Live data from Hacker News

Saying Thank You to the NHS, Using Clojure

clojure-conundrums.co.uk

61–70 of 71 posts

Re: Saying Thank You to the NHS, Using Clojure

#61
post #55

To the OP: Your write-up (nicely done) is particularly interesting to me in that I'm using this unplanned furlough to work on diving back into Clojure and coincidentally was wanting to set up some static personal sites. Thanks for sharing the write-up and sentiments. May I ask: - Do you use this approach more generally in your work? At first glance, it feels heavyweight for something like a blog (e.g. the intention s…

Thanks very much! I've made a few small static sites this way, and it's worked really well. However, it is missing several features that you need for larger (or more frequently changing) sites: asset minification, markdown compilation, etc.. Once these things become a pain, I'd either bring in a library like Misaki or Stasis (although I haven't actually tried either of these myself), or move to Hugo/Gatsby.

Re: Saying Thank You to the NHS, Using Clojure

#65
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please re-read my statement and compare it to your claim.

You said "The UK has never reduced NHS funding in real terms year on year" I have shown how it has, 9 times in the last 12 years.

I made no reference to anything per capita.

Re: Saying Thank You to the NHS, Using Clojure

#66
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK continuously votes to reduce healthcare funding relative to the rest of the world, so it's either "no funding and thanks" or "no funding".

The UK has never reduced NHS funding in real terms year on year.

Parent said relative to the rest of the world. Is that also false? You referenced inflation only

Re: Saying Thank You to the NHS, Using Clojure

#67
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am suggesting we keep in line with reality and facts, nothing more, nothing less.

Yes, and facts is that freezing funding while costs rise is effectively a reduction in funding.

With aging populations and more expensive healthcare funding, health inflation is far higher.

The only real way to compare is to create a healthcare inflation index on a per capita basis from a group of like countries and look at funding that way.

Re: Saying Thank You to the NHS, Using Clojure

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK has never reduced NHS funding in real terms year on year.

IMHO focussing on the NHS budget seems myopic. I haven't got the faintest clue about public health spending but there are so many things you can question like - What is medical inflation compared to overall inflation? - What do other countries spend? - Are we getting value for money? - Are key statistics getting worse despite increase budgets? - How does population factor in to spending? etc

> - What is medical inflation compared to overall inflation?

In the G7, per year

  1970-1980 13%
  1980-1990 8%
  1990-2000 5%
  2000-2010 6%
  2010-2018 4%
> What do other countries spend?

Far more than the UK

> - Are we getting value for money?

A notoriously difficult question with healthcare

> - Are key statistics getting worse despite increase budgets?

That depends on how you define the statistics, which is massively subjective

> - How does population factor in to spending?

Older populations lead to more health spending

Re: Saying Thank You to the NHS, Using Clojure

#69
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fact, singular. Taken in isolation from a context which could give it quite different meaning.

If someone makes a false statement, it is not unreasonable to dispute that claim.

You are the only one making a false statement

Re: Saying Thank You to the NHS, Using Clojure

#70
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You said "The UK has never reduced NHS funding in real terms year on year" I have shown how it has, 9 times in the last 12 years.

I made no reference to anything per capita.

So you're saying that government investment in the NHS has refused to keep pace with the population increase, when both the investment requirements and the taxation income can be assumed to be reasonably proportional to population size? Seems like either incompetence or malevolence to me.

Either way, yes you are 'technically correct' that you didn't mention per capita. Hope that gives you the warm fuzzy feeling you're looking for. Well done!

Post reply on HN