We pay our National Insurance contributions as did our fathers before us and their fathers this pays for the national health service - so why do particularly politicians refer to it as FREE? i admit that we don't pay the doctor when we visit him, nor do we pay the surgeon who carries out our operation, instead we are paying regular installments into the nation health insurance which covers us for health problems so it is not FREE - we are continually paying for this service throughout our lives from the age of 16 to retirement age - how is this FREE? I don't begrudge paying this insurance so that when i need it the service is there but i do object to the reference 'FREE' ? WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS?
2007-09-26 23:02:12 · 23 answers · asked by tkf57 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Very good point. It is something many politicians do, telling us that we have a free service when we are paying for it. Then they (Tories) tell us we should perhaps be made to pay for it like the continentals or yankees in the form of health insurance! What is the NI if it's not a health insurance? Are we stupid or what? They should not treat us like we are.
2007-09-26 23:16:41 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
You ask a good ? Read ladymoon post for your ans " we pay less tax's than the yanks-sure you do- This same person posted her and her partner make 200=$400 U S per week in the U S you would pay NO tax's and get money back at the end of the year=family of 3 about $1800 = she has posted many time we throw people into the street who can't pay There are times I think the U K has become the new Russia -I have 1st hand knowledge of y'all And I don't like what I see and hear for the last two years In a few day I can go home and i do not have a high opinion of y'all
2007-09-27 17:42:23 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
free at the point of use is the current term i believe...
for many it is absolutely free, many other contribute during their working lives.
there has been some tightening up recently (with regard to foreign visitors - especially those from outside the eu) - but on the whole, treatment will be given without the ability to pay for it ever being questioned beforehand.
and yes, anyone who thinks about it even briefly knows that the money has to come from somewhere - but it doesn't equate to going to the shops and being able to purchase either a cake or a loaf of bread... so (and again especially in comparison with the situation in other countries) free might possibly be the easiest way to describe it...
2007-09-26 23:47:37 · answer #3 · answered by vetaler 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Its not free but its easier this way when you need treatment rather than having to pay taxes AND Private Insurance or getting hit by a bill for £1,000s.
We pay less in our taxes than the Yanks pay in their taxes AND Private Health Insurance (and then they have to pay excesses when they need treatment and sometimes the rip-off insurance companies refuse them treatment).
If you have a long term illness or terminal illness in the USA you can end up bankrupt. Our system is so much more preferable. And if you're rich enough you can still "go private" any time you want.
2007-09-27 03:32:05 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Every meeting and discussion they have over this Bill in Congress ads pages to it, mostly from Republican requests. This is nothing more than copies people got their hands on at different times in the process. I'm n ot sure what your getting at, but no this isn't evidence of some secret agenda.
2016-05-19 22:20:53 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because its free at point of use - of course everyone realises that we all pay taxes.
And we all pay for it from an earlier age than 16 - remember VAT covers most items you buy from an early age.
In our youger days we are generally net contributers to the NHS whilst when we get old we are net beneficiaries as we generally need more and more healthcare
2007-09-27 04:43:55 · answer #6 · answered by lukee 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
In the U.S. the people and politicians who are pushing to Nationalize Healthcare use the word "free" to appeal to voters. They knowingly create the illusion that the government is just going to pay for eveyone's healthcare with monopoly money or something. If they told the truth and people understood that taxes would be raised indefinitely and most people would be then actually paying for medical services that they aren't even recieving, then there would be a lot more people who would vote against it.
2007-09-27 00:37:39 · answer #7 · answered by Voice of Liberty 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
It's a shell game. Most people don't notice where the money is coming from.
If there is no such thing as a free lunch, how can there possibly be free health care?
2007-09-26 23:08:16 · answer #8 · answered by Chef 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Think it refers to it being free at the point of delivery. In France you pay for everything immediately, this includes any dressings which are needed. Perhaps we need to see how it's done in countries which don't have an 'nhs' to appreciate just how fortunate we are.
2007-09-26 23:31:14 · answer #9 · answered by syberbird 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Actually my fathers father did not pay as there was no NHS then.
However I agree it is only free at the point of delivery.
2007-09-26 23:18:26 · answer #10 · answered by Oregon 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