Our National Debt

steampowered

antrobus wrote: »

It would be better to assume that there is no pension pot.

The national debt might well be £1500 bn. But there is another £1500 bn outstanding in terms of off-balance sheet public sector liabilities.

You need to look at the WGA to see a fuller picture.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/whole-of-government-accounts-2014-to-2015

Are you suggesting that the state pension will be abolished in future years?

I agree that would affect the net cost of obesity in future years; but for now the concept exists.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

steampowered wrote: »

Are you suggesting that the state pension will be abolished in future years?

Please show us where in the last few posts this has been suggested?

A_Medium_Size_Jock

steampowered wrote: »

But I am going to fact check you when you make sweeping, inaccurate statements

Please show me where you have provided evidence of this fact checking?
I provided evidence using links to corroborate my claims; you respond with "in my view", "I'm very sceptical" and "I'm not feeling convinced".
No evidence of your claims then?

Oh and I do mean reliable evidence such as NHS links (like I post); or government links like both myself and antrobus have posted.
No wonder so many posters in this thread disagree with you.

StevieJ

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Please show us where in the last few posts this has been suggested?

'It would be better to assume that there is no pension pot'

A_Medium_Size_Jock

StevieJ wrote: »

'It would be better to assume that there is no pension pot'

Which does not suggest that the state pension will be abolished, and more-so since AFAIK there has never been a "state pension pot".

State pension payments have always come from the current budget.
Unless you have evidence to the contrary?

steampowered

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Please show me where you have provided evidence of this fact checking?
I provided evidence using links to corroborate my claims; you respond with "in my view", "I'm very sceptical" and "I'm not feeling convinced".
No evidence of your claims then?

In relation to each of the specific claims you made, I searched online to find the actual figures to check whether they supported your claims or not. I've always done that with a fair mind and linked you to the actual figures.

In particular you referred to gender reassignment, paracetamol, and fertility treatment - so I found the figures for how much the NHS spends on each; and calculated what impact abolishing these would have on the NHS budget. As per the figures set out in previous posts, the actual budget impact of your proposed course of action is ridiculously tiny - your initial suggestions would cut the NHS budget by less than a tenth of one percent.

It is still a mystery to me what your "fundamental restructuring" would actually involve; or how you would propose to save the NHS significant sums of money. Unless you are able to explain this I think it is time for you to admit that you don't know how the NHS can save significant sums of money except by resorting to severe steps like hospital closures.

My view on this is that there is no "magic wand" which can be used to reduce the NHS budget. I think it would be inappropriate to reduce the NHS budget given that the UK spends less on healthcare than almost every other developed county, and I think you are living in cloud-cuckoo land to think that reducing the NHS budget can easily be done. My evidence for this is the graph I linked you to earlier in the thread comparing the UK's healthcare spend to those of other developed countries.

StevieJ

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Which does not suggest that the state pension will be abolished, and more-so since AFAIK there has never been a "state pension pot".

State pension payments have always come from the current budget.
Unless you have evidence to the contrary?

I was merely pointing out the statement that the poster was referring to. I know there is no pension pot, but I along with steampowered (I guess) assumed that the statement was inferring that (in his/her opnion) one should not depend on a state pension in the future. I could be wrong though

Thrugelmir

StevieJ wrote: »

(I guess) assumed that the statement was inferring that (in his/her opnion) one should not depend on a state pension in the future. I could be wrong though

Plenty of reform options available. Before that day arrives.

The_Last_Username

steampowered wrote: »

My view on this is that there is no "magic wand" which can be used to reduce the NHS budget. I think it would be inappropriate to reduce the NHS budget given that the UK spends less on healthcare than almost every other developed county, and I think you are living in cloud-cuckoo land to think that reducing the NHS budget can easily be done. My evidence for this is the graph I linked you to earlier in the thread comparing the UK's healthcare spend to those of other developed countries.

I have to agree with MSJ and say you are just being argumentative - and quite why you are doing so is a cause for concern.

MSJ has already said:

You insist upon using terminology like "cut the NHS budget".
No, not so.
I would like to see reallocation and rationalisation of the budget.
Funds from cuts such as those suggested *and more, remember* should be used for increasing capacity in the most-needed areas.

Others too in this thread have explained where savings may be made yet you ignore them too, amongst them MyOnlyPost; Kabayiri; and Thrugelmir and then you respond with the likes of "my view on this..".
Which is simply not good enough.
From what we see your view is worth nothing; the only one "living in cloud-cuckoo land" is yourself.

There have been many threads regarding the NHS.
Hamish himself suggested adopting a new model a few years ago in a thread about NHS reform:

So given it appears a mixed system of public and private care performs better than the NHS, why not consider a new model?

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5241957

A little more recently and regarding savings, see:

always_sunny
16-01-2017, 10:55 AM
Fantastically Fervent MoneySaving Super Fan


Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 2,138
Thanked 2,351 Times in 1,064 Posts



What about those EU migrants who use the NHS but the NHS doesn't collect the money?
Quote:
The UK paid out £6.2billion to EU countries to cover the treatment of Britons in their hospitals last year – but received only £405million in return from EU countries for treating ill foreigners in the National Health Service.
Always someone else's fault...

Expat here with an EU passport.
Last edited by always_sunny; 16-01-2017 at 10:58 AM.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/71933724#Comment_71933724

There you go, another £6.2 billion potential saving for the NHS to go with the £6 billion or so already discussed and look!
We're at almost 10% of the NHS budget.
Are you still going to call the impact of these savings "ridiculously tiny"?
Probably not.
More likely that you are "sceptical".
Which is nothing more than belligerence.

And before you deride my post too I will tell you that I at least will not be drawn into argument, as you seem to so desire.

Jon_B_2

Fundamentally, rather than continuously focussing on cuts. Maybe the government could look at how they could increase funding?

For me, it is reaching the point where our party political "first past the post" system is chronically holding our country to ransom. No party of any colour will make decisions or policy changes that are vaguely controversial for fear of being punished at the polls in five years time.

During these cuts we have seen both coalition governments and the guys in blue make further tax cuts, rather than increase taxes.

They are so scared of making tax cuts, they decide to introduce stealth taxes instead which infuriate me even more: -

Child Benefit Charge - Probably the most unfair tax regime for a long time. Couple with one worker earning £60,000 receives no child benefit. A dual working couple both earning £49,999 each receives full whack.

Insurance Premium Tax

Cancelling of 3% diesel levy on company cars - which for many people is not perk, it is an essential business tool.

Do you know what the government should do? Increase the basic rate of tax to 25%, do away with NI while they are at it and add it onto Income Tax, so what are we at now? 37% basic rate?

Make individuals pay for certain NHS treatments - admitted to A&E because you drank too much? £500 fine.

Want a hip/knee replacement costing c£10k because you are morbidly obese - pay for it.

Our NHS system is no longer fit for purpose. Our population is much larger and is ageing rapidly. Create a hybrid model - make emergency treatment free at point of use, but cancer treatments and pretty much anything else - use a private healthcare contribution - maybe a 50/50 split? That way if you lead a healthier lifestyle it will ultimately cost you and everyone else a lot less.

But going back to my first point, we do not have a political system capable of doing this. Governments are only ever able to introduce good news policies.