Home cinema - BBC let something slip through today

HomeCinemaBanter (http://www.homecinemabanter.com/index.php)

- UK digital tv (http://www.homecinemabanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=5)

- - BBC let something slip through today (http://www.homecinemabanter.com/showthread.php?t=72516)

BBC let something slip through today

In article , Bill Wright
wrote:

Until I had to semi-retire to look after the halt and the lame my income
was very considerably more than that. But now I am a benefits
scrounger! I even went down to the doctors last week and demanded my
indigestion pills on the NHS! I don't feel too guilty though. After
all, twice a year for 40 years I wrote the most alarmingly enormous
cheques made out to the Income Tax people. For a while I did feel
guilty, and it still doesn't seem right somehow, actually receiving
money from the government instead of paying it in. I have always
believed in saving the NHS money whenever possible, so in the past I
did a few daft things. Dragged myself down to the surgery when I could
barely walk to save the doctor coming out, all that sort of thing. But
a couple of years ago I was having a dressing changed because an
operation wound had gone septic, and I said to the nurse, "This seems a
terrible amount of fuss for a little wound. I feel quite embarrassed,"
and she said, "Look love, you've paid in all your life -- you've every
right to have a bit back." And of course she was right. But I still
think we should all be as careful as possible with NHS resources.

It seems curious that people do tend to feel that getting NHS treatment, or
some other social benefits is de-facto 'scrounging'. Whilst *not* feeling
that sending kids to the local school is also 'scrounging'.

The reality, of course, depends entirely on the specific case. As per the
nurse's comments, paying tax on the basis expected by the state is the
entry-fee to being a member of a civilised society. Yet even that is
case-by-case. Some people may be wealthy and dodge this 'fee', so may
judged as 'scrounging' for using *anything* provided socially that they
dodged paying for - e.g. asking for police help if robbed, or even using
the benefits of street lights. Whilst others may have problems which
prevent them from working throughout their life, hence not paying tax, but
we'd regard them as exempt as part of the idea that the social support
should go out of its way to aid those in serious trouble.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

BBC let something slip through today

In ,
critcher wrote:

On 29/11/2012 13:48, Tony Houghton wrote:
In ,
Bill Wright wrote:

The NHS: It should be protected against the Tories

It needs even more protection against Labour.

critcher said...........
I think not Tony. You may feel the need to spread rumour and malcontent
for all to see as an aid to tory philosophy,but the NHS was far safer
under Labour than it ever could be with this bunch of nincompoops in
power now.

Hm, maybe. Definitely, if you think what needs protecting most are the
bureaucracy and gold-plated pensions etc.

--
TH * http://www.realh.co.uk

BBC let something slip through today

Jim Lesurf wrote:

It seems curious that people do tend to feel that getting NHS treatment, or
some other social benefits is de-facto 'scrounging'. Whilst *not* feeling
that sending kids to the local school is also 'scrounging'.
Yes. Incidentally I think there is far more 'consumer awareness' than
there used to be, and the various providers (the schools, NHS, local
council, etc) have responded to varying degrees by setting up
'complaints' procedures of some sort.

The reality, of course, depends entirely on the specific case. As per the
nurse's comments, paying tax on the basis expected by the state is the
entry-fee to being a member of a civilised society. Yet even that is
case-by-case. Some people may be wealthy and dodge this 'fee', so may
judged as 'scrounging' for using *anything* provided socially that they
dodged paying for - e.g. asking for police help if robbed, or even using
the benefits of street lights. Whilst others may have problems which
prevent them from working throughout their life, hence not paying tax, but
we'd regard them as exempt as part of the idea that the social support
should go out of its way to aid those in serious trouble.
And therein lies a great difficulty, separating the deserving sheep from
the scrounging goats.

I do find it alarming that so many people seem to have a 'welfare state
mentality', this being shorthand for a mindset that regards state
support not as an emergency safety net but as a constant source of
income and support.

Also, I have witnessed people that I'm afraid I have quickly categorised
as trailer trash being appallingly rude to NHS staff, demanding their
'rights' and generally carrying on alarming. I can't help feeling that
although no-one has the right to be abusive to staff, it's particularly
grotesque when those doing it have clearly paid little or nothing into
the system.

Of course, a central problem with these people is that they lack
intelligence, and in particular social intelligence. That's why they
can't hold down a job, and that's why they don't know how to get the
best out of those who are trying to help them.

