[Misc] UK healthcare/NHS funding

[DavidinSouthampton]

Yes.

I would be willing to pay significantly higher tax for better public services.

Me too!

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

pleased about the NI increase then. its not gone down so well in some quarters despite so many saying they'd be happy to pay more for health.

…….. An unfair increase in NI, rather than through taxation, which would have been much fairer………

 

[wellquickwoody]

Yes.

I would be willing to pay significantly higher tax for better public services.

Would I pay more? Yes.

I would happily pay more tax

i'd happily pay more tax if it meant better public services

Agree as do most of my close friends. We would all happily pay more income tax for it to support the frontline workers ie, Nurses, Police, Firemen etc

Me too!

Most people answer yes when asked would they pay more to improve public services. Never seems to be reflected at the ballot box.

 

[BenGarfield]

Most people answer yes when asked would they pay more to improve public services. Never seems to be reflected at the ballot box.

They don’t need too. Tax does not fund public services as it performs other functions in the economy.

 

[wellquickwoody]

They don’t need too. Tax does not fund public services as it performs other functions in the economy.

Mmmmmm......not sure of the relevance. The majority of those who bother to vote do not back much higher public spending, if they did then they would vote for Labour.

And if public services are not funded from taxation, who actually does pay for them?

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Most people answer yes when asked would they pay more to improve public services. Never seems to be reflected at the ballot box.

It is by me.

But maybe people’s reasons for voting are a bit more complicated than that.

Or maybe they get hung up on one thing - immigration? climate change? Brexit? Corbyn? - and every other consideration goes out the window.

It will be very interesting to see how things develop between now and the next election.

 

[wellquickwoody]

It is by me.

But maybe people’s reasons for voting are a bit more complicated than that.

Or maybe they get hung up on one thing - immigration? climate change? Brexit? Corbyn? - and every other consideration goes out the window.

It will be very interesting to see how things develop between now and the next election.

It will be a VERY interesting election next time round. If Labour cannot win that one, they might as well disband.

 

[BenGarfield]

Mmmmmm......not sure of the relevance. The majority of those who bother to vote do not back much higher public spending, if they did then they would vote for Labour.

And if public services are not funded from taxation, who actually does pay for them?

The money is created by the government when it decides to spend it doesn’t have to wait for the receipts from elsewhere. This only applies to governments with their own currency so countries within the eurozone for example cannot do this, nor can local authorities or households.

 

[wellquickwoody]

The money is created by the government when it decides to spend it doesn’t have to wait for the receipts from elsewhere. This only applies to governments with their own currency so countries within the eurozone for example cannot do this, nor can local authorities or households.

By creating more money out of thin air, the government would be devaluing the currency. I’m sure you understand what the effects of that would be.

 

[beorhthelm]

The money is created by the government when it decides to spend it doesn’t have to wait for the receipts from elsewhere. This only applies to governments with their own currency so countries within the eurozone for example cannot do this, nor can local authorities or households.

logic failure of MMT exposed in one paragraph. this government can create money by spending, that government cant. where does their money come from? its nonsense.

 

[drew]

The money is created by the government when it decides to spend it doesn’t have to wait for the receipts from elsewhere. This only applies to governments with their own currency so countries within the eurozone for example cannot do this, nor can local authorities or households.

Oh dear!

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Yes, quite. I meant identifying components of the healthcare operating system that could be flogged off to private operators, rather than flogging the principle. The consequence would be hat the NHS would shrink in terms of capability, and the middle classes would engage even more with what they engage with already - private healthcare. Apologies for not making myself clear.

If the tories can pull off this trick while making it appear to be a way of making things better for a sufficient number of voters, they may try it, but my guess is they will need to let the present systen get hugely shitter, to the point where it looks dead on the vine, before making a move. After all, they still haven't had the guts to flog off the BBC yet, even though some of them are itching to do so, and it could be done relatively painlessly (compared with the upheaval of defenestrating the NHS).

Boiling the frog/gradualism.

 

[BenGarfield]

Oh dear!

