Coffee House

An NHS tax is just another name for a tax rise

17 May 2014

10:51 AM

17 May 2014

10:51 AM

Finding a way to raise taxes that is popular is, for some on the centre-left, the Holy Grail. As the well connected Andrew Grice reports in The Independent today, a growing number of people on the Labour side are attracted to the idea of an NHS tax. Their logic is that the public value the NHS so wouldn’t mind paying more for it. They point out that when Gordon Brown raised National Insurance to fund extra spending on the health service there was none of the backlash you would normally expect to a tax rise.

But the reality is that the introduction of a new NHS tax won’t be matched by tax cuts elsewhere. It will simply lead to people paying more tax overall.

Demand on the NHS might well be about to rise. But simply regularly raising taxes to fund extra spending on the NHS will, in the long run, do significant economic damage. It would be more sensible to look at how to reduce demand for the health service rather than just granting it ever larger spending settlements.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
  • saffrin

    “It would be more sensible to look at how to reduce demand for the health service rather than just granting it ever larger spending settlements.”

    Now, by that remark, is Forsyth suggesting the only realistic way to reduce NHS
    demand is to vote UKIP, stopping NHS tourism in its tracks or is Forsyth pro-EU
    establishment, sound biting compulsory euthanasia for any pension claimants
    found sick?

  • Andrew Smith

    Why not learn from the rest of the civilized world (and I don’t mean America here) and introduce a form of contributions-based health insurance scheme. Those in work pay according to their earnings (in Germany its 15.5 percent), the unemployed recieve it from the state. The patient can then choose which doctor and hospital they visit. All patients are entitled to treatment based on a catalogue of measures agreed on a national level. This is then checked by the insurance company to make sure that the doctor isn’t wasting money. This will save money and drive up standards.

    Or we could go on blathering about the unique and wonderful nature of the NHS, which would work oh so much better only if we were to pump in yet further millions. Has no-one ever asked why the NHS has never been copied abroad?

  • Denis_Cooper

    Off-topic, a sunny Sunday morning, and an article in the Observer quotes German politicians rejecting the central element of Cameron’s EU renegotiation plan:

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/17/david-cameron-ukip-germans

    Certainly worthy of an article here; as is this article inter alia warning that the Tories will have problems maintaining their ECR group in the EU Parliament, and may even have to swipe those nasty True Finns from UKIP’s group:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/european-elections-ukip-set-for-landmark-win-9391409.html

  • Smithersjones2013

    Now if I am not mistaken Health is a devolved function of government so I really don’t think the SNP are going to accept a tax specific to one of their devolved functions being imposed on them from Westminster and I really don’t see England accepting a tax that does not apply to Scotland.

  • Smithersjones2013

    But the reality is that the introduction of a new NHS tax won’t be
    matched by tax cuts elsewhere. It will simply lead to people paying more
    tax overall.

    Putting aside National Insurance is supposed to cover our Health contributions when Labour refuse to control immigration and pander to international imperialism (such as the EU), sanctimonious and malevolent liberal elitism and socialist dogma. Good luck with that one.

    Still is anyone not expecting Miliband the Misfit to get slaughtered by the electorate before his term is up?

    The way the metropolitian liberal elite are managing to destroy any relationship with the working and non urban middle classes nationally in recent months is quite astounding. At this rate Scotland will be independent and Labour will lose the general election.

    • HookesLaw

      loony toon comments as per usual.

      • Smithersjones2013

        I’m criticising Labour or have you now officially joined them?

        Go get some counselling, take a pill or have a lie down. You seem confused…..

        • HookesLaw

          NI is not meant to cover health. that was Brown’s conceit. It covers a range of benefits.
          ‘pander to international imperialism’? yes yes yes…. same old dreary rubbish.

  • Terry Field

    So long as the tax is targeted at the fat, lazy, ill-educated, smoking, drug-taking, junk-food munching, non-exercise taking, spouse and ‘pertner’ beating, innercity-existing, desiel-breathing, lighter-fuel sniffing, child-abusing trash that usually fills the A& E hellholes and the wards full of the chronically sick because so many of them are chronically stupid, functionally and behaviourally degenerate and self-indulgent, then I am RIGHT BEHIND it.
    Even as I do not live on the foggy isle.
    Oh and while they re at it, scrap the insane, soviet-style state-ownership of services model with lunatic supply controls, hopeless political interference, incompetent finance – modelled lune-land non-health-care system.
    That no other country in the WORLD goes ANYWHERE NEAR REPLICATING because they know IT IS MAD.
    As does the Labour Party top brass when the microphones are switched off and they have had a glass or two!!!

