I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS, as I said.
So why should immigrants pay more just because they're immigrants, again?
No you are wrong. Most people do not pay for the NHS, the rich paying lots of tax pays for the NHS and we all get to enjoy it whether we're rich or not. Just because you're not paying much in taxes doesn't stop you getting treated.
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
There is more to tax than income tax. VAT is paid be everyone who spends money on (most) goods and services.
And who do you think spends the most on VAT? Those spending lots of money or a little amount of money?
I don't think a course of chemotherapy is covered by the taxes on a minimum wage job and minimum wage VAT expenditure etc - but nor does it need to be as we as a society have decided healthcare doesn't depend upon taxes for our citizens.
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Not necessarily. A very large number of people pay less in tax than they get from the NHS and elsewhere. A surcharge ensures they are paying.
The justification for the difference is that we want our own citizens to get universal access to healthcare even if they're low earning and not paying tax but why should we be allowing low earning people who don't pay tax in and letting them use the NHS still?
But what if you're a rich immigrant and you pay your taxes which more than cover the cost of your healthcare and you end up contributing more than the average British citizen, you're saying they should still pay more?
If you're a rich immigrant and you pay your taxes and you pay your surcharge then you're contributing to the country that has taken you in. Welcome and thank you for your contribution to society.
I thought you Tories believed in treating everyone the same? * Not forriners. I thought the Tories were the party of low taxes? * Not for forriners. Forriners, no yor plase! You dont belong here, be grateful and give us mor dosh!
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS, as I said.
So why should immigrants pay more just because they're immigrants, again?
No you are wrong. Most people do not pay for the NHS, the rich paying lots of tax pays for the NHS and we all get to enjoy it whether we're rich or not. Just because you're not paying much in taxes doesn't stop you getting treated.
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
But earlier you were mentioning about discrimination. Now you support discrimination on the basis somebody is an immigrant.
Your argument is ridiculous. You pay to come here, you work full time and pay taxes as every other citizen, yet you ask them to pay again.
If you become a British citizen you're no longer charged, so apart from a bit of paper, what difference is there? Why does one pay twice and the other not?
On insurance, it's not really a valid comparison. You don't pay for healthcare twice abroad, you pay once as every person does.
We knew it was coming but I received an update in the post today on one of my investments. On February 14th it was worth nearly £44000; today it is worth £36000.
17% Londoners have had the Rona, according to antibodies tests. More than Stockholm?
Could be enough for herd immunity, if some experts are to be believed due to the heterogeneity of how it passes around in real people (as opposed to the models).
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS, as I said.
So why should immigrants pay more just because they're immigrants, again?
No you are wrong. Most people do not pay for the NHS, the rich paying lots of tax pays for the NHS and we all get to enjoy it whether we're rich or not. Just because you're not paying much in taxes doesn't stop you getting treated.
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
No you are wrong. If you move to a country where they have a health contribution, you pay for your health that way, and the taxes that you also pay are correspondingly lower. You do not pay your health contributions and then pay a health tax on top of that.
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
There is more to tax than income tax. VAT is paid be everyone who spends money on (most) goods and services.
And who do you think spends the most on VAT? Those spending lots of money or a little amount of money?
I don't think a course of chemotherapy is covered by the taxes on a minimum wage job and minimum wage VAT expenditure etc - but nor does it need to be as we as a society have decided healthcare doesn't depend upon taxes for our citizens.
Migrants need to buy in to that universality.
It's not covered by somebody on job seeker's allowance either, yet they don't pay twice.
Just face it, you're pro discrimination and a hypocrite.
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS, as I said.
So why should immigrants pay more just because they're immigrants, again?
No you are wrong. Most people do not pay for the NHS, the rich paying lots of tax pays for the NHS and we all get to enjoy it whether we're rich or not. Just because you're not paying much in taxes doesn't stop you getting treated.
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
But earlier you were mentioning about discrimination. Now you support discrimination on the basis somebody is an immigrant.
Your argument is ridiculous. You pay to come here, you work full time and pay taxes as every other citizen, yet you ask them to pay again.
If you become a British citizen you're no longer charged, so apart from a bit of paper, what difference is there? Why does one pay twice and the other not?
On insurance, it's not really a valid comparison. You don't pay for healthcare twice abroad, you pay once as every person does.
Its not discrimination its free CHOICE and I believe in choice.
Everyone in this country who is a citizen is treated the same universally.
Anyone who CHOOSES to come here is welcome. There is a fee to be paid to contribute to society to buy in to our universal healthcare system.
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS, as I said.
So why should immigrants pay more just because they're immigrants, again?
No you are wrong. Most people do not pay for the NHS, the rich paying lots of tax pays for the NHS and we all get to enjoy it whether we're rich or not. Just because you're not paying much in taxes doesn't stop you getting treated.
