2016 budget thoughts.....

N1AK

michaels wrote: »

Aren't all the above called 'politics' rather than 'economics'?

Only if you ascribe to the rather naive view that something can't be both.

caronoel

N1AK wrote: »

Discouraging 'time wasting' appointments by adding a cost also seems like trying to deal with a symptom rather than the cause. The research I've seen shows that it is lonely elderly people who make up the largest number of cases; surely we can do better than trying to further isolate vulnerable lonely people as a way to resolve this.

A nominal charge would address precisely this sort of misallocation of resources.

If someone elderly or lonely needs a chat, there are plenty of churches and charities they can turn to, rather than abusing the NHS

N1AK wrote: »

As to other time wasters, we already have examples of considerable costs caused by people using A&E for non-critical issues (so you'd need to work out a penalty mechanism here as well).

Do as they do in the Republic of Ireland: low level of charge for A&E if you have been referred by your GP, and a higher level charge if you present without a referral letter. Genuine emergencies not charged.

Funnily enough, that system seems to work.

wotsthat

I quite like the idea of a £10 charge to make an appointment with a GP refundable when you turn up. The biggest problem I see with it is that the people who are least likely to turn up will be exempted anyway.

As far as time wasting appointments I have an example in my MIL. She goes to the doctors about 1 - 2 times a week (her mother did too) for various problems both real and imagined. The buses she catches have changed and it's now more inconvenient so she's down to once a month. She's trying to get her housing association to rehouse her so she can be closer to the surgery.

She doesn't need to be charged. She needs the GP to (tactfully) tell her she's wasting time and money and she'd be better off taking her fat dog for a walk every now and again rather than getting excited about scoring for the Holy Grail - a hospital appointment!

mwpt

wotsthat wrote: »

I quite like the idea of a £10 charge to make an appointment with a GP refundable when you turn up. The biggest problem I see with it is that the people who are least likely to turn up will be exempted anyway.

As far as time wasting appointments I have an example in my MIL. She goes to the doctors about 1 - 2 times a week (her mother did too) for various problems both real and imagined. The buses she catches have changed and it's now more inconvenient so she's down to once a month. She's trying to get her housing association to rehouse her so she can be closer to the surgery.

She doesn't need to be charged. She needs the GP to (tactfully) tell her she's wasting time and money and she'd be better off taking her fat dog for a walk every now and again rather than getting excited about scoring for the Holy Grail - a hospital appointment!

Sounds exactly like she does need to be charged. People respond very well to costs like this. Not so well just being told, "don't come back so often".

caronoel

wotsthat wrote: »

I quite like the idea of a £10 charge to make an appointment with a GP refundable when you turn up. The biggest problem I see with it is that the people who are least likely to turn up will be exempted anyway.

As far as time wasting appointments I have an example in my MIL. She goes to the doctors about 1 - 2 times a week (her mother did too) for various problems both real and imagined. The buses she catches have changed and it's now more inconvenient so she's down to once a month. She's trying to get her housing association to rehouse her so she can be closer to the surgery.

She doesn't need to be charged. She needs the GP to (tactfully) tell her she's wasting time and money and she'd be better off taking her fat dog for a walk every now and again rather than getting excited about scoring for the Holy Grail - a hospital appointment!

Your MIL is exactly the sort of person who needs to be charged.

Small wonder its almost impossible to get a convenient appointment for so many genuine patients.

If she's paying a tenner a pop, she will soon reconsider the need to present so often.

wotsthat

mwpt wrote: »

Sounds exactly like she does need to be charged. People respond very well to costs like this. Not so well just being told, "don't come back so often".

I agree but she's a poor impoverished pensioner living on benefits - never in a million years would she be charged.

As far as I'm aware her GP has never even mentioned that maybe, just possibly, she doesn't need to visit quite so often. GP's surgeries, as far as I can tell, are burdened with people like this.

The obvious first step is for GP's to mention their concerns to the patient - they could do that now but I expect most bottle it and roll their eyes when the malingerer has left. It requires the utmost tact because you don't want people to be scared to present themselves when they are genuinely ill.

It's no skin off the GP's nose if I use an NHS drop-in centre because I didn't plan an illness in advance.

cells

primary residence stamp duty costs have gone too crazy in London. A flat 1% for primary residences should be put in place and 5% for second/investments starting at 0 all the way to a million. Beyond 1 million maybe make it 5% for primary residences.

[Deleted User]

Mmmm......... seems as if things may not be going too well......

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/osborne-set-to-impose-extra-spending-cuts-in-budget-a6898401.html

....or is the Chancellor using the tactic of getting out bad news in advance so that when it's just a little bad, instead of very bad, people think it's ok after all ?

WR