A most unfortunate day.

comment by moreinjuredthanowen (U9641)
posted 1 minute ago
you lot do know that depay was always likely to go to utd due to long standing link.

I think we were used to force a bid from utd and may or may not have even enquired I don't know.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactley

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

going to see a doctor over a stuffy nose

--------------------------

Southern fairy feckers. My grandad once had his leg blown off in a prank at work. Went home and my Granny stitched it back on for him, gave him a slap round th'ear 'ole for getting blood on her floor and sent him back to graft. Proper Northerner that lad. Proper.

My only hope is lvg turn depay into another pile of pooop . But he is bound to get one right soon

I don't understand this. You already have a very exiting similar type of player(sterling). Not sure why would you guys be disappointed. AFIK, depay to liverpool were all fabricated by media.....

Eventually you Britons will wake up one day and realize that funding your national health system through taxes was a poor idea. Your NHS is running out of money so the government has to raise taxes to make up that difference. Perhaps if people weren't abusing the system by going to see a doctor over a stuffy nose, the NHS might be able to sustain itself.
==========================================================
Yes, paying multiple times more for poorer outcomes is a much better idea. Shelling out more to private companies doesn’t make it any more affordable. (With the private system, you do have the option of not paying it, and dying, which by your logic, is a great option).

The problem, for all health systems, whether private or public, is that medicine is getting better and better at keeping people alive, but obviously it’s costing more and more.

Whether you pay it through a system like the NHS, or whether you pay it through a notoriously inefficient private healthcare system (as assessed by numerous independent reports), you still have to pay.

The NHS has plenty of problems, but it’s still one of the most cost-efficient systems in the world, and the US system...er.....isn’t. The US has the highest infant mortality rate of any of the developed nations....higher than fvcking Cuba’s.

“We need to get real: the NHS is already delivering extraordinary value for money. Private sector alternatives are exceptionally expensive, as the US proves, with worse quality outcomes (as the table shows).”

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2011/06/06/the-nhs-a-stunningly-cost-effective-supplier-of-high-quality-healthcare

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

Depay could well be the next Suarez, he could well be the next Babel or he could be somewhere in between. Waaay too early to tell whether it's bargain of the century or £30m spunked up the wall.

Right...a UK based blog that promotes the NHS as a guaranteed life saver over private health care system like here in the US. I am shocked
===========================================================
A UK based blog quoting a report compiled in the US, which echoes all the other international surveys done over the past few decades

I know you guys are in ideological denial about this, as you still think there’s commies under very bed, and that’s your entitlement, but it’s pretty well-established that a lot of money gets wasted in the US system, yet you are arguing the opposite.

Not that I care, you should have whatever system you want, I was just curious to know why you think that rising costs are only a problem for social healthcare systems, as if paying into a private system means you magically don’t have to pay them.

===========================================================
Also while you are at it about infant mortality, you can also explain how great the NHS is while pointing out how the UK is ranked 23rd in Europe in survival rate for mothers during child birth.
===========================================================
I didn’t say the NHS is great, I said it was cost-efficient, which is what the debate was about.

The point I made was that in the US you pay more for worse outcomes, so where the NHS lies in the league tables is irrelevant to that point, so long as it’s above where the US is, and the US has the worst infant mortality rate in the developed world.

We spend less on healthcare than most of the other developed countries, and I think we should spend more, but that’s also irrelevant to the point that it’s a cost-efficient system.

===========================================================
But you know what else is expensive? Having to pay for those millions who feel they need a doctor because they scraped their elbow or blew their nose. Waste of money.
===========================================================
Yes, that’s a problem and it’s quite expensive, but as they don’t get past their GP, it doesn’t place an expensive burden on hospitals. It’s the reason the NHS scores low on patient focus, because it places a burden on GPs, but I’m not sure that deterring people from visiting their doctor is the best solution, and it’s not as expensive as litigation insurance and gratuitous advertising.

This is not an anti-American rant, my sister-in-law and two of my nephews are American, and I spent a lot of time visiting them, where I came across a lot of hospitality and friendship in the community where they lived.

My brother actually worked in the American healthcare system, and is now a very successful consultant on comparative healthcare systems, which takes him all around the world, so through him I’ve seen a lot of the independent surveys done on this issue of cost-efficiency.