Should there be an opt-out option for certain taxes?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by WelshBluebird
Of course, with the OP, he hates everything. He doesn't give a damn if other people die in extreme pain. So whatever.
In terms of what he says though, no there should not be an opt out. Simply because that would mean the system would fail.
He says he would pay for private insurance - but I am willing to bet he would not be able to afford it (as is the case with many people).
In terms of what he says though, no there should not be an opt out. Simply because that would mean the system would fail.
He says he would pay for private insurance - but I am willing to bet he would not be able to afford it (as is the case with many people).
Can you think of a reason why cheap health insurance is very rare in the UK?
Original post by Classical Liberal
Can you think of a reason why cheap health insurance is very rare in the UK?
Because healthcare is expensive. End of.
If we got rid of the NHS, private healthcare costs would likely go up, not down.
Simply because private companies currently rely on the NHS for many different things. Including emergency ambulances and saving the day when operations go wrong.
Also they would somehow have to cater for those who cannot afford the costs (likely increasing the costs for those who can afford it to pay for others - which ironically is exactly the principle that the NHS runs on anyway).
Actually, I wonder if either you or the OP know what insurance actually is? No difference really to how the NHS works. People pay in money, and those who need treatment have that money spent on them. So you are still effectively paying for other peoples healthcare.
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by Classical Liberal
National Insurance should be voluntary. It is forced saving. I get so pissed off that the government literally takes my money for my 'own benefit'.
It is one thing taking my money to help other people. But to take my money for my own benefit is an absolute disgrace.
It is one thing taking my money to help other people. But to take my money for my own benefit is an absolute disgrace.
NI is income tax by another name. The only difference is that it is ringfenced for the welfare state.
Original post by Otkem
Because it's not my ****ing problem, and nanny-state proponents like you will not convince me that it is. And as for not affording private healthcare, people afford it in the USA (it's a lie that there are millions uncovered, there are reasons around that, like they don't want to pay for it etc).
Because it's not my ****ing problem, and nanny-state proponents like you will not convince me that it is. And as for not affording private healthcare, people afford it in the USA (it's a lie that there are millions uncovered, there are reasons around that, like they don't want to pay for it etc).
So other people don't matter in the slightest? What a horrible and self-centred attitude to have.
You seem to be suggesting that our nationalised health care system is a bad thing, would you care to take a look at reports from WHO (rankings from 2000).
http://www.who.int/whr/2000/media_centre/press_release/en/
http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
You may note that the UK is well ahead of America, and that all those ahead of the UK also have nationalised health care.
Original post by WelshBluebird
Because healthcare is expensive. End of.
.
.
Nope. It is because there is no demand for cheap healthcare because you get it for free on the NHS.
The only people who are willing to pay for health insurance are people who want their hospital to feel like a palace.
Some parts of healthcare are expensive. Other parts are not. I bet you have never look at a hospitals balance sheet or income statement in your life.
Original post by Callum828
NI is income tax by another name. The only difference is that it is ringfenced for the welfare state.
Well firstly it is not ring fenced. That is a ****ing lie. If it was I am sure the budget would be about to explode.
And even if it was, it is still forced saving into a ponzi scheme. It is just abhorrent which ever way you look at it.
Also, why has nobody pointed out that this suggestion is ****ing insane.
Voluntary taxation? How many people would be likely to actually pay taxes if they knew that they didn't have to. Everybody stops paying taxes, government collapses, Britain turns into Somalia.
We can vote for lower taxes as a nation, but if everyone was allowed to decide their own tax burden, you get a tragedy of the commons, which would obviously lead to near zero tax revenue.
Ya know why Greece is so messed up at the moment? Because people avoid taxes.
Voluntary taxation? How many people would be likely to actually pay taxes if they knew that they didn't have to. Everybody stops paying taxes, government collapses, Britain turns into Somalia.
We can vote for lower taxes as a nation, but if everyone was allowed to decide their own tax burden, you get a tragedy of the commons, which would obviously lead to near zero tax revenue.
