You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Coronavirus and the impact of Lockdown policy
July 23 2024 9.53am

Coronavirus and the impact of Lockdown policy

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 78 of 289 < 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 >

 

footythoughts Flag Beckenham 14 May 23 11.16pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I fully recognise my suggestions are not likely to command much support and are put forward with my tongue firmly in my cheek. Much though I would like to see it happen, I don't think it will.

They are an attempt to get the fact that doing anything deliberately that costs the NHS more than is necessary ought to be paid for by the individuals concerned. That's the way insurance works. Higher risks, higher premiums.

If we as a society decide not to do that then we need to make those who benefit are fully aware of the generosity shown to them by the rest of us. At the moment they seem to think it's their right to behave selfishly, without consequences. That mindset needs to change. At the moment we rely only on education to persuade but it's not enough. We need to make people feel ashamed of themselves and offered pathways to remove that shame. Telling what the costs are is part of that.

I see where you're coming from, as intuively we all want people to do their bit and to pull their weight, but I feel like the potential downside of where that might lead could end up being a step back from forward (misused by government). Insurance analogies might not be the best as that's kind of the idea and model we're keen to stay away from, but I get what you mean.

It's a pity that many don't look after themselves but there are many reasons to that. Low wages, long working hours and the like I feel often leave people demoralised and that they're not really getting anywhere. You've clearly worked hard in life and are reaping the rewards, but I'm of the view that for many now that hard often just isn't enough (to get on the housing ladder and so on), and as such banging on a fitness video might not be a priority. Most have one vice or another. I'm not sure that a health care system that further sticks the knife in, is a good thing.

But education, maybe free gym memberships for those who need it, money off fruit and veg maybe, I'm happy to encourage anything that allows people to improve their health. All just my take of course, it's not like I possess the answers on how to run a healthcare system!


Edited by footythoughts (14 May 2023 11.17pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 14 May 23 11.54pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Are you serious?

You want me to go through the video and transcribe all the points being made?

Watch the frigging video! It's all there. Or are you too scared it will pour water all over your prejudices?

You make the claim, you back it up.

Why should I watch a video about Brand when you don't even watch Brand. You don't even watch the videos you link to.....no one's fooled old bean.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Teddy Eagle's Profile Teddy Eagle Online Flag 15 May 23 2.37am Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I fail to see any logic there. I am not talking about taxing anyone. I am talking about the cost of insurance, which is assessed on risk.

Face it, this is an unworkable idea. An overweight person who goes out jogging to lose weight has a heart attack and is penalised whereas a thin person who has a heart attack eating chips is fine.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Teddy Eagle's Profile Teddy Eagle Online Flag 15 May 23 2.43am Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I fail to see any logic there. I am not talking about taxing anyone. I am talking about the cost of insurance, which is assessed on risk.

The National Health Service is supposed to be for everyone and is paid for out of taxes, not including prescriptions, opticians or dentists, but you want to penalise those whose lifestyles you don't approve of.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 15 May 23 6.54am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

You make the claim, you back it up.

Why should I watch a video about Brand when you don't even watch Brand. You don't even watch the videos you link to.....no one's fooled old bean.

Oh when you make claims based on his videos I suffer watching them!

You are simply prevaricating to avoid facing the truth, That another of your go-to sources has been outed!

Watch the video! Learn something!

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 15 May 23 8.01am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Face it, this is an unworkable idea. An overweight person who goes out jogging to lose weight has a heart attack and is penalised whereas a thin person who has a heart attack eating chips is fine.

Unlikely to be adopted I accept. Finding ways to bring people to face, and rectify, making unwise lifestyle choices is a desirable objective and amending the NI contribution basis could be a way to help this. Should an overweight person jog? More likely a new diet is needed to get the weight down first. We all eat some fat. Anyone who eats too much wouldn't be thin. Heart attacks can happen to anyone. They are just more likely in the obese.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 15 May 23 8.05am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

The National Health Service is supposed to be for everyone and is paid for out of taxes, not including prescriptions, opticians or dentists, but you want to penalise those whose lifestyles you don't approve of.

Penalising people is not the objective.

It's getting people to recognise the consequences of their poor lifestyle choice goes beyond a personal threat to themselves but extends, via additional costs, to the rest of society. The objective is to change behaviour.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Teddy Eagle's Profile Teddy Eagle Online Flag 15 May 23 11.38am Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Penalising people is not the objective.

It's getting people to recognise the consequences of their poor lifestyle choice goes beyond a personal threat to themselves but extends, via additional costs, to the rest of society. The objective is to change behaviour.

Change the behaviour of poor people. Those who can afford it can get private treatment anyway. Or does private health care disappear in this Brave New World?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Teddy Eagle's Profile Teddy Eagle Online Flag 15 May 23 11.49am Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Unlikely to be adopted I accept. Finding ways to bring people to face, and rectify, making unwise lifestyle choices is a desirable objective and amending the NI contribution basis could be a way to help this. Should an overweight person jog? More likely a new diet is needed to get the weight down first. We all eat some fat. Anyone who eats too much wouldn't be thin. Heart attacks can happen to anyone. They are just more likely in the obese.

Make fast food only available for those whose Ministry implanted microchip shows they've been following the government approved diet for at least 6 months.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Forest Hillbilly's Profile Forest Hillbilly Flag in a hidey-hole 15 May 23 12.23pm Send a Private Message to Forest Hillbilly Add Forest Hillbilly as a friend

just absolutely hilarious. comedy gold.

 


"The facts have changed", Rishi Sunak

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 15 May 23 1.48pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Oh when you make claims based on his videos I suffer watching them!

You are simply prevaricating to avoid facing the truth, That another of your go-to sources has been outed!

Watch the video! Learn something!

No you don't watch them....beyond the headline you rarely even read the article links you post. I know your game old bean.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 15 May 23 2.11pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Change the behaviour of poor people. Those who can afford it can get private treatment anyway. Or does private health care disappear in this Brave New World?

As I have suggested several times the poor would be excluded and, of course, private health wouldn't disappear, although some changes to their funding basis might be desirable. That's another subject though. When the purpose is to encourage it's obvious it won't work for everyone. It would be a nudge to some.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 78 of 289 < 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Coronavirus and the impact of Lockdown policy