Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davidr123)
    If it is privatised all the waste will be cut out - the "non-jobs".

    More money will be available to "retain customers" - its a customer based service so will focus on what patients want e.g. "Doctor, I have a cold, I want antibiotics!" :rolleyes:

    staff 1: off with "bad neck"
    staff 2: maternity leave 1 year, then 2 day a week flexi-time when back
    staff 3: off with "depression"
    staff 4: off on annual leave

    Maternity leave and annual leave are standard in any job.
    Bad neck and depression can be serious.



    those who are members of the ACA or ACCA can be sacked and fined unlimited amounts when things go wrong - the classic example being Enron and Arther Anderson. Accountants have ways of avoiding getting sacked so I have been told by accountants

    Currently fraud and scamming in the NHS is not accountable to anyone as if it is reported - the trusts lose funding - so it all gets swept under the carpet. Really? The trust I work in produces a mini newsletter/magazine/emails on targeting fraud which is regularly sent to staff, with examples of NHS fraud and how offenders were punished. We also have anti fraud traning.

    Consultants - the reason why they proliferate the NHS is because all the managers are paid salaries to command incremental budgets What are you on about?

    - if they don't spend the money - THEIR post is made redundant and they lose their job. So they spend, spend, spend and spend some more to "facilitate" Yeah this is ridiculous and happens in many public sector areas. It is not an inherent fault of the NHS. It doesn't mean the NHS should be dissolved, but that reforms throughout all public sector funding are undertaken

    Often NHS managrs climb the NVQ qualification system - i.e. they are not that bright at best, and at worst - thick as **** - True

    If the hospitals were privatised - they'd do what banks and auditors do - slash the staff in half and get in a few able people with professional private sector qualifications to do 100 hour weeks on bonus related pay. How do you give bonuses to people who work in healthcare? It's not like you can make money for the company

    The bonuses would be set on customer satisfaction, patient turnover and against targets for cancer, heart disease and stroke treatment. Giving patients what they want doesn't necessarily correlate with best clinical practice. How do you set arbitrary targets? If people are ill, you can do your best, but beyond a certain point it isn't humanly possible to improve their outcomes any further

    Currently all the figures are "cherry-picked" - And if they were profit driven, wouldn't this simply proliferate?
    above
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davidr123)
    I"m sorry - but the waiting list times etc are completely fudged - I fudged them for cancer waiting times in London! I spent time actually cherry picking these figures to send to audit - we only sent the "sample" from patients who didn't "breach" - anything that is reported by the NHS is false or spun, I'm sorry - but that is definitely the case - which is why no one takes any notice of NHS published reports. There are many reports nobody takes any notice of and many statistics are fudged or spun, NHS or otherwise

    You cannot compare the NHS to the US Why not? It's a Western country with a largely privatized healthcare system? (As well as similar health problems - obesity, cardiac, respiratory)

    Our open door policy lets consultants rack up huge fees doing boob jobs, tummy tucks What open door policy? Why can't surgeons perform such procedures if they're being paid privately? You can only get such things done on the NHS under special circumstances

    and drugs companies charge stupid money for anti-obesity/depression/smoking drugs Coz it's expensive to develop new fangled drugs that make you **** out the fat you've eaten. Is that the NHS's fault?

    which the doctors want to prescribe for kickbacks as oppossed to prescribing eating less and exercising. What planet are you on? This might happen in the odd case, but you make it sound as though this is standard medical practice.


    We open the floodgates for immigrants and "tourist patients" then pay out huge sums for HIV treatment when they claim asylum or sign up to be a student to get a visa. Our NHS trust charges international patients


    I needed a doctors note for an employer - my GP said he could do one and would give it to me for "£10 cash" It's a private service and takes the time of a professional. It's not necessary for your healthcare and he is entitled to charge you for his time. This is normal. You're lucky it was £10, in a totally private sector it'd cost far more. You're whining about a £10 sick note and at the same time calling for private healthcare? Do you know how much it'd cost for an appointment with a GP, the full cost of prescription meds, cancer treatment?

