once moaned about how much tax I pay.... In fact I always say we should increase the level of tax...

[eFestivals]

This is true. You moan about 'your' tax money being given to benefit scroungers to spend on mobiles, fags, sky tv and beer, but not about actually paying it.

benefit scroungers bad, fraudster billionaires good - in Barry's world.

[eFestivals]

Never once moaned about how much tax I pay.... In fact I always say we should increase the level of tax...

you seem to be forgetting your celebratory posts about not loosing the child benefit you thought you were going to lose.

Which, while perhaps not being you moaning about what you pay in, was very definitely a anti-moan about what you think you deserve to get back for what you pay in.

So at the end of the day it's the same thing - you are only happy to pay your taxes if you think you get enough back from paying your taxes.

And god forbid if you had to lose one of the three-plus holidays you take each year to pay for your daughters glasses - even tho you're not entitled to them via the NHS rules.

I reckon you need to borrow a dot-to-dot book from your daughter.

[Spindles]

This is true. You moan about 'your' tax money being given to benefit scroungers to spend on mobiles, fags, sky tv and beer, but not about actually paying it.

[TalkShow Bob]

I have no idea if she is entitled to them or not yet... Waiting for the decesion from the faceless PCT

Only had two this year by the way

Edited October 3, 2012 by TalkShow Bob

[eFestivals]

As much as I dislike agreeing with Barry I dont understand this backlash against the state providing certain things for people who could afford them themselves. For a start the NHS isn't a form of benefits and we should NEVER let it be seen as one, once that happens then it will get eroded and become as shoddy as Medicare in the states. The nation has made the decision that people shouldn’t face the bills for their ill health and weather that person is a king or a road sweeper it shouldn’t matter they should get exactly the same treatment and entitlements.

The state providing things for people that can afford them reminds them of why they pay taxes and keeps them engaged with state provided services. If rich and influential people stop using services then the services get overlooked and pressure is removed to keep up standards so they gets degraded.

what you've obviously missed is that Barry is wanting something above the NHS norm (a 2nd set of specs).

That doesn't mean he shouldn't get it of course, but if he does that means that someone else isn't getting something they need - and it's certainly the case from what Barry has said over the years that he's far more moneyed than the average.

So it it's him getting something or another getting something instead - which is the reality of any limited resource - then it's very likely that of the two he's the one who should dip into his pocket to get it.

But as a generalisation I agree with what you've said.

Edited October 3, 2012 by eFestivals

[Spindles]

I'd be pretty sure that eyecare is one area the NHS would come in under budget on regularly. I have made use of my NHS sight prescription maybe 6 times in the last 25 years, I wouldn't be surprised if it were the case for most who qualify for free tests/subsidised glasses that they make use of the facility in less years than they don't.

In childhood a second pair of glasses is an essential. I went through more pairs of glasses under the age of 16 than I have in the 25 years since. It was the same when I was young, with one pair of free NHS specs and one my parents (and later I) had to pay for. When the good ones got broke you need that second pair as a backup.

£2000 is insanely expensive. I have complex lenses and the most I ever paid for lenses was £220, and prices have dropped for me since then (this was in 1990, prices for my glasses have consistently dropped over the last 20 years as more and more of the cost of both lenses and frames has been covered by the NHS as time has gone on. Now my lenses are completely free and the frame gets a subsidised reduction in price even if it were a designer or luxury frame, so I'm no longer consigned to the £30 or less drawer.

I don't know what optician you use, but I discovered last year that vision express won't make up NHS prescription lenses for a pair of glasses unless they sell you a set of frames, which I was unhappy with, whereas specsavers have both repaired an old set of frames for me at a decent cost and then put lenses in them entirely under the cost of an NHS prescription, which I was REALLY impressed with

I don't envy you having a child so young in glasses Barry, that's going to be an expensive business indeed

[TalkShow Bob]

what you've obviously missed is that Barry is wanting something above the NHS norm (a 2nd set of specs).

That doesn't mean he shouldn't get it of course, but if he does that means that someone else isn't getting something they need - and it's certainly the case from what Barry has said over the years that he's far more moneyed than the average.

So it it's him getting something or another getting something instead - which is the reality of any limited resource - then it's very likely that of the two he's the one who should dip into his pocket to get it.

But as a generalisation I agree with what you've said.

[eFestivals]

I'd be pretty sure that eyecare is one area the NHS would come in under budget on regularly. I have made use of my NHS sight prescription maybe 6 times in the last 25 years, I wouldn't be surprised if it were the case for most who qualify for free tests/subsidised glasses that they make use of the facility in less years than they don't.

