Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
UK health tourism
#1
Diverting from the right wing narrative again
His last line nails it.
I am reading that it will cost more to monitor and collect than the cost of the treatment. At least the Mail n Express readers will be pacified

https://amp.theguardian.com/healthcare-n...burden-nhs
Reply
#2
That article's four years old, anything more recent?
Reply
#3
The 'problem' of Health Tourism is dwarfed by the elderly Free Riders. If you truly want to begin to address intergenerational theft in this country, and the burden of the elderly on the NHS then they ought to start paying NI.
Reply
#4
(10-27-2017, 07:39 AM)Protheroe Wrote: The 'problem' of Health Tourism is dwarfed by the elderly Free Riders. If you truly want to begin to address intergenerational theft in this country, and the burden of the elderly on the NHS then they ought to start paying NI.
I assume you weren't complaining about today's elderly when they were paying for your healthcare and education during your childhood?

I gathered you were right of centre but this and a previous post regarding pensioners sounds as though you want to hold a conference at Wannasee! 

And I thought the original poster was ageist.
Reply
#5
There's nothing ageist about it at all.

We have a major probem with funding health & social care which is only likely to get worse. People of working age are dealing with the highest tax burden in 35 years. Those under 40 generally don't have the same opportunities to acquire wealth and 'decent' pensions as many of those already retired did / have. NI is a clear and progressive contribution for Pensioners to make, that they don't already is an anomoly of the tax system.

The greatest sleight of hand ever pulled by the 1945-50 Labour Government was to convince the gullible that NI was some sort of 'fund'. It wasn't and isn't. It's current taxation for current spending - there is no concept of 'paying in'. I've argued for many years for a truly mutual health service, owned by the people - NOT the state, with pluralist provision and funded by individual mutual insurance - not general taxation. Many on the Left have too.

Nothing ageist, just realistic - and as I'm nearer retirement than university rather altruistic too.
Reply
#6
There are large parts of that I agree with.
Reply
#7
Me too Heath
Ignore JOKE He always plays the ageist card when he reads what he doesn't like as he is one of the golden generation
Reply
#8
(10-27-2017, 03:31 PM)Protheroe Wrote: There's nothing ageist about it at all.

We have a major probem with funding health & social care which is only likely to get worse. People of working age are dealing with the highest tax burden in 35 years. Those under 40 generally don't have the same opportunities to acquire wealth and 'decent' pensions as many of those already retired did / have. NI is a clear and progressive contribution for Pensioners to make, that they don't already is an anomoly of the tax system.

The greatest sleight of hand ever pulled by the 1945-50 Labour Government was to convince the gullible that NI was some sort of 'fund'. It wasn't and isn't. It's current taxation for current spending - there is no concept of 'paying in'. I've argued for many years for a truly mutual health service, owned by the people - NOT the state, with pluralist provision and funded by individual mutual insurance - not general taxation. Many on the Left have too.

Nothing ageist, just realistic - and as I'm nearer retirement than university rather altruistic too.

If, as you insist, it is not ageist then it is certainly a sweeping generalisation. It depends on your definition of a "decent" pension. Surely you would not claim those struggling on the basic state payout were in receipt of a decent income? If you had referenced those who retired on a 'final salary' pension I would agree, they can afford to pay national insurance (although they do still pay tax) I do not have the breakdown of the figures but I'd hazard a guess that the vast majority of pensioners only pick up the state pension.
I agree that successive governments erroneously fostered the belief that NI was some kind of personal insurance.
   
not say someone struggling on
Reply
#9
There are lots of Austrians and Germans who travel to the spas of Hungary but you don’t hear them complaining. Especially the undertakers.
Reply
#10
(10-27-2017, 08:18 PM)John Osbourne Wrote: If, as you insist, it is not ageist then it is certainly a sweeping generalisation.

It doesn't matter whether it's a sweeping generalisation or not. As NI is progressive those not included in my sweeping generalisation can rest easy.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)