    -- prescribing branded crap for kickbacks from Glaxo and co, Because new drugs aren't available in generic form? Would you rather have an inferior drug?

    There are a great many hard-working genuinely amazing medics, but for everyone of those there is a money-grabbing shyster playing the system for all its worth - and there is more money to be made from it than being a banker... Oh please, you don't make serious money in medicine compared to banking/business.

    The NHS is not fit for purpose in its current state - for healthcare it is 15th in europe whilst actually being the 3rd biggest employer/corporation in europe!! Madness....it costs more and dwarfs practically every other company/body in Europe but comes in 15th! By what measures? How do you know the figures reported for other countries aren't also being spun/fudged?


    The same hospital a disabled boy died on a ward becuase the nurses forgot to give him water - he died of thirst. And privitising the NHS would solve this how?
    above
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alhae)
    Our cancer survival rates are pisspoor and waiting lists are too long. The US doesn't suffer either of these problems because it is not the taxpayers that pay for everyones' healthcare, it is themselves. End the nonsense now and privatise the NHS. If you disagree with me then it shows that you cannot face the truth.
    What a doofus! Sorry if this has already been said but your argument makes no sense, looking at the bit in bold - the taxpayers ARE the people who need healthcare, 99.9% of people need healthcare at some point in their lives... so yes we are all paying for our own healthcare, just the poorer people with health problems out of their control are protected... what's your point?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    OP - if we all had to pay for our healthcare, surely that means that some doctors or whatnot would simply be working to make money, rather than looking after the patients who need it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Privite does not mean that it is better.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    NO FUTURE - good debates.

    The crux of this is if we go to a private system healthcare for all major operations and people on low incomes would be free - no minor/non-essential or cosmetic procedures would be.

    All the minor/cosmetic procedures would be covered by health insurance - which those earning enough would pay.

    Now the effect would be the government would be able to lower taxes - probably stretching the basic rate tax band - so everyone in the country (who works) would be better off - more than covering insurance premiums.

    -

    To clear up some points for you examples I had been involved in whilst temping:

    1. Cancer - Consultants (consultant gynaecologists etc)
    2 consultants with Harley Street practices brought their private patients to all MDT meetings to discuss, leapfrogging the queque and fast-tracking their patients. I asked the nurse involved why private patients were being discussed in the NHS, she told me that is how it works. Consultants have a private clinic which is an office - they charge for a consult, then simply jump the patient to the front of the queque on the NHS and charge the NHS for doing the operation.

    Is that a fair system for all on the NHS???

    2. US cannot be compared with UK for meaningful analysis
    US is a big country spannign different time zones with widely different laws, mode of government and regulations - 310,000,000 people
    UK is 70,000,000 people and part of the EU sharing common laws with other European states - they must be our comparative

    3. New drugs are expensive
    Yes - but why are we prescribing them to people who don't need them or who have better access to options to treat them?
    Why are we prescribing anti-obesity drugs to people who need to get exercise and reduce calorific intake?
    Why have we spent billions on anti-smoking drugs - when we all know its about stifling demand in the first place and now have laws to stop people starting?
    Why are we still pumping silly money into NHS for anti-smoking that goes on some thick as **** counsellors and pamphlets? Do you not think a private firm would simply cut all of that out and have 1 website?

    4. internal published magazines
    Of course your trust produces wasteful magazines to report on "fraud and whistleblowing' to be seen to be doing something - how many finance directors and other staff involved in fraud get prosecuted? They don't - the trust does not want the bad publicity so they are asked to leave and given a good reference - they then move to another trust!

    5. Medicine vs Banking
    Really - you watch to much TV! Very few bankers make it into the top bonus rounds. Average pay is about £80k after a few years.

    there are GP's on £300,000 a year - what do they do compared to bankers and manufactureres and business owners doing pressurized client-facing work and paying 50% income tax from money they bring into the UK along with corporation tax - to pay for everyone else's jobs, hospitals, teachers etc

    - why they tap on their computers and prescribe creams or refer them to hospital...they are getting paid DOUBLE the prime minister for prescribing cream!! Public sector workers should not be able to earn this kind of money full-stop.

