|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Jan 7, 2019 19:47:10 GMT
Well that explains it more logically, but there's definitely price fixing going on. Every shop has every TV at the same price at the same time, so the punter never finds a bargain anywhere nowadays. Bearing in mind there is 20% VAT on them I think generally TVs are extraordinarily good value.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Jan 7, 2019 20:26:24 GMT
Bearing in mind there is 20% VAT on them I think generally TVs are extraordinarily good value. I've said it once, and I'll say it again: I can remember when the standard rate of VAT was 8%. Why is it now so much more with worse economics of the country to go with it? Our politicians are guilty of severe financial mis-management over the past few decades
|
|
|
Post by LandieMark on Jan 7, 2019 21:10:56 GMT
VAT is a very fair tax IMO, especially when it’s levied on luxury goods. If you can afford it then spend it and if not then don’t. It’s very simple.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Jan 7, 2019 21:13:06 GMT
^ Yes but high VAT encourages the black economy, and people are willing to pay cash to make a substantial saving on their outgoings.
And although it may be a fair way to tax, it would be far fairer if it were to revert to 8% (or even 10%) and all other taxes were to remain as they are
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Jan 7, 2019 21:23:11 GMT
^ Yes but high VAT encourages the black economy, and people are willing to pay cash to make a substantial saving on their outgoings. And although it may be a fair way to tax, it would be far fairer if it were to revert to 8% (or even 10%) and all other taxes were to remain as they are It wouldn't be fairer for those who lost their services as a result of the financial black hole that would create. EDIT: I'd also point out that when VAT was 8%, the upper tax rate was 83% and that on investment income was 90%. I think I prefer a tax on discretionary spending as opposed to at source.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2019 9:02:45 GMT
Everyone finds one tax or another 'unfair'. My granddad worked for a building society and grumbled about having to pay tax on interest, as he'd paid tax when he earned the money in the first place. I saw what he was saying as a child, but the capital earned is (of course) not being re-taxed, and as he wasn't an affluent kind of chap that not taxing interest at all would benefit the well off far more than the likes of him. It would also have meant transferring tax burden to other areas, probably income tax, which would have affected him. That some people will choose to break the law does not make the law wrong - ditto taxes.
I'd love a 77" set, and there is space. But OLED is still very expensive, and the last piece I read in What Hifi suggested that QLED without backlight is heading in this direction and should be at least as good and cheaper. I think now is not the time to bite.
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Jan 8, 2019 9:57:05 GMT
Don't want to hijack the new TV thread but the easiest way to stop the black economy is to do away with cash: it will happen.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2019 10:04:07 GMT
There was a time where a card transaction of less than a fiver would have felt somehow embarrassing - not any more.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Jan 8, 2019 10:05:56 GMT
Don't want to hijack the new TV thread but the easiest way to stop the black economy is to do away with cash: it will happen. My wife has already made that move in my case. Any cash I do have is quickly hoovered up from pockets and wallet and I never see it again.
|
|
|
Post by Martin on Jan 8, 2019 10:27:44 GMT
There was a time where a card transaction of less than a fiver would have felt somehow embarrassing - not any more. With contactless it’s quicker and easier for everyone. I used to use Apple Pay on my phone a lot, but use my watch now which felt strange at first, but not anymore as it’s so quick. It helps that the limit on Apple Pay has been increased vs contactless cards in a lot of places, I paid for £100 worth of Shells finest with my watch yesterday.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Jan 8, 2019 10:33:43 GMT
^ That reminds me of the time I filled up and realised I'd forgotten my wallet and had to leave my watch as a deposit.
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Jan 8, 2019 12:29:51 GMT
There was a time where a card transaction of less than a fiver would have felt somehow embarrassing - not any more. With contactless it’s quicker and easier for everyone. I used to use Apple Pay on my phone a lot, but use my watch now which felt strange at first, but not anymore as it’s so quick. It helps that the limit on Apple Pay has been increased vs contactless cards in a lot of places, I paid for £100 worth of Shells finest with my watch yesterday. I use Apple Pay too, just means I only take my phone and keys if I’m popping to the shop. I rarely have cash and tbh on occasions when I go to buy something only to find that the vendor only takes cash, I just don’t bother. Their loss. It almost feels old fashioned to be told you can’t use card. Interesting argument about VAT as I can see how reducing it would make it less of a regressive tax that catches everyone both rich or poor, but it would have to be replaced by an increase in income tax and I’m sure there are a lot of us on yips forum who probably feel we pay enough of that already!
