Right below a kid who just became an mega millionaire. His time at BVB was fun but he’s the enemy now!
The daily fail
Daily Heil
Not to detract from the discussion but does anyone know what’s handwritten at the top of the ‘paper’ above the word Daily? It looks like it says “Hi Hi Farm” or “4141 Farm” and it’s becoming that mystery that’s going to periodically pop in my head at night when I’m trying to sleep.
I think it’s 4141 Farm, probably an address if the paper is delivered? Just my guess. Could also just be a quick note someone jotted down on the closest piece of paper during a phone call or something, who knows haha
Well, appointments are being cancelled because of the strikes, so technically that’s correct? 🤷
Okay, so, technically it may be correct, that there’s a causal relationship between access to medical services, the demand on those services and the availability of those providing the services. If supply goes down due to a strike, then yes, services are being interrupted to those who need them, and thus the situation is “harming” patients… By some definition of “harm”.
However, this bullshit headline implies that doctors are actively and intentionally harming patients and they are exclusively responsible for that, which is entirely untrue.
It’s the government’s responsibility to ensure that the healthcare system operates effectively and efficiently, and if they’re pushing people to the point where they feel that they need to execute a strike in order to be heard, that’s a significant sign of poor management at best, IMO.
The headline tries to shift the concept of responsibility for patients being “harmed” from the lack of doctors due to the strike… From the government, who is actually at fault, to the doctors, who are simply trying to get a fair deal.
But it’s both sides that are to blame.
The government for not negotiating to get this nonsense sorted out quicker, and the doctors for choosing to withdraw their labour. The doctors know full well that this will harm patients, but they chose to do it anyway. So let’s not pretend this is a one-sided thing.
I am not truly sure I could blame either side of that.
The government were - and are - people who explicitly campaign with/for this shit. You could be angry if they didn’t completely trash the country, its finances, and its health system to enrich themselves, after all that’s their very agenda. Voters for them - much as I cannot understand why anybody would vote that way - would rightfully be angry if they did stuff like care for anybody but themselvs. The voters would have been lied to.
At the same time, the doctors can only do so much to protest while also ensuring patients get as much care as possible. I talk to a doctor frequently. She was recently diagnosed with advanced-stage breast cancer while around the same time her mum was also diagnosed with cancer. You know what she did? Go to work. And do long hours. More than she is paid for. Becaue there’s no alternative. No one else can see to the patients. She would rather need to recuperate herself and care more for her mum, but there’s just no option. That’s so fucked up I lack words, and it also means the UK has a natural doctors problem: The ones that don’t move away because fuck, why wouldn’t you?!, they die off faster rather than slower or at least quit the field to protect their own health.
At some point, doctors end up having to force the issue. If they don’t do it, things never improve.
Back to reddit you go
Okay, so this kind of rationale is used a lot in the US to justify treating all kinds of professions (almost always those that exist at the action layer, where you’re doing the actual nominal work of the business) like shit. The rough format is “Won’t someone PLEASE think of the {customer}?!” Of course, this is always aimed at the people at the action layer, never ever at the administrative level. So, it might be more accurate to say “YOU need to care about the customer [because nobody else will].” It’s often very closely tied to sacrifice rhetoric in the workplace, where the employer places the onus on the employee to sacrifice, often without any bound. In other words, to accept personal loss with no expectations of recompense; they’ll take as much as they can get from the employee, and no amount of sacrifice will ever be ‘enough’, as there will always be some new crisis demanding a new sacrifice.
In teaching, this is “Won’t someone please think of the kids? What will they do if there’s no school? Remember why we’re here, it’s about the kids.” In EMS and all of healthcare, just replace the kids with the patients. It’s very common to see this in any industry where they think they can get away with paying their people in passion. It’s shitty and exploitive, and it ultimately does a disservice to the customer by creating high employee turnover, low organizational experience, organizational dysfunction (often in spite of ballooning admin costs and positions in these types of sectors) and more burned out employees.
“Look at how the poors keep trying to hurt the money!”
Doctors aren’t the only ones with power to end the strike. What about their demands? Doctors who aren’t getting what they need aren’t able to provide the best care either.
Understaffing, penny-pinching, forcing medical professionals to take on more and more work with no help, to say nothing of increased pay. These working conditions hurt patients chronically.
That’s why doctors and nurses strike. Especially THESE doctors - the new ones who just graduated from medical school. They’re the single most exploited group of people working in healthcare when you account for how little they are paid in comparison to how much they’re expected to work and how much revenue they generate.