    Surgeons make more basic salary and have complete job security - some go on until 70 doing locum work.
    This does not happen in banking and finance - most workers are gone by 40.

    You are mad if you think any other profession offers a more stable and high income career.

    6. The power of Glaxo etc
    Why during meetings to discuss cancer patients are their sales reps turning up and providing free gourmet food, discount vouchers and discussing horse-racing events with the doctors?

    Their drugs are no better than generic ones when the patent runs out.

    7. 15th in Europe
    Good point - I found that on a report site - I would assume its compiled by a firm of business advisors.
    IN any case you've made me re-think that, we are 15th with fudge figures - we are probably 20th.

    8. Boy dieing of thirst
    In a rivate company that would be grounds for sacking the service manager/nurse.


    Now your previous points regarding maternity leave, off sick for depression etc - none of this washes in the private sector - it is rampantly abused in the public sector to the point nothing works becuase everyon is off on a blag.

    it is fine for private sector workers to blag time off or go "off sick" if they can get away with it - becuase TAXPAYERS DO NOT PAY THEIR WAGES!! if their bosses don't like it - they get rid of them - you cannot sack anyone in the public sector!!

    9. Accountants have ways of avoiding being sacked
    Yes and no. When the sh*t hits the fan - they are dealt with by their bodies (like the general medical council) and are struck off and also face unlimited fines.

    I could go on and on - but the bottom line is the whole NHS needs to be radically reformed its ridiculously expensive for the taxpayer, open to rampant abuse from top to bottom, and often fails to deliver even basic levels of care.

    Oh - and of course every NHS worker defends it - you have no chance of getting decent work in the private sector with 10 years public sector worker on the CV....
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davidr123)
    Now the effect would be the government would be able to lower taxes - probably stretching the basic rate tax band - so everyone in the country (who works) would be better off - more than covering insurance premiums.
    I don't have time to respond to the rest of the post, but that is a HUGE fallacy IMO.

    1 - Taxes could never be lowered enough to save people enough money to pay for insurance.

    2 - how would extending the base rate tax band make the people in it any better off? You would just be making the people who used to be in the higher bend better off.

    3 - If you are still providing free health care for some people, then as I said in point 1, you could never lower taxes as much as you seem to think.

    4 - As I said, what would stop insurance companies refusing to pay out over things like "pre-existing conditions"?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Whoops meant - extend the personal allowance not the BR band - sorry!

    Insurance companies - let's knock off the myth they never pay out - they are regulated - they even pay out for suicide these days.The government would have ear-marked funds for special cases.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davidr123)
    NO FUTURE - good debates.

    The crux of this is if we go to a private system healthcare for all major operations and people on low incomes would be free - no minor/non-essential or cosmetic procedures would be.

    All the minor/cosmetic procedures would be covered by health insurance - which those earning enough would pay.
    What would you define as a minor/cosmetic procedure?

    (Original post by davidr123)
    Now the effect would be the government would be able to lower taxes - probably stretching the basic rate tax band - so everyone in the country (who works) would be better off - more than covering insurance premiums.
    In every privatised system in the Western world, the system costs more, and people will have to pay for this. The average person may pay less tax but they'll have more outgoings due to this increased cost.

    (Original post by davidr123)
    -

    To clear up some points for you examples I had been involved in whilst temping:

    1. Cancer - Consultants (consultant gynaecologists etc)
    2 consultants with Harley Street practices brought their private patients to all MDT meetings to discuss, leapfrogging the queque and fast-tracking their patients. I asked the nurse involved why private patients were being discussed in the NHS, she told me that is how it works. Consultants have a private clinic which is an office - they charge for a consult, then simply jump the patient to the front of the queque on the NHS and charge the NHS for doing the operation.

    Is that a fair system for all on the NHS???
    Cancer treatment generally has a short waiting time anyway (2 weeks) and besides, isn't fast-tracking treatment the point of private healthcare in this country? And do you think this won't happen in a privatised system?