    • HookesLaw

      You need to get out more.
      A lot of countries have national health services which come very close to replicating our own. In Italy 75% is funded by the state. Norway it all comes from the state through taxes. In France its a compulsory insurance scheme on individuals and businesses – ie a tax.
      In Denmark it’s funded by local taxation but regulated by the central government.
      Even in America the state funds a trillion dollars worth of health care.

      • Terry Field

        You are ignorant of the world. In France, the insurance system is progressive dependent on income, and only part of capacity os provided by state supply – the insurance top up adds very significantly to revenues. The same with the other systems. I know; I use them. You are just a provincial local Little Englander.

        • HookesLaw

          They, the French, have a national health service and fund it through compulsory insurance. Employers pay as well. Its a tax by any other name. Its a ‘tax’ which amounts to 12% of GDP. Are you suggesting that a political party peddles for votes on that proposal?
          The French govt has responsibility for managing the insurance. The system is state planned and operated. From 2000 France had universal health coverage irrespective of payments.

          It is absurd to pretend that other countries do not come ‘anywhere near’ replicating our health service. The fact that the poor in France do not pay a penny makes it more like, not less like, our own.

  • Alexsandr

    Sorry to post off topic, but please go to the amnesty site and do the email to try and save this poor girl in Sudan
    https://www.amnesty.org.uk/actions/sudan-execution-apostasy-pregnant-woman-mother-meriam-yahya-ibrahim-christian?from=issues

  • Alexsandr

    i have an elderly relative in a private nursing home and is having a peaceful and dignified end with carers and nurses who know her. I am so glad she isnt in an NHS hospital where she would be amongst strangers and just a number.

    • HookesLaw

      The terminally ill do not stay in hospitals. I too had an elderly Alzheimer’s stricken relative in a nursing home for 2 years. I deal regularly with health service workers and to them patients are not numbers.

  • Faceless Bureaucrat

    An NHS Tax will be as much about funding the NHS as the Road Tax is about funding the Roads. It’s a con-job.
    Reduce NHS running costs through efficiencies, drive down Drug costs by refusing to pay Big Pharma’s extortionate prices and introduce a ‘No NHS Treatment unless you have paid into it’ system.
    This nonsense about ‘Free at the point of Delivery’ to anyone who happens to demand it must now end – it’s the National Health Service, not the International Health Service…

  • RavenRandom

    Another left-wing tax… “but it’s for the NHS”; our tax is already for the NHS. Specific taxes for specific services is needless complication and a deliberate obfuscation. Left-wingers seem to take umbrage at people taking home 50% of their earnings.

    • LB

      New taxes solve every problem. From the King’s itch to general economic malaise, the left think you can solve it.

      The problem is that its the state and the taxes that are the problem.

    • Alexsandr

      try over 60%. when you add in both NI’s

    • Smithersjones2013

      The left take umbrage at people having any money they haven’t been given by the left.

  • David Booth.

    Hypothecation of tax will never work because politiciens find it impossible to keep their sticky fingers out of the pot.
    Remember the original purpose of Income Tax was to pay for the Naplolionic Wars and that seems to have “drifted” somewhat.

    • LB

      Simple solution.

      1. Index link all thresholds.
      2. Any tax rise, needs a referenda.

      • Alexsandr

        1 referendum, 2 referenda

        • Kerr Mudgeon

          One referendum, two referendums.

        • LB

          What in heaven’s name makes you think there will just be one attempt at extracting cash? 🙂

  • McRobbie

    I dont see why there is not a basic charge for hospital stays..the bedridden are fed and watered and heated yet still get paid benefits if on welfare and pensions and sick pay etc. Doesn’t make sense to me..its not about being nasty its about paying your way and helping the NHS reduce costs in a reasonable and rational way.

    • Wessex Man

      I do, I was in Hospital in January and yes I was well looked after and the food was good, I feel that over the very many years that I have paid tax and NI, I have more than paid for my stay!

