Radio 4 and Starmer

eazybee

Free school breakfasts, healthy eating?
Cereal, toast. jam and over sweetened fruit juice?

Please don’t say that! KS promised healthy breakfasts.

LizzieDrip

Hear, hear Mollygo and MaizieD👏👏

Absolutely agree!

👏👏👏

Hear, hear Mollygo and MaizieD👏👏

We had a BUPA "benefit" for a while years ago.
We were younger with no conditions.
It was worth more than that then I seem to remember!

Mollygo

Possibly Scandinavian countries have faith or even see, that their higher taxes are actually going to the services that they need.

Mandatory Social Insurance:
Germany has a compulsory long-term care insurance (Pflegeversicherung).

Germany has a mandatory social insurance system for long-term care, meaning most residents pay into a fund that helps cover the costs of care for those who need it.

Paying higher taxes is not as easy as it sounds.

What it really means in the UK, is that the poorest may or may not pay tax out of the little they earn or the benefits they get.
The middle will be squeezed of every last drop they have,
and the better off will find ways to avoid paying.

Your last paragraph has hit the nail squarely on its head, Mollygo

I'd add that the 'better off' will go on getting richer and richer and eventually there'll be little left for anyone else. Not my conclusion, Thomas Piketty's. The economist who has written the definitive book on the acquisition of wealth in the 21st Century.

I’m guessing eazybee is proposing gruel as the alternative?

eazybee

Free school breakfasts, healthy eating?
Cereal, toast. jam and over sweetened fruit juice?

Sounds fine for children as a start to the day.

Bread and breakfast cereals are fortified with vitamins and minerals. The milk on the cereals = calcium. A bit of jam is fine. The orange juice will probably be a small portion so hardly detrimental in the great scheme of things.

Far better than what many children were having (or not having) for breakfast, I would imagine - and at no cost to parents.

What’s the problem🤔

Free school breakfasts, healthy eating?
Cereal, toast. jam and over sweetened fruit juice?

Thanks Mamie.

Just in case the image takes forever to load the quote was £222.48, covering all treatments, all diagnosis, and cancer with access to a virtual GP.

Just out of interest here is my quote, from today, from BUPA, as a single 66 year old, with no medical conditions (and I do actually have multiple issues, as does my husband) with an excess of £250.

Incidentally, remember medication costs probably won’t be covered under any private health scheme and I have 5 different medications each month and my husband has 6, current all “free”. These costs alone would cripple us!

LizzieDrip

Mamie

Here in France everyone is expected to pay top-up insurance, apart from those whose income is below the threshold. Serious and long-term illnesses are funded at 100% for everyone. The top-up insurance company payments are regulated by the state.

Mamie I have a few of questions (genuinely interested):

Do those on a state pension have to pay the top up insurance or is it just working age people?

Do the top insurance premiums vary person to person e.g. will someone with a pre-existing illness pay more than a ‘fit, healthy’ person?

Do premiums increase if / when someone becomes ill?

Are all long term & serious illnesses covered 100%. Who defines ‘serious / long term’?

Thanks in advance🙏

We pay because our income from pensions is above the threshold
The amount goes up as you get older, but they cannot discriminate (and have no knowledge of (pre-existing conditions.)
They cannot increase premiums if people become ill and they do not have access to the information). If it is a serious illness (Affection Longue Durée) then the state pays 100%. Cancer, heart disease, diabetes etc. These are defined by the state funded cover from the Assurance Maladie.
There are levels of premiums from basic hospitalisation to cover for glasses, hearing aids etc.
The state pays 70% and the top- up 30% apart from in the case of an ALD.
For example, I consult my dermatologist I pay her directly, the state refunds 70% and my top-up insurance 30%.

Cossy

I have some questions too:-

Mamie What is the current rate/s of Income Tax and do you pay National Insurance.

Teazel What exactly is covered by BUPA for £100 a month? That seems incredibly low? How old are you and are you in perfect health?

Last time I had BUPA cover (as a work “benefit”), it was worth £400 a month, it did not cover any pre-existing conditions and had an excess. I just cannot see how BUPA can offer a service such as this for £100 a month?

I was also thinking that the £100 per month for BUPA seems very low, Cossy … interested to know what it covers🤔

I have some questions too:-

Mamie What is the current rate/s of Income Tax and do you pay National Insurance.

Teazel What exactly is covered by BUPA for £100 a month? That seems incredibly low? How old are you and are you in perfect health?

Last time I had BUPA cover (as a work “benefit”), it was worth £400 a month, it did not cover any pre-existing conditions and had an excess. I just cannot see how BUPA can offer a service such as this for £100 a month?

