Hysnaps Politics, Gaming, Music and Mental Health
Politics, Gaming, Music, Mental Health And other stuff.. Updated when Able
Ok so I ended the last post saying I wasn’t going to do this –
But I then got interested in investigating a few possibilities – so here we are.
WHAT A STABLE, MODERN, NON-FRAGMENTED NHS SHOULD LOOK LIKE FOR THE NEXT 30 YEARS
Other countries rearrange their health systems about as often as they repaint post boxes.
We rebuild ours like a kitchen remodel every election cycle.
So let’s explore systems that actually work — and what they teach us.
AND WHAT THE UK COULD LEARN
The UK is not alone in running a universal health system.
But it is almost unique in constantly rebuilding its health architecture.
Other countries rearrange their health systems about as often as they repaint post boxes.
We rebuild ours like a kitchen remodel every election cycle.
So let’s explore systems that actually work — and what they teach us.
So a bit bored waiting for new year’s eve to arrive, I thought I’d let googles NotebookLM have ago at producing a small video to explain one of my series.
I decided to give my series on Uk Government Debt the honour – so below is an AI generated video (cos I really have no good skills at this) providing a 6 min guide to the UK Government Debt addiction.
STRUCTURE, ECONOMICS AND INCENTIVES
In Part I we saw how the internal market emerged.
Part II explains why it never achieved what its architects intended.
The answer lies not in ideology, but in economics and structure.
There’s a line often attributed to the Roman army:
“The only constant is change.”
If that doesn’t describe the NHS, nothing does.
And during the 1990s, when yet another restructure rolled in, someone in a Birmingham hospital taped a follow-up note to the management accounts department wall: (this was in a time before email – yes ask your historians there was such a time)
“Due to further cuts, the light at the end of the tunnel has been switched off.”
Dark humour, yes — but also a quiet acknowledgement that the NHS experiences more structural churn than almost any other health system on earth.
To understand why the NHS looks the way it does today, and why Birmingham is a perfect case study, we have to go back to the beginning of the internal market era.
After over 27 days of digging through inequality, privatisation, democratic distortions, collapsing social care, slashed education budgets, chronic underinvestment, donor capture, and the small matter of Brexit, the conclusion is painfully obvious:
The UK’s political system isn’t broken.
It’s working exactly as designed — just not for most of us.
Yet ask any business leader, economist, or investor what they want and they’ll tell you the same thing:
“Please, stop swinging wildly between ideological extremes and give us something predictable.”
Please give us BORING politics
Boring politics is how countries become wealthy.
Boring politics is how crises are prevented.
Boring politics is how you attract investment.
Boring politics is how you rebuild trust.
Yes so at the end of this No wild solutions, just a plea for stability and long term thinking.
In my last post, I showed that if the Government paid all legally-permitted campaign spending — for every candidate, every party, every council election and every general election — the total cost would work out at roughly:
People often assume politics is extravagantly expensive: parties splurging millions, donors buying influence, elections being giant money-burning exercises.
So here’s the real question:
What would it cost if the Government paid all legally allowed campaigning costs – national and local – instead of political parties and donors?
I’m going to calculate it at the absolute maximum legal spending, assuming:
The UK’s political system isn’t broken — it’s working exactly as designed, just not for the public. This article explores how donor influence, privatisation, short-term politics, declining education, rising inequality and “swing” governance have created a nation stuck in permanent crisis. From the sale of nationalised industries to the collapse of social care and chronic underinvestment, the evidence points to one conclusion: without strict limits on political donations and a shift toward stable, boring, long-term politics, the UK cannot rebuild trust, prosperity or democratic resilience. Preventative, predictable governance is not radical — but demanding it in a donor-driven system is. This is why I am a radical leftist: because the system needs more than nudges; it needs rebuilding.
FPTP and its impact on UK Governemental and Business investment. Does it compound the issue or have no effect?
