No payment

midnight_express

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

A quick google showed that back in 2009, smoking and drink related illnesses cost the NHS 8 billion a year:eek:

But, how much do they save by people dying relatively young because of booze and fags. All that money not spent on geriatric health care or pensions or residential care. It's those that live the longest that cost the most.

Credit-Crunched

midnight_express wrote: »

They would be paying less in benefits if they hadn't made 700,000 public sector workers unemployed and if they didn't have a benefit system that encourages people to breed. They'd raise more in revenue from booze and fags if they cut taxes to encourage people to buy in this country rather than go abroad to stock up.
By the way I don't smoke and I'm not on any benefits.

As mentioned these QUANGO jobs (I accpept not all of the 700,000 cuts) were bleeding the system dry like a parasite.

The income tax recevived was no where near covering their 1/60ths final salary pension, overtime payments, flexi time allowance, generous holiday entitlement and minimial constructive output.

Credit-Crunched

midnight_express wrote: »

But, how much do they save by people dying relatively young because of booze and fags. All that money not spent on geriatric health care or pensions or residential care. It's those that live the longest that cost the most.

I hope that this is not a serious comment?

Do you believe that people just..... die.

They do not have four years of NHS funded cancer treatment, free diabetic prescriptions, free eye checks etc prior to passing away.

They are a huge burden, much less than the compartailvey healthy older generation, who are not obese, lead an active life and generally respected their bodies a lot more!

Credit-Crunched

They should introduce an interent forum tax!

This forum alone would fund the NHS, I reckon I could fund a whole hospital at times...I may be opiniated, but I know I am right....;)...er maybe

p00hsticks

Credit-Crunched wrote: »

I hope that this is not a serious comment?

Do you believe that people just..... die.

They do not have four years of NHS funded cancer treatment, free diabetic prescriptions, free eye checks etc prior to passing away.

They are a huge burden, much less than the compartailvey healthy older generation, who are not obese, lead an active life and generally respected their bodies a lot more!

you may find it distasteful, and this whole thread is veering alarmingly off-topic, but Midnight Express is perfectly correct in saying that rather than being a burden, current research suggest that smokers actually cost less financially to society as a whole than non-smokers. This is due to the fact that - in adidition to the tobacco tax they pay - they generally die much younger and so claim less state pension and are less likely to suffer many of the costly medical problems associated with the elderly such as dementia, osteoporiasis etc .

I can't find a link relating to the UK, but here is one for the USA.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-04-08-fda-tobacco-costs_N.htm

p00hsticks

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

A quick google showed that back in 2009, smoking and drink related illnesses cost the NHS 8 billion a year:eek:

But to put this in perspective, in the same year HMRC collected nearly 9 billion in taxes on tobacco alone.
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/research/cig-consumption-uk.pdf

MissMoneypenny

p00hsticks wrote: »

but Midnight Express is perfectly correct in saying that rather than being a burden, current research suggest that smokers actually cost less financially to society as a whole than non-smokers. This is due to the fact that - in adidition to the tobacco tax they pay <snip>

You missed the point. midnight express was talking about smokers avoiding tax by going on baccy runs abroad.

midnight_express wrote: »

From where I live you can get a coach to Belgium for 25 quid. You are legally allowed 20 pouches of tobacco for personal use. This would save you about 200 pounds on UK prices. People wouldn't do it if UK taxes weren't such a rip off.

p00hsticks

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

You missed the point. midnight express was talking about smokers avoiding tax by going on baccy runs abroad.

No, I don't think I have. Midnight express has made a number of different points on this thread. In post #20 s/he said that

"People who drink and smoke die younger and therefore cost the state less in health care and benefits."

and in post #22 that

"But, how much do they save by people dying relatively young because of booze and fags. All that money not spent on geriatric health care or pensions or residential care. It's those that live the longest that cost the most. "

Credit Crunched challenged this assertion in post #24, and I've then waded in with some information that supports Midnights viewpoint (and puts your figures about how much smoking and drinking costs the NHS into perspective)

MissMoneypenny

p00hsticks wrote: »

No, I don't think I have. Midnight express has made a number of different points on this thread.

Now try reading his/her posts in order, on this thread.

His/her first post was gleefully about smokers avoiding paying taxes by going on baccy runs. The rest of his/her posts were just backtracking, following the irony of that post being pointed out.

bigboybrother

mrgross9 wrote: »

My benefits were due to be paid in today, but I have just checked my bank but no money has gone in, does anybody know if there is an error today or if other people haven't been paid?

Thanks

Back to the original post. If you are talking about ESA, there has been a problem over the past two weeks with delayed and missing payments. An answer as to why has not been forthcoming as usual. Mine was due on the 21st March and it took until the following Monday (25th) before it appeared in the bank. Likewise it was due again today but no sign of it (as of 30mins ago). No doubt it will need a telephone call tomorrow for another Monday payment.