Discussion:
And the World keeps noticing . . .
Add Reply
Rich80105
2020-05-02 08:41:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
"Governments now ask heavy sacrifices from their people, with around a
third of the global population under some form of lockdown. But
demonstration that governments are in fact acting to protect the
public, for example, through adequately preparing the health system
and giving clear advice aimed at saving lives, has been highly
variable. Although international comparisons are not straightforward,
there are nonetheless encouraging examples of where strong and swift
action has succeeded in staving off the worst effects of the virus, be
they Germany's quick escalation of testing, New Zealand's elimination
strategy, or South Korea's aggressive pursuit of a test-and-trace
approach. By contrast, the UK, USA, and Brazil, among others, have
been slow to react and haphazard when they did. The serious
deficiencies in pandemic planning and response have sparked protests
and condemnation and call into question commitment to the most vital
interests of the public." The Lancet Journal

EDITORIAL| VOLUME 395, ISSUE 10234, P1401, MAY 02, 2020
COVID-19: remaking the social contract
__________________

There is quite a lot in those few words, but one sentence stands out :
"But demonstration that governments are in fact acting to protect the
public, for example, through adequately preparing the health system
and giving clear advice aimed at saving lives, has been highly
variable."

Well we know that there are big diffrences between countries, but
there are also differencesover time within New Zealand. We know that
much of our public health system was systematically run down overthe 9
years of the Key/English government; yes there was the usual manra
about efficiencies, some soft targets that picked opff low hanging
fruit to give a few "wins", but overall we saw the gradual reductions
in service that arose from staff shortages (remember National fought
hard to avoid pay rises for doctors and nurses), from lower
maintenance (always a target for National because with any luck it
doesn;t really bite until the next term - except they lasted longer
than expected), and the other big wish - privatisation.

I remember one of the publicity photos of Bill English shortly before
the election - attending a $20 million hospital extension. Looks good
- but then in the small print it says that it was an extension to a
private hospital, not a public facility. So what happened when Civid
hit? We had no fully recovered our health system from those years, but
htere had also been a shift from public to private. I remember back in
March tehre was talk of private hospitals picking up some of the
"elective surgery" that was deferred in the public system - but
apparently that has not happened. Why? Well opening a hospital in the
Covid-19 situation was a bit problematic. First you needed to cover
what would need to be done if a case of Covid was found on the
premises. In the public hospitals they made sure that there were
parallel systems for everything - if a ward had to be shut down, there
was another waiting that could be guaranteed claer - there was a
separate set of staff to open it up and start work immediately. Now
that would have increased costs, and private hospitals only exist for
profits. It meant that the cost for tratment would be more than
insurance companies wanted to pay - much better to close down than to
stay open. Much better that is for profits, not for New Zealanders
looking for treatment many public hospitals could not provide.

So when we look back to the last election campaign, remember the
symbolism of the then Prime Minister opening a hospital extension -
which didn't help New Zealand when a crisis happened.

The lesson - we need to "future proof' our public health system -
private hospitals are not part of the solution, they are part of the
problem. So don;t elect National - they put profit before lives.
Crash
2020-05-02 23:10:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
"Governments now ask heavy sacrifices from their people, with around a
third of the global population under some form of lockdown. But
demonstration that governments are in fact acting to protect the
public, for example, through adequately preparing the health system
and giving clear advice aimed at saving lives, has been highly
variable. Although international comparisons are not straightforward,
there are nonetheless encouraging examples of where strong and swift
action has succeeded in staving off the worst effects of the virus, be
they Germany's quick escalation of testing, New Zealand's elimination
strategy, or South Korea's aggressive pursuit of a test-and-trace
approach. By contrast, the UK, USA, and Brazil, among others, have
been slow to react and haphazard when they did. The serious
deficiencies in pandemic planning and response have sparked protests
and condemnation and call into question commitment to the most vital
interests of the public." The Lancet Journal
EDITORIAL| VOLUME 395, ISSUE 10234, P1401, MAY 02, 2020
COVID-19: remaking the social contract
__________________
"But demonstration that governments are in fact acting to protect the
public, for example, through adequately preparing the health system
and giving clear advice aimed at saving lives, has been highly
variable."
Well we know that there are big diffrences between countries, but
there are also differencesover time within New Zealand. We know that
much of our public health system was systematically run down overthe 9
years of the Key/English government; yes there was the usual manra
about efficiencies, some soft targets that picked opff low hanging
fruit to give a few "wins", but overall we saw the gradual reductions
in service that arose from staff shortages (remember National fought
hard to avoid pay rises for doctors and nurses), from lower
maintenance (always a target for National because with any luck it
doesn;t really bite until the next term - except they lasted longer
than expected), and the other big wish - privatisation.
I remember one of the publicity photos of Bill English shortly before
the election - attending a $20 million hospital extension. Looks good
- but then in the small print it says that it was an extension to a
private hospital, not a public facility. So what happened when Civid
hit? We had no fully recovered our health system from those years, but
htere had also been a shift from public to private. I remember back in
March tehre was talk of private hospitals picking up some of the
"elective surgery" that was deferred in the public system - but
apparently that has not happened. Why? Well opening a hospital in the
Covid-19 situation was a bit problematic. First you needed to cover
what would need to be done if a case of Covid was found on the
premises. In the public hospitals they made sure that there were
parallel systems for everything - if a ward had to be shut down, there
was another waiting that could be guaranteed claer - there was a
separate set of staff to open it up and start work immediately. Now
that would have increased costs, and private hospitals only exist for
profits. It meant that the cost for tratment would be more than
insurance companies wanted to pay - much better to close down than to
stay open. Much better that is for profits, not for New Zealanders
looking for treatment many public hospitals could not provide.
So when we look back to the last election campaign, remember the
symbolism of the then Prime Minister opening a hospital extension -
which didn't help New Zealand when a crisis happened.
The lesson - we need to "future proof' our public health system -
private hospitals are not part of the solution, they are part of the
problem. So don;t elect National - they put profit before lives.
Rich you consistently post such lies about past National governments
or the National party. You can never produce reputable cites in
support of your assertions and therefore your sole purpose is to
dogmatically promote a rigidly anti-National agenda.