In the US we call them resident doctors. In the UK junior doctors. I absolutely support their strike
How about, refusal to pay fair wages to [insert worker category] harms [insert end user]?
Article says it’s coming into a period when the NHS is coming under pressure- what do you think that translates to for the doctors and healthcare professionals that prop up that system? Sunshine and roses?
Ya an over worked under paid medical workers with limited resources is preferred… The only people hurting others is wealthy individuals
It’s the government that has systematically been selling off the NHS to private companies and allowing private insurers to let those who can pay skip those queues making them longer for everyone else, and it’s the government that has refused to give enough money both to the NHS itself and its staff (intentionally, so that it can’t function, which makes people like you complain about queues and blame strikes instead of looking at why they are both happening in the first place, while they’re busy doing the aforementioned selling off and profiteering).
Well done for putting yourself up as an example to show everyone who this propaganda is aimed at and how well it works.
If doctors aren’t working, patients aren’t being seen.
It’s not really that deep, but for some reason you’ve assumed my entire political philosophy from one short comment. Which is precisely the problem with political debate nowadays.
Whilst I agree that the daily mail is a peice of toilet paper, the rest of this post is concerning.
I would encourage you not to see the world in black and white. The NHS has been outsourcing operations to private providers since Tony Blares day, it’s not a new occurance.
Also private doesn’t have to mean american style healthcare. I would strongly encourage you to read up about how health care works in Germany and Franc. Both have fully privatised health care with goverment provided insurance coverage. Their systems are more efficient and provide better outcomes than the UK, whilst spending less money per person.
Whilst I agree front line staff are under paid, I also think the NHS suffers from poor management on a mid to upper level and that a polarised view set discourages us from seeking meaningful reforms.
The Dutch private system works very well, too. Unfortunately, as an American looking across the pond, it sure reads an awful lot to me like they’re just aching to get in on the absolute scam of a healthcare system we have here.
deleted by creator
Does this really belong in this community? Is this REALLY mildlyinfuriating?
I think so. I get the same sort of articles pushed on me in my news feed, like “How this 20 year old’s side hustle allowed her to buy a house with cash!” It feels sometimes like a narrative being pushed by media conglomerates to keep people hopeful or to sway public opinion, but I assume the actual answer is that those articles generate a reliable number of clicks and therefore revenue.
So yeah, it’s infuriating to consider that people are being manipulated like that, but in most cases it doesn’t really affect me, so my fury stays at a mild level.
It sounds like you think this shouldn’t be here, but do you think it’s not worth talking about or that we should all be more than mildly infuriated?
It’s definitely worth talking about and it makes me more than mildly infuriated because this affects me directly (as someone who administers anesthesia). But I think I’m just getting heavy political agenda vibes verses something that’s ACTUALLY mildly infuriating that other people can relate to. I’m being overly critical I’m sure. But for example - go to this community’s equivalent subreddit. There’s a post where someone bought diving goggles and the retailer placed price tag stickers on the LENSES of the goggles, leaving a gooey residue. That’s definitely mildly infuriating and fitting for the sub. I just feel this post is low effort political outrage.
Dude isn’t this “mildly infuriating”. The daily mail is designed to piss people off, feels more than “mildly” infuriating lol
!deliberatelyinfuriating?
Lol
It’s the Daily Mail… What were you expecting. Even toilet paper has more worth
Toilet paper is actually priceless. It’s very important. I think you meant “used” toilet paper.
Would you just shut up, and tell me how Annabel will heal her heartache?!?!
As someone who is consistently a patient I can very safely say that the only things that harm me are pharmaceutical and insurance companies. (I’m USA based)
Striking doctors…are striking doctors.
Yes, it will harm patients, but when wouldn’t it? How exactly do they think strikes work, working anyway and loudly complaining?
And as can brought up, the people not meeting the demands should be falling under the same scrutiny. It could be ended by either side.
Thatcher outlawed this (surprise, surprise) but thr way Japanese train drivers strike is they run the trains but refuse to collect fairs. That seems like a much better system to me.
I don’t know how doctors could do something similar though.
They do, doctors are still working for emergency cases, pre appointments get pushed…
But if healthcare is a human right, then they should not strike as that is violating the rights of others?
If health care is a human right, it should be available to everyone, paid for by those who have the money. And those who provide it of cause should be paid well, from doctors to nurses to assistants.