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Jan 8, 2019 13:31:23 GMT
Interesting argument about VAT as I can see how reducing it would make it less of a regressive tax that catches everyone both rich or poor, but it would have to be replaced by an increase in income tax and I’m sure there are a lot of us on yips forum who probably feel we pay enough of that already! Nope - our taxation is too high. Income tax can stay where it is, thank you very much (or even be cut) but VAT needs to come down. It should be the job of every honest government to lower the rates of taxation, not increase them.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 8, 2019 13:34:53 GMT
Interesting argument about VAT as I can see how reducing it would make it less of a regressive tax that catches everyone both rich or poor, but it would have to be replaced by an increase in income tax and I’m sure there are a lot of us on yips forum who probably feel we pay enough of that already! Nope - our taxation is too high. Income tax can stay where it is, thank you very much (or even be cut) but VAT needs to come down. It should be the job of every honest government to lower the rates of taxation, not increase them. Which services do you want to cut then?
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Jan 8, 2019 13:41:31 GMT
Nope - our taxation is too high. Income tax can stay where it is, thank you very much (or even be cut) but VAT needs to come down. It should be the job of every honest government to lower the rates of taxation, not increase them. But you can't do that and bring 100,000 new doctors and nurses into the NHS at the same time as building up our defences against both the physical and electronic attacks we seem to be subject to and provide more social housing etc etc. When VAT was reduced to 15% I saw a noticeable improvement in compliance from tradesmen etc and also a greater willingness to pay VAT from householders who were paying them. At 20% I agree that VAT is at a level that acts as a disincentive to compliance and possibly a reduction in the rate combined with greater compliance could see higher tax revenues being received - it certainly happened when the top rate of tax was reduced from 60% to 40% by Margaret Thatcher. Basically the Government need to bring in the maximum amount they can and that may mean reducing rates in some situations but it is a very difficult balancing act.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Jan 8, 2019 13:43:54 GMT
Nope - our taxation is too high. Income tax can stay where it is, thank you very much (or even be cut) but VAT needs to come down. It should be the job of every honest government to lower the rates of taxation, not increase them. Which services do you want to cut then? A lot of overseas aid for a start.... charity begins at home. MP's unreceipted allowances, benefits to people who've never been in the UK before (they wouldn't help me with anything when I when I needed help in late 1999-2000 and almost lost the house and everything else, just needed some financial assistance for a few months until I found another full-time job). We never had airport departure tax until fairly recently and it's still almost the world's highest, never had VAT on energy bills or telephone bills until recently too, I could go on..... all this extra tax revenue in my lifetime and what have we got to show for it?
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 8, 2019 13:46:56 GMT
We never had airport departure tax until fairly recently and it's still almost the world's highest, never had VAT on energy bills or telephone bills until recently too, I could go on..... all this extra tax revenue in my lifetime and what have we got to show for it? The NHS will soon account for close to 40% of the tax burden. So you have the 'our' NHS.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Jan 8, 2019 15:52:59 GMT
I think in many respects we don't know we are born in the UK with our income tax system. It is at least genuinely progressive in the sense that you need to be earning fairly comfortably before the tax band ticks up noticeably. Contrast the UK and Italy for example:
In the UK:
£0 - 11,850 - 0% £11,850 - 46,350 - 20% £46,350 - 150,000 - 40% Over £150,000 - 45%
Oh and for each £2 you earn over £100k, you lose £1 of your personal allowance, giving an effective tax rate between £100k and £123.7k of something like 61%.
So it's certainly a system where those with the broadest shoulders pay a substantially greater percentage than the poorest.
Whereas in Italy, which supposedly also has a progressive income tax system, the poorer and middle-income are clobbered much harder than in the UK and the rich are not substantially more highly taxed:
€0 - 15,000 - 23% €15,000 - 28,000 - 27% €28,000 - 55,000 - 38% €55,000 - 75,000 - 41% Over €75,000 - 43%
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2019 16:01:09 GMT
I think in many respects we don't know we are born in the UK with our income tax system. Chris certainly doesn't!
