Off Topic Political Debate

Do not agree. A company is there to make a profit - it does this after costs which include what they pay to people. If the company decided it will get better people by offering certain benefits that is how it chooses to operate. It could give more pay - instead it offers healthcare. It has nothing to do with the output which is a measure of GDP. It is the income of a company and gets spent as part of corporate decisions - does not affect tax so does not affect non employees. Tell me how you would stop a rich person going to America or elsewhere to pay for their treatment. You may not like it on moral grounds but Canute did not want the tide to come in either.

Huge Yes - just factual. My wife had her gall bladder removed on BUPA - she therefore did not take the place of an NHS person. BUPA is additional to the NHS so anyhthing they do is extra.

Again I am afraid it is just fact. As above - tell me how you prevent a rich person paying overseas if they so choose - in a democracy. You can aspire to anything you like but it is another Canute item - a rich person WILL pay -somewhere.

I carefully did not suggest you were jealous - I truly believe your motives are moral. But it is not an assumption but again fact that some people are jealous of others with wealth. The rest of this part is not an NHS point but about society - a wider topic which I am happy to debate separately.

This is the same across our modern society - not just health. Ask those in the police or education etc - we have increased bureaucracy, H&S and the nanny state - it eats into other things. It has nothing uniquely to do with NHS v Private health. Corbyn loves his soundbites. The NHS is nationalised - ie it is state run and funded - saying he wants to re-nationalise it is just a marketing trick - which he is good at - a meaningless phrase intended to win support from those who agree with the NHS - as most of us do. He does not mean that - he simply means he will not let any private company perform work for the (already) nationalised NHS - even if that means buying more expensively. It is just dogma. He is saying I do not care which is the more efficient cheaper or better but on principle I will not give state money to private firms. Fair enough. I sometimes buy worse things or things that are more expensive because I do not like a specific company.
Like you I am busy so have only picked a few points for reply. Can come back later if I miss something.
Be honest - is this not a good forum when two people- and hopefully more will give their views - can exchange honest opinions without seeing the need to be rude etc

 

Good to know you have finally given up the rude insults Leo.

 

Balls.
I'll be back later, too.

 

Looks like thee and me in this debate alone Andy. Shame W_Y no longer is posting - he was about the only person who is Right-minded poster on here - which is why neutral old me is having to hold the right wing torch.

 

Agree about w-y.
He wouldn't be able to defend you though - it's indefensible.

 

Not yet seen you rebuff any of my Canute or other points. He is far right of me - only other one who argues on the right I think is Aberdeen - and even then I think he is more central.

 

Maybe as a non-leftie, I can explain just how the French system works and let you decide if it is fair, or not. Remember on every measurement it comes out better for health care than the NHS.

Everyone pays taxes in one form or another that go to support the system. Nowhere near enough as the government is constantly telling us.
Go to visit your doctor and you will pay €23 and about a week later you find that €6 has been repaid to your bank account. You can choose to visit another doctor if you so wish, but that is your choice, and you will have to pay a lot more, without getting anything back
The doctor gives you a list of medicines and you pay the cost of them, less 30% that the state pays. No £8.00 per item that you pay in the UK or whatever the current charge is.
Many people take out top-up insurance to different levels so that they can reclaim the costs from the insurer. This is far from cheap and if on a middle income can be too expensive.
If you fall into the lowest income group, then you can receive a card that will cover your costs. If you have a long standing illness then you will be exempt from all charges.
Blood tests are carried out by private companies, but you get the results the next day along with the invoice, less the government contribution. The same goes for scans of many types.
To a large degree opticians and dentists are outside of the health system. If you want an eye test you will need to have a letter from your doctor to visit a specialist at the hospital. No popping into Specsavers as they only sell glasses. One or two companies have just started to give eye tests, but they are not easy to find.
The system is very heavy in paperwork, and requires an army of people just to make sure that people get the right refunds.
Go into hospital and you will pay for bed and breakfast, medicines, crutches etc., but the treatment will be free, unless you choose to go somewhere that you think will be better. Then you will pay a lot, unless you have taken out insurance.
The French pay a greater percentage of national income into the system than the UK, but still every year the spend far exceeds the income.
So use the facilities here and you will probably have to pay something towards the care that you have received. Don't need the system and you will still have paid something through taxation to ensure that the services are available for those who are less fortunate than yourself.

 

Sounds horribly complicated and expensive for most people - on face value I would think our NHS is better - but it would help for someone who has experienced both to comment - Yorkie or Toby?

 

I can't really comment on the cost, my parents were both teachers so received near-total health insurance, and I did too until I was about 25 I think?

