I've stayed out of this because it's frankly a ridiculous debate. You can't discuss the idiocy of UKIP without appearing as if you're a knuckle-dragging racist troglodyte or a liberal rice cakes and nettle tea idealist because the whole raison d'etre of Nige and his muppetshow is border control (it's in the fucking name for God's sake!). This makes any discussion about the party inevitably one about racism.
However, anyone who really thinks that Farage has had his words 'twisted' over private health care is either wilfully ignorant, hopelessly trusting of the man or pigshit thick.
Farage's paymasters are about 50 miles to the right of the Tories FFS. Even accounting for any rose-tinted glasses anyone may be wearing about him, can anyone with a functioning shwede seriously think UKIP wouldn't privatise the NHS if he were somehow elected?
... Did you hear the interview ? .. and the thing is UKIP IS NOT GOING TO GET ELECTED .. What was twisted was when asked about his views on the NHS, Farage reiterated that it WAS his personal opinion that private insurance was the best way in future to fund the NHS and that in this future the whole question of NHS funding would need looking into .. this was his stated opinion back when he was recorded in 2011 and he has not changed his mind .. however his opinion is not Ukip policy and I say AGAIN it's irrelevant because Ukip has ZERO CHANCE of getting any say in the running of the UK after the next election. The Independent has 'twisted' the interview to give the impression that this was a NEW Ukip policy. It's not, it is Farage's own opinion and right or wrong, he is entitled to it. My beef is with the way in which a supposedly 'quality newspaper' has distorted an interview with a very controversial figure who will soon be an irrelevancy. I don't want a propaganda rag owned by a Russian 'oligarch' or an Australian born American one come to that, distorting 'the news' and putting those distortions about as if they were fact
I think privatisation of the NHS might have to be talked about now. I just don't think the country will be able to afford free health care for all in 20-30 years time.
I think UKIP will stick around for as long as we're in the EU
I suspect that the money will run out and/or Ukip's backers will fund a party which is more 'English' orientated as opposed to 'British' on the lines of the SNP and Plaid Cymru. There is certainly a widespread feeling of a need for 'change' amongst (especially) the English people. Thing is, the people may need or want change but most can't express what that change should be. As the Chinese sage said: 'May you live in interesting times'
I think privatisation of the NHS might have to be talked about now. I just don't think the country will be able to afford free health care for all in 20-30 years time.
I don't think it's an a question of privatising the whole NHS or leaving it as it is. There are plenty of options between those two extremes. I agree with you on the affordability question though.
If you're going to let in every man and his dog from the EU, why not put a system in place whereby you must have contributed with taxes for at least 5 years?
Or better than that, why not have immigration control
If you're going to let in every man and his dog from the EU, why not put a system in place whereby you must have contributed with taxes for at least 5 years?
Or better than that, why not have immigration control
This, or a watered down version, is what the Tories are proposing .. trouble is that 'new proposals' if and when accepted into law, take years to be put into effect.
God forbid we have a meaningful debate on a health service that has made no progress since the 1950s. Likewise, God forbid we have a debate on an immigration system that has not been reviewed since the 1970s. No, as soon as you suggest that any problems are caused by the NHS or the immigration system, you're automatically branded a fruitcake or a racist.
God forbid we have a meaningful debate on a health service that has made no progress since the 1950s. Likewise, God forbid we have a debate on an immigration system that has not been reviewed since the 1970s. No, as soon as you suggest that any problems are caused by the NHS or the immigration system, you're automatically branded a fruitcake or a racist.
I've stayed out of this because it's frankly a ridiculous debate. You can't discuss the idiocy of UKIP without appearing as if you're a knuckle-dragging racist troglodyte or a liberal rice cakes and nettle tea idealist because the whole raison d'etre of Nige and his muppetshow is border control (it's in the fucking name for God's sake!). This makes any discussion about the party inevitably one about racism.
However, anyone who really thinks that Farage has had his words 'twisted' over private health care is either wilfully ignorant, hopelessly trusting of the man or pigshit thick.
Farage's paymasters are about 50 miles to the right of the Tories FFS. Even accounting for any rose-tinted glasses anyone may be wearing about him, can anyone with a functioning shwede seriously think UKIP wouldn't privatise the NHS if he were somehow elected?
I'm not sure there always has to be a link between someone wanting some form of border control and racism.
You can't discuss the idiocy of UKIP without appearing as if you're a knuckle-dragging racist troglodyte or a liberal rice cakes and nettle tea idealist because the whole raison d'etre of Nige and his muppetshow is border control (it's in the fucking name for God's sake!). This makes any discussion about the party inevitably one about racism.
It makes the discussion about border control doesn't it?