    (Original post by davidr123)
    2. US cannot be compared with UK for meaningful analysis
    US is a big country spannign different time zones with widely different laws, mode of government and regulations - 310,000,000 people
    UK is 70,000,000 people and part of the EU sharing common laws with other European states - they must be our comparative
    Eh? Why is a country uncomparable because it's larger or covers different time zones? The UK has very different health problems from most of Europe and in this regard is closer to the US, so comparison is very valid.
    (Original post by davidr123)

    3. New drugs are expensive
    Yes - but why are we prescribing them to people who don't need them or who have better access to options to treat them?
    Why are we prescribing anti-obesity drugs to people who need to get exercise and reduce calorific intake?
    Why have we spent billions on anti-smoking drugs - when we all know its about stifling demand in the first place and now have laws to stop people starting?
    Why are we still pumping silly money into NHS for anti-smoking that goes on some thick as **** counsellors and pamphlets? Do you not think a private firm would simply cut all of that out and have 1 website?
    It's all about cost-effectiveness. The cost of anti-obesity drugs and anti-smoking drugs is offset by the savings of not having to treat obesity and smoking related diseases later on.

    (Original post by davidr123)
    4. internal published magazines
    Of course your trust produces wasteful magazines to report on "fraud and whistleblowing' to be seen to be doing something - how many finance directors and other staff involved in fraud get prosecuted? They don't - the trust does not want the bad publicity so they are asked to leave and given a good reference - they then move to another trust!
    Do you have any evidence for that other than your word?

    (Original post by davidr123)
    5. Medicine vs Banking
    Really - you watch to much TV! Very few bankers make it into the top bonus rounds. Average pay is about £80k after a few years.

    there are GP's on £300,000 a year - what do they do compared to bankers and manufactureres and business owners doing pressurized client-facing work and paying 50% income tax from money they bring into the UK along with corporation tax - to pay for everyone else's jobs, hospitals, teachers etc

    - why they tap on their computers and prescribe creams or refer them to hospital...they are getting paid DOUBLE the prime minister for prescribing cream!! Public sector workers should not be able to earn this kind of money full-stop.

    Surgeons make more basic salary and have complete job security - some go on until 70 doing locum work.
    This does not happen in banking and finance - most workers are gone by 40.

    You are mad if you think any other profession offers a more stable and high income career.
    :facepalm:

    The vast majority of GPs earn less than 100K and they do a heck of a lot more than tap on their computers and prescribe cream. I'm a final year medical student and my friends who've gone into the city having graduated 2.5 years ago are already earning in excess of 60k. Medicine is incredibly hard work and if I were motivated by money, there are easier and much more lucrative routes to take.

    (Original post by davidr123)

    6. The power of Glaxo etc
    Why during meetings to discuss cancer patients are their sales reps turning up and providing free gourmet food, discount vouchers and discussing horse-racing events with the doctors?

    Their drugs are no better than generic ones when the patent runs out.
    I actually agree with you on this, but by and large the NHS has a huge control over it's formulary and changes drugs to generics whenever it can.

    (Original post by davidr123)
    Now your previous points regarding maternity leave, off sick for depression etc - none of this washes in the private sector - it is rampantly abused in the public sector to the point nothing works becuase everyon is off on a blag.

    it is fine for private sector workers to blag time off or go "off sick" if they can get away with it - becuase TAXPAYERS DO NOT PAY THEIR WAGES!!
    You think people don't take time off for depression or maternity leave in the private sector? You are seriously deluded.

    In any case, why does it make a difference if taxpayers pay their wages? Does this suddenly mean they have a different standard of employment law?

    (Original post by davidr123)
    I could go on and on - but the bottom line is the whole NHS needs to be radically reformed its ridiculously expensive for the taxpayer, open to rampant abuse, and often fails to deliver even basic levels of care.
    How is it radically expensive for the tax payer? The tax payer in this country pays less than the tax payer in pretty much every other western country including the privatised US system (through medicare and medicaid etc). The NHS has it's problems but cost isn't one of them
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    it costs £330 to change a lightbulb in some NHS trusts.

