Johnny Bognor Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 Jesus Christ are you deliberately dense? No one, that's not one single person, ever, in the history of the world, on this planet, on this thread has ever suggested the NHS is free. No one. I really don't know how to make that any clearer. You know where I am coming from. BTF states that health spending comes from Central Government and not from a specific tax. Whilst she is technically correct, you still have to pay for it. My problem is the inference that it is not acceptable to pay a specific tax but it is OK if it comes from the central pot - when essentially the 'take' is the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolution saint Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 You know where I am coming from. BTF states that health spending comes from Central Government and not from a specific tax. Whilst she is technically correct, you still have to pay for it. My problem is the inference that it is not acceptable to pay a specific tax but it is OK if it comes from the central pot - when essentially the 'take' is the same. Oh right you seriously think there are people wandering around who actually think the NHS is free? Again no one does. No one is that stupid to even try to pretend it's free. Of course we pay for it, of course it's funded by taxation - that's the whole bleeding point! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolution saint Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 I am not against the NHS - as I have said I would rather have an NHS as opposed to no NHS. However, I am against the leftie smokescreen that perpetrates the lie that it is Free. Even BTF goes on about how it comes out of Government spending as if G Clown goes into No 10's garden to pick money off the money tree that pays for all the great work he has achieved, whilst not costing us a penny. I brought up the issue of the French system as one poster held up the NHS as a shining example of success, being 17th in the world rather than 38th (like the US system). I happen to think that the number 1 system should be held up as an example, which also seems to be a comprise between the UK and US systems. As it happens, the US is decidedly Championship material, whilst the NHS is hovering above the relegation places. Meanwhile the French are league champions and in the running for Champions League. Sorry about the illustration, but this is a footie website. I was merely highlighting that the welfare state was not the only brain child of the left. Did you know that the tories invented income tax coupled with subsidies for the poor? Some 60-70 years before the labour movement existed? 1. Apart from you no one thought it was free. Did that come as a shock when you first realised? 2. It's fine that you want to emulate the French system, that's debate. It wasn't what the thread was about though. However I'm not sure many people would be happy to pay more in taxation and then pay 30% of treatment costs to fund a french style system - you're already moaning about our cheaper version! 3. You were the one who brought up socialism. No one else is interested. Socialism in this country is dead and died years ago. I'd love to debate with you it's various merits but it isn't really relevant. What we have now are two major parties and the only real difference between them is presentation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 Oh right you seriously think there are people wandering around who actually think the NHS is free? Again no one does. No one is that stupid to even try to pretend it's free. Of course we pay for it, of course it's funded by taxation - that's the whole bleeding point! hear it constantly on radio phone ins.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 13 August, 2009 Author Share Posted 13 August, 2009 hear it constantly on radio phone ins.. Yes, but when they say free, most will mean when they go to the hospital they are just treated without having to pay, whereas at an American hospital a credit card will be required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 Yes, but when they say free, most will mean when they go to the hospital they are just treated without having to pay, whereas at an American hospital a credit card will be required. no..they think it is litterally free....seriously, I listen to talk radio every night when i go to bed and the NHS is talked about alot... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolution saint Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 hear it constantly on radio phone ins.. OK, leaving aside morons no one thinks it's free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 OK, leaving aside morons no one thinks it's free. morons make up a decent percentage of those who use the NHS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolution saint Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 morons make up a decent percentage of those who use the NHS True. It's when they breed that annoys me but that's a different debate..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 13 August, 2009 Author Share Posted 13 August, 2009 no..they think it is litterally free....seriously, I listen to talk radio every night when i go to bed and the NHS is talked about alot... Well, I guess to the fools of this world who don't understand what taxes are for and how the money the government gets is sliced up, they'll think it is free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 Well, I guess to the fools of this world who don't understand what taxes are for and how the money the government gets is sliced up, they'll think it is free. probably those morons who think it is free...actually do get it free Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 13 August, 2009 Author Share Posted 13 August, 2009 probably those morons who think it is free...actually do get it free Well, the unemployed I guess which is 2.2 million now? But even then, VAT and what not... