Petition against car tracking

Gandelf · Post by **Gandelf** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:58 pm

Lieva wrote:ok that was ott gandelf.

Sorry. It was only a joke and I wasn't being serious. That's why there was a wink smiley. I have been known to have a very dark sense of humour sometimes.
So I apologise to Xest.

<ankh> · Post by **<ankh>** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:16 pm

Gandelf wrote:I have been known to have a very dark sense of humour sometimes.

No.

/Ankh

Satyn · Post by **Satyn** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:42 pm

Gandelf wrote:Sorry. It was only a joke and I wasn't being serious. That's why there was a wink smiley. I have been known to have a very dark sense of humour sometimes.
So I apologise to Xest.

your sense of humour is just terrible, you are capable to make two rocks fight just cos you think its funny

Post by **Lairiodd** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 12:59 am

Sharkith wrote: Nope the evidence is that if you allow highly trained people to induce demand they will tend to do the best treatment they can. Patients are dependant on professionals to advise them on what oiptions are available and are not able to evaluate all of the options.

They don't need to be able to evaluate treatments, they just need to be able to tell the good doctors from the bad ones. Currently, patients are not given any of the important information. Laws/customs prevent them from having access to that info. Why is that ?

For example, would a patient be told how many times the surgeon has attempted the procedure and how many times he has suceeded ? This may not give perfect info about the particular surgeon but it would give some.

Also, the same could be said for alot of professions. You don't need to know anything about a car to take it to a mechanic. Word of mouth and other market forces can put a bad mechanic out of buisness.

In the UK Dental Professionals are rejecting the current contract on the basis of the same ideals you espouse. The consequence of this will be reduced access even though the public paid for their training....

The government also paid for lots of other professions' training, and we still allow them to operate in the free market. There are also people from other countries working in the UK ... not sure if it actually balances, but it could go either way.

Also, I don't know what the dentist's plan is. However, if you allow them to set their own wages and operate in a free market, that will result in more dentists.

Sharkith · Post by **Sharkith** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:20 am

Lairiodd wrote:They don't need to be able to evaluate treatments, they just need to be able to tell the good doctors from the bad ones. Currently, patients are not given any of the important information. Laws/customs prevent them from having access to that info. Why is that ?

For example, would a patient be told how many times the surgeon has attempted the procedure and how many times he has suceeded ? This may not give perfect info about the particular surgeon but it would give some.

Also, the same could be said for alot of professions. You don't need to know anything about a car to take it to a mechanic. Word of mouth and other market forces can put a bad mechanic out of buisness.

I am afraid I prefer the current system by far. If we did what your suggesting above we would step back 30 years. If I am going to receive a treatment I would like to know if the evidence has been produced through systematic research rather than on the word of mouth of the professional. Society no longer trusts professionals they way it did in the 1950's for very good reasons.

Let me put it another way. What if your doctor was just like a car mechanic. Would you be happy letting him put you under to change your heart?

Lairiodd wrote:The government also paid for lots of other professions' training, and we still allow them to operate in the free market. There are also people from other countries working in the UK ... not sure if it actually balances, but it could go either way.

Also, I don't know what the dentist's plan is. However, if you allow them to set their own wages and operate in a free market, that will result in more dentists.

Dentists have been setting their own wages since the inception of the profession shortly after the second world war. The result has been less dentists rather than more. The numbers are kept low to keep wages high.

Your understanding of profession is deeply flawed since it is not by its very nature subject to free market rules. A profession is autonomous, trains its own members and decides on the exact numbers to be trained each year. The numbers trained are done so to keep maintain salaries up. If I am wrong point me to a pofession that does not have complete control over its labour?

So to mix free market economics with what are effectively monopolies is extremely naieve and will lead to lower access in the long run.

Ovi · Post by **Ovi** » Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:14 pm

More details on current government thinking...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/p ... 459230.ece

Heta · Post by **Heta** » Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:33 pm

[quote="Satyn"]your sense of humour is just terrible, you are capable to make two rocks fight just cos you think its funny ]

all I know if I could make 2 rocks fight I would do it...

Post by **Lairiodd** » Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:55 pm

Sharkith wrote: Your understanding of profession is deeply flawed since it is not by its very nature subject to free market rules. A profession is autonomous, trains its own members and decides on the exact numbers to be trained each year. The numbers trained are done so to keep maintain salaries up. If I am wrong point me to a pofession that does not have complete control over its labour?

So to mix free market economics with what are effectively monopolies is extremely naieve and will lead to lower access in the long run.

The reason for that is due to government regulation. If you want to be a doctor, you need to get a license ... and who gives out the licenses ?

Only courses certified by the professional body get licenses, which allows them to keep down the supply. If a University turns out to many doctors, it could have difficulty maintain certification for its course.

The free market solution is to allow doctors be licensed from more than one licensing body, and let the market decide. Btw, this also covers the quality issue. A doctor can lose his license if he does something incompetent and it is in the licensing body's interests to make sure doctors that it licenses maintain a high standard.

This is kinda like a brand name. Do you go to an NHS certified doctor or one certified by a private buisness? Most doctors would probably try to get certified by as many as possible.

Post by **Lairiodd** » Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:58 pm

Mr Ladyman said the system would also solve the problem of drivers taking longer routes to avoid high charges, as already happens in London where people divert around the £8-a-day congestion zone. “It wouldn’t pay you to come off busy roads on to quiet roads because you would still be in the same zone.”

.... erm, isn't the whole point to move people from congested roads onto less congested ?

Moley:) · Post by **Moley:)** » Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:32 pm

I think they just using this to get those damn ID card things in LOL .

LOL at the more british thing going on or will go on. I don't watch news much (playing computer games, du'h

) but that labour guy who scottish isn't he trying to make people know everything about it before comming in, like we all know about it loool.

And traffic round my area is bad i get almost hit few times in a week (probably cause im listening to mp3 player full blast) but im not sure how that will reduce pollution, hell they just want more people to start using public transport . Now that would be congested.