The quality is exceptional, but they do pay for it, both in taxes and at the point of delivery. It has some benefits, people don't go to the doctor's as often for minor ailments (although they're obsessed with antibiotics over there), and blood tests are amazing. I had to pay for my dentist appointment + work last time I was there, it set me back 600€ and I was in a weird limbo of being too English to get a social security number and as I refuse to sign on in the UK I wasn't able to get any money back for healthcare.

I'm going to follow my parents in getting dual nationality soon, and hopefully have paid off my UK debt in time to escape in a couple of years when the **** hits the fan. The 3000€ I owe my little brother is now £2500, not the £1600 it got me when I first borrowed it. Thanks Brexit.

 

It is expensive for the nation and for the individual, but it produces very good results. The government sets what the outside companies can charge for their services, and also for the GPs as they are self employed. Hobble into A&E as I did and you are seen within 10 minutes, none of this four hour waiting time. Need to see the doctor and you will get an appointment today if urgent, tomorrow or the next day if there is no hurry. My daughter in England frequently has to wait for three weeks to see someone. People moan about the cost, but try to take these benefits away from the French and blood would be shed on the streets.

 

What a non contest it is between Corbyn and Smith.
Shame really as I would definitely vote Labour if Smith were leader pledged to stay in the EU

 

Strange really that Corbyn who promised to cut out the spin, then gets caught out doing just that, thinks that by refusing to talk about it the exposure will just go away. I guess that this is part of the problem with the MPs as it seems he just doesn't want to talk to them about problems within the party.

 

We have a by-election for a Senator here on 7th September - for the first time I'm going to a hustings. I probably will just sit there and listen and let others ask questions.

 

David Davies said the concept of a system continuing "some sort of freedom of movement" between the UK and the EU was "probably right".

So has the harsh reality just hit him, or did he know all along, but didn't want to say?

 

When it comes to the NHS I find myself in two minds. The whole system was implemented by my Uncle Alwyns Uncle and we had many a fine debate over the merits of the current system over what Nai actually had in mind. Alwyn died this year (it's been a bad one for our family hence not been around much (father, father in law couple of uncles and aunt departed) and in his latter years he was in ill health needing a hip replacement. Obviously on fundamental belief grounds he relied on the NHS but it took 3 years to get that replacement done covering a period when he was looking after his wife who had suffered a stroke and could have done with able bodied support. Having used the private system a couple of times in the past but given it up I have to say that the two systems do conflict in that I get the same care with same surgeons under the NHS but sit differently in the priority and therefore waiting list. Aftercare was much better in private care and indeed the food!!! Ideally we would have a system whereby we had the efficiency of the private health system free to demand but this is an idealism. I'm a realist and as Leo said probably more central than right, I prefer to just label myself realist though in that I desire best for all but see that what is the epitome of service cannot be delivered to all. Give me the reins of power and I'd cut waste with thatcher like ferocity in public bodies, set minimum standards and pay and train within the public sector to change the level of standards. All pipe dreams. As it stands I'm still appalled by the wasteage and poor management in the public sector which is allowed to survive due to the lack of commercial consequence created by survival of the fittest capitalism.

 

Sorry to hear about the family Aberdeen - hope the bad run is at an end.
I have to agree on waste in public service. It is why I am opposed to nationalisation - not on moral grounds but on the simple fact that governments and public bodies just cannot run services effectively or efficiently. It is sad but a fact that people appear to need a motive to deliver the best service - and profit is one hell of a driver. Once you take that away, public servants -often with the best will in the world - waste time, money and effort meeting too many demands

 

Have the French really lost all their marbles ? How is it possible to start dictating to people what they are allowed to wear on the beach or when swimming. The Birkini allows the face to be seen (they are, therefore, identifiable), and also allows some Islamic women the luxury of swimming, and therefore actually integrating in some way with others, and the French go and ban them. Would they ask a nun to disrobe on the beach ? The answer to that I think we know. Maybe the birkini will start a fashion - when wet it actually looks more sexy than if they had everything flopping out everywhere.

 

Can we expect to see you donning your mankini any day soon, Cologne? Seriously however, hard to disagree with what you say.

 

Sorry for lack of responses. Heavy work-wise, stag tomorrow, goodbye party for my niece (leaving for Canada for a year) on Sunday. I've been around but limited time has gone to other threads that are a little more fun. Mr Serious will be back early next week.

 

Ask the Saudis! They've got away with dictating what can and cannot be worn not just on the beach for decades. Got to disagree with the burkini being better looking than a bikini... it depends on the wearer but the wife has gone back to bikini from one piece and its much much more attractive, it depends on the shape of the wearer in the first place but my size 8 latina who has a better body than J Lo looks fantastic with her bits just covered