Iam64

The pip and sickness benefits system needs over hauling. Like Cossy, I’ve seen fraud in both. I’ve seen decent hard working people with less disposable income than their neighbours who get e tra benefits due to substance addictions.
We have growing numbers of 18-24 year olds on sickness benefits because of anxiety and depression. Isolating in their. Bedrooms is no solution. The increasing dependence on an unfair system is unsustainable.

Let’s hope Starmer, his ministers and advisors now understand the need to discuss the changes needed with their
MPs

👏👏👏👏

Mamie

Here in France everyone is expected to pay top-up insurance, apart from those whose income is below the threshold. Serious and long-term illnesses are funded at 100% for everyone. The top-up insurance company payments are regulated by the state.

Mamie I have a few of questions (genuinely interested):

Do those on a state pension have to pay the top up insurance or is it just working age people?

Do the top insurance premiums vary person to person e.g. will someone with a pre-existing illness pay more than a ‘fit, healthy’ person?

Do premiums increase if / when someone becomes ill?

Are all long term & serious illnesses covered 100%. Who defines ‘serious / long term’?

Thanks in advance🙏

NotSpaghetti

Maybe we just aren't very accepting of the "social good"?

We are perhaps thinking more of ourselves?

Family in Sweden are happy to pay.

Indeed the concept of the social good has gone out the window here. I want to hear Starmer standing up and saying we all need to care for and about each other and that in order to do that we have to pay.

There is no "vision" for people to get behind as they did Thatcher's destructive individualism. A new vision is what iis needed, but no party has the courage to make this happen.

Here in France everyone is expected to pay top-up insurance, apart from those whose income is below the threshold. Serious and long-term illnesses are funded at 100% for everyone. The top-up insurance company payments are regulated by the state.

Maybe we just aren't very accepting of the "social good"?

We are perhaps thinking more of ourselves?

Family in Sweden are happy to pay.

Possibly Scandinavian countries have faith or even see, that their higher taxes are actually going to the services that they need.

Mandatory Social Insurance:
Germany has a compulsory long-term care insurance (Pflegeversicherung).

Germany has a mandatory social insurance system for long-term care, meaning most residents pay into a fund that helps cover the costs of care for those who need it.

Paying higher taxes is not as easy as it sounds.

What it really means in the UK, is that the poorest may or may not pay tax out of the little they earn or the benefits they get.
The middle will be squeezed of every last drop they have,
and the better off will find ways to avoid paying.

Why do you say that Teazel? Waiting times for hospital are reducing

Doodledog

The trend over the past 20 years or so is to blame people for their ill health. Yes, there are some things (eg drinking and smoking) that contribute to disease, but a lot of it is genetic or, as has been said, bad luck.

It would make much more sense to increase taxes for all than to restrict healthcare to those who can pay and give it free to those with very little money. As ever, that would disadvantage the ‘squeezed middle’ who are expected to work and pay for everything. If everyone contributes the individual cost would be much lower than the cost of an operation or medication if one is unfortunate enough to need it.

I don’t know how much a Sky subscription costs, but a lot less than private healthcare for someone with pre-existing conditions who is over 60 and is deemed able to ‘afford it’ by others.

It does feel that higher taxes will just be absorbed though, with no improvement in healthcare.

MayBee70

The important thing imo ( and I thought the government were going to do this) is to educate people from an early age in a healthy lifestyle*. Which I think they’re doing with free breakfasts etc. It will cost more than Sky subscriptions etc to pay for private health care.
*although I must point out that the older I get the more I realise that a lot of awful medical conditions are just downright bad luck .

I had a quote recently of £100 per month BUPA which included private GP. It does feel this is the way healthcare is headed.

We need higher taxes and more services for everyone, including the resurrection of Sure Start.

Scandinavian countries have high taxes and excellent services. Do the citizens bugger off to low tax countries? No they don't. They have a sense of loyalty and community and understand that you have to pay in to get the benefits.

This is exactly the truth of it Luckygirl!

We need to pay higher taxes.

The trend over the past 20 years or so is to blame people for their ill health. Yes, there are some things (eg drinking and smoking) that contribute to disease, but a lot of it is genetic or, as has been said, bad luck.

It would make much more sense to increase taxes for all than to restrict healthcare to those who can pay and give it free to those with very little money. As ever, that would disadvantage the ‘squeezed middle’ who are expected to work and pay for everything. If everyone contributes the individual cost would be much lower than the cost of an operation or medication if one is unfortunate enough to need it.

I don’t know how much a Sky subscription costs, but a lot less than private healthcare for someone with pre-existing conditions who is over 60 and is deemed able to ‘afford it’ by others.