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
But earlier you were mentioning about discrimination. Now you support discrimination on the basis somebody is an immigrant.
Your argument is ridiculous. You pay to come here, you work full time and pay taxes as every other citizen, yet you ask them to pay again.
If you become a British citizen you're no longer charged, so apart from a bit of paper, what difference is there? Why does one pay twice and the other not?
On insurance, it's not really a valid comparison. You don't pay for healthcare twice abroad, you pay once as every person does.
Its not discrimination its free CHOICE and I believe in choice.
Everyone in this country who is a citizen is treated the same universally.
Anyone who CHOOSES to come here is welcome. There is a fee to be paid to contribute to society to buy in to our universal healthcare system.
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS, as I said.
So why should immigrants pay more just because they're immigrants, again?
No you are wrong. Most people do not pay for the NHS, the rich paying lots of tax pays for the NHS and we all get to enjoy it whether we're rich or not. Just because you're not paying much in taxes doesn't stop you getting treated.
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
But earlier you were mentioning about discrimination. Now you support discrimination on the basis somebody is an immigrant.
Your argument is ridiculous. You pay to come here, you work full time and pay taxes as every other citizen, yet you ask them to pay again.
If you become a British citizen you're no longer charged, so apart from a bit of paper, what difference is there? Why does one pay twice and the other not?
On insurance, it's not really a valid comparison. You don't pay for healthcare twice abroad, you pay once as every person does.
Its not discrimination its free CHOICE and I believe in choice.
Everyone in this country who is a citizen is treated the same universally.
Anyone who CHOOSES to come here is welcome. There is a fee to be paid to contribute to society to buy in to our universal healthcare system.
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS, as I said.
So why should immigrants pay more just because they're immigrants, again?
No you are wrong. Most people do not pay for the NHS, the rich paying lots of tax pays for the NHS and we all get to enjoy it whether we're rich or not. Just because you're not paying much in taxes doesn't stop you getting treated.
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
But earlier you were mentioning about discrimination. Now you support discrimination on the basis somebody is an immigrant.
Your argument is ridiculous. You pay to come here, you work full time and pay taxes as every other citizen, yet you ask them to pay again.
If you become a British citizen you're no longer charged, so apart from a bit of paper, what difference is there? Why does one pay twice and the other not?
On insurance, it's not really a valid comparison. You don't pay for healthcare twice abroad, you pay once as every person does.
Its not discrimination its free CHOICE and I believe in choice.
Everyone in this country who is a citizen is treated the same universally.
Anyone who CHOOSES to come here is welcome. There is a fee to be paid to contribute to society to buy in to our universal healthcare system.
They do by paying tax
So you're saying if someone isn't earning enough to pay much in taxes the NHS should turn them away?
Did anyone catch the date on the London antibody survey? 17% would be 1.5 million infections - assuming "London" is 9 million, guess it depends which definition of the city you use.
Best figures I can find on deaths are ONS excess mortality, 9300 as of May8th.
The fact that the government sees it as a good thing to tax people for being foreigners is very telling. Like taxes on tobacco and alcohol, the concept is presumably to treat it as a sin tax.
But like ending freedom of movement, I expect the government sees it as a sign of how welcoming they are to immigrants.
With Hancock talking about London immunity, I wonder if this is an early sign of regional lockdowns. London is clearly far ahead of the rest of the country.
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS, as I said.
So why should immigrants pay more just because they're immigrants, again?
No you are wrong. Most people do not pay for the NHS, the rich paying lots of tax pays for the NHS and we all get to enjoy it whether we're rich or not. Just because you're not paying much in taxes doesn't stop you getting treated.
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
But earlier you were mentioning about discrimination. Now you support discrimination on the basis somebody is an immigrant.
Your argument is ridiculous. You pay to come here, you work full time and pay taxes as every other citizen, yet you ask them to pay again.
If you become a British citizen you're no longer charged, so apart from a bit of paper, what difference is there? Why does one pay twice and the other not?
On insurance, it's not really a valid comparison. You don't pay for healthcare twice abroad, you pay once as every person does.
Its not discrimination its free CHOICE and I believe in choice.
Everyone in this country who is a citizen is treated the same universally.
Anyone who CHOOSES to come here is welcome. There is a fee to be paid to contribute to society to buy in to our universal healthcare system.
Why are you shouting at me?
I was emphasising words that you seemed to be struggling to comprehend. Its not difficult. People choosing to come here are asked to choose to contribute to our healthcare system that we have pre-established from day one for them.
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS, as I said.
So why should immigrants pay more just because they're immigrants, again?