I could equally do this with an anti-Labour tirade. I could point out
with cites how the Labour party is constitutionally dominated by the
Trade Union movement and is therefore has its DNA derived from a
movement rooted in British worker-rights movements imported into NZ as
part of the British 'invasion' of NZ that started in the 19th century.
I could also point out that the Labour party of today is still largely
the same as the one that suffered defeat in the 2008, 2011 and 2014
elections. The reason why Labour is popular today is because just
prior to the 2017 election they found an inspirational leader two
years after National lost theirs.

But I wont go any further down this track because I am only
anti-Labour in the face of your irrational anti-National rants.

I am fervently anti-NZF and I despise the watermelon party. ACT are
irrelevant. Both the other political parties in Parliament have good
and bad points.


--
Crash McBash
Rich80105
2020-05-02 23:42:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
"Governments now ask heavy sacrifices from their people, with around a
third of the global population under some form of lockdown. But
demonstration that governments are in fact acting to protect the
public, for example, through adequately preparing the health system
and giving clear advice aimed at saving lives, has been highly
variable. Although international comparisons are not straightforward,
there are nonetheless encouraging examples of where strong and swift
action has succeeded in staving off the worst effects of the virus, be
they Germany's quick escalation of testing, New Zealand's elimination
strategy, or South Korea's aggressive pursuit of a test-and-trace
approach. By contrast, the UK, USA, and Brazil, among others, have
been slow to react and haphazard when they did. The serious
deficiencies in pandemic planning and response have sparked protests
and condemnation and call into question commitment to the most vital
interests of the public." The Lancet Journal
EDITORIAL| VOLUME 395, ISSUE 10234, P1401, MAY 02, 2020
COVID-19: remaking the social contract
__________________
"But demonstration that governments are in fact acting to protect the
public, for example, through adequately preparing the health system
and giving clear advice aimed at saving lives, has been highly
variable."
Well we know that there are big diffrences between countries, but
there are also differencesover time within New Zealand. We know that
much of our public health system was systematically run down overthe 9
years of the Key/English government; yes there was the usual manra
about efficiencies, some soft targets that picked opff low hanging
fruit to give a few "wins", but overall we saw the gradual reductions
in service that arose from staff shortages (remember National fought
hard to avoid pay rises for doctors and nurses), from lower
maintenance (always a target for National because with any luck it
doesn;t really bite until the next term - except they lasted longer
than expected), and the other big wish - privatisation.
I remember one of the publicity photos of Bill English shortly before
the election - attending a $20 million hospital extension. Looks good
- but then in the small print it says that it was an extension to a
private hospital, not a public facility. So what happened when Civid
hit? We had no fully recovered our health system from those years, but
htere had also been a shift from public to private. I remember back in
March tehre was talk of private hospitals picking up some of the
"elective surgery" that was deferred in the public system - but
apparently that has not happened. Why? Well opening a hospital in the
Covid-19 situation was a bit problematic. First you needed to cover
what would need to be done if a case of Covid was found on the
premises. In the public hospitals they made sure that there were
parallel systems for everything - if a ward had to be shut down, there
was another waiting that could be guaranteed claer - there was a
separate set of staff to open it up and start work immediately. Now
that would have increased costs, and private hospitals only exist for
profits. It meant that the cost for tratment would be more than
insurance companies wanted to pay - much better to close down than to
stay open. Much better that is for profits, not for New Zealanders
looking for treatment many public hospitals could not provide.
So when we look back to the last election campaign, remember the
symbolism of the then Prime Minister opening a hospital extension -
which didn't help New Zealand when a crisis happened.
The lesson - we need to "future proof' our public health system -
private hospitals are not part of the solution, they are part of the
problem. So don;t elect National - they put profit before lives.
Rich you consistently post such lies about past National governments
or the National party. You can never produce reputable cites in
support of your assertions and therefore your sole purpose is to
dogmatically promote a rigidly anti-National agenda.
I could equally do this with an anti-Labour tirade. I could point out
with cites how the Labour party is constitutionally dominated by the
Trade Union movement and is therefore has its DNA derived from a
movement rooted in British worker-rights movements imported into NZ as
part of the British 'invasion' of NZ that started in the 19th century.
I could also point out that the Labour party of today is still largely
the same as the one that suffered defeat in the 2008, 2011 and 2014
elections. The reason why Labour is popular today is because just
prior to the 2017 election they found an inspirational leader two
years after National lost theirs.
But I wont go any further down this track because I am only
anti-Labour in the face of your irrational anti-National rants.
I am fervently anti-NZF and I despise the watermelon party. ACT are
irrelevant. Both the other political parties in Parliament have good
and bad points.
It would be helpful if you could identify any statement that you
believe is a lie, but the following may help:
https://www.bowen.co.nz/our-resources/news/media-releases/bowen-hospital-expansion-officially-opened
(That is a 2011 extension, opened by the then Minister of Health)
and the one I referred to:
https://www.bowen.co.nz/our-resources/news/media-releases/first-private-cancer-care-centre-opens-in-wellington
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/95131684/pm-opens-wellingtons-first-private-cancer-care-centre