Why Oh Dear? After 1971 when the UK abandoned the gold standard, and the pound became a fiat currency, that`s the way the monetary system works . Answer these questions - where do tax payers get their money if not from the government, or its agents, the banks? Why would a government with its own fiat currency need to fund itself with tax revenue it issued itself, or need to borrow by issuing bonds? That is illogical.

 

[beorhthelm]

Why Oh Dear? After 1971 when the UK abandoned the gold standard, ...

we left gold standard in 1931.

Why would a government with its own fiat currency need to fund itself with tax revenue it issued itself, or need to borrow by issuing bonds? That is illogical.

why indeed. yet they do continue to borrow money, issue bonds and take taxes. maybe your thesis is wrong, based on the evidence you've observed.

 

[BenGarfield]

we left gold standard in 1931.



why indeed. yet they do continue to borrow money, issue bonds and take taxes. maybe your thesis is wrong, based on the evidence you've observed.

No, I`m saying the government does not require tax or the issue of bonds (which is erroniously referred to as `borrowing`) to fund its spending. Tax and bond issueing perform other functions, for example, in the case of tax, to make sure that otherwise valueless coins or notes have value because tax by law has to be paid in pounds. Bonds are used as a tool of monetary policy and for funding amongst other things, private pensions.

 

[stewart12]

Most people answer yes when asked would they pay more to improve public services. Never seems to be reflected at the ballot box.

maybe the majority aren't bothered about it but that certainly doesn't apply to me!

 

[Badger]

You say it covers emergency treatment but what about things like replacement hips or knees or chemotherapy etc. You also mention employers do a top up insurance but what about the unemployed, how are they catered for?

Yes, it's not just emergency treatment. It covers medical treatments in a very similar way to the NHS. I don't know the exact details but I think in some cases the coverage is more extensive than the NHS. The extended healthcare insurance is more for things like dental work, physiotherapy, massages, eye care etc. If you're unemployed you still have access to full medical care covered by OHIP.

One difference is it's not a single organisation like the NHS. The overall insurace plan is on a provincial level but within that there are hospital groups which are able to make a lot of their own decisions in terms of staff and funding.

Thankfully, I don't have first hand experience of the hospitals here but I've only really heard good things from people. There is still an issue of long waiting times at ER departments at busy times but I think that will always be the case in a big city.

 

[Lenny Rider]

New NI deductions kick in today, to be fair if the money goes to improving the NHS and looking after the care of the elderly should any of us really complain about paying a little bit extra?

 

[The Clamp]

New NI deductions kick in today, to be fair if the money goes to improving the NHS and looking after the care of the elderly should any of us really complain about paying a little bit extra?

It won’t go to the NHS or social care.

Here’s a few ways the Tory’s could find the NHS without ripping off the working man;

Off the top of my head..

Stop deliberately under funding the NHS
Pay Decent wages for frontline staff and cut wages of top tier admin staff, so the operation is more efficient.
Go after the people who defrauded us during the pandemic
Raise taxes for wealthier people
Chase taxes from corporations getting a free ride in the U.K.
Insist MP’s invest their wealth in the U.K. and not in Russia and the Middle East.

 

[portslade seagull]

It won’t go to the NHS or social care.

Here’s a few ways the Tory’s could find the NHS without ripping off the working man;

Off the top of my head..

Stop deliberately under funding the NHS
Pay Decent wages for frontline staff and cut wages of top tier admin staff, so the operation is more efficient.
Go after the people who defrauded us during the pandemic
Raise taxes for wealthier people
Chase taxes from corporations getting a free ride in the U.K.
Insist MP’s invest their wealth in the U.K. and not in Russia and the Middle East.

My wifes Brother worked for the NHS at the Sussex as a procurement manager brought in to cut costs. He was paid £800 a day. The waste in the NHS is big. One dept paid £1.99 for a pair of surgical gloves whilst another dept using a different supplier were paying £5.99. It took him 12 months to change them to the same cheaper supplier because the head of dept was good friends with the suppliers.
Also he was told any money saved would be reinvested to employ more nurses. He made a yearly saving of 8M. Guess what no new nurses were taken on and the money wasted elsewhere.
He also advised they were top heavy with managers and admin who outnumbered nurses by 10 to 1, no action was taken