Bill

BBC let something slip through today

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
I'm sure you must get them in your line of work as well...
What? You don't have any young female aerial rigging apprentices?

Do you know I've never seen a female aerial rigger or TV technician come
to that, they must exist but not here;!..

Do you mean TV repair etc technician?

Yes...

Quite a few females are engineers in
broadcasting, and even more on the operational side. Even know a couple of
sex changes. ;-)

;!...

--
Tony Sayer

BBC let something slip through today

On Saturday, December 1, 2012 2:35:46 PM UTC, Bill Wright wrote:

But I still think we should all be as careful as possible
with NHS resources.

Parsimony for prudence is a concept lost on most people (in any part of life, not just healthcare). Very sad, and a bit worrying.

BBC let something slip through today

wrote in message
...
On Saturday, December 1, 2012 2:35:46 PM UTC, Bill Wright wrote:

But I still think we should all be as careful as possible
with NHS resources.

Parsimony for prudence is a concept lost on most people (in any part of
life, not just healthcare). Very sad, and a bit worrying.

ISTR that 'prudence' was a favourite word of Gordon Brown's, and see where
that got us.

--
Max Demian

BBC let something slip through today

In article , Bill Wright
wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:

It seems curious that people do tend to feel that getting NHS
treatment, or some other social benefits is de-facto 'scrounging'.
Whilst *not* feeling that sending kids to the local school is also
'scrounging'.
Yes. Incidentally I think there is far more 'consumer awareness' than
there used to be, and the various providers (the schools, NHS, local
council, etc) have responded to varying degrees by setting up
'complaints' procedures of some sort.

I'm aware of that from the University side of things. An increasing number
of students have started to assume "We pay the fees so we should *expect*
to pass the exams with good results." The thinking being that the main
responsibility is on those teaching to ensure they pass. Not on the student
to learn. Hence rise in the number of appeals, and threats of legal action
from ex-students who decide their exam grades or teaching weren't 'fair'.

This isn't true for the majority. But such cases seem to have become more
common in recent years, and Unis have become more wary of it happening.
Made more complex because of a change in the rules a decade ago. Now
students can demand to see their marked papers and any documents (inc
emails) about them. They can then have a legal eagle trawl this for any
'evidence' that they weren't well treated and given the benefit of every
doubt.

[snip]
And therein lies a great difficulty, separating the deserving sheep from
the scrounging goats.

Indeed. This is hard to do, even if in a position to have evidence on
individual cases. Not something I tend to rush to judge on an individual
basis from outside. Particulary as some of the behaviour of those involved
may be affected by their situation. So we can have people who say things
like they "like" sleeping rough or trying to exploit benefit as a reaction
to being in a hard situation or have an out-of-control life. Or are simply
unwell.

I do find it alarming that so many people seem to have a 'welfare state
mentality', this being shorthand for a mindset that regards state
support not as an emergency safety net but as a constant source of
income and support.

I'm rather more "alarmed" by the way the rich and powerful exploit their
ability to dodge taxes or manipulate the papers, polticians, etc, into
letting them hide their behaviour and make use of the poor as a diversion
target. I suspect this costs us far more - in both money *and* social
terms. Ye olde divide and rule.

Also, I have witnessed people that I'm afraid I have quickly categorised
as trailer trash being appallingly rude to NHS staff, demanding their
'rights' and generally carrying on alarming. I can't help feeling that
although no-one has the right to be abusive to staff, it's particularly
grotesque when those doing it have clearly paid little or nothing into
the system.

I've seen that. I've also seen staff abuse patients. The reality can be
that people behave badly at times of stress. Particularly if mental illness
is a pre-existing factor. And some medical staff can be arrogant and
uncaring, if only as a reaction to cope with deathly worries all around
them.

Of course, a central problem with these people is that they lack
intelligence, and in particular social intelligence. That's why they
can't hold down a job, and that's why they don't know how to get the
best out of those who are trying to help them.

The problem with discussing this is the way it vanishes into vague and
sweeping categories like "these people" which allow the Daily Hate and its
owners to shove as many of the poor into such a bag as they can.

And IIUC most of the "poor" do have jobs and tend to work long hours. I
think they is also true for most on benefits. How intelligent they are, I
don't know. Such conditions may not help people to score well in a standard
IQ test. But even well qualified people can end up sleeping rough or poor
or seriously ill. When you then look at them they may just show as someone
who could be dismissed as an idiotic lazy whino.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

BBC let something slip through today