As for health generally:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11824097
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/health/2017/03/nurses-spending-their-own-money-to-help-patients-union.html
https://www.nbr.co.nz/article/leaked-document-shows-10-district-health-boards-face-budget-cuts-king-b-188722
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/80318036/researchers-claim-nz-health-budget-declining-publiclyfunded-surgery-on-way-out
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/@health--science/2017/03/30/17370/auckland-mental-health-services-crumbling
http://www.indiannewslink.co.nz/despite-denials-poor-service-plagues-our-health-system/
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/83702839/new-zealands-declining-health-care-system-is-slipping-behind-other-countries

Was there anything else you wanted to know?
Crash
2020-05-03 00:34:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
"Governments now ask heavy sacrifices from their people, with around a
third of the global population under some form of lockdown. But
demonstration that governments are in fact acting to protect the
public, for example, through adequately preparing the health system
and giving clear advice aimed at saving lives, has been highly
variable. Although international comparisons are not straightforward,
there are nonetheless encouraging examples of where strong and swift
action has succeeded in staving off the worst effects of the virus, be
they Germany's quick escalation of testing, New Zealand's elimination
strategy, or South Korea's aggressive pursuit of a test-and-trace
approach. By contrast, the UK, USA, and Brazil, among others, have
been slow to react and haphazard when they did. The serious
deficiencies in pandemic planning and response have sparked protests
and condemnation and call into question commitment to the most vital
interests of the public." The Lancet Journal
EDITORIAL| VOLUME 395, ISSUE 10234, P1401, MAY 02, 2020
COVID-19: remaking the social contract
__________________
"But demonstration that governments are in fact acting to protect the
public, for example, through adequately preparing the health system
and giving clear advice aimed at saving lives, has been highly
variable."
Well we know that there are big diffrences between countries, but
there are also differencesover time within New Zealand. We know that
much of our public health system was systematically run down overthe 9
years of the Key/English government; yes there was the usual manra
about efficiencies, some soft targets that picked opff low hanging
fruit to give a few "wins", but overall we saw the gradual reductions
in service that arose from staff shortages (remember National fought
hard to avoid pay rises for doctors and nurses), from lower
maintenance (always a target for National because with any luck it
doesn;t really bite until the next term - except they lasted longer
than expected), and the other big wish - privatisation.
I remember one of the publicity photos of Bill English shortly before
the election - attending a $20 million hospital extension. Looks good
- but then in the small print it says that it was an extension to a
private hospital, not a public facility. So what happened when Civid
hit? We had no fully recovered our health system from those years, but
htere had also been a shift from public to private. I remember back in
March tehre was talk of private hospitals picking up some of the
"elective surgery" that was deferred in the public system - but
apparently that has not happened. Why? Well opening a hospital in the
Covid-19 situation was a bit problematic. First you needed to cover
what would need to be done if a case of Covid was found on the
premises. In the public hospitals they made sure that there were
parallel systems for everything - if a ward had to be shut down, there
was another waiting that could be guaranteed claer - there was a
separate set of staff to open it up and start work immediately. Now
that would have increased costs, and private hospitals only exist for
profits. It meant that the cost for tratment would be more than
insurance companies wanted to pay - much better to close down than to
stay open. Much better that is for profits, not for New Zealanders
looking for treatment many public hospitals could not provide.
So when we look back to the last election campaign, remember the
symbolism of the then Prime Minister opening a hospital extension -
which didn't help New Zealand when a crisis happened.
The lesson - we need to "future proof' our public health system -
private hospitals are not part of the solution, they are part of the
problem. So don;t elect National - they put profit before lives.
Rich you consistently post such lies about past National governments
or the National party. You can never produce reputable cites in
support of your assertions and therefore your sole purpose is to
dogmatically promote a rigidly anti-National agenda.
I could equally do this with an anti-Labour tirade. I could point out
with cites how the Labour party is constitutionally dominated by the
Trade Union movement and is therefore has its DNA derived from a
movement rooted in British worker-rights movements imported into NZ as
part of the British 'invasion' of NZ that started in the 19th century.
I could also point out that the Labour party of today is still largely
the same as the one that suffered defeat in the 2008, 2011 and 2014
elections. The reason why Labour is popular today is because just
prior to the 2017 election they found an inspirational leader two
years after National lost theirs.
But I wont go any further down this track because I am only
anti-Labour in the face of your irrational anti-National rants.
I am fervently anti-NZF and I despise the watermelon party. ACT are
irrelevant. Both the other political parties in Parliament have good
and bad points.
It would be helpful if you could identify any statement that you
https://www.bowen.co.nz/our-resources/news/media-releases/bowen-hospital-expansion-officially-opened
(That is a 2011 extension, opened by the then Minister of Health)
https://www.bowen.co.nz/our-resources/news/media-releases/first-private-cancer-care-centre-opens-in-wellington
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/95131684/pm-opens-wellingtons-first-private-cancer-care-centre
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11824097
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/health/2017/03/nurses-spending-their-own-money-to-help-patients-union.html
https://www.nbr.co.nz/article/leaked-document-shows-10-district-health-boards-face-budget-cuts-king-b-188722
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/80318036/researchers-claim-nz-health-budget-declining-publiclyfunded-surgery-on-way-out
http://www.indiannewslink.co.nz/despite-denials-poor-service-plagues-our-health-system/
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/83702839/new-zealands-declining-health-care-system-is-slipping-behind-other-countries
Was there anything else you wanted to know?
Not really - these cites needed to be in line with each of the
anti-National statements, in your original post. I cant be bothered
going through the 10 cites you have belatedly provided to see which
point in your original post each of them supports.

