UK faces " Randontimeinthefuturethatnobodyknows BOMB" from ageing population

Koicarp

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Possibly, yes. I wasn't really thinking of anything, just throwing it out, but I think you would be right to throw in charging for these services.

They are afterall services you use due to your choice to use them.

Maybe you could throw in sports injuries etc etc. Charges for using A&E when drunk.

Interesting viewpoint, we "choose" to use paediatrics for the child who gets meningitis, epilepsy, type 1 diabetes or cancer, and they should be charged. Yet for you the adult getting a sports injury or an injury when drunk is only a "maybe" for charging?

StevieJ

vivatifosi wrote: »

It's astonishing isn't it Thrug? That change is just round the corner yet so few people know about it or know it is coming. Still, according to Back to the Future II, we're getting hoverboards and Jaws 19 first.

Hoverboards are already here, may have to wait a bit longer for the Jaws film

(Newser) – It is now officially the future: Hoverboards are real. A company called Arx Pax has developed a skateboard-style device that rides on air instead of wheels, and it's raising money to "perfect" the project on Kickstarter, Phys.org reports.

http://www.newser.com/story/197602/the-future-is-now-hoverboards-exist.html

Graham_Devon

Koicarp wrote: »

Interesting viewpoint, we "choose" to use paediatrics for the child who gets meningitis, epilepsy, type 1 diabetes or cancer, and they should be charged. Yet for you the adult getting a sports injury or an injury when drunk is only a "maybe" for charging?

Peadiatrics is NOT maternity services.

Thrugelmir

Chrysalis wrote: »

what such changes?

Only takes a google

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/pensions/article-2632792/New-state-pension-leave-workers-rich-poor-worse-off.html

Koicarp

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Peadiatrics is NOT maternity services.

I know exactly what paediatrics is, I work in paediatrics. However you agreed that maternity, IVF AND paediatrics should be chargeable, on page 1.

BobQ

I would much rather see a more concerted attempt to cut back on NHS waste.

People not being able to return walking sticks and crutches is absurd. So why not put a £5 refundable deposit on equipment items that are loaned to people. If people do not return them it generates revenue, if they do it saves money in replacing them.

We should stop employing nurses on agency contracts and employ them direct when this saves money. It is not as if we are not able to forecast increasing demand for nurses is it?

Let us stop these wasteful, politically motivated change programmes

http://www.kingsfund.org.uk/sites/files/kf/field/field_publication_file/reforming-the-nhs-from-within-kingsfund-jun14.pdf

Graham_Devon

Koicarp wrote: »

I know exactly what paediatrics is, I work in paediatrics. However you agreed that maternity, IVF AND paediatrics should be chargeable, on page 1.

I was responding to the IVF and maternity part, though could have made it clearer (didn't cross my mind that I'd need to).

Obviously you can't choose whether you need to use the Paediatric service.

Koicarp

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I was responding to the IVF and maternity part, though could have made it clearer (didn't cross my mind that I'd need to).

I think on this board you do need to do so. Bearing in mind you want to charge for maternity, at what point would you provide free care to the child? conception? 20 weeks gestation? Birth?

Graham_Devon

Koicarp wrote: »

I think on this board you do need to do so. Bearing in mind you want to charge for maternity, at what point would you provide free care to the child? conception? 20 weeks gestation? Birth?

I don't want to do anything. I was commenting on what another poster stated and agreed that some services, where you are using them through your own choices, could be charged for.

Ultimately full on privatisation would work better than charging for bits and pieces. That's not something I want to see either. But reality shows that going forward, something has to give.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Ultimately full on privatisation would work better than charging for bits and pieces. That's not something I want to see either. But reality shows that going forward, something has to give.

Something only "has to give" if people continue to resent immigration more than they resent paying for NHS services.

The NHS can remain free, and we won't need to slash public spending by 25%, if we simply replace through immigration the millions of missing younger people caused by decades of our birth rate being below the replacement level.



By simply keeping net migration at around current levels, the debt will reduce to sustainable levels without the need for charging for the NHS or slashing the provision of pensions, benefits and services by 25%.



Be interesting to see just how much extra people are willing to pay from their own pockets to fund their dislike of immigration.

I suspect the answer from most will be "a lot less than is required"....