Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2018 10:45:16 GMT
Nobby It's your last point and an emphasis on behaviour after alcohol or drug taking leading to use of the NHS that should be charged. We are not talking about activities that 100s of 000s take part in like sport, and something all of us do at some point like DIY. The behavioural thing is important as it includes costs of policing etc, not just the NHS. Too complicated Oldie. What if you've had a few too many, and being sensible, you catch a taxi home.....which is then in an accident that requires you to go to hospital......Is it the job of the hospital to determine what caused your injuries, and did the alcohol play a part? No. That's covered by The taxi drivers insurance. His risk and he/she pays for liability already |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2018 10:47:00 GMT
Shoot me down, but the tax smokers pay on tobacco pretty much holds up the NHS. That's the story put out by the manufacturers. Ill health costs the economy much more than the headline figure of health care consequences. |
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Aug 13, 2018 10:51:12 GMT
Shoot me down, but the tax smokers pay on tobacco pretty much holds up the NHS. and the same could be said for the tax paid on alcohol ! Yep. Talking of tax, I would do away with road tax and put the price of fuel up. The more you drive, the more you pay. Seems obvious. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2018 11:04:46 GMT
and the same could be said for the tax paid on alcohol ! Yep. Talking of tax, I would do away with road tax and put the price of fuel up. The more you drive, the more you pay. Seems obvious. Agree. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2018 11:39:21 GMT
and the same could be said for the tax paid on alcohol ! Yep. Talking of tax, I would do away with road tax and put the price of fuel up. The more you drive, the more you pay. Seems obvious. Absolutely |
|
|
|
Post by Officer Barbrady on Aug 13, 2018 19:43:17 GMT
Shoot me down, but the tax smokers pay on tobacco pretty much holds up the NHS. and the same could be said for the tax paid on alcohol ! All mildly true. Are you happy it is enough to leave it as is? I see no issue with anyone with drug or alcohol related short term admission to be charged a nominal fee. We can talk definitions forever but by and large these presentations are obvious and easily tested. An ambulance call out without police and with ED check is over a grand, we may be paying tax on alcohol but the individual does not cover their own costs in the acute setting. You pay for it. We all have a mildly poorer funded health service as a result. |
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Aug 13, 2018 21:21:10 GMT
Shoot me down, but the tax smokers pay on tobacco pretty much holds up the NHS. That's the story put out by the manufacturers. Ill health costs the economy much more than the headline figure of health care consequences. That's just not true. Smokers and drinkers pay a massive tax on the products they choose to consume throughout their lives, which I'm not too worried about, but only consult the NHS infrequently for treatment. If you really want me to, I can post a link which justifies what I have said, but no one will read it. Legal drugs are very expensive. Most of the expense is taken up by taxation. God only knows how much they will tax us for weed when it finally becomes legal, as it will, and as it is now in more and more US states. |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Aug 13, 2018 22:48:53 GMT
As I understand it, the tax take on alcohol and tobacco is about £10bn pa each, while costs to the NHS is estimated at £3.5bn and £2.5bn respectively.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Aug 14, 2018 5:08:05 GMT
As I understand it, the tax take on alcohol and tobacco is about £10bn pa each, while costs to the NHS is estimated at £3.5bn and £2.5bn respectively. That may be the case, but does the NHS actually receive £6bn specifically to treat those people with alcohol/cigarette related illnesses? As an ex nurse myself, one thing I will say to debunk my own earlier thoughts is that making people pay some kind of "blame cost" would be impossible to administer. Nurses are only interested in helping others. They don't care about what led you to hospital and they are not accountants! It would just never work! |
|
|
|
Post by Officer Barbrady on Aug 14, 2018 5:47:05 GMT
As I understand it, the tax take on alcohol and tobacco is about £10bn pa each, while costs to the NHS is estimated at £3.5bn and £2.5bn respectively. That may be the case, but does the NHS actually receive £6bn specifically to treat those people with alcohol/cigarette related illnesses? As an ex nurse myself, one thing I will say to debunk my own earlier thoughts is that making people pay some kind of "blame cost" would be impossible to administer. Nurses are only interested in helping others. They don't care about what led you to hospital and they are not accountants! It would just never work! Did you ever work in A and E? I think actually the majority would support such a notion. What basis do you have for suggesting it would never work? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2018 6:41:27 GMT
As I understand it, the tax take on alcohol and tobacco is about £10bn pa each, while costs to the NHS is estimated at £3.5bn and £2.5bn respectively. That may be the case, but does the NHS actually receive £6bn specifically to treat those people with alcohol/cigarette related illnesses? As an ex nurse myself, one thing I will say to debunk my own earlier thoughts is that making people pay some kind of "blame cost" would be impossible to administer. Nurses are only interested in helping others. They don't care about what led you to hospital and they are not accountants! It would just never work! I agree. It would be impossible to administer. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Aug 14, 2018 7:02:37 GMT