No you are wrong. Most people do not pay for the NHS, the rich paying lots of tax pays for the NHS and we all get to enjoy it whether we're rich or not. Just because you're not paying much in taxes doesn't stop you getting treated.
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
But earlier you were mentioning about discrimination. Now you support discrimination on the basis somebody is an immigrant.
Your argument is ridiculous. You pay to come here, you work full time and pay taxes as every other citizen, yet you ask them to pay again.
If you become a British citizen you're no longer charged, so apart from a bit of paper, what difference is there? Why does one pay twice and the other not?
On insurance, it's not really a valid comparison. You don't pay for healthcare twice abroad, you pay once as every person does.
Its not discrimination its free CHOICE and I believe in choice.
Everyone in this country who is a citizen is treated the same universally.
Anyone who CHOOSES to come here is welcome. There is a fee to be paid to contribute to society to buy in to our universal healthcare system.
But why do immigrants have to pay in twice? Please address the question.
With Hancock talking about London immunity, I wonder if this is an early sign of regional lockdowns. London is clearly far ahead of the rest of the country.
A government minister said a few days ago that there wouldn't be regional differences in the way the lockdown is modified.
London = 17% with antibodies with lockdown. Stockholm = 7% with antibodies with no lockdown.
Swedes are more socially distant naturally and have been socially distancing anyway.
As a friend of mine from Stockholm put it: We've been asked to be 2 metres apart from each other. Why do we need to be closer to each other than normal?
Sunetra Gupta, Professor of Theoretical Epidemiology at Oxford University:
"Asked what her updated estimate for the Infection Fatality Rate is, Professor Gupta says, “I think that the epidemic has largely come and is on its way out in this country so I think it would be definitely less than 1 in 1000 and probably closer to 1 in 10,000.” That would be somewhere between 0.1% and 0.01%."
We have a population of 67 million and 36 000 confirmed Covid deaths (plus excess deaths) so we already have lost 0.05% of the population, assuming 100% of the population infected.
As we are nowhere near 100% infected, then surely 0.01% is impossible, or have I slipped a decimal place somewhere?
With Hancock talking about London immunity, I wonder if this is an early sign of regional lockdowns. London is clearly far ahead of the rest of the country.
A government minister said a few days ago that there wouldn't be regional differences in the way the lockdown is modified.
They also said they wouldn't U-turn on a surcharge for the NHS.
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS, as I said.
So why should immigrants pay more just because they're immigrants, again?
No you are wrong. Most people do not pay for the NHS, the rich paying lots of tax pays for the NHS and we all get to enjoy it whether we're rich or not. Just because you're not paying much in taxes doesn't stop you getting treated.
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
But earlier you were mentioning about discrimination. Now you support discrimination on the basis somebody is an immigrant.
Your argument is ridiculous. You pay to come here, you work full time and pay taxes as every other citizen, yet you ask them to pay again.
If you become a British citizen you're no longer charged, so apart from a bit of paper, what difference is there? Why does one pay twice and the other not?
On insurance, it's not really a valid comparison. You don't pay for healthcare twice abroad, you pay once as every person does.
Its not discrimination its free CHOICE and I believe in choice.
Everyone in this country who is a citizen is treated the same universally.
Anyone who CHOOSES to come here is welcome. There is a fee to be paid to contribute to society to buy in to our universal healthcare system.
But why do immigrants have to pay in twice? Please address the question.
Only twice? So if they're paying Income Tax and National Insurance they don't need to pay VAT?
With Hancock talking about London immunity, I wonder if this is an early sign of regional lockdowns. London is clearly far ahead of the rest of the country.
A government minister said a few days ago that there wouldn't be regional differences in the way the lockdown is modified.
They also said they wouldn't U-turn on a surcharge for the NHS.
No they didn't, they said they were keeping it under review.
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS, as I said.
So why should immigrants pay more just because they're immigrants, again?
No you are wrong. Most people do not pay for the NHS, the rich paying lots of tax pays for the NHS and we all get to enjoy it whether we're rich or not. Just because you're not paying much in taxes doesn't stop you getting treated.
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
But earlier you were mentioning about discrimination. Now you support discrimination on the basis somebody is an immigrant.
Your argument is ridiculous. You pay to come here, you work full time and pay taxes as every other citizen, yet you ask them to pay again.
If you become a British citizen you're no longer charged, so apart from a bit of paper, what difference is there? Why does one pay twice and the other not?
On insurance, it's not really a valid comparison. You don't pay for healthcare twice abroad, you pay once as every person does.
Its not discrimination its free CHOICE and I believe in choice.
Everyone in this country who is a citizen is treated the same universally.
Anyone who CHOOSES to come here is welcome. There is a fee to be paid to contribute to society to buy in to our universal healthcare system.