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 morons make up a decent percentage of those who use the NHS ....DD you are spot on. Many in the general public seem to think it's free, well I suppose it is if you don't pay tax. The original point of the thread was in response to the rabid right wing in the US. Well my point is that it is no different to the bull fed to us from Brown & co when they 'infer' that is free. To be fair, you can see why they do it as they win a decent percentage of the moronic vote. I would like our leaders to improve the NHS rather than just chuck a load of money at it. I think the debate should move on to what should and shouldn't be covered as the current system is unsustainable. If you have a boob job and it goes wrong, you should have to pay for it. Apparently it costs approximately £1500 to treat your average drunk in A&E on a saturday night - is this essential? Especially when lives are at risk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolution saint Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 ....DD you are spot on. Many in the general public seem to think it's free, well I suppose it is if you don't pay tax. The original point of the thread was in response to the rabid right wing in the US. Well my point is that it is no different to the bull fed to us from Brown & co when they 'infer' that is free. To be fair, you can see why they do it as they win a decent percentage of the moronic vote. I would like our leaders to improve the NHS rather than just chuck a load of money at it. I think the debate should move on to what should and shouldn't be covered as the current system is unsustainable. If you have a boob job and it goes wrong, you should have to pay for it. Apparently it costs approximately £1500 to treat your average drunk in A&E on a saturday night - is this essential? Especially when lives are at risk? I'm sorry but I'm going to keep doing this - where has any politician ever stated the NHS was free? Just give me one quote. I'm glad you agree with the OP though. The rest of your posts are decent - start a thread on them as a general NHS one is just too.....well general....to reach any sort of consensus. The idea that what should and shouldn't be paid for though has actually been set up (to a degree) with NICE. They recommend the drugs which should be used and they have difficult decisions to make - any body that makes them would. You were arguing against them earlier though weren't you? You can't have it both ways - either you want a body that will decide what is and what isn't cost effective or you don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 13 August, 2009 Author Share Posted 13 August, 2009 Some people moan that alot of the very very expensive treatments aren't available on the NHS, but of course there has to be a limit because the NHS obviously has an overall budget it can't exceed, but at least you know here you will get some sort of treatment and you also know you won't have to pay thousands of pounds for that treatment or drugs. Some of the criticisms aimed at the NHS on treatments or drugs not offered are all very well, but in the U.S very few people would be able to afford these treatments anyway, or many of the treatments or drugs the NHS provides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 You know where I am coming from. BTF states that health spending comes from Central Government and not from a specific tax. Whilst she is technically correct, you still have to pay for it. My problem is the inference that it is not acceptable to pay a specific tax but it is OK if it comes from the central pot - when essentially the 'take' is the same. You silly little man! I was actually responding to that bastion of republicansim, St George. He asked how much of our 'pay check' do we pay out for the NHS, comparing this to medical insurance. As Revolution Saint has said to you over and over again, no-one has ever suggested that the NHS is free. We all know that we pay for it but we pay a fixed rate, be that through tax and / or National Insurance. But we get as much treatment as we need, regardless of cost. This is in contrast to the current system in the US where you pay medical insurance (if you can afford it) but then stand a good chance of being denied treatment because your insurance doesn't cover a condition, or the cash for the treatment has been exhausted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Bizzle Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 I'm sorry but I'm going to keep doing this - where has any politician ever stated the NHS was free? Just give me one quote. quote] http://www.nhscampaign.org/uploads/File/newsletter.pdf http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/article556758.ece Patricia Hewitt, the latest Health Secretary, has been quick to trot out the same old untruths. Only last weekend, she defended the status quo in the NHS with the promise that: “As long as there is a Labour government, Britain is not going to move away from a tax-funded system of NHS, where we all contribute and where we can all benefit free at the point of need.” Here's a good article if you are interested http://www.reform.co.uk/Research/Health/HealthArticles/tabid/80/smid/378/ArticleID/590/reftab/69/t/Free%20at%20the%20point%20of%20delivery%20-%20reality%20or%20political%20mirage/Default.aspx