In the past you have provided cites that do not directly address the
points you have made, so I am not that interested in doing this again.


--
Crash McBash
Rich80105
2020-05-03 01:45:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
"Governments now ask heavy sacrifices from their people, with around a
third of the global population under some form of lockdown. But
demonstration that governments are in fact acting to protect the
public, for example, through adequately preparing the health system
and giving clear advice aimed at saving lives, has been highly
variable. Although international comparisons are not straightforward,
there are nonetheless encouraging examples of where strong and swift
action has succeeded in staving off the worst effects of the virus, be
they Germany's quick escalation of testing, New Zealand's elimination
strategy, or South Korea's aggressive pursuit of a test-and-trace
approach. By contrast, the UK, USA, and Brazil, among others, have
been slow to react and haphazard when they did. The serious
deficiencies in pandemic planning and response have sparked protests
and condemnation and call into question commitment to the most vital
interests of the public." The Lancet Journal
EDITORIAL| VOLUME 395, ISSUE 10234, P1401, MAY 02, 2020
COVID-19: remaking the social contract
__________________
"But demonstration that governments are in fact acting to protect the
public, for example, through adequately preparing the health system
and giving clear advice aimed at saving lives, has been highly
variable."
Well we know that there are big diffrences between countries, but
there are also differencesover time within New Zealand. We know that
much of our public health system was systematically run down overthe 9
years of the Key/English government; yes there was the usual manra
about efficiencies, some soft targets that picked opff low hanging
fruit to give a few "wins", but overall we saw the gradual reductions
in service that arose from staff shortages (remember National fought
hard to avoid pay rises for doctors and nurses), from lower
maintenance (always a target for National because with any luck it
doesn;t really bite until the next term - except they lasted longer
than expected), and the other big wish - privatisation.
I remember one of the publicity photos of Bill English shortly before
the election - attending a $20 million hospital extension. Looks good
- but then in the small print it says that it was an extension to a
private hospital, not a public facility. So what happened when Civid
hit? We had no fully recovered our health system from those years, but
htere had also been a shift from public to private. I remember back in
March tehre was talk of private hospitals picking up some of the
"elective surgery" that was deferred in the public system - but
apparently that has not happened. Why? Well opening a hospital in the
Covid-19 situation was a bit problematic. First you needed to cover
what would need to be done if a case of Covid was found on the
premises. In the public hospitals they made sure that there were
parallel systems for everything - if a ward had to be shut down, there
was another waiting that could be guaranteed claer - there was a
separate set of staff to open it up and start work immediately. Now
that would have increased costs, and private hospitals only exist for
profits. It meant that the cost for tratment would be more than
insurance companies wanted to pay - much better to close down than to
stay open. Much better that is for profits, not for New Zealanders
looking for treatment many public hospitals could not provide.
So when we look back to the last election campaign, remember the
symbolism of the then Prime Minister opening a hospital extension -
which didn't help New Zealand when a crisis happened.
The lesson - we need to "future proof' our public health system -
private hospitals are not part of the solution, they are part of the
problem. So don;t elect National - they put profit before lives.
Rich you consistently post such lies about past National governments
or the National party. You can never produce reputable cites in
support of your assertions and therefore your sole purpose is to
dogmatically promote a rigidly anti-National agenda.
I could equally do this with an anti-Labour tirade. I could point out
with cites how the Labour party is constitutionally dominated by the
Trade Union movement and is therefore has its DNA derived from a
movement rooted in British worker-rights movements imported into NZ as
part of the British 'invasion' of NZ that started in the 19th century.
I could also point out that the Labour party of today is still largely
the same as the one that suffered defeat in the 2008, 2011 and 2014
elections. The reason why Labour is popular today is because just
prior to the 2017 election they found an inspirational leader two
years after National lost theirs.
But I wont go any further down this track because I am only
anti-Labour in the face of your irrational anti-National rants.
I am fervently anti-NZF and I despise the watermelon party. ACT are
irrelevant. Both the other political parties in Parliament have good
and bad points.
It would be helpful if you could identify any statement that you
https://www.bowen.co.nz/our-resources/news/media-releases/bowen-hospital-expansion-officially-opened
(That is a 2011 extension, opened by the then Minister of Health)
https://www.bowen.co.nz/our-resources/news/media-releases/first-private-cancer-care-centre-opens-in-wellington
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/95131684/pm-opens-wellingtons-first-private-cancer-care-centre
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11824097
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/health/2017/03/nurses-spending-their-own-money-to-help-patients-union.html
https://www.nbr.co.nz/article/leaked-document-shows-10-district-health-boards-face-budget-cuts-king-b-188722
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/80318036/researchers-claim-nz-health-budget-declining-publiclyfunded-surgery-on-way-out
http://www.indiannewslink.co.nz/despite-denials-poor-service-plagues-our-health-system/
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/83702839/new-zealands-declining-health-care-system-is-slipping-behind-other-countries
Was there anything else you wanted to know?
Not really - these cites needed to be in line with each of the
anti-National statements, in your original post. I cant be bothered
going through the 10 cites you have belatedly provided to see which
point in your original post each of them supports.
In the past you have provided cites that do not directly address the
points you have made, so I am not that interested in doing this again.
Yet it was you that claimed "Rich you consistently post such lies
about past National governments or the National party." - without any
identification of any lie, let alone cites to justify your assertion.
Double standards?