But why do immigrants have to pay in twice? Please address the question.
Only twice? So if they're paying Income Tax and National Insurance they don't need to pay VAT?
Okay three times then, why do they have to pay again? Why discriminate based on where you come from, you said you're against that.
Your entire argument is entirely contradictory. You contradict yourself readily to explain away Tory policy.
With Hancock talking about London immunity, I wonder if this is an early sign of regional lockdowns. London is clearly far ahead of the rest of the country.
A government minister said a few days ago that there wouldn't be regional differences in the way the lockdown is modified.
They also said they wouldn't U-turn on a surcharge for the NHS.
No they didn't, they said they were keeping it under review.
If the London rate is 17% overall, I wonder what it is for people under 50? Probably much higher because they won't have been self-isolating to the same extent as older people.
The fact that the government sees it as a good thing to tax people for being foreigners is very telling. Like taxes on tobacco and alcohol, the concept is presumably to treat it as a sin tax.
But like ending freedom of movement, I expect the government sees it as a sign of how welcoming they are to immigrants.
Well it clearly doesn't put off people from coming here, does it?
Saw something today that PMQ figure of £900m for exempting NHS workers from surcharge was wrong.
Anyone know if its a lot lower?
I think that figure turned out to be for 5 years.
Kudos to Seema Malhotra (Shadow Employment Minister) for digging out the right number, and mainly for being sceptical enough to check in the first place.
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS, as I said.
So why should immigrants pay more just because they're immigrants, again?
No you are wrong. Most people do not pay for the NHS, the rich paying lots of tax pays for the NHS and we all get to enjoy it whether we're rich or not. Just because you're not paying much in taxes doesn't stop you getting treated.
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
But earlier you were mentioning about discrimination. Now you support discrimination on the basis somebody is an immigrant.
Your argument is ridiculous. You pay to come here, you work full time and pay taxes as every other citizen, yet you ask them to pay again.
If you become a British citizen you're no longer charged, so apart from a bit of paper, what difference is there? Why does one pay twice and the other not?
On insurance, it's not really a valid comparison. You don't pay for healthcare twice abroad, you pay once as every person does.
Its not discrimination its free CHOICE and I believe in choice.
Everyone en this country who is a citizen is treated the same universally.
Anyone who CHOOSES to come here is welcome. There is a fee to be paid to contribute to society to buy in to our universal healthcare system.
But why do immigrants have to pay in twice? Please address the question.
Only twice? So if they're paying Income Tax and National Insurance they don't need to pay VAT?
Okay three times then, why do they have to pay again? Why discriminate based on where you come from, you said you're against that.
Your entire argument is entirely contradictory. You contradict yourself readily to explain away Tory policy.
Only three times? So if they buy a home they don't need to pay stamp duty?
So if they buy fuel they don't need to pay fuel duty?
So if they sell shares they don't need to pay CGT?
So if they run a business they don't need to pay Corporation Tax?
So if they die they don't need to pay estate taxes?
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS, as I said.
So why should immigrants pay more just because they're immigrants, again?
No you are wrong. Most people do not pay for the NHS, the rich paying lots of tax pays for the NHS and we all get to enjoy it whether we're rich or not. Just because you're not paying much in taxes doesn't stop you getting treated.
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
But earlier you were mentioning about discrimination. Now you support discrimination on the basis somebody is an immigrant.
Your argument is ridiculous. You pay to come here, you work full time and pay taxes as every other citizen, yet you ask them to pay again.
If you become a British citizen you're no longer charged, so apart from a bit of paper, what difference is there? Why does one pay twice and the other not?
On insurance, it's not really a valid comparison. You don't pay for healthcare twice abroad, you pay once as every person does.
Its not discrimination its free CHOICE and I believe in choice.
Everyone en this country who is a citizen is treated the same universally.
Anyone who CHOOSES to come here is welcome. There is a fee to be paid to contribute to society to buy in to our universal healthcare system.
But why do immigrants have to pay in twice? Please address the question.
Only twice? So if they're paying Income Tax and National Insurance they don't need to pay VAT?
Okay three times then, why do they have to pay again? Why discriminate based on where you come from, you said you're against that.
Your entire argument is entirely contradictory. You contradict yourself readily to explain away Tory policy.
Only three times? So if they buy a home they don't need to pay stamp duty?
So if they buy fuel they don't need to pay fuel duty?
So if they sell shares they don't need to pay CGT?
So if they run a business they don't need to pay Corporation Tax?
So if they die they don't need to pay estate taxes?
Bargain!
You've gone off the deep end again. It's obvious to anyone sane what I meant.