Ya know why Greece is so messed up at the moment? Because people avoid taxes.
Original post by Callum828
We can vote for lower taxes as a nation, but if everyone was allowed to decide their own tax burden, you get a tragedy of the commons, which would obviously lead to near zero tax revenue.
We can vote for lower taxes as a nation, but if everyone was allowed to decide their own tax burden, you get a tragedy of the commons, which would obviously lead to near zero tax revenue.
It is not the tragedy of the commons. It is the free rider problem.
Original post by WelshBluebird
Because healthcare is expensive. End of.
If we got rid of the NHS, private healthcare costs would likely go up, not down.
Simply because private companies currently rely on the NHS for many different things. Including emergency ambulances and saving the day when operations go wrong.
Also they would somehow have to cater for those who cannot afford the costs (likely increasing the costs for those who can afford it to pay for others - which ironically is exactly the principle that the NHS runs on anyway).
Actually, I wonder if either you or the OP know what insurance actually is? No difference really to how the NHS works. People pay in money, and those who need treatment have that money spent on them. So you are still effectively paying for other peoples healthcare.
If we got rid of the NHS, private healthcare costs would likely go up, not down.
Simply because private companies currently rely on the NHS for many different things. Including emergency ambulances and saving the day when operations go wrong.
Also they would somehow have to cater for those who cannot afford the costs (likely increasing the costs for those who can afford it to pay for others - which ironically is exactly the principle that the NHS runs on anyway).
Actually, I wonder if either you or the OP know what insurance actually is? No difference really to how the NHS works. People pay in money, and those who need treatment have that money spent on them. So you are still effectively paying for other peoples healthcare.
Yes I know it's similar, but the difference is that it's not GOVERNMENT. I would also pay less than an alcoholic etc as they are damaging their own liver, but in the NHS I pay exactly the same as some old ****er who needs load of care.
Original post by Classical Liberal
Nope. It is because there is no demand for cheap healthcare because you get it for free on the NHS.
The only people who are willing to pay for health insurance are people who want their hospital to feel like a palace.
Some parts of healthcare are expensive. Other parts are not. I bet you have never look at a hospitals balance sheet or income statement in your life.
The only people who are willing to pay for health insurance are people who want their hospital to feel like a palace.
Some parts of healthcare are expensive. Other parts are not. I bet you have never look at a hospitals balance sheet or income statement in your life.
1 - Healthcare is expensive. I am sorry you cannot accept that.
2 - Cheap healthcare is usually bad and dangerous healthcare (aka there is a reason why it is cheap). Not something we want in this country.
3 - Again, what about people who would not be able to afford private insurance if we did not have the NHS?
4 - Again what about the fact the private companies rely on the NHS to help keep their costs down? If it wasn't for the NHS, costs would go up, and so prices would too.
5 - As I suggested, insurance works on the same principle as the NHS. So if you have a problem with paying for other peoples healthcare (as the OP does), then you should have a problem with insurance too.
Original post by Otkem
Yes I know it's similar, but the difference is that it's not GOVERNMENT. I would also pay less than an alcoholic etc as they are damaging their own liver, but in the NHS I pay exactly the same as some old ****er who needs load of care.
Of course, that ignores the fact that most people who need healthcare are not alcoholics and are not to blame themselves.
Original post by Otkem
Like for example, I hate both the NHS and the BBC, but I am forced to pay for both of these (even though I never watch BBC programmes and would more than happily purchase health insurance if the Govt stopped robbing me blind).
If, for example, the BBC stopped transmitting on my TV, I would be happy as I wouldn't have to pay for it. It makes me angry that I have to pay for the BBC when I don't even watch it, and old farts don't pay and they're the ones who watch it!
Also, I hate paying for other people's healthcare, but I keep seeing my taxes going on funding this.
Should people have the right to opt out of paying certain taxes when they don't want to use the service provided?
If, for example, the BBC stopped transmitting on my TV, I would be happy as I wouldn't have to pay for it. It makes me angry that I have to pay for the BBC when I don't even watch it, and old farts don't pay and they're the ones who watch it!