So what specifically did you believe was a lie, and was that assertion
based on anything other than your personal opinion? You do appear to
be capable of taking reasonable balances approaches to issues;
presumably there was some reason for what from others I would presume
based on past experienced would have been a knee-jerk unthinking
response from an idiot that cuts and runs when called on addressing
arguments with insults.
Gordon
2020-05-03 03:18:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
"Governments now ask heavy sacrifices from their people, with around a
third of the global population under some form of lockdown. But
demonstration that governments are in fact acting to protect the
public, for example, through adequately preparing the health system
and giving clear advice aimed at saving lives, has been highly
variable. Although international comparisons are not straightforward,
there are nonetheless encouraging examples of where strong and swift
action has succeeded in staving off the worst effects of the virus, be
they Germany's quick escalation of testing, New Zealand's elimination
strategy, or South Korea's aggressive pursuit of a test-and-trace
approach. By contrast, the UK, USA, and Brazil, among others, have
been slow to react and haphazard when they did. The serious
deficiencies in pandemic planning and response have sparked protests
and condemnation and call into question commitment to the most vital
interests of the public." The Lancet Journal
EDITORIAL| VOLUME 395, ISSUE 10234, P1401, MAY 02, 2020
COVID-19: remaking the social contract
__________________
"But demonstration that governments are in fact acting to protect the
public, for example, through adequately preparing the health system
and giving clear advice aimed at saving lives, has been highly
variable."
Well we know that there are big diffrences between countries, but
there are also differencesover time within New Zealand. We know that
much of our public health system was systematically run down overthe 9
years of the Key/English government; yes there was the usual manra
about efficiencies, some soft targets that picked opff low hanging
fruit to give a few "wins", but overall we saw the gradual reductions
in service that arose from staff shortages (remember National fought
hard to avoid pay rises for doctors and nurses), from lower
maintenance (always a target for National because with any luck it
doesn;t really bite until the next term - except they lasted longer
than expected), and the other big wish - privatisation.
I remember one of the publicity photos of Bill English shortly before
the election - attending a $20 million hospital extension. Looks good
- but then in the small print it says that it was an extension to a
private hospital, not a public facility. So what happened when Civid
hit? We had no fully recovered our health system from those years, but
htere had also been a shift from public to private. I remember back in
March tehre was talk of private hospitals picking up some of the
"elective surgery" that was deferred in the public system - but
apparently that has not happened. Why? Well opening a hospital in the
Covid-19 situation was a bit problematic. First you needed to cover
what would need to be done if a case of Covid was found on the
premises. In the public hospitals they made sure that there were
parallel systems for everything - if a ward had to be shut down, there
was another waiting that could be guaranteed claer - there was a
separate set of staff to open it up and start work immediately. Now
that would have increased costs, and private hospitals only exist for
profits. It meant that the cost for tratment would be more than
insurance companies wanted to pay - much better to close down than to
stay open. Much better that is for profits, not for New Zealanders
looking for treatment many public hospitals could not provide.
So when we look back to the last election campaign, remember the
symbolism of the then Prime Minister opening a hospital extension -
which didn't help New Zealand when a crisis happened.
The lesson - we need to "future proof' our public health system -
private hospitals are not part of the solution, they are part of the
problem. So don;t elect National - they put profit before lives.
Rich you consistently post such lies about past National governments
or the National party. You can never produce reputable cites in
support of your assertions and therefore your sole purpose is to
dogmatically promote a rigidly anti-National agenda.
I could equally do this with an anti-Labour tirade. I could point out
with cites how the Labour party is constitutionally dominated by the
Trade Union movement and is therefore has its DNA derived from a
movement rooted in British worker-rights movements imported into NZ as
part of the British 'invasion' of NZ that started in the 19th century.
I could also point out that the Labour party of today is still largely
the same as the one that suffered defeat in the 2008, 2011 and 2014
elections. The reason why Labour is popular today is because just
prior to the 2017 election they found an inspirational leader two
years after National lost theirs.
But I wont go any further down this track because I am only
anti-Labour in the face of your irrational anti-National rants.
I am fervently anti-NZF and I despise the watermelon party. ACT are
irrelevant. Both the other political parties in Parliament have good
and bad points.
It would be helpful if you could identify any statement that you
https://www.bowen.co.nz/our-resources/news/media-releases/bowen-hospital-expansion-officially-opened
(That is a 2011 extension, opened by the then Minister of Health)
https://www.bowen.co.nz/our-resources/news/media-releases/first-private-cancer-care-centre-opens-in-wellington
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/95131684/pm-opens-wellingtons-first-private-cancer-care-centre
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11824097
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/health/2017/03/nurses-spending-their-own-money-to-help-patients-union.html
https://www.nbr.co.nz/article/leaked-document-shows-10-district-health-boards-face-budget-cuts-king-b-188722
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/80318036/researchers-claim-nz-health-budget-declining-publiclyfunded-surgery-on-way-out
http://www.indiannewslink.co.nz/despite-denials-poor-service-plagues-our-health-system/
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/83702839/new-zealands-declining-health-care-system-is-slipping-behind-other-countries
Was there anything else you wanted to know?
Not really - these cites needed to be in line with each of the
anti-National statements, in your original post. I cant be bothered
going through the 10 cites you have belatedly provided to see which
point in your original post each of them supports.
In the past you have provided cites that do not directly address the
points you have made, so I am not that interested in doing this again.
Yet it was you that claimed "Rich you consistently post such lies
about past National governments or the National party." - without any
identification of any lie, let alone cites to justify your assertion.
Double standards?
So what specifically did you believe was a lie, and was that assertion
based on anything other than your personal opinion? You do appear to
be capable of taking reasonable balances approaches to issues;
presumably there was some reason for what from others I would presume
based on past experienced would have been a knee-jerk unthinking
response from an idiot that cuts and runs when called on addressing