Here is another: http://www.healthdirect.co.uk/2007/04/nhs-free-at-point-of-use-is-political.html I particularly like this bit: But politicians and others are reluctant to engage with the issue. "By perpetuating the political mirage of a service completely free at the point of delivery, debate is conveniently stifled," the doctors say. "What is urgently needed is a proper debate on the future of healthcare funding, covering both tax and independent financing". Politicians eh? I could go on, but I will close on this: At the point the healthcare is delivered, a direct cost is incurred by the state and therefore, by definition, it is not free. ....this is without having to pay for parking in the hospital when going to A&E. Free? Yea right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 I'm sorry but I'm going to keep doing this - where has any politician ever stated the NHS was free? Just give me one quote. quote] http://www.nhscampaign.org/uploads/File/newsletter.pdf http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/article556758.ece Patricia Hewitt, the latest Health Secretary, has been quick to trot out the same old untruths. Only last weekend, she defended the status quo in the NHS with the promise that: “As long as there is a Labour government, Britain is not going to move away from a tax-funded system of NHS, where we all contribute and where we can all benefit free at the point of need.” Here's a good article if you are interested http://www.reform.co.uk/Research/Health/HealthArticles/tabid/80/smid/378/ArticleID/590/reftab/69/t/Free%20at%20the%20point%20of%20delivery%20-%20reality%20or%20political%20mirage/Default.aspx Here is another: http://www.healthdirect.co.uk/2007/04/nhs-free-at-point-of-use-is-political.html I particularly like this bit: But politicians and others are reluctant to engage with the issue. "By perpetuating the political mirage of a service completely free at the point of delivery, debate is conveniently stifled," the doctors say. "What is urgently needed is a proper debate on the future of healthcare funding, covering both tax and independent financing". Politicians eh? I could go on, but I will close on this: At the point the healthcare is delivered, a direct cost is incurred by the state and therefore, by definition, it is not free. ....this is without having to pay for parking in the hospital when going to A&E. Free? Yea right And in one fell swoop you demolish your own argument Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junction 9 Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 I visited QA in Portsmouth tonight and the car park barriers were broken for the second night running thus making the parking completely FREE. True story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 From the liebour party website: http://www.labour.org.uk/proud/labour_nhs To save you the bother: For the first time ever hospital services, family practitioner services (doctors, pharmacists, opticians and dentists) and community-based services were available to the public for free under one organisation. Game. Set. Match Goodnight. Mods you can lock this thread now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolution saint Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 I'm sorry but I'm going to keep doing this - where has any politician ever stated the NHS was free? Just give me one quote. quote] http://www.nhscampaign.org/uploads/File/newsletter.pdf http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/article556758.ece Patricia Hewitt, the latest Health Secretary, has been quick to trot out the same old untruths. Only last weekend, she defended the status quo in the NHS with the promise that: “As long as there is a Labour government, Britain is not going to move away from a tax-funded system of NHS, where we all contribute and where we can all benefit free at the point of need.” Here's a good article if you are interested http://www.reform.co.uk/Research/Health/HealthArticles/tabid/80/smid/378/ArticleID/590/reftab/69/t/Free%20at%20the%20point%20of%20delivery%20-%20reality%20or%20political%20mirage/Default.aspx Here is another: http://www.healthdirect.co.uk/2007/04/nhs-free-at-point-of-use-is-political.html I particularly like this bit: But politicians and others are reluctant to engage with the issue. "By perpetuating the political mirage of a service completely free at the point of delivery, debate is conveniently stifled," the doctors say. "What is urgently needed is a proper debate on the future of healthcare funding, covering both tax and independent financing". Politicians eh? I could go on, but I will close on this: At the point the healthcare is delivered, a direct cost is incurred by the state and therefore, by definition, it is not free. ....this is without having to pay for parking in the hospital when going to A&E. Free? Yea right Ha ha, you must be on a wind up! Surely no one is that stupid! Did you really think free at the point of use was free? You did, didn't you? I bet you get all excited about winning the reader's digest lucky prize as well..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 Ha ha, you must be on a wind up! Surely no one is that stupid! Did you really think free at the point of use was free? You did, didn't you? I bet you get all excited about winning the reader's digest lucky prize as well..... Read my previous post (http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showpost.php?p=415787&postcount=121) where the Labour party, on their own website, claim it is free. I rest my case. Goodnight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolution saint Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 From the liebour party website: http://www.labour.org.uk/proud/labour_nhs To save you the bother: For the first time ever hospital services, family practitioner services (doctors, pharmacists, opticians and dentists) and community-based services were available to the public for free under one organisation. Game. Set. Match Goodnight. Mods you can lock this thread now. Oh FFS you even quote a link that says free at the point of need! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 Oh FFS you even quote a link that says free at the point of need! Read on and the labour lie unfolds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 From the liebour party website: http://www.labour.org.uk/proud/labour_nhs To save you the bother: For the first time ever hospital services, family practitioner services (doctors, pharmacists, opticians and dentists) and community-based services were available to the public for free under one organisation. Game. Set. Match Goodnight. Mods you can lock this thread now. And earlier in the article it mentions the need for a service 'free at the point of delivery'. Oh sorry I forgot - you don't understand the difference, do you The sentence you now quote centres on the fact that all the health services were under an umbrella organisation, rather than with disparate private operators as was the case pre 1948. Actually, if you properly read the link you provide, you'll see absolutely the justification for the NHS being created and why it is so admired world-wide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolution saint Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 Read my previous post (http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showpost.php?p=415787&postcount=121) where the Labour party, on their own website, claim it is free. I rest my case. Goodnight Night Johnny. I'm sorry to have shattered a few illusions - there's just one more. Father Christmas isn't real but on the plus side neither are the monsters under the bed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socalocal Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 I don't think anyone would claim the NHS is a perfect system but I have lived in the US for four years now and the only thing that makes me question my long term future in this country is the current situation with health insurance. I have a good job with an excellent insurance scheme which is completely paid for by my employer and has very low out of pocket expenses for most things. However, having health insurance tied to the employer is one reason why the prospect of being made redundant is so much more scary over here - although there are policies that can be purchased to provide continuing cover for a fixed period of time it is not exactly ideal to have to start forking out for this just at the time when you loose your job. In general employees have a lot less rights over here so it is not uncommon for someone whose is diagnosed with a serious illness to end up loosing their job because they can no longer work and then subsequently loosing their health insurance. Finding alternative insurance is then a complete nightmare because insurance companies are looking to maximise their profits and will therefore refuse to insure people with pre-existing conditions. A lot of the discussion is around people not having insurance, but even if you have an excellent policy, it is still entirely possible that a serious illness could wipe you out financially. Even aside from that kind of nightmare scenario, the system is extremely confusing and it is very difficult to work out in advance what is likely to be covered by your insurance and what is not. There doesn't seem to be much logic to it either - I ended up with a hospital bill for 'emergency oxygen' after visiting an emergency room in a ski resort with altitude sickness because apparently the provider of the oxygen was not the approved to supplier to my insurance network, but on the other hand I have been able to see a sports injuries specialist (which I didn't expect to be fully covered by insurance) without paying anything beyond the standard doctor visit fee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LVSaint Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 However, having health insurance tied to the employer is one reason why the prospect of being made redundant is so much more scary over here - although there are policies that can be purchased to provide continuing cover for a fixed period of time it is not exactly ideal to have to start forking out for this just at the time when you loose your job. In general employees have a lot less rights over here so it is not uncommon for someone whose is diagnosed with a serious illness to end up loosing their job because they can no longer work and then subsequently loosing their health insurance. Finding alternative insurance is then a complete nightmare because insurance companies are looking to maximise their profits and will therefore refuse to insure people with pre-existing conditions. The cobra plan lasts for just 18 months after you leave your employer and is gap insurance until your new employer provides a subsidized rate or if you're lucky as you are Socal, pays entirely for it. As it is an extension of your old plan which you pay for, you are still covered for pre-existing conditions but after that you are on your own. The predicament we face is that once we move out of this state (the sooner the better), my wife would have to change her healthcare provider as it is a Nevada based company. As she has existing conditions, she is facing the prospect of being denied by new