Sunetra Gupta, Professor of Theoretical Epidemiology at Oxford University:
"Asked what her updated estimate for the Infection Fatality Rate is, Professor Gupta says, “I think that the epidemic has largely come and is on its way out in this country so I think it would be definitely less than 1 in 1000 and probably closer to 1 in 10,000.” That would be somewhere between 0.1% and 0.01%."
We have a population of 67 million and 36 000 confirmed Covid deaths (plus excess deaths) so we already have lost 0.05% of the population, assuming 100% of the population infected.
As we are nowhere near 100% infected, then surely 0.01% is impossible, or have I slipped a decimal place somewhere?
The fact that the government sees it as a good thing to tax people for being foreigners is very telling. Like taxes on tobacco and alcohol, the concept is presumably to treat it as a sin tax.
But like ending freedom of movement, I expect the government sees it as a sign of how welcoming they are to immigrants.
Well it clearly doesn't put off people from coming here, does it?
Quite - no idea why they have allowed the bullying metro twitterati to bully them on this - it's not compulsary.
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS, as I said.
So why should immigrants pay more just because they're immigrants, again?
No you are wrong. Most people do not pay for the NHS, the rich paying lots of tax pays for the NHS and we all get to enjoy it whether we're rich or not. Just because you're not paying much in taxes doesn't stop you getting treated.
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
But earlier you were mentioning about discrimination. Now you support discrimination on the basis somebody is an immigrant.
Your argument is ridiculous. You pay to come here, you work full time and pay taxes as every other citizen, yet you ask them to pay again.
If you become a British citizen you're no longer charged, so apart from a bit of paper, what difference is there? Why does one pay twice and the other not?
On insurance, it's not really a valid comparison. You don't pay for healthcare twice abroad, you pay once as every person does.
Its not discrimination its free CHOICE and I believe in choice.
Everyone en this country who is a citizen is treated the same universally.
Anyone who CHOOSES to come here is welcome. There is a fee to be paid to contribute to society to buy in to our universal healthcare system.
But why do immigrants have to pay in twice? Please address the question.
Only twice? So if they're paying Income Tax and National Insurance they don't need to pay VAT?
Okay three times then, why do they have to pay again? Why discriminate based on where you come from, you said you're against that.
Your entire argument is entirely contradictory. You contradict yourself readily to explain away Tory policy.
Only three times? So if they buy a home they don't need to pay stamp duty?
So if they buy fuel they don't need to pay fuel duty?
So if they sell shares they don't need to pay CGT?
So if they run a business they don't need to pay Corporation Tax?
So if they die they don't need to pay estate taxes?
Bargain!
You've gone off the deep end again. It's obvious to anyone sane what I meant.
Yes you were asking why an action would have another tax. And the answer is because they almost all do. We get "taxed twice" on buying homes, selling shares, even dying. So why shouldn't those coming to this country contribute to the NHS?
What logical argument is there against asking for a contribution from immigrants but supporting a contribution taken from corpses?
Trump essentially won the Whitehouse by winning these 3 states. If the election follows these polls, it means Trump would have to gain a non trivial state to remain president.
Sunetra Gupta, Professor of Theoretical Epidemiology at Oxford University:
"Asked what her updated estimate for the Infection Fatality Rate is, Professor Gupta says, “I think that the epidemic has largely come and is on its way out in this country so I think it would be definitely less than 1 in 1000 and probably closer to 1 in 10,000.” That would be somewhere between 0.1% and 0.01%."
We have a population of 67 million and 36 000 confirmed Covid deaths (plus excess deaths) so we already have lost 0.05% of the population, assuming 100% of the population infected.
As we are nowhere near 100% infected, then surely 0.01% is impossible, or have I slipped a decimal place somewhere?
Trump essentially won the Whitehouse by winning these 3 states. If the election follows these polls, it means Trump would have to gain a non trivial state to remain president.
If Trump holds Pennsylvania but loses Wisconsin and Michigan he narrowly wins the Electoral College with 279 to 259 for Biden if he holds the other Trump voting states from 2016
If the Oxford model is in any way correct, then London's immunity to Corona could now be very high indeed.
Sky high.
Let's hope so. We need to get London back to normal again as soon as possible, and to be able to do it without mass surveillance and/or vaccination would be a very good thing.
I wonder if Kle4 thinks this cost BoZo anything...
I didn't say u-turning wouldn't cost him anything. I also never said he wouldn't u-turn, nor did I even comment on whether I thought u-turning in this instance was a good idea or not (though I have said I am far from opposed to u-turning as a principle), or if the proposed policy was a good idea or not. I did say I didn't believe u-turning one day or not, or one week or not, would make a difference in lessening a loss of political capital (unless very long term, eg taking something from an opposition pre-election then doing it much later)
What I commented on was the spinning 'not u-turned yet' into a news story by creative use of language on 'doubling down'.