arguments with insults.
Rich, what Crash is saying in a somewhat diplomatic way is that you have
burnt the bridge.
Rich80105
2020-05-03 04:01:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gordon
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
"Governments now ask heavy sacrifices from their people, with around a
third of the global population under some form of lockdown. But
demonstration that governments are in fact acting to protect the
public, for example, through adequately preparing the health system
and giving clear advice aimed at saving lives, has been highly
variable. Although international comparisons are not straightforward,
there are nonetheless encouraging examples of where strong and swift
action has succeeded in staving off the worst effects of the virus, be
they Germany's quick escalation of testing, New Zealand's elimination
strategy, or South Korea's aggressive pursuit of a test-and-trace
approach. By contrast, the UK, USA, and Brazil, among others, have
been slow to react and haphazard when they did. The serious
deficiencies in pandemic planning and response have sparked protests
and condemnation and call into question commitment to the most vital
interests of the public." The Lancet Journal
EDITORIAL| VOLUME 395, ISSUE 10234, P1401, MAY 02, 2020
COVID-19: remaking the social contract
__________________
"But demonstration that governments are in fact acting to protect the
public, for example, through adequately preparing the health system
and giving clear advice aimed at saving lives, has been highly
variable."
Well we know that there are big diffrences between countries, but
there are also differencesover time within New Zealand. We know that
much of our public health system was systematically run down overthe 9
years of the Key/English government; yes there was the usual manra
about efficiencies, some soft targets that picked opff low hanging
fruit to give a few "wins", but overall we saw the gradual reductions
in service that arose from staff shortages (remember National fought
hard to avoid pay rises for doctors and nurses), from lower
maintenance (always a target for National because with any luck it
doesn;t really bite until the next term - except they lasted longer
than expected), and the other big wish - privatisation.
I remember one of the publicity photos of Bill English shortly before
the election - attending a $20 million hospital extension. Looks good
- but then in the small print it says that it was an extension to a
private hospital, not a public facility. So what happened when Civid
hit? We had no fully recovered our health system from those years, but
htere had also been a shift from public to private. I remember back in
March tehre was talk of private hospitals picking up some of the
"elective surgery" that was deferred in the public system - but
apparently that has not happened. Why? Well opening a hospital in the
Covid-19 situation was a bit problematic. First you needed to cover
what would need to be done if a case of Covid was found on the
premises. In the public hospitals they made sure that there were
parallel systems for everything - if a ward had to be shut down, there
was another waiting that could be guaranteed claer - there was a
separate set of staff to open it up and start work immediately. Now
that would have increased costs, and private hospitals only exist for
profits. It meant that the cost for tratment would be more than
insurance companies wanted to pay - much better to close down than to
stay open. Much better that is for profits, not for New Zealanders
looking for treatment many public hospitals could not provide.
So when we look back to the last election campaign, remember the
symbolism of the then Prime Minister opening a hospital extension -
which didn't help New Zealand when a crisis happened.
The lesson - we need to "future proof' our public health system -
private hospitals are not part of the solution, they are part of the
problem. So don;t elect National - they put profit before lives.
Rich you consistently post such lies about past National governments
or the National party. You can never produce reputable cites in
support of your assertions and therefore your sole purpose is to
dogmatically promote a rigidly anti-National agenda.
I could equally do this with an anti-Labour tirade. I could point out
with cites how the Labour party is constitutionally dominated by the
Trade Union movement and is therefore has its DNA derived from a
movement rooted in British worker-rights movements imported into NZ as
part of the British 'invasion' of NZ that started in the 19th century.
I could also point out that the Labour party of today is still largely
the same as the one that suffered defeat in the 2008, 2011 and 2014
elections. The reason why Labour is popular today is because just
prior to the 2017 election they found an inspirational leader two
years after National lost theirs.
But I wont go any further down this track because I am only
anti-Labour in the face of your irrational anti-National rants.
I am fervently anti-NZF and I despise the watermelon party. ACT are
irrelevant. Both the other political parties in Parliament have good
and bad points.
It would be helpful if you could identify any statement that you
https://www.bowen.co.nz/our-resources/news/media-releases/bowen-hospital-expansion-officially-opened
(That is a 2011 extension, opened by the then Minister of Health)
https://www.bowen.co.nz/our-resources/news/media-releases/first-private-cancer-care-centre-opens-in-wellington
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/95131684/pm-opens-wellingtons-first-private-cancer-care-centre
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11824097
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/health/2017/03/nurses-spending-their-own-money-to-help-patients-union.html
https://www.nbr.co.nz/article/leaked-document-shows-10-district-health-boards-face-budget-cuts-king-b-188722
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/80318036/researchers-claim-nz-health-budget-declining-publiclyfunded-surgery-on-way-out
http://www.indiannewslink.co.nz/despite-denials-poor-service-plagues-our-health-system/
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/83702839/new-zealands-declining-health-care-system-is-slipping-behind-other-countries
Was there anything else you wanted to know?
Not really - these cites needed to be in line with each of the
anti-National statements, in your original post. I cant be bothered
going through the 10 cites you have belatedly provided to see which
point in your original post each of them supports.
In the past you have provided cites that do not directly address the
points you have made, so I am not that interested in doing this again.
Yet it was you that claimed "Rich you consistently post such lies
about past National governments or the National party." - without any
identification of any lie, let alone cites to justify your assertion.
Double standards?
So what specifically did you believe was a lie, and was that assertion
based on anything other than your personal opinion? You do appear to
be capable of taking reasonable balances approaches to issues;
presumably there was some reason for what from others I would presume
based on past experienced would have been a knee-jerk unthinking
response from an idiot that cuts and runs when called on addressing
arguments with insults.
Rich, what Crash is saying in a somewhat diplomatic way is that you have
burnt the bridge.
Are you trying to build one?
Gordon
2020-05-03 03:15:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
[Snip]