carriers. Hopefully by this point, the current administration will have remedied this pitiful retarded scenario for good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 13 August, 2009 Share Posted 13 August, 2009 do you know what this would cost..? im not being flippant just generally want to know what health care cover costs in america.. You don't seem to have received an answer to your question, so here goes... When I lived in Cambridge, Massachusetts in 2002/3, the best quote I got was $1200, for a family of three. That was for full medical cover, not an HMO. I thought that was quite reasonable - just $1200 a year...until it was pointed out that that was the MONTHLY bill. I asked around among some of my friends in Cambridge, because, frankly, I couldn't believe it. But, no - $1200 a month was about what it cost them to avoid the ludicrous rip off merchants in the HMO trade. Frightening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 (edited) Night Johnny. I'm sorry to have shattered a few illusions - there's just one more. (1) Father Christmas isn't real but on the plus side (2) neither are the monsters under the bed. ...don't want to be picky but that is two. If you need help with your maths, just let me know. Education, education, education eh? Anyway, luckily for me I don't believe in such fairytales as "father christmas", "monsters under the bed" or "no more boom and bust". Anyway, good morning to you. Edited 14 August, 2009 by Johnny Bognor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 You don't seem to have received an answer to your question, so here goes... When I lived in Cambridge, Massachusetts in 2002/3, the best quote I got was $1200, for a family of three. That was for full medical cover, not an HMO. I thought that was quite reasonable - just $1200 a year...until it was pointed out that that was the MONTHLY bill. I asked around among some of my friends in Cambridge, because, frankly, I couldn't believe it. But, no - $1200 a month was about what it cost them to avoid the ludicrous rip off merchants in the HMO trade. Frightening. so that is what..£200 a month each.. i wonder how much I pay a month Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 so that is what..£200 a month each.. i wonder how much I pay a month Well, the spend per head on the NHS is approx £1834 per annum which is roughly $3000, so for a family of three the NHS spends an equivalent of $9000 per annum. Bearing in mind that this burden is funded by the tax payer, who represent approximately half of the population, I would have thought a tax payer would be paying (directly or indirectly) quite a bit more than $9000 per annum for their free at the point of delivery healthcare. So the "cost" of our free at the point of delivery healthcare is probably not too dissimilar to the "cost" of the expensive American healthcare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 Well, the spend per head on the NHS is approx £1834 per annum which is roughly $3000, so for a family of three the NHS spends an equivalent of $9000 per annum. Bearing in mind that this burden is funded by the tax payer, who represent approximately half of the population, I would have thought a tax payer would be paying (directly or indirectly) quite a bit more than $9000 per annum for their free at the point of delivery healthcare. So the "cost" of our free at the point of delivery healthcare is probably not too dissimilar to the "cost" of the expensive American healthcare. There is a difference between what a person 'pays' whether through insurance or tax / NI and what their treatments cost. I think most sensible people realise that. I pay £200 a year house insurance (that's MY cost) but if my house was burgled or flooded it could cost £thousands to remedy (what it will cost my insurance company). LV may well have been quoted £1200 a month for his family's insurance. But he hasn't said how much the cost of any treatment they might receive will be. However he has pointed out that a lot of conditions rule insurance out. Just because the average cost of NHS care in this country is £1800 odd, doesn't mean the individual contributes that amount. AND THAT'S THE POINT - the cost of treatment is irrelevant. It's the need of the individual that is sacrosanct. I pay for the Police and Fire Service (through my council tax). I've never used them. But I wouldn't be without them or want to be dependent on 'insurance' where I might have to pay more / less depending on where I live / how often I set fire to the chip pan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 Saint George: How would you answer this then...found on another forum?? So much for your fantastic health system ! "As A martial artist who also frequents martial arts forums, all I can say is that I'm amazed by how many Americans put up posts saying I have hurt, broken, damaged, torn, been poked in the, sprained my arm, leg, wrist, eye, tactical what should I do, oh and I'm not insured and can't afford a doctor right now!" If you know the rules you surely adhere to them. If you dont have car insurance and end up in a wheel chair who do you blame for that? Those people have played the risky game of avoiding paying in to the systemand then cry when their clever scheme goes wrong. It is a case of taking responsibility Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 I find it amusing/annoying when Mandelson comes on air and says 'we have pumped in 175 billion into the economy' no he hasn't, the government hasn't , WE HAVE and that is around our necks for generations. So please dont make it sound he has done us all a favour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 I find it