Also, I hate paying for other people's healthcare, but I keep seeing my taxes going on funding this.
Should people have the right to opt out of paying certain taxes when they don't want to use the service provided?
Your TV Licence fee pays not only for BBC TV, but also radio (including the World Service, perhaps one of our greatest foreign aids in my view), online content including reporting and the website, which you continuously link to regarding the NHS, iPlayer, the Digital Switchover, a long-term cost-saving process bringing us up-to-speed with other nations, and many other streams. I do understand the TV Licence argument, reasons for getting rid of it and so forth, but I do think the vast majority of the people in this country use the BBC in some way. I would like to see it go (because it's a very odd tax really), but I'm not sure I'd like the BBC's services to be covered in ads either :s
NHS equipment naturally changes at a high pace because of advances in medicine, pharmacy, and computer science research, which even the articles points out. Their concern is that they're not bulk buying the equipment to save cash, which really is just an admin problem which can be sorted out over the space of a few months and by writing up an internal policy on it.
I am not lobbying to get rid of the NHS. I am just trying to point out that your so called justifications are sometimes fallacies.
Saying healthcare is expensive is really a meaningless statement. Travel is expensive, if you want to fly to Australia and fly tomorrow. Whilst getting a bike to ride 10 miles is not so expensive.
Just proclaiming something is expensive unilaterally is just wrong on a technical level and makes any discussion impossible.
2 - Cheap healthcare is usually bad and dangerous healthcare (aka there is a reason why it is cheap). Not something we want in this country.
Again. Not always true. Antibiotics arguably one of the best medical tools are actually quite cheap when you consider what they do.
Those things that are cheap, safe and very effective are easy to take for granted.
5 - As I suggested, insurance works on the same principle as the NHS. So if you have a problem with paying for other peoples healthcare (as the OP does), then you should have a problem with insurance too.
The difference is coercion opposed to voluntary exchange.
Original post by WelshBluebird
1 - Healthcare is expensive. I am sorry you cannot accept that.
Saying healthcare is expensive is really a meaningless statement. Travel is expensive, if you want to fly to Australia and fly tomorrow. Whilst getting a bike to ride 10 miles is not so expensive.
Just proclaiming something is expensive unilaterally is just wrong on a technical level and makes any discussion impossible.
2 - Cheap healthcare is usually bad and dangerous healthcare (aka there is a reason why it is cheap). Not something we want in this country.
Again. Not always true. Antibiotics arguably one of the best medical tools are actually quite cheap when you consider what they do.
Those things that are cheap, safe and very effective are easy to take for granted.
5 - As I suggested, insurance works on the same principle as the NHS. So if you have a problem with paying for other peoples healthcare (as the OP does), then you should have a problem with insurance too.
The difference is coercion opposed to voluntary exchange.
Original post by SpicyStrawberry
TV License isn't strictly speaking a tax, but I don't think people should be forced to pay for it as a lot of the stuff they churn out is crap anyway.
Opting out of paying for the NHS would be stupid tbh, we're lucky to have it and yet people don't realise it. If you were on death's door you wouldn't appreciate the ambulance driver firstly asking you if you had health insurance before helping you.
Opting out of paying for the NHS would be stupid tbh, we're lucky to have it and yet people don't realise it. If you were on death's door you wouldn't appreciate the ambulance driver firstly asking you if you had health insurance before helping you.
it's interesting that people slate the BBC for turning out 'crap'
when it delivers the volume and quality of new programming it does, when it;s able to take risks with some of the material which started on radio or more recently on BBC 3 or 4
the BBC does need to address it;s editorial slants in current affairs programming it is not as impartial as it might be in terms of 'editorial' reporting and discusion of news and current affairs as opposed to the plain delivery of fact regarding events
much of the calls of 'left wing bias' are from those like the OP who do not have the emotional maturity to have progressed beyond childhood 'me me me i want' fuelled by the likes of the USAn right wing who are stuck in a mccarthyite time warp and the likes of Murdoch who want to dismantle t state controlled media and then get any form of impartiality requirement removed so they can deliver their message through their media properties ...
in terms of healthcare as has been proved time and time again in Otkems threads , he simply doesn't have clue of the reality of healthcare delivery and why the vastest majority of the developed world and much of the developing world looks towards state underwritten universal acces healthcare services , even if providers remain i nthe private secotr
I'd would be great if we had such a system, but without the contributions of the Rich, whom would be the ones to opt out, the system would fail.
