To think a lot of MN are ableist?

My son had cancer and due to some complications is now disabled as a result though is thankfully now in remission.

I can't even begin to imagine how much it cost and the vast, vast majority of parents wouldn't be able to self fund.

308 days in hospital including 7 weeks of specialist intensive care involving 3 different types of life support as well as dialysis
5 surgeries
4 rounds of chemotherapy as well as immunotherapy to lower the risk of relapse
many chest x rays
4 CT scans
1 bone density scan
2 echo scans (he will now need these heart scans for the rest of his life as he's now more at risk of heart failure due to some of the chemo drugs)

etc

Not to mention the cost now due to his disability and the medications he will now need to be on likely for the rest of his life.

Not to mention eg health risks from many choosing not to have their waste collected; wholly uneducated children because parents couldn’t pay for schooling etc etc.

It’s not that long ago that many of the poor were illiterate (my grandfather learned to read as a teenager, having had to support his mother too much to attend school as a child); stunted by malnutrition (my grandmother stood at about 4’10”, my mother - child of food rationing that brought milk and vitamin C and a basic standard of nutrition- was 5’7”, taller than both of her parents); dying or disabled by avoidable diseases like polio (my other grandfather didn’t walk unaided over the age of 7). Do we really want to return there?

So how would it work if a child is born disabled, or becomes disabled when very young, but their parent is in a minimum wage job which can in no way meet the medical, schooling and equipment cost for that child?

Does the child die for lack of medical care?

Even America, land of private healthcare, does have a minimal safety net and both federal and state taxation.

Great idea Nige. How about you lead by example next time you get ran over, need months in hospital, a wheelchair due to severe disability, adaptions to your property and heavy doses of pain relief for the rest of your life. You can show us how it all works.

It seems we have made life far too complicated.

We have made it too easy for people to avoid accountability for their decisions. Needs have been replaced with wants and gratitude with entitlement.

I would like something in the middle but we seem to be edging closer to communism.

It seems we have made life far too complicated.

We have made it too easy for people to avoid accountability for their decisions. Needs have been replaced with wants and gratitude with entitlement.

I would like something in the middle but we seem to be edging closer to communism.

So how would it work if a child is born disabled, or becomes disabled when very young, but their parent is in a minimum wage job which can in no way meet the medical, schooling and equipment cost for that child?

Does the child die for lack of medical care?

Even America, land of private healthcare, does have a minimal safety net and both federal and state taxation.

Would it be easier all round if we stopped all taxes but people paid for everything they used.

So you get your wages, you get them in full so no tax deducted or NI.

However you get absolutely nothing for free. Kids pay to go to school (or their parents do anyway). You pay for a doctor or an ambulance. You pay for a policeman to come out. You pay for your bin to be collected. Absolutely everything is a paid for service between the buyer (us) and the organisation (police, GP practice, Ambulance Service ie they all run like private businesses)

There is no goverment pensions though so you have to put away for yourself. There is no benefits of any kind. You just have the money you earn which you keep in full and you get to decide how you spend it or not.

This seems so much simpler and would stop all the arguments.

People want their sen kids to go to great schools and have taxis. Not a problem. It's between you and the private school or you and the taxi company. Nothing to do with goverment or any taxpayer (because there are none)

If you want to not see a doctor even though you are ill, then that is your choice. When you die though you (your estate) has to pay for the funeral etc

I mean it's kind of a mad system isn't it. You pay tax according to some 'rule' regardless of what you use or consume.
That isn't really a capitalist principle is it? I mean we are supposed to be a capitalist society.

I bet loads of people would go for that. Even if they were worse off they would say okay I have my gross wage. I pay for my kids schooling, I pay my everyday bills, I put money away because I know there is no state pension. I had a few extras this month - I needed a doctor once and my house caught fire so I had to pay the fire brigade to attend. I think if people were paying for what they got they wouldn't actually mind.

I can think of a few things it wouldn't work for and I guess we would need a system to cover things like roads, lights that just can't be apportioned on a pay for use system. However surely it could be implemented for most things.

People could have as many kids as they wanted or not but only pay for what they decide. If they want to have 4 kids they need to be able to support them or they go hungry I guess.

I think people would take more accountability and make better decisions and be happier paying for what they use only.

That avoids all the resentment which is currently going on in society.
You work hard, you reap the benefits.
You are a lazy fucker, you reap what you sow. It doesn't affect anyone else.

Wouldn't this actually be really straightforward and really fair? I mean I think America does operate more on a basis like this (not quite) but much closer to it than we do.

It seems we have made life far too complicated.

I think everyone would be alot more motivated as you would have complete control over your own income and your own expenditure.

Would it be easier all round if we stopped all taxes but people paid for everything they used.

So you get your wages, you get them in full so no tax deducted or NI.

However you get absolutely nothing for free. Kids pay to go to school (or their parents do anyway). You pay for a doctor or an ambulance. You pay for a policeman to come out. You pay for your bin to be collected. Absolutely everything is a paid for service between the buyer (us) and the organisation (police, GP practice, Ambulance Service ie they all run like private businesses)

There is no goverment pensions though so you have to put away for yourself. There is no benefits of any kind. You just have the money you earn which you keep in full and you get to decide how you spend it or not.

This seems so much simpler and would stop all the arguments.

