Well, yes, so we agree then Senior Lecturer?

The NHS is in crisis. That’s not just because of money. It’s also because its management structure is hopelessly inappropriate and prevents the possibility of truly effective working.

Excellent, so, how do we change that management structure then?

Perhaps a near-Stalinist central bureaucracy and direct state provision isn’t the way to do things then?

After all, other places do things differently and don’t appear to have the same problems.

This is cute too.

I also know it is unnecessary because we can have all the money we need to pay for the services we require. That’s because in an economy where there are people to do jobs that are not being done, which is the prospect we face in all the situations I describe, it is simply not possible to say that there is not enough money to pay.

With an unemployment rate of 4.2% we’ve an excess, a surplus, of skilled labour, have we?

And if a government deficit simply represents new money injected into the economy to facilitate the growth in things that need doing then, within reason, deficits are not an issue to worry about. And they can be controlled at will in any case by simply charging more tax, where the footballing equivalent was introducing the offside rule.

This is different from Old Labour’s high tax, high spend, economy how?

Well, obviously, it isn’t, is it? It’s that same old Keynesian demand management, using tax (something paid in arrears note) as the management instrument. Didn’t work last time, it’ll work this time because reasons.

15 comments on “Well, yes, so we agree then Senior Lecturer?

  1. Any hospitals near the Dover road or within a taxi ride of a major international airport will know exactly why they are having serious problems.

  2. And they can be controlled at will in any case by simply charging more tax

    “Simply”

    Anyway, you can raise more tax, makes no difference – the extra money will be spent before the tax bills hit the doormat.

  3. ‘It’s also because its management structure is hopelessly inappropriate and prevents the possibility of truly effective working.’

    A government entity will always have a political management structure. ‘Truly effective working’ is not a rational expectation of a government institution. Because it will always have a political management structure.

  4. “A government entity will always have a political management structure. ‘Truly effective working’ is not a rational expectation of a government institution. Because it will always have a political management structure.”

    Yup. About the only bits of government that come close to working are small local authorities, because they’re small enough and close enough to be scrutinised.

  5. “And they can be controlled at will in any case by simply charging more tax, where the footballing equivalent was introducing the offside rule”

    The footballing equivalent to controlling government deficits by increasing taxes was the introduction of the offside rule?

    Because?

    This makes so little sense as to defy analysis.

    Is Murphy trying to appeal to the common man by using football analogies?

  6. @ Tim
    During the so-called “13 wasted years” between the glorious Attlee government and “White heat of the technological revolution” under Harold WillSoon, unemployment dropped to below 2%. It would be much more than 4.2% on the definition used by SuperMac and co.
    There are indeed people available to do some of the jobs that need to be done – unfortunately the Blair government’s introductions of the National Minimum Wage and George Osborne’s headline-grabbing increase in it means that they cannot do them.

  7. AndrewC,

    “This makes so little sense as to defy analysis.

    Is Murphy trying to appeal to the common man by using football analogies?”

    I thought I understood the offside rule and even some basic economics and taxation theory until I read Spud’s analogy.

    Having read it a few times I can only conclude that one of us knows fuck all about those subjects.

  8. I would call it a False Analogy Fallacy, except for one problem:

    ‘The fallacy of incorrectly comparing one thing to another in order to draw a false conclusion.’

    There is no ‘in order to’ here. Murphy believes it.

  9. @john77
    I would add to that tax credits meaning jobs we probably don’t need to be done – car washing by hand being created as well.

  10. A Surgeon friend reckons that the NHS bureacracy could be cut by 50% without damaging the service.

  11. @ anon
    I agree with the first part of your comment – good point – but car washing by hand was commonplace in the ’50s – and sometimes a Dad paid his son to do it.
    A better example is child care where mothers are going back to paid work that doesn’t (after tax abd commuting costs) cover the price of child care without an additional subsidy.

  12. @The Laughng Cavalier, January 29, 2018 at 9:33 am

    50% doesn’t even take it back to pre Blair/Brown splurge. 90% reduction should be aim.

  13. @john77, January 29, 2018 at 12:51 pm

    High cost of child-care is another Blair/Brown creation – must be qualified, certified, max number child per carer, minimum wage……

  14. His ex is feeling some strain. She is expected to do some hours in surgery or else take a pay reduction. Cui bono?

  15. “A Surgeon friend reckons that the NHS bureacracy could be cut by 50% without damaging the service.”

    Surgeons always want to cut. It’s what they do.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.