I'd guess that the budgets for these sorts of things are adjusted downwards as the demand goes down, so that the money is free to be used elsewhere within the NHS where there's a higher demand than there is resources.

So while I can see that there might be plenty of people who aren't getting everything they're entitled to, it won't necessarily mean that there's spare money for things outside of the standard cover.

[eFestivals]

I dont belive that the NHS is zero sum. They won't have to take the second pair of glases from someone else and there will be budgets for Glases amougst other things. They will then be ajusted to reflect. If the budget is cut for some reason its going to be political influence not Barrys. However if Barry has good service then maybe his glowing report will push up the glases departments budget, you never know.

It might not be zero sum, but it certainly has a fixed set of (perhaps local) rules.

So while it's easy to say 'make an exception' and it all sounds very reasonable on an individual basis, the effect when panned out across 1M+ NHS workers is incalculable.

[TalkShow Bob]

It might not be zero sum, but it certainly has a fixed set of (perhaps local) rules.

So while it's easy to say 'make an exception' and it all sounds very reasonable on an individual basis, the effect when panned out across 1M+ NHS workers is incalculable.

[eFestivals]

Whats the exeption being made?

From what Barry posted somewhere along the way, the extra specs he's after are outside of the standard NHS issue, because they only provide one set of specs.

I'm not trying to say that his daughter and his circumstances are being correctly dealt with, btw - a 2 year old with glasses must be a nightmare.

[eFestivals]

What I said was you have no "automatic" entitlement to a second pair... Which is a bit different...

standard/automatic - it's not so different.

The point behind either word is that you have to fight in some way to get them, if you get them.

It's a git for you personally, but at the same time there does need to be a line drawn somewhere for what they'll do without questioning - and where they've drawn the line isn't in an unreasonable place overall. As you've pointed out on enough occasions, the govt doesn't has a bottomless pit of money to spend.

[TalkShow Bob]

standard/automatic - it's not so different.

The point behind either word is that you have to fight in some way to get them, if you get them.

It's a git for you personally, but at the same time there does need to be a line drawn somewhere for what they'll do without questioning - and where they've drawn the line isn't in an unreasonable place overall. As you've pointed out on enough occasions, the govt doesn't has a bottomless pit of money to spend.

[eFestivals]

This is back to the idea of the health service as being a service for all though. He will have to proove he needs them and then the burocracy will decide the proof is enough to warrent him getting them. Unless he was breaking them on purpose of course the NHS should be supplying them no matter how much he makes. Its the same as the argument people are currently making against free percriptions. The system isn't and shouldn't be based on ability to pay - the service should be free at the point of delever for all. At the end of the day thats why we all pay tax.

It's not denying treatment, and it's not demanding payment. It's supplying what in most eyesight cases is possibly a perfectly adequate level of care.

Where it's insufficient for Barry is that his daughter is 2 and so breaking glasses often, and she has a complex prescription which means it takes a long time to get them replaced.

The line that they've drawn is in a good place overall (I'm confident that most people would agree), but far from sufficient for cases like this. But even that isn't saying he can't have it, just that it needs justifying - and I'm similarly confident that most people would accept the justification (and so, I'd hope, he'll get sorted).

I can't really see a problem with it (tho I get it's annoying for Barry personally), unless you're going to show me the majority who are happy to pay bottomless taxes.

[Spindles]

Just to clarify, a single pair of glasses isn't £2000... The cost of 12 pairs of replacement lens in a year is around that number... Presuming she doesn't break the frames... If she does it will be more...

[Rufus Gwertigan]

There is something compeling, yet voyeuristic, about the drama in Wales with the missing girl. I found myself wondering if the police had evidence the suspect was involved, as to whether a car battery attached to his testicles would help find her. Would it be worth it anyway?

[eFestivals]

There is something compeling, yet voyeuristic, about the drama in Wales with the missing girl. I found myself wondering if the police had evidence the suspect was involved, as to whether a car battery attached to his testicles would help find her. Would it be worth it anyway?

there's a lot about everything that's going on with this case which doesn't appear to add up to me, particularly to do with the guy they've arrested.

If they've not got the right guy, it's looking like it could be a monumental police cock-up. Let's hope they have.

[thetime]

there's a lot about everything that's going on with this case which doesn't appear to add up to me, particularly to do with the guy they've arrested.

If they've not got the right guy, it's looking like it could be a monumental police cock-up. Let's hope they have.