Rich a task for you. Times up. Time to let it go.

We live in a democracy and MPs are elected to The House and form
Governments. The people of this country are happy with this process. Some
concerns exist over how the MP's are elected, maybe.

So we have a had a Government which was not of your colour. It has happened.
It will happen again.

Turn around and let us see what needs to be done to make this country
better. Ranting on about the past as and excuse for the present woes is
pointless.
Tony
2020-05-03 03:57:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gordon
[Snip]
Rich a task for you. Times up. Time to let it go.
We live in a democracy and MPs are elected to The House and form
Governments. The people of this country are happy with this process. Some
concerns exist over how the MP's are elected, maybe.
So we have a had a Government which was not of your colour. It has happened.
It will happen again.
Turn around and let us see what needs to be done to make this country
better. Ranting on about the past as and excuse for the present woes is
pointless.
But just about his entire armoury.
Gordon, Rich is wasted in this newsgroup, he should be running comedy hour for
a psychiatric prison, his sarcasm and lies would be seen by many of the inmates
as funny instead of abusive.
George
2020-05-03 20:02:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 02 May 2020 22:57:54 -0500
Post by Tony
But just about his entire armoury.
Gordon, Rich is wasted in this newsgroup, he should be running comedy
hour for a psychiatric prison, his sarcasm and lies would be seen by
many of the inmates as funny instead of abusive.
As if those inmates didn't have enough to contend with
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Crash
2020-05-03 05:07:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gordon
[Snip]
Rich a task for you. Times up. Time to let it go.
We live in a democracy and MPs are elected to The House and form
Governments. The people of this country are happy with this process. Some
concerns exist over how the MP's are elected, maybe.
So we have a had a Government which was not of your colour. It has happened.
It will happen again.
Turn around and let us see what needs to be done to make this country
better. Ranting on about the past as and excuse for the present woes is
pointless.
Very well said Gordon.


--
Crash McBash
Rich80105
2020-05-03 05:13:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gordon
[Snip]
Rich a task for you. Times up. Time to let it go.
We live in a democracy and MPs are elected to The House and form
Governments. The people of this country are happy with this process. Some
concerns exist over how the MP's are elected, maybe.
So we have a had a Government which was not of your colour. It has happened.
It will happen again.
Turn around and let us see what needs to be done to make this country
better. Ranting on about the past as and excuse for the present woes is
pointless.
Indeed, the first thing is to learn from the past, not repeat the same
mistakes, and think through what will be needed as the current crisis
is resolved. Regardless of the colour of a government, the same
lessons are there. New Zealand has shown that despite the poor
situation we found ourselves, we have done quite well regading
Covid-19, but there are still structural issues that do not get looked
at closely in international comparisons even now.

We have a large number of operations that have not taken place because
ofthe pressure on hospitals - I know of one lady who had already had a
hip operation deferred for over a month before Lockdown; she is now
unable to move except in a wheelchair. It will take some time for our
hospitals to get back to normal throughput. Yes there had been
problems in the health system, but we are fortunate that Covid did not
happen in early 2018 - at that time we would have been much more
vulnerable. In part our response was influenced by the need to reduce
strain on hospitals even after two years of a lot of money being spent
to bring back capacity. So a clear lesson is that we should not allow
th health system to again regress; we cannot know whether there will
be different Covid-like viruses come though next year or the year
after. That support will require funding; and that has implications
for the level of taxation which we need to ensure is set at the best
level.

Businesses and public service organisations are loking at the
advantages of working from home - we do not know how long that will be
needed, but there have been someproductivity gains. As a country, it
may assist us meet goals supported by governments of different colours
relating to international obligations by reducing pollution due to
travel, we may be able to absorb population growth with a lower level
of new commercial buildings. That will make different requirements on
housing stock - many homes are not very suitable for working from
home; and it will also change the pattern of retail sales - it is
likely that there will not be as great a demand for restaruants for
example.

