I think a figure should be set of household income less than £20,000 p/a so there is no reasonable excuse why a family over 20k a year can't afford to pay for their own medicines.

There are plenty

There are plenty

 

People have to budget according to what they can afford, if someone over 20k a year needs prescriptions then they should adjust their lifestyle accordingly to take account of that, drink less, cheaper holidays, smoke less, less restaurant visits or whatever, £20k a year is quite sufficient to live on in terms of being able to pay for prescriptions

People have to budget according to what they can afford, if someone over 20k a year needs prescriptions then they should adjust their lifestyle accordingly to take account of that, drink less, cheaper holidays, smoke less, less restaurant visits or whatever, £20k a year is quite sufficient to live on in terms of being able to pay for prescriptions

 

yeah?.... what bollox you talk sometimes craig.

 

my daughters on £27k and she finds it hard to make ends meet. she doesnt own a car, smoke, drink (except occassionally), doesnt have a holiday, eat out... her money goes on living costs in islington.

Suppose someone needs 2 prescriptions a week (£12 ?) and wage is £20k a year (£400 a week) before tax and after tax about £280 a week, are you seriously telling me someone can't afford £12 out of £280 ? as far as I am concerned anyone on that wage can if they prioritise, £20k is not wealthy but it is above national average wage £14,800 I believe it is.

 

Make the cut off point £20k some will want it to be 30k, make it £30k some will say it should be 50k, can't please everyone

are you seriously telling me someone can't afford £12 out of £280 ?

 

Depends on how much rent is, in London rents are horrendous, particularly places like Islington (god knows why anyone would want to live in Islington though, overhyped, and totally OTT in terms of rents, house prices, etc, it's not even particularly nice).. Also factor in water rates, the rip-off council tax, gas, electric, travel costs, food...... Not gonna be much left out of £280 after that lot is there....?

Depends on how much rent is, in London rents are horrendous, particularly places like Islington (god knows why anyone would want to live in Islington though, overhyped, and totally OTT in terms of rents, house prices, etc, it's not even particularly nice).. Also factor in water rates, the rip-off council tax, gas, electric, travel costs, food...... Not gonna be much left out of £280 after that lot is there....?

 

exactly!.... my daughters only 'luxury' is living in a half decent flat, tbh it hit her hard realising that her £27k job was leaving her less well off then me! lol... she could pay for her prescription, but there would have to be sacrifices elsewhere. on the other hand.... i could live very well off on £280 a week, reckon i could live comfortably and save ....

exactly!.... my daughters only 'luxury' is living in a half decent flat,

 

In Islington a "half decent" flat is gonna hit her for around £150-£200 per week... Bloody ludicrous that is, but when you consider that Islington is very close to City where all the slickers work, then you begin to see the reasons why..... -_-

 

Ermm if want to live there you cannot go around and moan about how much you pay, you want to live there so therefore pay for it. If you can't afford it then you shouldn't have even bothered trying!

In Islington a "half decent" flat is gonna hit her for around £150-£200 per week... Bloody ludicrous that is, but when you consider that Islington is very close to City where all the slickers work, then you begin to see the reasons why..... -_-

 

her rent is over £700 pcm.

Ermm if want to live there you cannot go around and moan about how much you pay, you want to live there so therefore pay for it. If you can't afford it then you shouldn't have even bothered trying!

 

yep... agree.

yep... agree.

 

Well now you can stop moaning :D :P

 

And you Scott! :P

Ermm if want to live there you cannot go around and moan about how much you pay, you want to live there so therefore pay for it. If you can't afford it then you shouldn't have even bothered trying!

 

Oh yeah Clare, we should all just tolerate being utterly ripped off shouldn't we......? :P I wouldn't care if I was earning a hundred grand a year or whatever, I'd still say that we were being ripped off...

 

My whole argument is that if somewhere is expensive to live then wages should reflect that rise of cost of living.... Companies in London and SE should be obliged to offer their staff London Weighting or cost of living allowances.....

In terms of the BBC there would be no need for adverts

 

Companies could pay money to sponsor programs and also product placement within programs and that would make enough money to heavily cut the licence fee

 

For example instead of ads there would be at the opening credits and closing credits an announcement - Eastenders Bought To You By Cadburys, that could happen with every program, companies would pay a fortune to sponsor Eastenders, MOTD, SCD and so on and that would reduce the burden on the taxpayer and no need for ads

Utter rubbish. All of ITVs big programs are sponsered and they still have ridiculous amounts of adverts. Also, if there's more programs to sponser, less money will be recieved...

Utter rubbish. All of ITVs big programs are sponsered and they still have ridiculous amounts of adverts. Also, if there's more programs to sponser, less money will be recieved...

 

ITV is about PROFIT, of course they are going to show ads, they have to to make more and more money for shareholders, BBC is not about profit so sponsorship would be quite sufficient, ITV could run without ads and still make money quite easily, but these ads are all about profit for ITV shareholders not fundraising

Setting a figure, isn't all that simple a way of doing it either. Some people have ongoing conditions which are only treatable by a combination of many medications. Sometimes they're just above free prescription qualification and so risk their health by delaying getting some of their medication or not getting it at all.

