A Labour Government.

How do you know I wouldn't have got a degree if there hadn't been the OU trisher? you make too many assumptions.

Do you assume that it's only Tory supporters who've taken advantage of buying social houses at below market value or do you accept that Labour supporters have quite happily taken advantage of this scheme resulting in a serious lack of affordable social housing. Would you be having a go at them for taking advantage of a policy introduced by a political party they don't support of do you save that for me?

There are so few excellent posts on GN that the good ones are worth it!

rar do you never get tired of cheerleading?

typical GN jibe trisher when nothing better can be thought of!

Do you know how much an OU degree costs now Smileless?

So you know better than the NUT, the Headteachers, and many education experts Smileless2012 must be good to be an expert on everything.

sorry those-bloody predictive text!

From somebody who earlier in this post posted a picture of the child catcher and likened this of us who believed in Labour as children that's a bit rich.

Hear hear!

Who is "she"? The cats mother? If I really believed that the only way of providing my GC and all their generation of a decent education was having a labour gov. with Corbyn as PM then I'd vote labour. I don't believe that to be the case.

I just hope that regardless of who forms the successive governments during the period of my GC's education, that when they become adults they'll be able to take part in discussions like this without resorting to personal attacks but with a degree of civility.

I have said many times that although I totally disagree with the Tory agenda and the sort of society they want to construct I respect those who believe in such ideas. What I find hard to understand is people who have benefitted from a welfare state and socialist policies which have made their lives easier and enabled them to progress but who will happily oversee the demise of the very society that has made them. Do you not understand Smileless2012 that there would not have been an OU if voices like yours had prevailed in the 60s? You wouldn't have got a degree at all. My GDs school will lose 24 teachers if the Tories get in that's why you will be denying my GCs an education. Keep such opinions if you must but at least accept responsibility for what they will result in.

She wants to deny your grandchildren a decent education, but she won't say so, trisher. Sorry about that.

Yes of course I'm grateful that the OU was established, it is as you say a wonderful organisation trisher but the welfare state didn't pay for my degree, I paid for it myself, worked while I was taking my degree and it was very expensive.

I was only 3 years old when the OU first became a manifesto commitment and 9 when it's first vice chancellor was appointed so not old enough to be moaning about anything regarding politics.

When you cast your vote on June the 8th, you will be voting for what you believe is the best thing for you, your children and your GC, as will I. Asking me why I want to deny your GC is such a ridiculous question it certainly doesn't warrant an answer.

Smileless2012 So pleased you got your degree through the OU. You must be so grateful there was a Labour government (headed by Harold Wilson) that established this wonderful organisation. I would Imagine when Wilson came to power there were lots of people like you moaning about how we wouldn't be able to afford such things. Still you had the benefits of a proper welfare state and Labour policies so I would ask again why do want to deny them to my GCs?(I think last time you questioned my assumption that you had benefitted from them)

I am staying with family and can only dip in here on and off - have read all this thread but become totally lost!!!

GG
rosesarered

Shall we all sing 'I have a little list.....and there none that shall be missed etc'

Smileless your posts are sound as usual.

It would be rather nice if there was a little less general rudeness on here anyway
for any reason let alone for simply posting a fact or opinion without backing it with facts and figures
After all, we're not on a radio debate here.

I do now you have obviously done some research to check what you are saying.

If you asked contributors what their national insurance contributions went on, many of them would put the NHS first. They would be largely wrong. There are powers to deduct money from contributions but in most cases section 162 of the Social Security Administration Act limited these to 1.05% of the wages on which employees national insurance is paid and 0.9% of the employers contribution on the same wages. This means that around 10% of all national insurance contributions went to the NHS from 1992 up to 2003. (There are slightly different rules for the self employed)

However this does not cover the cost of the things NI is supposed to cover so the majority now comes from money moved from general taxation in to the general National Insurance fund. This allows governments to use this money in any way they choose within the NI remit.

It is, therefore, wrong to assume that those not making NI contributions have not contributed to the NHS.

I do not have any argument with someone expressing a point of view but the rudeness of pushing one at everyone else without any backing astounds me. You are now off that mental list and I am sorry if I was rude to you in return.

GG "Of course you weren't talking about pensioners Smileless as you don't do facts or statistics do you"; well then why did you berate me for mentioning them.

As for facts, I used facts yesterday in response to mcem's post regarding quantitative easing; I use facts when I choose too. The problem with statistics is they can be very subjective and misleading so I don't regard them as particularly reliable.

NIC came into being when an NHS was originally proposed by Beveridge, it was that money that was to be used to finance it. Before there was a NHS there was no such thing as NIC.

NIC are a form of taxation paid for by an employee and an employer; NIC are one element of general taxation.

I don't expect you to take me seriously GG, I'm merely expressing my point of view. I don't expect, but hope to be responded too with some civility though which isn't present when my post is being replied to but I'm referred too as "this person" and "she".

Of course you weren't talking about pensioners Smileless as you don't do facts or statistics do you.

This is the bit I had seen in the Manifesto.

National Care Service will be built alongside the NHS, with a shared requirement for single commissioning, partnership arrangements, pooled budgets and joint working arrangements. We will build capacity to move quickly towards a joined-up service that will signpost users to all the appropriate services at the gateway through which they arrive.

It is actually talking about a Care Service but pooled budgets. Whether or not this would lead to an new Insurance I can't tell.

I wasn't talking about pensioners daphnedill, I didn't mention them in my post. If someone past retirement age continues working they don't pay NI and rightly so, they've already had a life time of contributions. My post clearly referred to those who don't work because they don't want too yet benefit from the NHS.

Why do you find LL attitude offensive? She's referring to people who fake illness in order to claim benefits, she wasn't referring to you who had genuine health issues, was unable to work and told didn't qualify for ESA. Being genuinely ill and unable to claim benefits is wrong as is faking illness to be able to claim.

Lies GG!! what lies? I referred to benefit fraud and there are people committing benefit fraud so how can that be a lie?

It's those who will not work, who do not make NI contributions but make use of the NHS who are robbing us of it.

All that tells me is this person does no know what she is talking about but expects me to take her seriously. That is extremely arrogant.

I don't know how many times we have to say it but I will try again. NI DOES NOT COVER THE NHS. THE NHS IS FUNDED FROM GENERAL TAXATION. If I have got this wrong please show me.

This is the very reason why some of us talk about an NH&CI (National Health and Care Insurance) which would be paid through working age AND after State Pension Age. It should (hollow laughter) bring a reduction in general taxation and would let us know what we can afford to spend on the NHS and Care and allow them to work along side each other. This appears to be the direction in which the Labour Party may be going to do. When I can find time to check their manifesto I will do so but (I am sorry but it's true) I have a busy day today so it may be later rather than earlier.