amusing/annoying when Mandelson comes on air and says 'we have pumped in 175 billion into the economy' no he hasn't, the government hasn't , WE HAVE and that is around our necks for generations. So please dont make it sound he has done us all a favour. Are MPs exempt from paying tax then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 There is a difference between what a person 'pays' whether through insurance or tax / NI and what their treatments cost. I think most sensible people realise that.. Of course there is, as all taxpayers pay into the pot and don't necessarily take out what they pay in. LV may well have been quoted £1200 a month for his family's insurance. But he hasn't said how much the cost of any treatment they might receive will be. However he has pointed out that a lot of conditions rule insurance out. Just because the average cost of NHS care in this country is £1800 odd, doesn't mean the individual contributes that amount. No, but on average we do contribute this amount, one way or another - unless the Clown is lumping the cost on governement borrowing for future generations to pay off. It would be difficult for me to work out Delldays exact contribution as I don't know his earning and tax arrangements. Therefore, it is sensible to look at the average cost per capita, because on average, that is what it costs per person. In terms of what people actually pay on average, then you have to look at the total cost, divided by the number of taxpayers. As there are 30m taxpayers in the UK, on average a taxpayer will be contributing £3600 per annum. Some taxpayers will be paying more than this, whilst some will be paying less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 so, the average man earning say 25k a year in the UK will probably contribue a similar amount to that of his opposite number in the US for a far inferior service..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 Oh right you seriously think there are people wandering around who actually think the NHS is free? Again no one does. No one is that stupid to even try to pretend it's free. Of course we pay for it, of course it's funded by taxation - that's the whole bleeding point! Jesus Christ are you deliberately dense? No one, that's not one single person, ever, in the history of the world, on this planet, on this thread has ever suggested the NHS is free. No one. I really don't know how to make that any clearer. OOOOPPPPPSSSSSSS!!!!! I don't know what the cover costs. But I do know that my ex sister-in-law, who has lived and worked in the US for 40 odd years and paid health insurance, couldn't afford to come home for her mother's funeral because of the personal cost of her treatment for breast cancer. Her insurance didn't cover the cost of treatment. Her family have had to help her with the cost. A stark contrast to the cost of my mother's treatment for leukaemia - around £30,000 a year for the past 9 years and not costing her a penny. Thank goodness for the NHS for all it's perceived failings (many of which are media scaremongering). Unless my understanding of the phrase 'not costing her a penny' is wrong, it would appear that BTF has suggested that treatment on the NHS is free - which of course it would be if her mother had never worked in her entire life, and never claimed any benefits either [because even those have a deduction for NI contributions...]. Also, why do people keep harping on about companies in the US that subsidise their employees healthcare? At least they have a choice whether or not to offer a scheme, whereas in the UK, every single employer must pay an employers National Insurance contribution - check your payslip to see how much your employer is contributing towards your healthcare... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Martini Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 What I don't get in this whole discussion is why they seem to be so preoccupied with the NHS in the US. Aren't they aware that there are better (this is ofcourse open for debate but lets just say that the NHS is by no means the holy grail of public health care systems) public healthcare systems in the rest of Europe? Are they just focussing on the UK because the plan is written in English whereas they would need to learn Danish, Dutch, Swedish or German to read the plans from the other European coutnries? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecuk268 Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 I see a Tory MEP has been in the US saying that the NHS has been "a 60-year mistake". Cameron is now sh*tting himself as he knows that other Tory MPs agree with this fella. See BBC website to read all about it. Maggie Thatcher ****ed it up when she decided that the NHS should be run as a business. The trusts were set up with no accountabilty to local people and were supposed to buy services from the hospitals. This therefore required layers of highly paid "management" who seemed to be immune from dismissal. Before Thatcher, we had local health authorities who were semi-democratic in that they had some local councillors as members. Tony Blair promised to reverse the semi-privatisation in 1997, but later reversed his decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 OOOOPPPPPSSSSSSS!!!!! Unless my understanding of the phrase 'not costing her a penny' is wrong, it would appear that BTF has suggested that treatment on the NHS is free - which of course it would be if her mother had never worked in her entire life, and never claimed any benefits either [because even those have a deduction for NI contributions...]