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Jan 8, 2019 16:58:02 GMT
Which services do you want to cut then? all this extra tax revenue in my lifetime and what have we got to show for it? What have the Romans ever done for us? Give your head a wobble, Chris, you're not comparing like for like. Take the NHS for example; compare a hospital today with one from when the VAT rate was 8% - they're from different planets in terms of their facilities and what they can treat. My hip replacement was £12k and they do 80,000 a year - there's a billion quid right there.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 8, 2019 17:06:19 GMT
Having paid for a canine TPLO recently, £12k sounds like tremendous value for money.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Jan 8, 2019 17:24:31 GMT
Having paid for a canine TPLO recently, £12k sounds like tremendous value for money. And I got a free one of these:
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Jan 8, 2019 20:00:34 GMT
I don't know if this has been kept up to date, but when I saw it a few years back I kept a copy:
Since 1997, there have been over 80 different tax rises - all of which are listed here.
1997
1. Council tax up 6.5 per cent to Band D average of £688 2. Mortgage tax relief cut from 15 per cent to 10 per cent, saving Chancellor £800million-a-year 3. £5billion-a-year tax grab on retirement savings by scrapping dividend tax credits for pension funds 4. Private medical insurance tax relief for pensioners abolished 5. Health insurance taxed again 6. Fuel tax escalator up, leading to inflation-busting rises on petrol prices 7. Vehicle excise duty up 8. Tobacco duty escalator up (as fuel) 9. Stamp duty increased on properties over £250,000 10. Corporation tax changes 11. Windfall tax on privatised utilities, designed to raise £5.2billion
1998
12. Married couples' allowance cut from 15 per cent to 10 per cent from April 1999 13. Tax on travel insurance up 14. Tax on casinos and gaming machines up 15. Fuel tax escalator brought forward 16. Tax on company cars increased 17. Tax relief for foreign earnings abolished 18. Tax concession for certain professions abolished 19. Capital gains tax imposed on certain non-residents 20. Reinvestment relief restricted 21. Corporation tax payments brought forward 22. Stamp duty on properties increased again 23. Some petrol and oil duties raised 24. Additional diesel duties 25. Landfill tax up, from £7 to £10 per ton 26. Council tax up by 8.6 per cent for average bill on Band D property to £747
1999
27. Upper earnings limit for National Insurance contributions raised above inflation 28. National Insurance for self-employed people raised 29. Married couple's allowance abolished from 2000 for under-65s 30. Mortgage interest relief abolished from April 2000, increasing typical bill for average homeowner by £240-a-year 31. New rules to stop contractors in IT industry setting up firms to reduce their tax bills 32. High mileage discount for company cars cut 33. Tobacco duty escalator brought forward 34. Insurance premium tax up from one to five per cent 35. Vocational training relief abolished 36. Employer's National Insurance contributions extended to all benefits-in-kind 37. VAT on some banking services increased 38. Premiums paid to tenants by landlords taxed 39. Duty on minor oils, such as fuel oil, up 40. Vehicle excise duties for lorries up 41. Landfill tax escalator introduced 42. Stamp duty on properties increased again 43. Council tax up by 6.7 per cent for average bill on Band D property to £798
2000
44. Tobacco duties up by five per cent above inflation 45. Stamp duty on properties increased again 46. Extra taxation of life assurance companies 47. Rules extended on companies using foreign subsidiaries to shelter profits in low tax regime 48. Council tax up by 6.1 per cent for average bill on Band D property to £847
2001
49. Council tax up by 6.4 per cent for average bill on Band D property to £901
2002
50. Personal allowances for everybody under the age of 65 frozen 51. National Insurance rate to rise from 10 per cent to 11 per cent from April 2003 52. New NI band for higher earners 53. National Insurance for employers rises from 11 per cent to 12 per cent 54. Self-employed also rises by 1 per cent 55. North Sea taxation up 56. Tax on some alcoholic drinks up 57. New stamp duty regime aimed at stamping out tax avoidance 58. New rules on loan relationships 59. Council tax up by 8.2 per cent for average bill on Band D property to £976
2003
60. VAT on electronically supplied services 61. IR35 applied to domestic workers to stop families from reducing tax bills on nannies 62. Betting duty change 63. Tax on red diesel and fuel oil up 64. Rules extended on companies using foreign subsidiaries to shelter profits in low tax regime extended to Ireland 65. Vehicle excise duty up by £5 on cars and vans 66. Council tax up by 12.9 per cent for average bill on Band D property to £1,102
2004