“And it wouldn’t be surpising If there’d be another rising Said the man from the Daily Mail”
It’s not left vs right it’s wealthy vs everyone else
You just described the left part of left vs right.
So you’re trying to gaslight people into thinking that wealthy people only represent the left or the right? Rofl.
No. I’ve read enough theory to know that the left understands the world as a struggle between two classes: capitalists and workers.
The right believes in meritocracy, the invisible hand of the market, and risking capital as the most valuable asset.
Of course there are poor people leaning right. There is not a single leftist billionaire, though.
…oh, and in case you’re from the United States (you act as if you were): Both of your political parties are right-wing. Your ‘radical leftist politicians’ are centrists at best. Right-wingers don’t become leftists because they’re ok with giving some human rights to the population.
I disagree.
Left is more than wealth. Left is often reffered to socialism or liberalism. Either cases have at its core nothing to do with wealthy at all. Its not because your local politics have the left as wealthy fuckwads that this is everywhere.That said, dont get me wrong, this is some terrible shit to say and the wealthy should piss off.
A) Liberalism is not left wing
B) Socialism, at its core, is about seizing control of the means of production, as it is they which create wealth.
Liberalism is the ONLY left wing.
The principle of “let consenting adults do whatever they want” is absolutelly compatible with some people having almost all of the money and others starving, but the principle of “the greatest good for the greatest number” is not.
Liberalism (the first) has nothing to do with Left (the second).
Now if Liberalism was actually about maximizing Freedom in all its senses, then it would end up mainly concerning itself with how Human Basic Needs and Money and Ownership Law (mainly of Land) are used to limit the Freedom of most people, but “strangelly” I have never once heard or read a “liberal” mention how the very structures that keep a few in wealth limit the freedom of everybody else.
Trully thinking liberals could end up as lefties but they always stop at the boundary of reducing wealth discrimination, liberalizing access to land anf in general doing things that would free people who are born landless (i.e. most people) from being forced to work for others under other people’s conditions for a roof over their heads and food on their tables.
De facto present day liberals as are hard right (though socially liberal, they’re extremelly conservative in everything else).
That’s some authoritarian delusion. Liberalism gives everyone tools to achieve their own goals. What you want is to erase individuality for some imaginary greater cause. Which is exactly what all and every totalitarian regime is about.
BULLSHIT!
Libertarians are for example in favour of Private Education, something which gives better tools to those born from wealthier parents who can afford the better schools than to those born from poor parent’s who can: providing people who were lucky to pop-out of a wealthier vagina more/better tools hence more/better chances in life than others is literally the opposite of Meritocracy.
Ditto for Inheritance legislation: it makes even the most inept, lazy-ass, destructive scion of a wealthy family out there have far more chances and power than even the smartest, most hardworking, most able creator out there from poor families.
And lets not forget keeping Land Ownership as is now locking in centuries (in some countries millenia) of the most anti-meritocratic methods of acquring it and a gigantic advantage which is passed down the generations through inheritance, all this, again, the very opposite of a “fair playing field where everybody has a chance”.
Libertarianism just wants to remove the Power of the State, a system which is managed by people elected by citizens in a “all votes count the same” process, by the Power of Money, which is mainly the product of past injustices, dynastic and were power has an extremelly uneven distribution (with some having hundreds of billions of times more power than others).
By wanting to weaken the fair playing field (one person one vote) in access to power which is vote by severely reducing that which that power controls (i.e. reducing the State) and replace it by an extremelly unever form of power, Money, which is so unfair that, like in the times of the Monarchy, it is Power which is mainly inherited, Liberarians are some of the most anti-Democratic anti-Freedom people out there, not to mention extraordinary hypocrites.
Most people who call themselves liberals don’t even know what that word means, and just think it means gay rights and anti racial oppression.
You can disagree with me all you want. You’re extremely misinformed, though. An entire life of propaganda made you believe some weird shit, but socialism is unequivocally about wealth distribution and liberalism is undoubtedly right-wing.
I didn’t understand your comment about local politics. Mostly because you can’t possibly know where i’m from, and calling the left ‘wealthy fuckwads’ is just bizarre.
No. The true left is all about freedoms and rights - liberal democracy. What you call left is the same authorisation shit as right.
Cringe
Yes, pseudo-lefties are cringe indeed.
deleted by creator
It works that way pretty much everywhere but the US.
deleted by creator
Nice subject change!
deleted by creator
The Daily Shart has never been anything but tabloid garbage, no one should ever be subjected to anything from that publication for the good of all humankind
removed by mod
deleted by creator