Now don;t misunderstand me, I hate the tax burden on the Rich, and I feel many, many savings could be made through our tax system, however, I don't really want to see our society descend into some sort of Dystopian nightmare with people dieing on street corners.
Now don;t misunderstand me, I hate the tax burden on the Rich, and I feel many, many savings could be made through our tax system, however, I don't really want to see our society descend into some sort of Dystopian nightmare with people dieing on street corners.
Original post by Otkem
Like for example, I hate both the NHS and the BBC, but I am forced to pay for both of these (even though I never watch BBC programmes and would more than happily purchase health insurance if the Govt stopped robbing me blind).
If, for example, the BBC stopped transmitting on my TV, I would be happy as I wouldn't have to pay for it. It makes me angry that I have to pay for the BBC when I don't even watch it, and old farts don't pay and they're the ones who watch it!
Also, I hate paying for other people's healthcare, but I keep seeing my taxes going on funding this.
Should people have the right to opt out of paying certain taxes when they don't want to use the service provided?
If, for example, the BBC stopped transmitting on my TV, I would be happy as I wouldn't have to pay for it. It makes me angry that I have to pay for the BBC when I don't even watch it, and old farts don't pay and they're the ones who watch it!
Also, I hate paying for other people's healthcare, but I keep seeing my taxes going on funding this.
Should people have the right to opt out of paying certain taxes when they don't want to use the service provided?
Whatever your opinion on taxes is, surely this basically defeats the object of tax, which is that you all chip in for services that you may or may not use, with the desired effect that it works out cheaper. If you can opt out, you may as well not have taxes at all.
Original post by Otkem
Darling, I went to an independent school, and didn't get a grant at university. Not like those people whose parents can't be arsed to work.
So what you're saying is that someone who lives on their own with children should be able to send them all to independent schools and university grantless even if they work a full time job on the tills?
Get your head out of your arse and take a really long good look at another human being, then at a mirror. They are the same as you. Empathy is a natural feeling that sets us apart from animals, microbes, even rocks. NOBODY chooses to not have money. It's NOT easy for everyone. I am ashamed to even be sharing the same planet as you.
Original post by Otkem
Original post by Otkem
Darling, I went to an independent school, and didn't get a grant at university. Not like those people whose parents can't be arsed to work.
Then your independent school must have been pretty poor quality, you're a brilliant example of why state funded education is a necessity.
If your economical thoughts is the best elite education has to offer
Quick Reply
Latest
Last reply 3 minutes ago
Children to no longer be prescribed puberty blockers, NHS England confirmsLast reply 7 minutes ago
Official Cambridge Postgraduate Applicants 2024 ThreadLast reply 10 minutes ago
Official London School of Economics and Political Science 2024 Applicant ThreadLast reply 10 minutes ago
Official: University of Bristol A100 2024 Entry ApplicantsPosted 11 minutes ago
Barclays Graduate Scheme with Graduate VisaLast reply 11 minutes ago
Official: Lancaster University A100 2024 Entry ApplicantsLast reply 11 minutes ago
Oxford Economics Degree ApprenticeshipPosted 12 minutes ago
Biomedical Science bachelors(undergraduate) in New South Wales AustraliaLast reply 15 minutes ago
OCR GCSE English Literature Paper 1 (J352/01) - 17th May 2023 [Exam Chat]Last reply 16 minutes ago
JK Rowling in ‘arrest me’ challenge over hate crime lawTrending
Last reply 1 hour ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 hour ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
