howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i doubt that anyone is taken in by the reforms, there is a massive deficit so it stands to reason that the health budget has to take a hit.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
BERN;
I 'm sure that REG can speak for himself, but to be fair, your postings are clearly biased towards the govts reforms(and thats fine) but you appear unwilling to accept others peoples points of view
it could be said you to are making this into a political football
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Keith - you know very well that Bern is not a Tory, or LibDem come to that, and has no political axe to grind, she is however more thoughtful and knowledgeable about NHS issues than you (or Reg) who really are motivated by political point scoring, everybody can see that.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
BARRY
I have no political ambitions, nor do i associate with any party(as iv stated in other postings im unlikely to vote for any party at the next general election) that said i marginally at this time prefer a labour govt to the present cobbled together one.
Does get a bit boring keep saying, there are differing points of view on this one subject, and it's grasping that we are on this forum able to disagree but still respect these differing viewpoints.
because we disagree doesn't mean theres any misunderstanding, purely its just that we differ.
nowt wrong with that, i respect even yours and others views although i may not share them all.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
theres profit and then theres profit,drug companies profit on misery,sickness etc etc.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Drug companies spend £billions in high risk development of new treatments and drugs. Without them there would be a lot more incurable disease, pain and suffering Brian. Do you not understand how drugs are developed and the massive costs and risks involved - the failure rate in testing is massive.
Keith - you do not fool anyone. Because of your job, yes, you can no longer be a member of a political party but you cannot escape from your long active involvement in the Labour Party and the roles you have played.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
barryw;
There is no problem my being a member of any political party if i so wished.
It was my decision to leave the labour party, reasons i'v highlighted briefly on here before.
as i also said at the lat local elections i canvassed with/for
1 labour geezer
1 indy geezer
1 tory geezer
that probably says it all
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
barryw,i know the score on the drug companys research/profit schemes.but as i said its a dirty profit.these so called drug companys have double standerds,they sell the drugs to the nhs at one price [a high price,proven fact] and at half price to other organizations.
so in conclsion the nhs is being ripped of by the drug companys
It is up to the NHS to manage the contracts with the drug companies better to avoid being ripped off! That is what I mean when I say that rather than moan about managers we need to understand that good managers - and if they are good there could probably be fewer! - will reap results.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
just like local council managers/cllrs
share your view on this bit BERN
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Drug comanies are a business.............................Our Health should not be a business........................
Drug companies make obscene profits producing `elite greedy pigs`salaries and bonuses..................
Privatising our Health will produce obscene profits and `elite greedy pigs`salaries and bonuses...............
In the past only one forumite would regard this ``OK``...................it appears there may be a few more........
eg....Glazo chief last year`s pay was £ 6.7 million........this year it will be £ 10.4 million...............
Having been a businessman with a social conscious all working life enjoying excellent`respectable`profits in several
competative markets.....profit is `not` a dirty word.....it is puerile and at best suspect naivety to hear repeating `why
is profit a dirty word`..`why is profit a bad thing`together with pseudo intellectual gobbledegook.
When we talk about profit it is the enormous obscene profit margins..........
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
I would have asked again for a reply to my earlier question as to why it is unacceptable for NHS facilities to be used by the private sector, but I suspect the result would be another screenful of socialist dogma so I shall not waste my time. Nor shall I bother posting on this thread again as we have been here before and I have better things to do.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
getting back to the risk register.
Ok, last try.
Drug comanies are a business.............................Our Health should not be a business........................ how else should we finance the running of the services?
Drug companies make obscene profits producing `elite greedy pigs`salaries and bonuses.................. the NHS needs to manage the contracts better
Privatising our Health will produce obscene profits and `elite greedy pigs`salaries and bonuses.............. .the contracts need to be managed properly to avoid rip-offs, and setting the contracts is a skill (like compiling and managing risk registers!) that is best done by experts
In the past only one forumite would regard this ``OK``...................it appears there may be a few more........ supporting development in no way implies blanket acceptance of all changes or all policies
eg....Glazo chief last year`s pay was £ 6.7 million........this year it will be £ 10.4 million............... and?
Having been a businessman with a social conscious all working life enjoying excellent`respectable`profits in several
competative markets.....profit is `not` a dirty word.....it is puerile and at best suspect naivety to hear repeating `why
is profit a dirty word`..`why is profit a bad thing`together with pseudo intellectual gobbledegook. I have not noticed the pseudo intellectual gobbledegook. I have noticed articulate and professional language being used.
When we talk about profit it is the enormous obscene profit margins.......... who are you to set the limits?
OK, now I give up.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Well Bern, I don't blame you.
Reg clearly places his socialist dogma (as correctly referred to by Peter) ahead of the development of new drugs and treatments and the quality of healthcare care provided to people.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i think reg is referring to the fact that he has no problem with profits, he wouldn't have been as successful in business otherwise.
as i read it his attitude is different towards any company making excessive profits out our healthcare.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Howard - define excessive. As has been explained many times a lot of factors go into creating a profit and a small change can turn a profit into a loss. The development of new drug is massively risky and you have to take into account risk related returns as well. Complaining about 'excessive' profits is a cheap and easy shot but rarely is there any substance to back that up.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
if what you are saying is true barry then they would post a huge loss now and then but they don't.
we all know that most of their research fails to deliver a new drug, that is built into their costings.
finally "cheap and easy shots" can also apply to referring to someone elses political beliefs.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Factual Howard and in context.
These are well run companies Howard and whenever some people rant about so-called excessive profits rarely is there any demonstrable substance. Once again we have to look are return against capital and add a risk premium. Whatever you say there are huge costs and risks involved in developing and testing drugs.
Take Pfizer for one thing. I quote a recent article on their performance:
"""Shares of Pfizer (PFE), the world's largest pharmaceutical company, experienced a bit of a slide following its mediocre Q4 2011 report on January 31, which I examined in greater detail in my last article about the company. Lipitor's expiration in November 2011, naturally contributed a lot to the relatively weak revenue from Pfizer's pharmaceutical division, as expected. This is including very favorable conditions in the forex market, which has softened the blows to the biopharmaceutical division's quarterly numbers.
Revenue for the cumulative year of 2011 relative to 2010 ended up growing only 1% as a result, although net income increased 21% in 2011 due to some strong cost-cutting efforts by the company. The company's net profit margins stand at about 8.5%, so there is enormous room for improvement and hence share appreciation based on company fundamentals. The current P/E ratio of 19.5 won't last much longer if Pfizer continues its renewed efforts on bottom-line growth."""
This article alone demonstrates that such companies are far from cash-cows and it is a very difficult business to operate in. Margins are clearly tight and Foreign Exchange (Forex) alone can have a big impact on margins in either direction.
So, what is this absurd verbage about excessive profits then? margins of 8.5% excessive? No way.