      Whilst having phsyio yesterday saw the number of non-attendees for traetment fro March 183 and April 172. It’s people like this who really don’t give a f*** about costs who should be fined £20 for missed appopintment and if you miss two on the trot a £50 fine. You wouldn’t need to talk about a NHS tax then!

      • LB

        Does it work the other way? If you get crap food, you get a refund. Cancelled or delayed operation, the NHS pays you?

      • HookesLaw

        I can agree with that! One of the problems the NHS has is people missing appointments. The other is actually discharging people after treatment. Its difficult to dischange them is they have no one to look after them.

        • Alexsandr

          also they need to stop the ambulance people taking every patient to A+E. often its not appropriate. especially the elderly.

  • Colonel Mustard

    Maybe it would also be a good idea if Labour stopped funding its vision for the future of top heavy, inefficient, back-scratching “management” structures filled with hordes of ideologue apparatchiks in cosy, taxpayer funded sinecures by inventing new ways to steal money from people who actually earn it. They seem to have gone from Big Government to Big State, Whole State and Nothing But The State.

    And maybe the demands on the NHS (like the demands on housing) would not be increasing so much if Labour had not flooded the country with immigrants in order to “rub the right’s nose in diversity”. Squeeze the population every which way they can, and then charge them for the privilege. Set your house on fire and then impose a tax to put it out. That’s the Labour way.

    • telemachus

      Griffiths
      Powell
      Mosley
      Farage
      Mustard, you have made the mistake of all demagogues in ascribing acknowledged national problems to minorities who are already vaguely disliked by the majority of the population
      The problem is that you stoke the base instincts of otherwise reasonable people
      You end with a tolerance of Krystallnacht
      We are not far from that
      *
      Retract or withdraw

      • Colonel Mustard

        Lets make it absolutely crystal clear. I ascribe the “acknowledged national problems” to the Labour party.

        And like them all you can do is resort to nasty smearing in a desperate bid to point the finger elsewhere.

        • telemachus

          All demagogues dissemble and cloak

          • Colonel Mustard

            I wouldn’t call you a demagogue although you certainly dissemble and cloak (multiple pseudonyms). You are more a self-appointed, blue-pencilling censor, running desperately up and down each thread tagging any comments you disagree with or disapprove of on behalf of the Labour party and almost always tagging the top thread so you can dominate the discourse. You rarely post comments on the blog articles themselves as your ideological fanaticism and extremism is always directed towards trying to control what others are saying.

            Unfortunately it has the exact opposite effect to what you apparently wish to achieve. I can’t think of a better way to incite loathing of the Labour party, what it represents or the madness it attracts, so please do keep it up!

            You can have the last word. I’ve got better things to do.

            • David Booth.

              Took the words right out of my mouth.

              • Inverted Meniscus

                Mine too.

      • Inverted Meniscus

        Get stuffed.

      • 2trueblue

        Perfectly put. Well done.

  • Alexsandr

    I thought NI was to pay for the NHS and welfare payments. why do we need an extra tax?
    there again i would advocate rolling NI into income tax.

    • David B

      The economic reality of combining income tax and NI is there for all to see. The saving in HMRC admin cost along would be massive. The reason it has not happened is that the political cost to the party that does it is also massive.

      The reason is the way NI operates. NI is only levied on income which is deemed to be “earned” ie not on dividends, interest and more importantly pensions! So if you combine the two and increase basic rate to say 22% you give a tax cut to those in work but those living on unearned income get a tax rise.

      The headlines and political attacks write themselves – the granny tax (again), tax cut for bankers! You name it they’ll say it for the political advantage over the economic advantage

      • HookesLaw

        Combining NI and PAYE would I believe adversly affect the self employed so that may be one reason why despite it always being mentioned it never happens.

        • David B

          Class 4 NI hits the self employed very hard. A combination of the taxes should not have a material effect, if properly implemented, as all self employed income is by nature earned and therefore within the scope of NIC. Any reform which reduces the total rate of both taxes will help them.

          • jj155749

            surely the worst deal for taxation is employed and paye. consider what employers ni does to wage levels also.

            • David B

              Not necessarily if you own the company you can pay dividends which gives planning opportunities to manage your tax liability and accumulate wealth without NI.

          • HookesLaw

            In respect of class 4 the payment over £40k is 2%. What is the tax % at over £40k? I am happy to be corrected if wrong – but you see my point?
            Pensioners do not pay NI, indeed they receive money from it. Is encouraging pensioners to pay tax a good vote winning idea?