So I really don't know what point you even think you are making. That I was wrong about something I wasn't even saying?
And I feel confident about that because I have happily admitted to being wrong many times previously, nor could I have a motivation of defending Boris given all the times I've said I think he's an arse.
Trump essentially won the Whitehouse by winning these 3 states. If the election follows these polls, it means Trump would have to gain a non trivial state to remain president.
If Trump holds Pennsylvania but loses Wisconsin and Michigan he narrowly wins the Electoral College if he holds the other Trump voting states from 2016
Trump may have a chance of taking New Hampshire, Maine, Minnesota from the Democrats. The demographics suit him in all those states, whereas Arizona is moving in the other direction.
I see my comparison of Boris Johnson's performance as PMQs yesterday to Crassus at Carrhae has stood the test of time.
Not a lot of people know this but the emperor Caracalla was murdered by a pissed off soldier while taking a shit behind a bush at Carrhae (modern Harran) in 217AD.
Just thought I would give you that for your stock of Carrhae similes in case it becomes relevant at a future point in Boris's career.
Yes they did. Repeatedly check Hansard or media interviews. Going ahead with an increase is neither here nor there as the increase applies to the other migrants not healthcare ones.
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS, as I said.
So why should immigrants pay more just because they're immigrants, again?
No you are wrong. Most people do not pay for the NHS, the rich paying lots of tax pays for the NHS and we all get to enjoy it whether we're rich or not. Just because you're not paying much in taxes doesn't stop you getting treated.
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
But earlier you were mentioning about discrimination. Now you support discrimination on the basis somebody is an immigrant.
Your argument is ridiculous. You pay to come here, you work full time and pay taxes as every other citizen, yet you ask them to pay again.
If you become a British citizen you're no longer charged, so apart from a bit of paper, what difference is there? Why does one pay twice and the other not?
On insurance, it's not really a valid comparison. You don't pay for healthcare twice abroad, you pay once as every person does.
Its not discrimination its free CHOICE and I believe in choice.
Everyone en this country who is a citizen is treated the same universally.
Anyone who CHOOSES to come here is welcome. There is a fee to be paid to contribute to society to buy in to our universal healthcare system.
But why do immigrants have to pay in twice? Please address the question.
Only twice? So if they're paying Income Tax and National Insurance they don't need to pay VAT?
Okay three times then, why do they have to pay again? Why discriminate based on where you come from, you said you're against that.
Your entire argument is entirely contradictory. You contradict yourself readily to explain away Tory policy.
Only three times? So if they buy a home they don't need to pay stamp duty?
So if they buy fuel they don't need to pay fuel duty?
So if they sell shares they don't need to pay CGT?
So if they run a business they don't need to pay Corporation Tax?
So if they die they don't need to pay estate taxes?
Bargain!
He obviously meant, why do they nead to pay a higher level than a citizen?
Trump essentially won the Whitehouse by winning these 3 states. If the election follows these polls, it means Trump would have to gain a non trivial state to remain president.
If Trump holds Pennsylvania but loses Wisconsin and Michigan he narrowly wins the Electoral College if he holds the other Trump voting states from 2016
Trump essentially won the Whitehouse by winning these 3 states. If the election follows these polls, it means Trump would have to gain a non trivial state to remain president.
If Trump holds Pennsylvania but loses Wisconsin and Michigan he narrowly wins the Electoral College with 279 to 259 for Biden if he holds the other Trump voting states from 2016
Yes, I have admitted that I misread one of the poll results.
I cannot think of any off the top of my head, but surely Corbyn managed to secure some u-turns during his tenure? (and no, adopting things a little like what he suggested as a normal event, during an emergency pandemic, does not count). Even Corbyn had some decent ideas.
Sunetra Gupta, Professor of Theoretical Epidemiology at Oxford University:
"Asked what her updated estimate for the Infection Fatality Rate is, Professor Gupta says, “I think that the epidemic has largely come and is on its way out in this country so I think it would be definitely less than 1 in 1000 and probably closer to 1 in 10,000.” That would be somewhere between 0.1% and 0.01%."
We have a population of 67 million and 36 000 confirmed Covid deaths (plus excess deaths) so we already have lost 0.05% of the population, assuming 100% of the population infected.
As we are nowhere near 100% infected, then surely 0.01% is impossible, or have I slipped a decimal place somewhere?
Your calc looks right to me. 67 million pop gives max 67k deaths at 1 in 1000 risk and max 6700 at 1 in 10000 risk, if everyone infected.
Assuming the quote is accurate, when basic sanity checking is skipped like that, it does make you wonder about the entire analysis - first thing for any model output: is this in any way plausible?