67. New 19 per cent tax rate for owner-managed businesses 68. Six-fold increase in the amount of tax paid by tradesmen for using their vans outside working hours. For basic rate tax-paters, an annual rise of £110 to £660 69. UK transfer pricing introduced, substantially increasing red tape on British firms 70. Increase in rate of tax on discretionary trusts becomes 40 per cent 71. Increase in tax on red diesel fuel 72. Increase in tax on red diesel fuels, including LPG (liquid petroleum gas) 73. Council tax up by 5.9 per cent for average bill on Band D property to £1,167
2005
74. Cancellation of stamp duty land tax relief on disadvantaged areas 75. Tax on North Sea oil firms doubled from 10 per cent to 20 per cent 75. Tax on North Sea oil firms doubled from 10 per cent to 20 per cent 76. 0 per cent rate of corporation tax abolished which had been introduced by Mr Brown to encourage small businesses 77. Council tax up by 4.1 per cent for average bill on Band D property to £1,214
2006
78. Clampdown on trusts and insurance policies commonly used to cut future inheritance bills 79. Increase of £45 in vehicle excise duty for gas-guzzling 4x4s cars 80. Council tax up by 4.5 per cent for average bill on Band D property to £1,268
Source: Grant Thornton, Institute for Fiscal Studies
The years refer to when the taxes were announced but not necessarily when they were introduced. In addition to these rises the Chancellor has increased his take by dragging more and more income tax payers into the 40 per cent bracket by consistently limiting rises in allowances and top rate thresholds. ================ I remember when North Sea Oil was discovered and we were promised by the politicians low taxes for the future plus massive spending on infrastructure etc to give us the best roads, libraries, public transportation etc etc in Europe.
I'm not angry just very annoyed with those who have progressively lied and mislead us over the years.
Anyway.....
I now declare this thread well and truly hijacked !!
|
|
|
Post by LandieMark on Jan 8, 2019 20:24:24 GMT
Feel free to keep this going as it is interesting. I’ve moved the relevant posts as it was derailing the TV topic. 😀
|
|
|
Post by PG on Jan 8, 2019 21:25:25 GMT
This book is worth a read, although it may make some of you very angry. It did me. www.amazon.co.uk/Squandered-David-Craig/dp/1845298322It basically catalogues the increases in public expenditure that Brown and Blair presided over in their first 10 years in power. And asks whether things really improved by the same magnitude. No surprise that they did not. And that's before you add on all the PFI money that got hosed everywhere too and that is off balance sheet. And for those who say that public services were dying in 1997, I don't think that was ever the case. I don't remember bodies piling up in the streets before Blair and Brown "saved us". So in effect, if politicians had chosen to be more careful with our money ans avoided some of the stupid excesses that went on, we'd all be paying less tax than we are now and we'd still have good public services. On tax, I think whoever it was wrote that the best way to tax people is to "lower the rate but widen the base" had the right idea. Low taxes mean it not worth bothering to pay clever people to help you avoid it, or commit crime to evade it. If VAT was 10% for example, but covered a much wider range of goods than now - not just zero rated stuff like books and food - but also exempt stuff like insurance and air or rail fares, the overall take would be higher but the rate would make it not worth avoiding. Adding VAT onto things like food, air travel (which is a luxury item after all) and insurance or financial services, would allow other taxes to be abolished as well. Sugar tax anyone! VAT on food - the poor will starve people will cry..... well we all eat too much so how is making food more expensive a bad thing? After all, other taxes are used to influence behaviour, why not tax on food to do the same? You can increase certain benefits to compensate those at the bottom end anyway if you choose to. And people arguing about VAT on food seem to always forget that there is already VAT (at 20%) on a lot of food and drink that we consume. And on income tax, real tax rate includes of course that tax by any other name - National Insurance. Which utterly muddies the waters as to what rates people really are on. Much is made of the tax free allowance being increased. But NI starts at a lower rate of pay. £162 per week = £8424 pa. Stealth tax anyone? In the middle, the 20% basic rate is really 32%. And at the top end, that extra 2% on all income means that people are paying 47% not 45% as often discussed. And then of course there is employers NI that means that the rates for employed v self employed people are way bigger than the oft mentioned "few %". Personally, I think that tax and NI need to be merged and the rates and bands simplified - and then lowered. And as a pensioner drawing income, that means I'd pay more probably, but people not paying NI on pensions is just an anachronism that distorts rates and behaviours. But in doing