OK I'll go for the QI klaxon, Petrol prices / against some representation of cost of living
nope changed my mind petrol price compared to Weetabix consumption
Clicky FORUM SEARCH
I don't know... it's a Full Fact tease. As it happens there's another thread which said that petrol was 34p/ gallon in 1970!
Any ideas why there are two similar but not identical lines?
A proper answer, it looks to me like petrol/diesel prices,
Petrol vs diesel?
On the first infographic - presumably the cost is per income tax payer? So that will include children (earnings plus savings/investments?) and retired non-income tax payers?
I've never really understood how far NICs go to pay for the NHS and how far all health costs come under health (e.g. I think the cost of paying pensions to NHS retirees is now classified as an NHS cost?).
I've always thought it useful to look at such as health and welfare costs per employed person - of which there are now over 30m. That though makes such costs look to be a lot more per person.
On the Commonwealth Fund - despite its name I believe it is a US left of centre organisation? Its ranking of the UK as top looks to suit its political US agenda so I wonder where the NHS sits if you look at all independent commentators' surveys. Certainly, from memory, we don't come out quite as well in say the WHO's analysis.
Sorry, more questions than answers!
On that first post: the three links at the bottom answer some of that... it's for someone earning £45k, and it all depends what you mean by "Welfare": the latter point stirred up some strong responses around using non-standard definitions and presenting data for political purposes.
NIC isn't hypothecated in any way for the NHS or anything else. But an "NHS tax" might just make an appearance in parties' policies in next year's election...
Yes I feel sorry for you guys in health! Remember Jennifer's ear?
Or Gordon Brown moving NHS pensions from Treasury to health and so creating an instant boost in health spending.
Or the previous Conservative Government reclassifying nursing sisters as managers and so reducing the number of nurses and increasing the number of managers overnight (can you treat shooting yourself in the foot in A&E?).
And how many politicians of all parties will continue with the myth that all healthcare is free at the point of use and so ignoring:
- a lot of dentistry (even if registered with an NHS dentist)
- road traffic victims (insurers pay for that)
- work accident victims (ditto - one of Gordon Brown's clever moves that no one semed to notice at the time).
Plus travel vaccinations, much alternative therapy and over the counter drugs, and (arguably) parking.
Will we ever get a proper non-political debate on the NHS? Silly question - of course not. Labour is seen as pro-NHS (despite probably having damaged it more and 'privatised' more than the Tories ever did) and won't let go of that; The Cons simply aren't trusted with the NHS and the other parties are pretty much unproven. Despite that, our dear old NHS has survived 66 years, most people in the NHS do a brilliant job and probably all of us know people who work for the NHS (no suprise as it's still one of the biggest employers in the world). Long may it thrive!
Spot (!) on, Tim: premium unleaded and Diesel fuel prices.
I should have said that there is a clue: "They’re all based in the UK or some of its countries and cover one of our five core areas: Economy, Immigration, Health, Education and Crime".
And here's today's:
Improvement in Navigation skills 1900 to 2010
"Let's not see the same old hands."
I think I know this one... the second most stupid UK policy and one we have discussed a few times.
I would think it is UK prison population.
Meanwhile, on the fuel price graph, Tim, you don't really think that that graph had a cost-of-living adjustment, do you? If it had, the line would be descending over substantial portions, not ascending most of the time.
Democratic dissent is not disloyalty, it is a positive civic duty