I don't understand the justification for a surcharge anyway. Don't immigrants pay for the NHS through their taxes, the same as the rest of us?
Lots of things are unjustified. But if people are willing to pay...
Most immigrants will also pay for the NHS at the point of use, as overseas visitors...
Not if they're paying the surcharge they don't, do they?
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS.
Apart from being immigrants, they should pay more why again?
No, most people are not paying for the NHS, not really. Very few actually pay for the NHS. 30% of all income tax is paid by just 1% of the country.
If you pay taxes, you're paying for the NHS, as I said.
So why should immigrants pay more just because they're immigrants, again?
No you are wrong. Most people do not pay for the NHS, the rich paying lots of tax pays for the NHS and we all get to enjoy it whether we're rich or not. Just because you're not paying much in taxes doesn't stop you getting treated.
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
But earlier you were mentioning about discrimination. Now you support discrimination on the basis somebody is an immigrant.
Your argument is ridiculous. You pay to come here, you work full time and pay taxes as every other citizen, yet you ask them to pay again.
If you become a British citizen you're no longer charged, so apart from a bit of paper, what difference is there? Why does one pay twice and the other not?
On insurance, it's not really a valid comparison. You don't pay for healthcare twice abroad, you pay once as every person does.
Its not discrimination its free CHOICE and I believe in choice.
Everyone en this country who is a citizen is treated the same universally.
Anyone who CHOOSES to come here is welcome. There is a fee to be paid to contribute to society to buy in to our universal healthcare system.
But why do immigrants have to pay in twice? Please address the question.
Only twice? So if they're paying Income Tax and National Insurance they don't need to pay VAT?
Okay three times then, why do they have to pay again? Why discriminate based on where you come from, you said you're against that.
Your entire argument is entirely contradictory. You contradict yourself readily to explain away Tory policy.
Only three times? So if they buy a home they don't need to pay stamp duty?
So if they buy fuel they don't need to pay fuel duty?
So if they sell shares they don't need to pay CGT?
So if they run a business they don't need to pay Corporation Tax?
So if they die they don't need to pay estate taxes?
Bargain!
He obviously meant, why do they nead to pay a higher level than a citizen?
Why does a homebuyer have to? Why does a businessman have to? Why does a corpse have to?
Trump essentially won the Whitehouse by winning these 3 states. If the election follows these polls, it means Trump would have to gain a non trivial state to remain president.
If Trump holds Pennsylvania but loses Wisconsin and Michigan he narrowly wins the Electoral College with 279 to 259 for Biden if he holds the other Trump voting states from 2016
Yes, I have admitted that I misread one of the poll results.
It would though be the 2nd closest EC margin since WW2 after 2000
I'd take a wild guess that high % of that 77% were neither students or furloughed workers.
Digging down on the numbers the highest % by age (59%) thinking it very fair were 65+. Quelle surprise.
No one is stopping them volunteering. Given how misty-eyed many of them get about fruit-picking in their youth, you'd have thought they'd be straining at the leash to get involved.
I see my comparison of Boris Johnson's performance as PMQs yesterday to Crassus at Carrhae has stood the test of time.
Not a lot of people know this but the emperor Caracalla was murdered by a pissed off soldier while taking a shit behind a bush at Carrhae (modern Harran) in 217AD.
Just thought I would give you that for your stock of Carrhae similes in case it becomes relevant at a future point in Boris's career.
I didn't know that and am glad I now do. Those Roman Emperors, such scamps.
Trump essentially won the Whitehouse by winning these 3 states. If the election follows these polls, it means Trump would have to gain a non trivial state to remain president.
If Trump holds Pennsylvania but loses Wisconsin and Michigan he narrowly wins the Electoral College if he holds the other Trump voting states from 2016
Trump may have a chance of taking New Hampshire, Maine, Minnesota from the Democrats. The demographics suit him in all those states, whereas Arizona is moving in the other direction.
You've got to give Johnson credit for caving in quickly and not letting this become a bigger issue.
Yep. Theresa May would not have done this. Johnson has done the right thing.
Starmer has developed quite an interesting tactic at PMQs. Its not just Punch and Judy, or even a QC forensically questioning a hapless suspect.
Starmer is using PMQs in a way that I cannot recall in recent times. He is using it to lead the agenda. First this reverse on policy, but also the heffalump trap set for 1 June if we do not have an effective Tracing system in place.
You can just close your eyes and see the advisors trying to get some pretence of that in place for that deadline. Meanwhile the heffalump will blunder into another one.
Its like watching my cat play with a mouse. Gripping and appalling at the same time.