Privatisation has proved to have unforeseen difficulties - I have
pointed out that favourng private hospitals may not have been a good
idea; fundamentally publicly owned services for health in particular
canbe organised to be much more efficient than a framented ownership
syste. we have known that for years of course - a comparison of the US
System with most countries has shown that the distortions in their
system are delivering high profits at the expense of equal opportunity
and public health. The current pandemic also shows that our health
system has been too fragmented - it has not delivered the innovation
that was sought, and has hampered adoption of best practice.

You are correct that we need to accept whatver government our country
votes for. I believe we would have had a stronger opposition for this
current term if we had been truly proportional - The Opportunity Party
achieved a much higher level of votes than ACT, but did not gain any
seats.

The other aspect to consider is that in my view around two-thirds of
all legislation is broadly supported by both parties; John Key gained
support by being prepared to look "Labour-light" to swinging voters;
blind opposition to anything the government does has made Mike Hosking
something of a laughing stock, in part because he is unprepard to
accept that a lot of the time any government will follow independent
public servant advice that would be the same for any government.

So what do you believe needs tobe done to make our country better,
Gordon?
James Christophers
2020-05-03 22:09:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
"Governments now ask heavy sacrifices from their people, with around a
third of the global population under some form of lockdown. But
demonstration that governments are in fact acting to protect the
public, for example, through adequately preparing the health system
and giving clear advice aimed at saving lives, has been highly
variable. Although international comparisons are not straightforward,
there are nonetheless encouraging examples of where strong and swift
action has succeeded in staving off the worst effects of the virus, be
they Germany's quick escalation of testing, New Zealand's elimination
strategy, or South Korea's aggressive pursuit of a test-and-trace
approach. By contrast, the UK, USA, and Brazil, among others, have
been slow to react and haphazard when they did. The serious
deficiencies in pandemic planning and response have sparked protests
and condemnation and call into question commitment to the most vital
interests of the public." The Lancet Journal
EDITORIAL| VOLUME 395, ISSUE 10234, P1401, MAY 02, 2020
COVID-19: remaking the social contract
__________________
"But demonstration that governments are in fact acting to protect the
public, for example, through adequately preparing the health system
and giving clear advice aimed at saving lives, has been highly
variable."
Well we know that there are big diffrences between countries, but
there are also differencesover time within New Zealand. We know that
much of our public health system was systematically run down overthe 9
years of the Key/English government; yes there was the usual manra
about efficiencies, some soft targets that picked opff low hanging
fruit to give a few "wins", but overall we saw the gradual reductions
in service that arose from staff shortages (remember National fought
hard to avoid pay rises for doctors and nurses), from lower
maintenance (always a target for National because with any luck it
doesn;t really bite until the next term - except they lasted longer
than expected), and the other big wish - privatisation.
I remember one of the publicity photos of Bill English shortly before
the election - attending a $20 million hospital extension. Looks good
- but then in the small print it says that it was an extension to a
private hospital, not a public facility. So what happened when Civid
hit? We had no fully recovered our health system from those years, but
htere had also been a shift from public to private. I remember back in
March tehre was talk of private hospitals picking up some of the
"elective surgery" that was deferred in the public system - but
apparently that has not happened. Why? Well opening a hospital in the
Covid-19 situation was a bit problematic. First you needed to cover
what would need to be done if a case of Covid was found on the
premises. In the public hospitals they made sure that there were
parallel systems for everything - if a ward had to be shut down, there
was another waiting that could be guaranteed claer - there was a
separate set of staff to open it up and start work immediately. Now
that would have increased costs, and private hospitals only exist for
profits. It meant that the cost for tratment would be more than
insurance companies wanted to pay - much better to close down than to
stay open. Much better that is for profits, not for New Zealanders
looking for treatment many public hospitals could not provide.
So when we look back to the last election campaign, remember the
symbolism of the then Prime Minister opening a hospital extension -
which didn't help New Zealand when a crisis happened.
The lesson - we need to "future proof' our public health system -
private hospitals are not part of the solution, they are part of the
problem. So don;t elect National - they put profit before lives.
Rich you consistently post such lies about past National governments
or the National party. You can never produce reputable cites in
support of your assertions and therefore your sole purpose is to
dogmatically promote a rigidly anti-National agenda.
I could equally do this with an anti-Labour tirade. I could point out
with cites how the Labour party is constitutionally dominated by the
Trade Union movement and is therefore has its DNA derived from a
movement rooted in British worker-rights movements imported into NZ as
part of the British 'invasion' of NZ that started in the 19th century.
I could also point out that the Labour party of today is still largely
the same as the one that suffered defeat in the 2008, 2011 and 2014
elections. The reason why Labour is popular today is because just
prior to the 2017 election they found an inspirational leader two
years after National lost theirs.
But I wont go any further down this track because I am only
anti-Labour in the face of your irrational anti-National rants.
I am fervently anti-NZF and I despise the watermelon party. ACT are
irrelevant. Both the other political parties in Parliament have good
and bad points.
And apart from Gordon's cogent contribution later in the thread, there's nothing further to be said that can have any useful relevance; although how The Lancet extract and Rich's sidelining follow-up tract relates to the topic header, "And the world keeps noticing..." is lost on me.
Loading...