People want their sen kids to go to great schools and have taxis. Not a problem. It's between you and the private school or you and the taxi company. Nothing to do with goverment or any taxpayer (because there are none)

If you want to not see a doctor even though you are ill, then that is your choice. When you die though you (your estate) has to pay for the funeral etc

I mean it's kind of a mad system isn't it. You pay tax according to some 'rule' regardless of what you use or consume.
That isn't really a capitalist principle is it? I mean we are supposed to be a capitalist society.

I bet loads of people would go for that. Even if they were worse off they would say okay I have my gross wage. I pay for my kids schooling, I pay my everyday bills, I put money away because I know there is no state pension. I had a few extras this month - I needed a doctor once and my house caught fire so I had to pay the fire brigade to attend. I think if people were paying for what they got they wouldn't actually mind.

I can think of a few things it wouldn't work for and I guess we would need a system to cover things like roads, lights that just can't be apportioned on a pay for use system. However surely it could be implemented for most things.

People could have as many kids as they wanted or not but only pay for what they decide. If they want to have 4 kids they need to be able to support them or they go hungry I guess.

I think people would take more accountability and make better decisions and be happier paying for what they use only.

That avoids all the resentment which is currently going on in society.
You work hard, you reap the benefits.
You are a lazy fucker, you reap what you sow. It doesn't affect anyone else.

Wouldn't this actually be really straightforward and really fair? I mean I think America does operate more on a basis like this (not quite) but much closer to it than we do.

It seems we have made life far too complicated.

I think everyone would be alot more motivated as you would have complete control over your own income and your own expenditure.

Could I just ask sorry as I’ve always wondered, if there are children in mainstream primary schools where they need 1:1 support (with an ehcp) is that the job of already employed TA’s or do they have to employ extra support? And if it’s down to the TA do they ever feel like “this isn’t what I signed up for”

I get that argument to some point if parents to this until 18 but most are forced to carry on caring until the day they die. And that is not ok.

Would it be easier all round if we stopped all taxes but people paid for everything they used.

So you get your wages, you get them in full so no tax deducted or NI.

However you get absolutely nothing for free. Kids pay to go to school (or their parents do anyway). You pay for a doctor or an ambulance. You pay for a policeman to come out. You pay for your bin to be collected. Absolutely everything is a paid for service between the buyer (us) and the organisation (police, GP practice, Ambulance Service ie they all run like private businesses)

There is no goverment pensions though so you have to put away for yourself. There is no benefits of any kind. You just have the money you earn which you keep in full and you get to decide how you spend it or not.

This seems so much simpler and would stop all the arguments.

People want their sen kids to go to great schools and have taxis. Not a problem. It's between you and the private school or you and the taxi company. Nothing to do with goverment or any taxpayer (because there are none)

If you want to not see a doctor even though you are ill, then that is your choice. When you die though you (your estate) has to pay for the funeral etc

I mean it's kind of a mad system isn't it. You pay tax according to some 'rule' regardless of what you use or consume.
That isn't really a capitalist principle is it? I mean we are supposed to be a capitalist society.

I bet loads of people would go for that. Even if they were worse off they would say okay I have my gross wage. I pay for my kids schooling, I pay my everyday bills, I put money away because I know there is no state pension. I had a few extras this month - I needed a doctor once and my house caught fire so I had to pay the fire brigade to attend. I think if people were paying for what they got they wouldn't actually mind.

I can think of a few things it wouldn't work for and I guess we would need a system to cover things like roads, lights that just can't be apportioned on a pay for use system. However surely it could be implemented for most things.

People could have as many kids as they wanted or not but only pay for what they decide. If they want to have 4 kids they need to be able to support them or they go hungry I guess.

I think people would take more accountability and make better decisions and be happier paying for what they use only.

That avoids all the resentment which is currently going on in society.
You work hard, you reap the benefits.
You are a lazy fucker, you reap what you sow. It doesn't affect anyone else.

Wouldn't this actually be really straightforward and really fair? I mean I think America does operate more on a basis like this (not quite) but much closer to it than we do.

It seems we have made life far too complicated.

I think everyone would be alot more motivated as you would have complete control over your own income and your own expenditure.

I've got an image of someone defiantly turning their nose up and crossing their arms in a superior way as I'm reading this. 😂

Could I just ask sorry as I’ve always wondered, if there are children in mainstream primary schools where they need 1:1 support (with an ehcp) is that the job of already employed TA’s or do they have to employ extra support? And if it’s down to the TA do they ever feel like “this isn’t what I signed up for”

No, they don't. Nobody disputes that carers do a valuable job, it's just not a favour.

This is my opinion, yours is different. You don't have to change yours and I have yet to encounter any information that would make me change mind.

It's still not and never will be a favour to the state to look after your own children. Having a welfare state will always be a privilege.

No, they don't. Nobody disputes that carers do a valuable job, it's just not a favour.

This is my opinion, yours is different. You don't have to change yours and I have yet to encounter any information that would make me change mind.

Also, most families need two full time incomes to cope. Yes, there is DLA and CA but even in combination, it makes up only for a small fraction for the loss of income. Bills don't just stop because you have a disabled child - quite the opposite.

i'm doing it as a single parent, and have been for 8+ years. the answer to 'where is the dad' is at work, keeping a roof over his own head and paying all his own bills.

I do understand.

Your posts show otherwise.