all this, I'd also remove a lot of reliefs and wheezes that means that many uber-rich people and those who can access "legal fiddles" don't really pay a fair rate overall. As usual, income tax falls on the employed middle classes. Corporation Tax. It is a bonkers tax. The large corporates avoid it. And all the wailing and moaning of people can never stop that. I'd abolish it. Instead I'd tax distributions - of capital and dividends - as income in the hands of the receivers and make overseas holders pay a witholding tax to get a fair % off them too. This would also at a stroke even up the treatment of equity and loans for corporate funding - as neither gets tax relief - making highly leverages takeovers les attractive. Inheritance Tax and Capital Gains Tax are another area ripe for reform. Following the widen the base but lower the rate mantra, my reform would be to abolish IHT, have CGT rates at 20%, but bring people's home into the CGT net. I'd allow gains on private residences to be rolled over as long as all the proceeds of a sale were reinvested - a roll over relief - so that it only became due when people downsized or died. This would also allow Stamp Duty to be abolished as well. As encouraging people to move is a good thing as they will buy stuff and keep the other taxes roling in. Current Stamp Duty rates do the exact opposite. Right, I'm just off the form a new political party. Who's in?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2019 23:28:35 GMT
OK, sign me up. Can we add a call for the generationally unemployed to be used for some form of work to get their 'benefits'? How about tightening up employment laws and cleaning out organised crime using the SAS etc with a shoot first and make up the answers later AND chuck the Irish vagrants and other roadable vermin? Get them to travel around their coo for a few decades and a PNG on their passports or driving licenses etc. No problem with people who come here for good reason but the oriental profesional wives club should be attending their meetings in Manilla or somewhere near there.
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Jan 8, 2019 23:53:11 GMT
The NHS will soon account for close to 40% of the tax burden. So you have the 'our' NHS. Aside from all the stuff PG wrote, the NHS is the single factor that needs to be dealt with immediately. As Bob says, historically the NHS did a lot more preparing you for death and a lot less keeping you alive in a vegetative state whilst lawyers argued about whether you knew you couldn't move and were only breathing with assistance or whether "vegetative state" could be defined as "being in a state that could be likened to being a vegetable, that is unaware of the world around you with no sensory capabilities whatsoever". Midwives used to smother the babies that were born looking quite clearly not fit and healthy and register them still born and when you were terminally ill you get sent home with a prescription of morphine and instructions to make sure your affairs were in order. I'm not suggesting we should reintroduce some of the older levels of care as being told by a witch doctor to jump over a rope three times backwards as a form of contraception might not be 100% effective but it needs to be realised that some elements of modern medicine and the care levels required during and following treatments and procedures were not remotely envisaged when the NHS was conceived. There also needs to be a fundamental change in the health model in the UK. Far too much media focus is put on life saving surgery, maintenance of the living dead and pioneering surgery when far better is looking after yourself and a huge switch to preventative activity from reactive treatment administered too late. The non-UK doctors in the family are shocked by the lack of escalation of medical treatment at as an early a stage as possible that prevails in the UK (although I point out that there are 12x more of us in the UK so it gets a bit busy...). I also noted over the Christmas period the lamentable take up of free health checks by the middle aged population, something which has the potential to save £billions through early action and lower cost. This lack of take up is partly caused by an understanding by the public that treatment of all kinds will be available when you eventually fall into the clutches of whatever it was that has been progressively making you ill and it needs to be drummed into people that this is not the way the NHS should be thought of. That aside we generally pay fuck all tax in the UK compared to the rest of the western EU states and compulsory and necessary services are dirt cheap due to the imposition of competition - things like car insurance, electricity, gas, mobile phones, banking are all peanuts in the UK. As this is a car forum remember that new and used cars in the UK are priced like bangers compared to the mainland and how many of you here commute or travel on business on the motorway network? Now imagine doing that in France on the Autoroute - eye popping!