            • David B

              But that’s the point – the self employed pay tax at 40% plus the NI. Those who are in employment reach the NI limit and pay no more. Class 4 has no upper limit! Meaning the effective rate on the self employed is 40% plus the NI.

              Yes the pensioner issue is why it is politically impossible to combine income tax and NI because NI is a tax on employment – combine the 2 and it raise tax on the unearned income even if the would reduce the administration costs and collection costs of HMRC

    • LB

      National Insurance contributions count towards the following state benefits:
      the basic State Pension
      the additional State Pension, sometimes called the State Second Pension
      Jobseeker’s Allowance – the ‘contribution-based’ element
      Employment and Support Allowance – the ‘contribution-based’ element
      Maternity Allowance
      bereavement benefits – Bereavement Allowance, Bereavement Payment and Widowed Parent’s Allowance
      Incapacity Benefit
      http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/ni/intro/benefits.htm

      ===============

      NI isn’t for the NHS. Get over it.

      If you look also at what NI pays for, you will see that the vast bulk of Welfare payments aren’t included as well.

      The NHS and most of welfare, all comes out of general taxation.

      For the NI fund, they have save enough to pay a few months of payouts, and that will be exhausted in 2-3 years at current rates of depletion. At that point payouts get cut, or taxes increase.

      Notice too that the annual charges for the DWP come to 18% of the fund administered. And the state thinks 1% for a private scheme is bad, very bad.

      • HookesLaw

        A recent annual report (2011-12) said that that the Fund expenditure is projected to increase from around 5 per cent of GDP in 2008-09 to around 8 per cent of GDP in 2070-71. The main driver of this effect is the ageing of the population. So there is a long way to go yet.

        The report also pointed out … ‘The National Insurance Scheme is financed on a pay-as-you-go basis with contribution rates set at a level broadly necessary to meet the expected benefits expenditure in that year, after taking into account any other payments and receipts and to maintain a working balance’
        and
        ‘Changes in contribution levels, in response to the needs of the Fund, take time to implement therefore a working balance is necessary because the NIF has no borrowing powers.’
        It pointed out that this balance is £38,594 million ie £38.5 billion or 47% of benefits expenditure. So your doomsday projections are a bit out.

        Furthermore out of 86.3 billion payments, administrative costs were 1.1 billion. So again you are a bit out.

        • LB

          National Insurance contributions count towards the following state benefits:
          the basic State Pension
          the additional State Pension, sometimes called the State Second Pension
          Jobseeker’s Allowance – the ‘contribution-based’ element
          Employment and Support Allowance – the ‘contribution-based’ element
          Maternity Allowance
          bereavement benefits – Bereavement Allowance, Bereavement Payment and Widowed Parent’s Allowance
          Incapacity Benefit
          http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/ni/intr

          ================

          NI doesn’t pay for the NHS. Wake up.

          For the pensions, the state owes 7,100 bn for past pension contributions. The state has assets of 28 bn put aside to cover and owns nothing to sell to pay.

          It’s bust.

          ==========
          It pointed out that this balance is £38,594 million ie £38.5 billion or 47% of benefits expenditure. So your doomsday projections are a bit out.

          ==========

          Since you repeat it, I’ll point out why its untrue.

          Expenditure PER YEAR is 100 bn. The liabilities are until the last 19 year old dies. So 1/4 of the year in funny assets, against a 100 year liability at 92.5 bn a year.

          https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/269301/National_Insurance_Fund_Account_2012-13_Great_Britain.pdf

          You’ve left all the other admin costs such as paying their staff pensions. Transfers to the NI, Staff redundancy costs.

          What percentage is that of the fund administered? You like using the fund number a big number implying its safe.

          Lastly, why GDP? Why not taxes? Why not point out that you will need to add 10% to taxes to try and make good?

        • LB

          The problem Hooke, is that you don’t realise the difference between income and expenses, and assets and liabilities.

          Until you realise the difference you will continue to delude yourself.

    • Terry Field

      I agree, to ensure taxation is regressive and the lazy and the failed are taxed because they have not been successful.

      • Alexsandr

        but NI is bad in that it kicks in at a very low income, £111 per week.

