So what is BTL? Finders Keepers?

SquatNow

But surely she's entitled to ask the man to sign over half of his wealth.

If he refuses to then surely that was his decision to refuse to be treated?

silvercar

Whether your ethics would require the nurse to treat him or not, her ethics undoubtedly would.

Jorgan_2

SquatNow wrote: »

I ask the question again because no-one would give a proper answer the first time

Is the proper answer one that agrees with you, or is there another answer?

PasturesNew

SquatNow wrote: »

But surely she's entitled to ask the man to sign over half of his wealth.

If he refuses to then surely that was his decision to refuse to be treated?

And if she worked in a private hospital, that might be the case. I'd imagine if you collapsed at the door of a BUPA hospital they'd not drag you in, give you a bed, sort you out, feed you, etc.

They'd call 999 at a push.

You're comparing two different beasts. The nurse/fireman are paid to do a job, paid for by the taxpayer.

The landlord is a private individual who has speculated and taken a risk. He isn't paid by anybody. He isn't obliged to provide free or cheap housing to anybody.

SquatNow

The ultimate question I'm trying to get to here, is:
If the nurse is ethically required to treat him whether he pays her half his wealth or not, surely a landlord is required to house a homeless person, whether then pay the landlord half their wealth or not?

Eyesparky

He already pays them circa half his wealth via the Government taxation that employs them and has done through their entire working life. (If you want to dispute the circa 50% don't forget to factor in all indirect taxation and duties including inheritance tax etc.).

SquatNow

Eyesparky wrote: »

He already pays them circa half his wealth via the Government taxation that employs them and has done through their entire working life. (If you want to dispute the circa 50% don't forget to factor in all indirect taxation and duties including inheritance tax etc.).

Incorrect... he doesn't pay HER directly... a very small portion of his money will go towards her wages.

Jorgan_2

SquatNow wrote: »

surely a landlord is required to house a homeless person, whether then pay the landlord half their wealth or not?

If the landlord runs his properties as a business, is he not allowed to make a profit from that business?

SquatNow

Jorgan wrote: »

If the landlord runs his properties as a business, is he not allowed to make a profit from that business?

And if by him making a profit it forces people to sleep on the streets, that's OK?

subjecttocontract

SquatNow wrote: »

Anyway, the question is simple: Is the nurse ethically required to treat someone who forced her to pay him in order that she not freeze to death in the street.

The answer is surely......It doesn't matter, because the landlord is rich and can choose where he is treated and by whom via his private health care insurance.

Its the same old story.......the rich get richer and the poor continue to moan about their lot.

There will always be landlords and rich people. Sometimes they are the same person.