I think Starmer is seeking to build a narrative for the time when the really tough decsions have to be made. It's all about framing Johnson as out of touch, reactive and not on top of his brief. He happens to be winning the bouts each week as well, but that is by the by. The hope, I suspect, is that when lockdown does end, when the furlough is wound down and when no deal with the EU gets closer, people will see the calls the government makes in a very different light because they do not trust the government to make the right calls.
One of the long term implications of corona is how people fed up with the terrible mainstream news coverage have turned to alternative news sources.
This is the most interesting thing I've read on the crisis for a while, even though I suppose I am a lockdown sceptic.
Its also interesting that prof Gupta chose Unherd to do this interview. But her analysis is persuasive.
It is a good video, addressing head on the issue I raised here this morning.
The irony is that, if she is right, the government’s initial ‘shield the elderly whilst everyone else carries on’ policy, which lasted only days until the Imperial model blew it out of the water, would have been the correct one.
Comments
Immigrants should pay more because they're choosing to come here so should make a contribution, just as if I went overseas I would need to make a contribution or buy insurance.
I don't think a course of chemotherapy is covered by the taxes on a minimum wage job and minimum wage VAT expenditure etc - but nor does it need to be as we as a society have decided healthcare doesn't depend upon taxes for our citizens.
Migrants need to buy in to that universality.
This is the most interesting thing I've read on the crisis for a while, even though I suppose I am a lockdown sceptic.
Its also interesting that prof Gupta chose Unherd to do this interview. But her analysis is persuasive.
I thought the Tories were the party of low taxes? * Not for forriners.
Forriners, no yor plase! You dont belong here, be grateful and give us mor dosh!
Your argument is ridiculous. You pay to come here, you work full time and pay taxes as every other citizen, yet you ask them to pay again.
If you become a British citizen you're no longer charged, so apart from a bit of paper, what difference is there? Why does one pay twice and the other not?
On insurance, it's not really a valid comparison. You don't pay for healthcare twice abroad, you pay once as every person does.
Just face it, you're pro discrimination and a hypocrite.
Everyone in this country who is a citizen is treated the same universally.
Anyone who CHOOSES to come here is welcome. There is a fee to be paid to contribute to society to buy in to our universal healthcare system.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/21/health/tea-mental-health-benefits-wellness/index.html
Best figures I can find on deaths are ONS excess mortality, 9300 as of May8th.
But like ending freedom of movement, I expect the government sees it as a sign of how welcoming they are to immigrants.
London = 17% with antibodies with lockdown.
Stockholm = 7% with antibodies with no lockdown.
As a friend of mine from Stockholm put it: We've been asked to be 2 metres apart from each other. Why do we need to be closer to each other than normal?
As we are nowhere near 100% infected, then surely 0.01% is impossible, or have I slipped a decimal place somewhere?
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1263486652615405569?s=20
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1263454121186807819?s=20
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1263453632449712128?s=20
Your entire argument is entirely contradictory. You contradict yourself readily to explain away Tory policy.
So if they buy fuel they don't need to pay fuel duty?
So if they sell shares they don't need to pay CGT?
So if they run a business they don't need to pay Corporation Tax?
So if they die they don't need to pay estate taxes?
Bargain!
https://twitter.com/JasonGroves1/status/1263451251494342657
Sky high.
What logical argument is there against asking for a contribution from immigrants but supporting a contribution taken from corpses?
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1263507646876921857
Edit: Oops sorry I misread the Penn State result.
Digging down on the numbers the highest % by age (59%) thinking it very fair were 65+.
Quelle surprise.
The interview with Gupta is very interesting.
Which it appears they've now changed to exclude NHS staff...
What I commented on was the spinning 'not u-turned yet' into a news story by creative use of language on 'doubling down'.
So I really don't know what point you even think you are making. That I was wrong about something I wasn't even saying?
And I feel confident about that because I have happily admitted to being wrong many times previously, nor could I have a motivation of defending Boris given all the times I've said I think he's an arse.
Just thought I would give you that for your stock of Carrhae similes in case it becomes relevant at a future point in Boris's career.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/az/arizona_trump_vs_biden-6807.html
Assuming the quote is accurate, when basic sanity checking is skipped like that, it does make you wonder about the entire analysis - first thing for any model output: is this in any way plausible?
Why does a businessman have to?
Why does a corpse have to?
The Exchequer needs money to fund the NHS etc
Someone's not measuring this right.
It is a little poor how Boris has behaved over this. Patel has defended Government policy, and been hung out to dry publicly.
Perhaps all people wanted to do was take back control. They don't mind immigration - its uncontrolled immigration they don't like.
https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1263509964884258816?s=20
The irony is that, if she is right, the government’s initial ‘shield the elderly whilst everyone else carries on’ policy, which lasted only days until the Imperial model blew it out of the water, would have been the correct one.