        • Terry Field

          But the poor – who eat badly, take no exercise, smoke and breath particulates are the ones who get sick. Why should they not pay for their health-care??????????

  • Ostercy

    Good idea. It’s about time we started putting having good state services over Tory profiteers and asset strippers.

    • McRobbie

      It would be good if the state service was good..the NHS is the non caring profession thanks to labours “invest (spend) but dont improve” policies and our education standard is now 3rd world thanks to liebore.

    • Alex

      Funny how most other developed countries have more for-profit providers and also better health outcomes than the UK then, isn’t it.

      • Ostercy

        (a) Selective facts are selective and (b) I don’t care what they do in other countries. The NHS is a great and successful (and very popular) British institution and spivs and ideologues want to destroy it.

        • RavenRandom

          Any proof of that or is it just prejudice. I note my local hospitals are all still NHS and still here.

        • LB

          Well, explain why the NHS says 15,000 are killed each year from bad kidney management.

          • Ostercy

            Even if that figure is accurate which I doubt, I’m sure privatising the NHS would make it much worse.

            • LB

              http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/apr/22/avoidable-deaths-acute-kidney-injury

              Research finds acute kidney injury costs more than £1bn every year, and is responsible for at least 15,000 deaths annually

              http://www.england.nhs.uk/ourwork/patientsafety/akiprogramme/

              Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) is an emerging global healthcare issue. As health care increases in complexity, the interaction between long term medical conditions, medication and inter-current illness are too often complicated by AKI. It is estimated that one in five emergency admissions into hospital are associated with AKI (Wang et al, 2012), that up to 100,000 deaths in secondary care are associated with AKI and that 1/4 to 1/3 have the potential to be prevented (National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death (NCEPOD) Adding Insult to Injury 2009).

              ==============

              You are wrong. This is just one cause.

              The problem with the NHS is structural. The three legs, of supplier, insurer and regulator are combined. They connive to the detriment of the patient.

              Look at any pair and ask the question, what’s the conflict of interest.

              Perhaps next you will be suggesting that the police investigate themselves.

              • Ostercy

                Like a quack doctor your remedies will worsen the disease.

                • LB

                  Why? So you and your NHS can carry on killing? With PPI out of the way, the claims companies will move on to the NHS. That will be the end of it.

                  For the solutions to the mess and the slaughter, you have to look around the world for systems that work. The US is out. It’s a crap system, even with Obama care. Expensive and it doesn’t work for all.

                  However, if you look at the Swiss system, it does work and it produces much better care affordable compared to the UK. The reason is the three legs are split. It also has the necessary feature, everyone gets cover at the agreed price, even if they are high risk high cost patients.

                  Just as a pointer. Don’t go near the PRU in Orpington. It’s crap.

                • Ostercy

                  “Me and my NHS?” For the third time, deaths would be worse without our NHS, if it was broken up and sold off. I know you disagree, so no need to repeat yourself.

                • LB

                  No they won’t. The reason is that if you separate insurer, regulator and supplier, the conflicts of interest that harm patients go.

                  Take the AKI example. 15K patients killed and their relatives have to pick up the pieces. The NHS washes their hands of their mistakes.

                  Separation means that the regulator goes in, and gets the doctors. The legal system goes in and gets compensation for the victims. The insurer who is paying for the mess at that point, goes after the doctors and gets them to sort their act out. The patient, or the victims benefit.

                  Or post code lottery. That disappears. The doctors decide and treat, and send the bill to the insurer. The NHS currrently says, sorry doctors, don’t treat the patient. Don’t give them the treatment they need. Hence deaths go up.

                  Heck they even have a protocol for killing off patients. The Liverpool Care Pathway. Get rid of the expensive cases.

                • Ostercy

                  That is merely you repeating what you believe. Repeating it doesn’t make it any more convincing.

              • HookesLaw

                The fact that these deaths occur is not in dispute – it used to be called acute renal failure. The question is, are they avoidable and is the NHS any different from other health services.

                ‘Severe acute kidney injuries are becoming more common in the United
                States, rising 10 percent per year and doubling over the last decade’
                ie in private healthcare America.
                http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2012/12/13267/severe-acute-kidney-injuries-rise-rapidly-nationwide

                I have to say I take a jaundiced view of all scientific/university reports these days. The global warming scam shows that low self interest is rife in the sciemntific community.

