the poor lose out again

[DrFilth]

don't you love it when the tories say > in real terms <

does this mean they were only joking or lying terms last time

http://itn.co.uk/uk/2...out+in+NHS+reforms%27


god help the sick under the tory and liberals

[Kromovaracun]

'Real terms' is not some spin term that's been made up off-the-hoof by politicians! It's been a staple of meaningfully researching economics for decades at the very least. In fact if you'd bothered to actually look up the meaning and usage before mouthing off about it, you'd realise it's the exact opposite of taking figures at face value and is typically used to calculate the 'real' impact of spending rather than just accepting figures showing raw/gross investment - it's constantly used to deflate incomplete statistical claims. Just because you've not heard of it before, does not make it unreliable and does not make it invalid.

[VHG]

>>>>god help the sick under the tory and liberals

God help the COUNTRY under Labour.

[DrFilth]

for your information i have heard of it and yes labour did use it

they use it to hoodwink the young and gullible to make it sound better than it is

[Kromovaracun]

So using a figure that takes account of inflation/deflation, growth (or lack thereof) in GDP, and other real-world variables is less reliable than just relying on raw investment figures, is it? It'd be less gullible of me to just look at the amount of money going into services comparatively, and just ignore all other factors? Or to completely disregard figures because people I know have had bad experiences in the health service, despite the fact that the figures don't even necessarily contradict it?

Look, I'm not trying to be a tory apologist here - I'm trying to be neutral and just stick to what makes good analysis and how we can intelligently try to analyse the problems of the health service. With all due respect, even if you've 'heard of' the term, you don't come across as particularly aware of its meaning.

[DrFilth]

as soon as i hear real terms i think what has he cut down on now

i shall remember what you have said and when the next person says to me

i have to wait over 12 months to see a consultant i will say look at this in real terms it is only a year

have a nice day

[Kromovaracun]

"as soon as i hear real terms i think what has he cut down on now "

Well, you're wrong.

"i have to wait over 12 months to see a consultant i will say look at this in real terms it is only a year "

Again, if you'd have looked up the phrase 'real terms' and understood it (or read anything that I have written), then you would you know that it refers to how you measure investment/money. So you'd know that's a completely invalid application of the term...

[flip_flop]

Kromo has given Dr Filth the equivalent of a 5-0 drubbing.

[KARL]

Reading the sort of discussion this thread represents always reminds me how many people fit/bend every variable in existence to the political (or religious) colour they are born into. It is not a discussion so much as a statement of belief(s) - and one should not attempt to mix reason into such exchanges because no amount of it is going to make any difference to the righteous believer.

[DrFilth]

hope that is for me karl that is one of the niicest things ever said to me

the dr is righteous


as for flip flop in real terms i think Kromovaracun has just wasted a load of pixels

5-0 my @ rse

[jackthehat]

If you earn £100 per week and your rent is £50......you have £50 to spend on Motorbike Magazines.......

If your wage increases to £150 per week at exactly the same time as your rent rises to £100........how much better off are you, each week, *in real terms* ?

[Kromovaracun]

"Whatever it means I`m with you Dr. THEY use the term to disguise their empty shallow promises"

For the love of Christ!

'Real Terms' is not a soundbite that's been made up by politicians! If you think it is, you are wrong- that's not a debatable point. It's quite a clearly defined term for measuring value (usually of an investment) in a certain way - with inflation, growth adjustments and other variables accounted for. If you don't believe me, then go to your local library and take a look in any introductory/reference book you can find for economics. You will find it there.

With that (i.e. the actual) definition in mind, what the spokesman in the link is promising to do is make an investment which is a net increase once said variables have been factored in. Now if you think there's something wrong or misleading about doing that, or if you think he is being insincere or deceitful in making that promise, then that's a very different objection. But you need to understand what it actually means first. Jeez.

[DrFilth]

>> that's not a debatable point.<<

if it is not rude i don't think the ed will mind

[factor-fiction]

Hi Kromovaracun, whilst I agree with your points I think you are flogging a dead horse on this one. You are more tenacious than I am but I think sometimes it's appropriate to walk away.

[DrFilth]

itchy has just been to the house and i asked him this question

if cameron said they have been given an increase of 5 per cent in real terms what does it mean to you


his answer was , that t***will be doctoring the figures to make it look good

[jackthehat]

Did he say anything similar when Blair/Brown were at the helm?

[DrFilth]

yep

[factor-fiction]

I know I said I'd pulled out but I'm a bit bored while they are takig lunch in the cricket....

So how would you describe the increase in NHS spending that is needed, doc?

[DrFilth]

it is the staff cuts that you should worry about factor

if you are not in bupa and become ill you will notice the difference

the rich get richer and the poor get s*** on

[rowanwitch]

It wasn't the tories that created the current target driven climate where huge departments are needed to provide the department of health with statistical information....and where time on the list is more important than clinical need...
There are some positives in that overall waiting times have fallen, and treatments for cancer are prioritised

but scare stories, while making good press are not the whole picture as no one stands up and says actually the care I had was excellent yet there are large independent surveys of various aspects of healthcare that say pretty much that.... there will always be those who are failed by the system
and there always were...
Yes the care might have been better...but the treatments that can save you today didn't exist back then...