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Jan 9, 2019 7:35:14 GMT
Something I see in my line of business is the size of pensions being paid to those who have worked in the public sector - higher education, councils, doctors & dentists etc. An index linked pension of £50K to £60K+ is commonplace and is being funded by the taxpayer. Police, normal teachers, fire fighters don't get anything like that amount and pensions between £15K and £25K are probably the norm in the stuff I see.
The big pensions would require a pension fund of around £1.5m and for those of us who have to fund all of our pensions personally, getting to that size of fund is a complete impossibility whilst trying to have some enjoyment out of life.
The Blair/Brown era increased Doctors salaries (and as a consequence their pensions) by c25% in one year and they have been getting their increases each year since based on the higher salary levels. The same era saw a massive increase in the number of public sector jobs, all with index linked pensions attached and as the population ages, the funding of all these past promises using future money is going to cause issues. It is high time we saw the start of some kind of fully funded pension provision both for the State Pension and for public service pensions. At the moment the State Pension paid to pensioners is funded entirely from the taxes paid by today's taxpayers and public service pensions are only partly funded with significant State top-ups required.
I have long been an advocate of tax and NI being amalgamated because that one act would bring clarity to the real tax levels people are paying and it would remove the need for the mountain of legislation and complication which only exists because we effectively have two different kinds of tax which apply to different types of income at different rates with different bands. Gordon Brown used to make my blood boil when he stood up with a smug smile and announced "once again we have maintained income tax at its existing level whilst increasing expenditure on ......". What he didn't say was that he had put NI up 2%. NI is still a tax but he used to use his words carefully.
It will take a Politician with big balls to grasp the tax/NI issue and it probably needs cross party agreement otherwise someone will find a way to poison the whole idea by showing how this is going to unfairly impact on the poor pensioners or some other sector when that doesn't need to be the case. If they want to protect pensioners from NI then they can reintroduce the higher personal allowance for pensioners to compensate. If you take the view that pensioners with income in excess of, say £40K don't need any help then they can taper the increased personal allowance away. That's a whole lot easier to administer than the current mess which includes IR35 and the demonisation of a sector of the workforce who work flexibly, throughout the country on temporary contracts and provide much needed expertise for short periods of time where and when they are needed.
I would also like to see some contribution to the NHS by those who use it. I know it is a massively controversial suggestion but somehow we need to help fund it better. I certainly don't want to see people not seeking treatment because they can't/won't pay something but maybe we need an NHS tax sitting alongside income tax so that it is taken at source. I have a great love and admiration for the NHS but it is very obvious to anyone visiting a hospital that there are lots of things that could be done better and lots of people who work there who are perhaps not working as hard as others (maybe the staff mix isn't right).
I can see some very big changes coming in the way that wealth is taxed because the current system isn't working properly but it is going to have to be very carefully judged otherwise social meltdown could ensue. The bottom line though is that things have to change one way or another and the wealthier are probably going to have to pay more but at the same time with all the jobs freed up by the EU nationals leaving the country, those receiving benefits and able to work should be forced to take employment and the benefits system should be tapered so that it makes it beneficial for them to work.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Jan 9, 2019 8:34:27 GMT
I have a great love and admiration for the NHS but it is very obvious to anyone visiting a hospital that there are lots of things that could be done better and lots of people who work there who are perhaps not working as hard as others (maybe the staff mix isn't right). Fun fact: the biggest purchaser of fax machines in the World is...the NHS. You're right, changes need to be made in the way it works because if we keep doing what we've always done, we'll get what we've always got. One thing's for sure; in the future we'll all be paying more tax.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 9, 2019 8:55:48 GMT
It also accounts for 10% of the worlds pagers usage. The NHS isn’t fit for purpose and needs a radical overhaul at every level.
|
|