          • Alexsandr

            lets be explicit. bad kidney management is negligence keeping patients hydrated.

        • Inverted Meniscus

          Tell that to 1,200 people who died unnecessarily at Mid Staffs. Complacent rubbish.

          • Ostercy

            Can I recommend you read the Twitter feed of Gabriel Scally (@GabrielScally) about the lies and distortion surrounding the Mid Staffs tragedy? You wouldn’t want to be complacent would you?

            • Inverted Meniscus

              Ah so the report was wrong, the scathing criticisms don’t exist and best of all, nobody died. What a relief.

              • Ostercy

                I’m guessing you didn’t bother.

    • LB

      So on the asset stripping front.

      Explain how the welfare state owes 7,100 bn for pensions, but only has 28 bn in the fund.

      That’s asset stripping on a level that is incomprehensible.

      OH, I get it. If Labour assets strips, its a good thing. You get the assets that have been stripped. Profiting from asset stripping is OK if Labour does it.

      • Ostercy

        I’m not defending New Labour. Labour today needs to apologise for allowing Tory ideas about marketisation and privatisation into the NHS. Ask Labour, not me.

        • LB

          NHS needs breaking up. You cannot have supplier, regulator and insurer combined without damaging the patients.

          • Ostercy

            Spouting ideology is only convincing to people in the same cult.

            • LB

              You’re the one who is the ideologue because you’ve bought in to the NHS religion that only the NHS can deliver.

              Hence 15,000 deaths plus from AKI. You didn’t believe it because it would hit at your religious belief in the NHS. You believe the NHS is good, so the NHS can’t kill 15K plus, and you go into denial mode. That’s religion.

              Take one example. Those 15K deaths from one cause. Are there 15K payouts to the relatives of those killed? Nope. The reason is conflict of interest. It’s not in the medical staffs interests for their to be a payout. It’s not in the insurance element of the NHS interest to pay out. And since the regulator is all the same, they won’t regulate either. So the patient and their relatives get screwed.

              Another example of your religious beliefs is Stafford. Lets pick the Guardian as its a left wing view on it.

              http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/feb/06/mid-staffs-hospital-scandal-guide

              An estimated 400-1,200 patients died as a result of poor care over the 50 months between January 2005 and March 2009

              Julie Bailey, whose 86-year-old mother Bella died in the hospital as a result of poor care in late 2007, also played a key role in exposing the Mid Staffs scandal.

              Now look at people like you and what they did to Julie.

              http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-25570725

              She said she was “hurt” by comments made on the Support Stafford Hospital Facebook page which accused her of “wrecking health services in the town”.

              One post also said her award was a “complete insult” to hospital staff.

              That will be the hospital staff that killed all those people.

              • Ostercy

                Can I recommend the Twitter feed of Gabriel Scally @GabrielScally? He’s nailed a lots of the right wing lies and distortion about Mid Staffs.

          • HookesLaw

            There is no logic to what you say. The situation would be no different with compulsory insurance. There are zero votes in saying break up the NHS and everyone pay more for insurnace costs than they would get back in tax and the old and childrren would still be paid for by the state taxes.
            The notion that France and Germany do not have a national health service is daft. they do – its paid by compulsory insurance by employees and employers. In some places they have to pay top ups to get better service.

      • HookesLaw

        You talk endless gibberish. The state does not own any money for pensions – pensions are paid for out of the contributions being paid in. There is a £40ish billion fund to cover the fluctuations in changes between payments and contributions.
        You are a fool.

    • manonthebus

      You have absolutely no idea. Millions of people in this country pay nothing towards the public services they consume. And you would like those of us who pay for everything to pay a little more for you. Of course you would!

      • Ostercy

        This is probably as waste of time but saying that people who disagree with you have “absolutely no idea” makes you sound a bit silly. I probably earn more than you and pay more tax than you. And I’d happily pay a hypothecated extra 1-2% on income tax to help the NHS. That’s what being a British patriot is all about.

        • Fergus Pickering

          But how do you know where it would go? OPh, you trust he politicians? Gotcha!

          • Ostercy

            I’d rather vote for politicians who try not to mess up the NHS rather than those who set out to mess it up.

            • Inverted Meniscus

              Fatuous. Nobody actually sets out to destroy the NHS.

              • Ostercy

                How naive.

Close