    Would any private sector company negotiate absurd contracts like that for kickbacks?

    Somehow i think not.

    -

    You are a med student - when you actually start work and realise that all your operations are cancelled because nothing from procurement is being delivered on time as everyone is off sick and they can't get the budget for new staff or sack the old ones - and everything goes missing - then you'll start hitting your head against the wall.

    You'll be infuraited as clinics get cancelled, notes go missing and endless temps turn up saying "I'm just a temp i don't know anything".

    people cannot take the piss in the private sector with blagging off work, how many of your city friends said "no" to doing 12 hour days in busy season? O took 6 months of depression fully paid?

    The cost to the taxpayer of all this is high - and could be used to pay for cancer drugs, more nurses and other frontline staff and treatments - the NHS is not value for money.

    Is anything in the public sector value for money?!?

    -

    Your city friends are teh high flyers - the vast majority of private sector workers in professions get nowhere near their salaries - if they don't keep up the pace they'll be let go - they can't hide behind employment legislation.

    Sorry there is no easier profession for stable long-term high pay than medicine - yes getting on the course and studying is hard - but its a job for life once done.

    Evidence for the finance director fraud - yes I do!:

    X head of procurment at X hospital I worked in's wife ran a medical supplies company - he set up a seperate warehouse and ordered goods not needed and standard goods from her at a higher price. HE had previously done this in Scotland - a management consultant (rolls eyes) - queried the second stock room and he was caught - by which time the document s had been shredded - he was asked to move on.

    How do I know this? The management consultant had to ask us about all the stock items and try and find a paperwork trail - my temp role was taking receipt of goods in that department
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davidr123)
    Whoops meant - extend the personal allowance not the BR band - sorry!

    Insurance companies - let's knock off the myth they never pay out - they are regulated - they even pay out for suicide these days.The government would have ear-marked funds for special cases.
    Fair enough.

    And how can you be so sure though? Insurance companies in all sectors do all they can to avoid paying out. Why would it be any different? What would stop them from having complicated clauses that most people wouldn't be able to understand? You can say "they are regulated" as much as you like, but regulation doesn't always work, and it is often reactionary (any punishment is done after the event, rather than preventing it in the first place).

    And despite what you are saying, I just don't see why privatisation is the answer. There is no reason why you can't bring certain costs (like changing a lightbulb) down, while still keeping the NHS as it is.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Crap troll is crap.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alhae)
    Our cancer survival rates are pisspoor and waiting lists are too long. The US doesn't suffer either of these problems because it is not the taxpayers that pay for everyones' healthcare, it is themselves. End the nonsense now and privatise the NHS. If you disagree with me then it shows that you cannot face the truth.
    firstly, I don't think you anticipated just how many neg' reps you would get.

    Anyway, no I don't agree with privatising the NHS at all. The problem is not that it is payed for by taxpayers. The problem is that the overwhelmingly vast majority of NHS funds are spent on bureaucrats, paperwork, drug addicts and drunks who have hurt themselves, old people who 'stock up for the winter', teenage parents and people who go and see their GP because they have had a cough for a week and think they have cancer.

    Thirdly, because it is government owned, the focus is on care, with a company, the focus will be on profits.

    Fourthly, if you don't want to be part of the NHS, no one is saying you have to, go and join a private health group.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I agree with OP. I don't really see how healthcare is that different from anything else, you wouldn't expect the government to pay for everybodys cars even though cars are essential for transport and improve peoples quality of life. There is no fundamental difference between healthcare and other goods or services that also improve people's lives.

    Unfortunalty, the reality is that providing healthcare costs money and the cost must be paid for by somebody, don't think that the government can spend money at nobodys expense. There are two types of people who can pay for it, either the people who use the healthcare or the people who don't use the healthcare, that is it. You may say it is unfair for the people who use the healthcare to pay for it but it is even less fair for the people who don't use it to pay for it. Why should they? I would love it for nobody to pay for it but somebody has to, surely the people who benefit should pay rather than the people who don't.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/s/P...r_NHS_Petition

    :ninja:

    (It's completely safe by the way, they wont give away your personal details. So please sign if you can )
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Welsh Bluebird - those £330 lightbulb contracts are tied into long-term service contracts.