 

Either we have cradle to grave care in this country or we haven't. Personally, I wouldn't mind if the Scottish Executive decided to use their tax raising powers to put a penny on tax and ringfenced it especially for the Health Service.

 

I've been very lucky to have been blessed with good health. The Welfare State is Labour's finest achievement.

Setting a figure, isn't all that simple a way of doing it either. Some people have ongoing conditions which are only treatable by a combination of many medications. Sometimes they're just above free prescription qualification and so risk their health by delaying getting some of their medication or not getting it at all.

 

Either we have cradle to grave care in this country or we haven't. Personally, I wouldn't mind if the Scottish Executive decided to use their tax raising powers to put a penny on tax and ringfenced it especially for the Health Service.

 

I've been very lucky to have been blessed with good health. The Welfare State is Labour's finest achievement.

 

The welfare state is fine in principle but it should only exist as a safety net for those on low incomes or those that are out of work, there is no money tree out there it is all taxpayers money so the welfare state should not be from cradle to grave it should be purely as a safety net for the poor and disadvantaged. The welfare state is seen by many as a way of life these days and that should not be the case, the welfare state should not be paying out child benefit for the rich, it is obscene that taxpayers money is used to provide child benefit for millionaires while impoverished pensioners are freezing to death in winter, the NHS should also be nothing more than a form of free healthcare for the poor, those over a certain income should be made to go private so that the NHS focuses entirely on providing healthcare for the poor. Cradle to the grave is fine in principle but someone has to pay for it

That sounds too much like the American system to me. I'd absolutely hate to have a system which has very different standards, depending on whether one happens to have enough on one's medical insurance or not, and where those who are using the welfare system are looked down upon.

 

The one section of deductions from my salary which I have never complained about even to my mates is my National Insurance contributions. I would gladly have paid far more although I was aware that there are always people who abuse the system. Finding a solution to the latter, is where I believe successive governments have failed, including four conservative ones, who were dedicated to cost cutting.

 

 

That sounds too much like the American system to me. I'd absolutely hate to have a system which has very different standards, depending on whether one happens to have enough on one's medical insurance or not, and where those who are using the welfare system are looked down upon.

 

The one section of deductions from my salary which I have never complained about even to my mates is my National Insurance contributions. I would gladly have paid far more although I was aware that there are always people who abuse the system. Finding a solution to the latter, is where I believe successive governments have failed, including four conservative ones, who were dedicated to cost cutting.

 

It is a myth that the tories cut welfare or NHS spending under Maggie and Major, both spent way above inflation amounts on welfare and NHS

 

The one area I condemn my party is the fact that services such as cleaning were contracted out to private companies which is something Labour have continued and also it was us that bought in NHS trusts and also league tables but both have been maintained by Labour so we are not solely to blame there

 

I believe in the NHS and the principle of the welfare state but both are unsustainable in their current form and are just drinking money and that needs to be addressed. We are not doing the NHS or the benefits system any favours by simply throwing more and more money into it most of which is being lost in a giant financial black hole so both areas need RADICAL reform as they can't survive in their present state

 

Benefits - needs to be completely overhauled, too many people are taking the p*** and the whole system needs reform -

 

1) Scrap child benefits for families earning over a fixed amount £30k annual family income for arguments sake, there is no justification for wealthy families to be getting child benefit

 

2) No benefits whatsoever for immigrants until they have paid into the system via tax and NI for 3 years

 

3) Complete reform of disability benefit including all claimants both new and existing having to be examined by an independent doctor appointed by the benefits agency, too many people take the complete f***ing p*** and there are too many bent GP's out there prepared to sign sick notes to get people onto disability benefit, doctors that are found to have conspired with false claimants struck off by the GMC and automatic prison sentences for bogus claimants

 

 

NHS -

 

1) Everyone that is paying higher rate tax (me included) should not be entitled to free NHS treatment and instead should take out private health insurance

 

2) Immigrants to pay for their own NHS treatment or private health insurance until they have paid into the system for 3 years

 

3) Automatic prison sentences for NHS trust executives in the event of a hospital in their area suffering an outbreak of fatal MRSA

 

 

The savings to taxpayers with my reforms would run into billions

 

Benefits - needs to be completely overhauled, too many people are taking the p*** and the whole system needs reform -

 

1) Scrap child benefits for families earning over a fixed amount £30k annual family income for arguments sake, there is no justification for wealthy families to be getting child benefit

So my parents are taking the p*** then are they?

 

Don't be so f***ing stupid.

 

With mortgages and petrol costs, all the taxes, bills and $h!t mentioned above that doesn't exactly leave much left from 30k. Its obvious you live alone and earn over 30k because nobody could be stupid enough to think that any family under 40k can survive fine without child benefits.

Edited December 11, 200717 yr by XmasMad

It would be better to base it on how much the household income PER PERSON rather than on a fixed amount really.