3 ms·
>> "they've paid in to the NHS at some point earlier, or their parents had" Yeh, to cover them for the time they were paying. If you're no longer paying your t
by k-mcgrady 12y ago
>> "they've paid in to the NHS at some point earlier, or their parents had"
Yeh, to cover them for the time they were paying. If you're no longer paying your taxes or seeking employment or unable to work due disability the money you paid in the past should't cover you morally.
Edit: There's no doubt the price the writer has to pay in the US is a disgrace and if they couldn't afford it then I think using the NHS is a good temporary solution but the fact that he could afford it but uses that money for a holiday instead is very immoral imo.
- droope 12y agoI know, we should take this person their medicine away, so they can have a wretched and miserable life! Healthcare should not be something you can or cannot afford, we should all be able to access healthcare. It is just common sense.
- k-mcgrady 12y agoHuh? I didn't say that at all. This person CAN afford their medicine. Instead they spend that money on a trip to the UK to see family but also gets their medicine. Medicine they didn't contribute taxes to pay for.
- mgkimsal 12y ago> Yeh, to cover them for the time they were paying So... what if someone is no longer paying anything in, living there, but is a huge net drain? Should people only be covered while they're able to pay premiums/taxes?
- mgkimsal 12y agoHe doesn't really indicate that he can afford it. min $500/month for 6 months is $3k. Trip to UK, staying with family, is far less than $3k.