That may be the case, but does the NHS actually receive £6bn specifically to treat those people with alcohol/cigarette related illnesses? As an ex nurse myself, one thing I will say to debunk my own earlier thoughts is that making people pay some kind of "blame cost" would be impossible to administer. Nurses are only interested in helping others. They don't care about what led you to hospital and they are not accountants! It would just never work! Did you ever work in A and E? I think actually the majority would support such a notion. What basis do you have for suggesting it would never work? I was a psychiatric nurse. |
|
|
|
Post by Officer Barbrady on Aug 14, 2018 7:06:08 GMT
Did you ever work in A and E? I think actually the majority would support such a notion. What basis do you have for suggesting it would never work? I was a psychiatric nurse. I don't know much about your field but I suspect that most emergency staff would be sympathetic to your notion that it would be impossible but they would not oppose it. Let's say difficult rather than impossible |
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Aug 14, 2018 7:22:18 GMT
As I understand it, the tax take on alcohol and tobacco is about £10bn pa each, while costs to the NHS is estimated at £3.5bn and £2.5bn respectively. That may be the case, but does the NHS actually receive £6bn specifically to treat those people with alcohol/cigarette related illnesses? As an ex nurse myself, one thing I will say to debunk my own earlier thoughts is that making people pay some kind of "blame cost" would be impossible to administer. Nurses are only interested in helping others. They don't care about what led you to hospital and they are not accountants! It would just never work! As it goes direct to the Treasury it wouldn't be ringfenced. You could assume as general taxation it would be split along government spending so about 10%. I agree the cost of administering wouldn't be cost effective and the "free at the point of need" principle would be blurred. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2018 11:17:44 GMT
That's the story put out by the manufacturers. Ill health costs the economy much more than the headline figure of health care consequences. That's just not true. Smokers and drinkers pay a massive tax on the products they choose to consume throughout their lives, which I'm not too worried about, but only consult the NHS infrequently for treatment. If you really want me to, I can post a link which justifies what I have said, but no one will read it. Legal drugs are very expensive. Most of the expense is taken up by taxation. God only knows how much they will tax us for weed when it finally becomes legal, as it will, and as it is now in more and more US states. I am painfully aware of the tax % on alcohol. But until we have hypothocated tax collection spending it on related services is wish rather than a fact. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2018 11:19:33 GMT
As I understand it, the tax take on alcohol and tobacco is about £10bn pa each, while costs to the NHS is estimated at £3.5bn and £2.5bn respectively. That may be the case, but does the NHS actually receive £6bn specifically to treat those people with alcohol/cigarette related illnesses? As an ex nurse myself, one thing I will say to debunk my own earlier thoughts is that making people pay some kind of "blame cost" would be impossible to administer. Nurses are only interested in helping others. They don't care about what led you to hospital and they are not accountants! It would just never work! You don't collect it at the point of need. But through PAYE. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Aug 14, 2018 11:43:34 GMT
That may be the case, but does the NHS actually receive £6bn specifically to treat those people with alcohol/cigarette related illnesses? As an ex nurse myself, one thing I will say to debunk my own earlier thoughts is that making people pay some kind of "blame cost" would be impossible to administer. Nurses are only interested in helping others. They don't care about what led you to hospital and they are not accountants! It would just never work! You don't collect it at the point of need. But through PAYE. Someone at the point of need would have to make a blame judgement though surely? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2018 11:54:40 GMT
You don't collect it at the point of need. But through PAYE. Someone at the point of need would have to make a blame judgement though surely? It's not the job of the NHS to do this. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2018 12:00:57 GMT
You don't collect it at the point of need. But through PAYE. Someone at the point of need would have to make a blame judgement though surely? A judgement, but let's not be emotive and use the word blame. Let's call it probable cause. Where a Dr signs off on probable cause the cost of treatment is then linked back through the person's NI number to HMRC and the cost us added to their tax code. Reducing their net income will have a positive impact on excessive drinking |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Aug 14, 2018 12:05:07 GMT
Someone at the point of need would have to make a blame judgement though surely? It's not the job of the NHS to do this. Agreed. |
|