. Also, why do people keep harping on about companies in the US that subsidise their employees healthcare? At least they have a choice whether or not to offer a scheme, whereas in the UK, every single employer must pay an employers National Insurance contribution - check your payslip to see how much your employer is contributing towards your healthcare... No it didn't cost her a penny because she is of the generation that didn't work once married and so didn't pay tax or NI. She did of course pay tax on her pension and my father did of course pay tax and NI. But she didn't pay for her health treatment specifically. As you well know and understand. And - again - NI is not hypothecated for health services. What a shame you don't read the contributions from our American resident fans. Sorry Weston - I thought your post was from dear old JB. But my comments still stand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popyto Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 my father has spent the last 3 months in an NHS hospital, do I think the systems free or perfect no, am I happy paying my National insurance to help keep my father in there yes. from what I am aware of the US health system my father would have struggled to get insured because of a pre existing condition and if he could would be paying through the nose for it. the extremes that the Republican party have been spouting about our healthcare system calling it 'evil' just seems to me to hark back to their paranoia that their country could turn into some kind of communist state with such a system. Yes most of us pay for the UK healthcare system via national insurance and to an extent with prescription charges anyone claiming its truly free is out of their mind. But we have a system that says when you are down on your luck and need aid and treatment you will get the same treatment as the man next to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 But we have a system that says when you are down on your luck and need aid and treatment you will get the same treatment as the man next to you. but not always the same as the next town as you though...depending on postcodes of course in some cases Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 but not always the same as the next town as you though...depending on postcodes of course in some cases That's called local democracy and accountability - something many people have been demanding for years. You can't moan about centralised control on the one hand and then about local decision making on another. I'm not too sure that my local police force offers exactly the same service as the one in the next door county either - or my local fire service. But I'd still rather have them there and pay for them, even if I don't use them. Same with the NHS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 (edited) That's called local democracy and accountability - something many people have been demanding for years. You can't moan about centralised control on the one hand and then about local decision making on another. I'm not too sure that my local police force offers exactly the same service as the one in the next door county either - or my local fire service. But I'd still rather have them there and pay for them, even if I don't use them. Same with the NHS. but you said the money from the NHS comes from a central fund.. I think with a system like health care..i should be able to get the same as a person living in west london say or northumberland..???? when it comes to picking up your recycled rubbish, then yeah, sure..have it different all over Edited 14 August, 2009 by Thedelldays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 14 August, 2009 Author Share Posted 14 August, 2009 The thing with the NHS is you always know you will be treated in some respect. In the U.S, you are at the mercy of the insurance companies who may decide your insurance doesn't cover the treatment you need to live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 The thing with the NHS is you always know you will be treated in some respect. In the U.S, you are at the mercy of the insurance companies who may decide your insurance doesn't cover the treatment you need to live. but you dont..you only have to look at the links jonny bognor posted to know you just dont both system are very far from perfect...both suit the countries they occupy.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 14 August, 2009 Share Posted 14 August, 2009 but you said the money from the NHS comes from a central fund.. I think with a system like health care..i should be able to get the same as a person living in west london say or northumberland..???? when it comes to picking up your recycled rubbish, then yeah, sure..have it different all over Yes, that's right the NHS is funded by central government. The government then devolves money to local Primary Care Trusts who spend their budgets as they see fit. Primary Care Trusts are broadly based on counties. The level of funding is decided by population levels and demographics i.e. poverty levels, numbers of young children and pensioners etc. So my PCT that caters for large numbers of students and young families may have different spending priorities than, say, Worthing where there is a large retired population. However, PCTs have to meet national targets such as waiting times, speediness of cancer treatment, reduction in smoking, obesity and alcoholism. I hope this explains to you how the NHS is funded and operated. As an aside, why should I have to have a less / more effective level of rubbish collection than you or anyone else? Why should schools in my area be better (or worse) than those in your area? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now