    Its the result of not having shreholders and cost-driven board of directors scrutinising things and being held culpable.

    No one wants to keep the NHS in the state its in - not the doctors, nurses or patients.

    The only people who DO want to keep it in the current state are unskilled (NVQ) NHS back-office workers who will never get employed outside it or drop dead when they can't take 6 months off ill a year in a private sector job.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sternumator)
    I agree with OP. I don't really see how healthcare is that different from anything else, you wouldn't expect the government to pay for everybodys cars even though cars are essential for transport and improve peoples quality of life. There is no fundamental difference between healthcare and other goods or services that also improve people's lives.
    Except cars aren't essential for transport, are they, because there are buses and trains. They may be less convenient, but it doesn't mean that having a car is essential. Yes, you pay to use buses and trains, but the cost of the transport is in part paid by the government.


    (Original post by Sternumator)
    Unfortunalty, the reality is that providing healthcare costs money and the cost must be paid for by somebody, don't think that the government can spend money at nobodys expense. There are two types of people who can pay for it, either the people who use the healthcare or the people who don't use the healthcare, that is it. You may say it is unfair for the people who use the healthcare to pay for it but it is even less fair for the people who don't use it to pay for it. Why should they? I would love it for nobody to pay for it but somebody has to, surely the people who benefit should pay rather than the people who don't.
    Why is it less fair for the people who don't use healthcare to pay for it? The majority of people do need some sort of healthcare in their lives, and so will either use the NHS or private healthcare. If a person chooses private healthcare rather than public healthcare, why should they not also fund the public healthcare in their taxes when they have had the choice of using public heathcare but turned it down.

    This situation isn't unique to the NHS: our taxes fund public transport and state schools, even though we may choose only to drive and never use public transport, and send our children to private schools. Should people who never use public transport or state schools not pay taxes towards them?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davidr123)
    Welsh Bluebird - those £330 lightbulb contracts are tied into long-term service contracts.

    Its the result of not having shreholders and cost-driven board of directors scrutinising things and being held culpable.

    No one wants to keep the NHS in the state its in - not the doctors, nurses or patients.

    The only people who DO want to keep it in the current state are unskilled (NVQ) NHS back-office workers who will never get employed outside it or drop dead when they can't take 6 months off ill a year in a private sector job.
    You are right that the NHS sometimes employs idiots, you are proof of such an error.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Persephone9)
    Except cars aren't essential for transport, are they, because there are buses and trains. They may be less convenient, but it doesn't mean that having a car is essential. Yes, you pay to use buses and trains, but the cost of the transport is in part paid by the government.




    Why is it less fair for the people who don't use healthcare to pay for it? The majority of people do need some sort of healthcare in their lives, and so will either use the NHS or private healthcare. If a person chooses private healthcare rather than public healthcare, why should they not also fund the public healthcare in their taxes when they have had the choice of using public heathcare but turned it down.

    This situation isn't unique to the NHS: our taxes fund public transport and state schools, even though we may choose only to drive and never use public transport, and send our children to private schools. Should people who never use public transport or state schools not pay taxes towards them?
    I am guessing you live in London or another big city, for a lot of people cars are essential and without one they couldn't get any where. The NHS also funds a lot of nonessential things.

    Why is it less fair for the people who don't use healthcare to pay for it? It is less fair because you are paying for something you don't want. If I got a gang to come around your house with guns and forcibly take everything valuable in your house in order to fund the manufactue of cocaine in columbia it would clearly be wrong. It doesn't make it any more acceptable if I say you can come over to columbia when ever you want and sniff all the coke you can. This is in effect what happens with the NHS, people are threatend with prison, closing down of their businesses etc so they pay tax. The tax is then not spent on them it is spent on something they don't even want.

    Should people who never use public transport or state schools not pay taxes towards them? No
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.