It's also antisemitic, sexist (if women are involved), fattist (so long as greedy folk are involved), and any other 'ist' or 'ism' if the topic being discussed doesn't convey the utter ludicrous belief that everyone is equal. It's about stifling legitimate debate and aiming any accusation you can at people for having the temerity to even dare speak up about issues that they see as being problematic within their communities.
Empathy offence is alive and kicking in Britain, and it stinks.
The NHS is a sacred cow. I think it is right to say that it costs more to run than the country raises in income tax. If that is so, one day politicians will have to be honest enough to tackle the question of whether Britain can actually afford what it currently offers in terms of public health care. That conversation ought to recognise that it is future generations who will be saddled with the burden of paying for the country's bourgeoning debt. So if the youth of today agree that the NHS must be preserved in its current form regardless of the cost, who am I, as an old fart, taking advantage of free healthcare, to argue? But I don't see it as my generation's decision to make or something that can just be ring fenced regardless.
This is a bit off piste as regards UKIP winning a seat though.
The NHS is a sacred cow. I think it is right to say that it costs more to run than the country raises in income tax. If that is so, one day politicians will have to be honest enough to tackle the question of whether Britain can actually afford what it currently offers in terms of public health care. That conversation ought to recognise that it is future generations who will be saddled with the burden of paying for the country's bourgeoning debt. So if the youth of today agree that the NHS must be preserved in its current form regardless of the cost, who am I, as an old fart, taking advantage of free healthcare, to argue? But I don't see it as my generation's decision to make or something that can just be ring fenced regardless.
This is a bit off piste as regards UKIP winning a seat though.
Good post Bryan. Trouble is that 'young people' - I will generalise here -too often act and think from the heart (and elsewhere of course) rather than the head. 'The money will come from somewhere, scrap trident, tax the rich, power to the people'. As 'someone' once said: 'anyone who is not a socialist at 20 doesn't have a heart, anyone who is not a 'tory' at 50 does not have a brain' ... AND, even the most hale and healthy 18 year old will probably be a doddering 'old fart' one day
No survey has ever been conducted that didn't know what the outcome would be and weights the responses to the findings accordingly. I would guess that the US survey was designed to support the Obama case for state funded health care. This survey was not conducted by World representatives and probably funded by a pro Democrat political body.
I would guess the survey was designed to show the US at the bottom, not the UK at the top. It just happens that the things the US are good at (like early detection and survival rates) needed low weightings to get them a low ranking, so by chance the things the NHS are bad at (like early detection and survival rates) didn't detract from the other things the NHS are good at. Another day another political agenda and the NHS might not fare as well.
The NHS is a sacred cow. I think it is right to say that it costs more to run than the country raises in income tax.
Planned NHS expenditure for 14/15 is £113bn. Estimated income tax receipts are £172bn (plus another £111bn from NICS). So not more but a very sizeable chunk.
It doesn't have to be private, just not completely free like it isn't completely free on the rest of the planet. Here in France you get all critical illness covered by social charges and everything else you either pay as you go, or get top up insurance. My health top up costs 27 Euros per month and that pays for consultations and prescriptions (it would be about 20, but I pay the extra 7 for teeth and eye cover).
The NHS is a sacred cow. I think it is right to say that it costs more to run than the country raises in income tax. If that is so, one day politicians will have to be honest enough to tackle the question of whether Britain can actually afford what it currently offers in terms of public health care. That conversation ought to recognise that it is future generations who will be saddled with the burden of paying for the country's bourgeoning debt. So if the youth of today agree that the NHS must be preserved in its current form regardless of the cost, who am I, as an old fart, taking advantage of free healthcare, to argue? But I don't see it as my generation's decision to make or something that can just be ring fenced regardless.
This is a bit off piste as regards UKIP winning a seat though.
This statement intrigued me so I decided to look up the figures, this is by now means a slight on your Bry, it's just interesting how our perceptions are so often distorted by the constant stream of drivel that is written and said by politicians and the mainstream media.
NHS spending 2013/14: £109.721bn Income tax 2012/13: £162.1bn
This is before you consider the income from National Insurance (106.7bn), VAT (108.2bn), Excise (46.9bn), Corporation (40.3bn) and Other (41.6bn) Total tax income: £505.8bn
The NHS is a sacred cow. I think it is right to say that it costs more to run than the country raises in income tax. If that is so, one day politicians will have to be honest enough to tackle the question of whether Britain can actually afford what it currently offers in terms of public health care. That conversation ought to recognise that it is future generations who will be saddled with the burden of paying for the country's bourgeoning debt. So if the youth of today agree that the NHS must be preserved in its current form regardless of the cost, who am I, as an old fart, taking advantage of free healthcare, to argue? But I don't see it as my generation's decision to make or something that can just be ring fenced regardless.
