C_J I think in Finland for example there are small fees for GP appointments and hospital stays (@Homegrove?). Does this not seem sensible? Or is free healthcare for all still too much of a sacred cow?
Why the fuck should the poorest and most vulnerable pay when there are giant companies and billionaires who could pay a small amount more and make a huge difference to the whole of society.
nicksneddon Amen brother.
We’ve never had it completely free in the first place though.
Besides the moral standpoint, I am fairly convinced by the practical argument that redistributive policies make the economy work better anyway, from the data I have seen.
Poorer households spend a much higher proportion of their income on consumption than rich people do. There is a fairly robust practical argument for things like unemployment benefits and subsidised/free necessities as the overall effect is to free up some of the low-income household budget for spending on crap like widescreen tellies (and Cath Kidston wellies) and thus boost consumer demand in the economy. This is why I (personally) think extreme supply-side economics is short-termist in that it is basically stripping the ability of poorer households to consume out of the economy.
Homegrove You see that’s the problem. Once you start giving stuff to people for free they become dependent on it and think they’re entitled to it.
for the record, I would not be expecting people on minimum wage or unemployed people to necessarily be contributing to this. The left like to paint this as evil Tories deliberately going after the poor and the vulnerable. I think that’s a bit childish personally.
To sum up, tax tech companies more and keep the god awful Labour party out of government.
Is that about right?
C_J I would not be expecting people on minimum wage or unemployed people to necessarily be contributing to this. The left like to paint this as evil Tories deliberately going after the poor and the vulnerable. I think that’s a bit childish personally.
I don’t think you have enough cynicism towards the right then…
James Buchanan, 2005: people who “failed to foresee and save money for their future needs are to be treated, as subordinate members of the species, akin to…animals who are dependent”
C_J Once you start giving stuff to people for free they become dependent on it and think they’re entitled to it.
Bigger conversation there then about what as a human you should be entitled too. Another slippery slope… should they be entitled to water? Food? Shelter? Healthcare? Where do you start and stop? I think if a country is as wealthy as the UK is, we should be able to look after our own, and we should be able to give people free medical care, regardless of the fact that some of them will take it for granted or feel entitled to it.
Are you really that upset by the fact that some poor people are cunts, that you look at the state of America, and think, ’Yeah, they’ve got it right, I fancy a bit of that’? Plenty of the rich and wealthy are cunts too.
I think there is an onus on the NHS itself to do better with management of its service / funding too. If we take the example from yesterday, the Government has done its bit in setting up these arrangements with other countries - the responsibility for reclaiming the costs falls to the NHS. When the unclaimed costs run into the hundreds of millions its pretty negligent on their part to not be recovering the money which could be reinvested into the service.
Amps To be fair though, quoting someone like James Buchanan, an extreme libertarian who was part of the Mont Pelerin Society as typical of the right is roughly equivalent to the right quoting an extreme-left tankie who writes stuff like the owners of capital should be first against the wall and then saying “see, that’s lefties!”
bosstrabs It’s relevant to the NHS though, as it’s Buchanan’s disciples in the States who are trying to take control of the NHS, and it’s there ilk who will stop it from being free at the point of delivery etc. So I think it’s applicable. Also, do you think he’s that different in his thinking to Rees-Mogg?
The percentage is completely irrelevant - it is hundreds of millions of pounds, Amps. When you are an organisation being funded by the taxpayer and you are always claiming that you are being underfunded, you should be looking at yourself and your practices to see if there is wastage. Any organisation that can write off hundreds of millions of pounds and at the same time say they are underfunded needs to have a shake up
