4 ms·

NICE doesn't face the same choices as insurance companies. NICE picks treatments based on trying to get the best results for the whole population whilst only s

NICE doesn't face the same choices as insurance companies. NICE picks treatments based on trying to get the best results for the whole population whilst only spending a finite amount of money. Insurance companies pick treatments based on trying to get the largest amount of profit compatible with people being willing to carry on paying for insurance.

gaius 17y ago
It's much the same from the perspective of the person being denied treatment, having paid NI their whole life.
- Quarrelsome 17y ago
  You can't compare taxes to services, Tobacco tax gets NOWHERE near covering the medical costs that the system has to bear for example. NI is pretty cheap and the only kinds of treatments that are going to be prevented are those that are incredibly expensive, experimental or incredibly rare. You can still go private though. Same sort of scenario for pensions, if you don't save for yourself you will still get a state pension. You will have to live on Tesco value bread even though you "paid taxes your entire life". The defining line is: If you're a UK resident and you're not wealthy and you don't save any money you WILL be catered for: TO A DEGREE. Sure its not always fair but it has to be pragmatic at the edge cases to work at all.
  - gaius 17y ago
    Tobacco tax gets NOWHERE near covering the medical costs that the system has to bear for example. The UK govt. makes approx GBP 10Bn a year from tobacco, and spends approx. GBP 2Bn on medical costs associated with it. if you don't save for yourself you will still get a state pension. You will have to live on Tesco value bread even though you "paid taxes your entire life" The problem I and others have with this is that the person who contributes nothing, by their own free choice, will receive far more than those who have contributed, and saved, and now get nothing due to means testing.
    - Quarrelsome 17y ago
      You sure about those figures? Last I knew they were pushing through legislation about tobacco based on the premise that it was costing the UK too much in healthcare. What is your source? I and others like me have a problem with people like you who do not understand the principle of true charity. No strings attached. Sure I agree that we need to improve the way we provide some of our benefits, there are probably too many people on incapacity benefit suggesting some (many?) of these are fraudulent cases. However where we appear to differ is that in principle I have no problem for a single parent or someone else with "problems" being able to claim benefit. I'm happy to have some false positives if we can help positive positives. I'm lucky with my life, other people need a hand. It is not my place to morally assert how they should lead their lives. I'm also puzzled how you think means testing is unfair. Those who have, have. Those who haven't get given. Do you appreciate what would happen to crime figures if the dole was abolished?
      - gaius 17y ago
        and others like me have a problem with people like you who do not understand the principle of true charity True charity doesn't involve coercing the donor - and the donor is free to switch their donation to another charity that does a better job! I'm also puzzled how you think means testing is unfair Because it punishes those who do the right thing: work hard, pay your taxes, save what you can, get nothing. And yet those (note that I said this in my earlier comment - you seem to have overlooked that rather crucial qualifier) choose not to contribute, get everything handed to them on a silver platter. It's easy enough to implement this: anyone who leaves their free education without some qualifications needs to work for X years before they are entitled to anything further from the taxpayer. Those who have, have Ermm, no, those who work hard, earn. Those who don't, take.

gaius 17y ago

It's much the same from the perspective of the person being denied treatment, having paid NI their whole life.

Quarrelsome 17y ago
You can't compare taxes to services, Tobacco tax gets NOWHERE near covering the medical costs that the system has to bear for example. NI is pretty cheap and the only kinds of treatments that are going to be prevented are those that are incredibly expensive, experimental or incredibly rare. You can still go private though. Same sort of scenario for pensions, if you don't save for yourself you will still get a state pension. You will have to live on Tesco value bread even though you "paid taxes your entire life". The defining line is: If you're a UK resident and you're not wealthy and you don't save any money you WILL be catered for: TO A DEGREE. Sure its not always fair but it has to be pragmatic at the edge cases to work at all.
- gaius 17y ago
  Tobacco tax gets NOWHERE near covering the medical costs that the system has to bear for example. The UK govt. makes approx GBP 10Bn a year from tobacco, and spends approx. GBP 2Bn on medical costs associated with it. if you don't save for yourself you will still get a state pension. You will have to live on Tesco value bread even though you "paid taxes your entire life" The problem I and others have with this is that the person who contributes nothing, by their own free choice, will receive far more than those who have contributed, and saved, and now get nothing due to means testing.
  - Quarrelsome 17y ago
    You sure about those figures? Last I knew they were pushing through legislation about tobacco based on the premise that it was costing the UK too much in healthcare. What is your source? I and others like me have a problem with people like you who do not understand the principle of true charity. No strings attached. Sure I agree that we need to improve the way we provide some of our benefits, there are probably too many people on incapacity benefit suggesting some (many?) of these are fraudulent cases. However where we appear to differ is that in principle I have no problem for a single parent or someone else with "problems" being able to claim benefit. I'm happy to have some false positives if we can help positive positives. I'm lucky with my life, other people need a hand. It is not my place to morally assert how they should lead their lives. I'm also puzzled how you think means testing is unfair. Those who have, have. Those who haven't get given. Do you appreciate what would happen to crime figures if the dole was abolished?
    - gaius 17y ago
      and others like me have a problem with people like you who do not understand the principle of true charity True charity doesn't involve coercing the donor - and the donor is free to switch their donation to another charity that does a better job! I'm also puzzled how you think means testing is unfair Because it punishes those who do the right thing: work hard, pay your taxes, save what you can, get nothing. And yet those (note that I said this in my earlier comment - you seem to have overlooked that rather crucial qualifier) choose not to contribute, get everything handed to them on a silver platter. It's easy enough to implement this: anyone who leaves their free education without some qualifications needs to work for X years before they are entitled to anything further from the taxpayer. Those who have, have Ermm, no, those who work hard, earn. Those who don't, take.