LateThanNever
Member
- Joined
- 18 Jul 2013
- Messages
- 1,027
Would your aspiration of funding by the payment of a higher rate of income tax to "properly fund" the service bring in enough monies to fund the ever-increasing drugs bill borne annually by the NHS, let alone other staffing costs.
Many people are already taken out of the payment of income tax, so they as the poorest wage earners would not contribute anything to this scheme, so would you then put a special tax surcharge on them? If so, would both optical and dental services then also be free of charge to one and all, or would you set income bands of combined income tax and national insurance to cover such an eventuality?
What do you propose should happen to those who already subscribe to private medical services?
You have just cited a very good example in the part of your posting that I have emboldened of why those to which you refer to in the banking industry should forsake Britain as quickly as possible and relocate to the financial hub centres of Europe, to escape such strictures.
The wunch of bankers are absolutely expert at losing money abroad and then expecting, us, the home country to pay. We should start local banking on the German model and let the big banks go bust, when they cannot survive without government money.
Meanwhile please don't forget Britain has a sovereign currency and has, so far, created the best part of a quarter of a trillion £s out of thin air for the banks. AKA Quantitative Easing. If this inane and irresponsible government had any moral fibre it could create Quantitative Easing for the NHS or for social care or roads or railways. We don't tax and spend, we spend and tax. The currency becomes valuable because the government produces it (together with licensing private banks to produce it when they create loans) and legitimises its currency by accepting taxes only in £ sterling.
Fundamentally it matters not how the funding is raised (the lower the overhead the better of course), what does matter is how much funding there is.
In 2015 the USA spent $9,451 per head. Germany $5,267. France $4,407. The UK only spent $4,003. We're closing the gap -- 66% to 75% of German's spend per head in the 5 years of coalition budget, but still more to close.
The NHS is far better funded now than it was in 2010, although how much of that is taken off by PPP profits is another matter. Fundamentally health care is increasing in cost due to more expensive treatments being available, and more elderly people requiring those treatments.
The costs of PFI are crazy and now Quantitative Easing has shown us we don't need PFI (which effectively feeds the richest from government coffers) we should stop it. The NHS administration costs are increased immesasurably by subcontracting - these contracts all need specifying and administering - a complete waste of resources. Then those that quote for the contracts all want to make lots of profit - which in effect the government pays for. Madness!
I'm left of centre, but I'm getting very bored with the hysterical "YOU CAN'T TOUCH OUR NHS" whenever any change is suggested. We need to stop worshiping the NHS and start funding the NHS/ prioritising the NHS/ limiting the NHS.
The NHS has been in a state of permanent change for a long time and made substantially worse by Cameron's pledge not to reorganise it but doing just that. And this just makes for a labour force that is under unecessary extra pressure in an already demanding job.