This is a bit off piste as regards UKIP winning a seat though.
This statement intrigued me so I decided to look up the figures, this is by now means a slight on your Bry, it's just interesting how our perceptions are so often distorted by the constant stream of drivel that is written and said by politicians and the mainstream media.
NHS spending 2013/14: £109.721bn Income tax 2012/13: £162.1bn
This is before you consider the income from National Insurance (106.7bn), VAT (108.2bn), Excise (46.9bn), Corporation (40.3bn) and Other (41.6bn) Total tax income: £505.8bn
Not that this will dent the figures too much but are your quoted tax figures for the whole of the UK or for England only? Because NHS spending only covers England and not for the other home nations.
Also, the NHS is not 'free', neither in the sense that someone somewhere is paying for it, and also that there are plenty of services that you have to pay for at the point of use (prescriptions, for example). Also many drugs and treatments that are available (either for free or at an affordable price) on other countries' health services are not available here due to cost reasons.
Generally though, if it is an emergency or life-threatening situation you can take comfort in that you will be admitted urgently and not have to worry about treatment costs. It's long-term or terminal illnesses where the NHS is consistently much worse than other comparable nations.
Just to balance the thread title. UKIP lose seat. (Only a County Council but perhaps UKIP have had their high water mark moment already.) bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-31762491
Thank God for the BBC. I don't know where we would be without a media outlet that are relentless in their wall to wall coverage of such an atrocity: a comment that was made in the context of a documentary about race, over 6 months ago.
Thank God for the BBC. I don't know where we would be without a media outlet that are relentless in their wall to wall coverage of such an atrocity: a comment that was made in the context of a documentary about race, over 6 months ago.
I know, thank God it has knocked Syria and that blasted IS organisation off of the headlines, how boring that was. Have the Society of Black Lawyers anything been informed?
Comments
Just saying......
The Independent has 'twisted' the interview to give the impression that this was a NEW Ukip policy. It's not, it is Farage's own opinion and right or wrong, he is entitled to it.
My beef is with the way in which a supposedly 'quality newspaper' has distorted an interview with a very controversial figure who will soon be an irrelevancy.
I don't want a propaganda rag owned by a Russian 'oligarch' or an Australian born American one come to that, distorting 'the news' and putting those distortions about as if they were fact
I just don't think the country will be able to afford free health care for all in 20-30 years time.
There is certainly a widespread feeling of a need for 'change' amongst (especially) the English people. Thing is, the people may need or want change but most can't express what that change should be.
As the Chinese sage said: 'May you live in interesting times'
Or better than that, why not have immigration control
Empathy offence is alive and kicking in Britain, and it stinks.
This is a bit off piste as regards UKIP winning a seat though.
As 'someone' once said: 'anyone who is not a socialist at 20 doesn't have a heart, anyone who is not a 'tory' at 50 does not have a brain' ... AND, even the most hale and healthy 18 year old will probably be a doddering 'old fart' one day
For all its bad points, the NHS is still the envy of most people in the world - though not necessarily most governments
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/uks-healthcare-ranked-the-best-out-of-11-western-countries-with-us-coming-last-9542833.html
I would guess the survey was designed to show the US at the bottom, not the UK at the top. It just happens that the things the US are good at (like early detection and survival rates) needed low weightings to get them a low ranking, so by chance the things the NHS are bad at (like early detection and survival rates) didn't detract from the other things the NHS are good at. Another day another political agenda and the NHS might not fare as well.
Not rubbishing the NHS, just rubbishing surveys.
NHS spending 2013/14: £109.721bn
Income tax 2012/13: £162.1bn
This is before you consider the income from National Insurance (106.7bn), VAT (108.2bn), Excise (46.9bn), Corporation (40.3bn) and Other (41.6bn)
Total tax income: £505.8bn
Also, the NHS is not 'free', neither in the sense that someone somewhere is paying for it, and also that there are plenty of services that you have to pay for at the point of use (prescriptions, for example). Also many drugs and treatments that are available (either for free or at an affordable price) on other countries' health services are not available here due to cost reasons.
Generally though, if it is an emergency or life-threatening situation you can take comfort in that you will be admitted urgently and not have to worry about treatment costs. It's long-term or terminal illnesses where the NHS is consistently much worse than other comparable nations.
http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/farage-ukip-government-could-scrap-race-discrimination-laws
bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-31762491
I don't know where we would be without a media outlet that are relentless in their wall to wall coverage of such an atrocity: a comment that was made in the context of a documentary about race, over 6 months ago.
Lawyersanything been informed?