Helping the government save money

Why not remove free prescriptions from over 60s first? Many of them are still healthy and wealthy

Dont you think she pays for her own prescriptions by paying high tax on 200 000 income where u want to get ur scripts free by paying in peanuts?

No. Too many attempts to give free stuff only to people on low incomes which carry on eroding the point of working.
I also think higher earners deserve subsidised childcare.

I get free prescriptions as I have an underactive thyroid which is medicated. Took time to get the right dose of medication too. So I shouldn’t get free prescriptions then?

Thankyou. Genuinely though I would ask you read more of the responses- I personally have strong reasons for objecting to some of OPs ideas but I don't expect you to trawl back looking for my comments as to why. Safe to say having read some of this thread out to my 62 year old disabled veteran husband, who has his own very strong views about where our country actually wastes most money (and it isn't on free prescriptions for the likes of him....) there very much is emotion involved, but many responses are well justified and not a matter of over reaction. He also has a very good understanding of our national defences which OP claims was their reason for starting this- our needing to cut costs to negate our reliance on US defence support, so we ourselves need no schooling there from OP. I also personally save the state a considerable amount by juggling a demanding outside job with his care and not calling on adult social care for help which I could- but don't to try and preserve some of his dignity. So there is always going to be a lot of real life emotion triggered due to real life situations when someone sweeps in and says cut this, cut that, I've got all the answers...

Agree!

Er, the economy is doing the very opposite of boom, even with the free prescriptions! The current annual payment is affordable to most people. Cutting free prescriptions, most of which are for >60s anyway, wouldn't make a signficiant difference. The damage has been done to the economy over decades. There will be far more major changes needed than tinkering with who pays for prescriptions.

@Samdelila but that would include all of us on Retirement Pension. We are the biggest users of the NHS, including getting prescriptions for free (if you ignore the years we've paid into the NHS)

this country has an aging population, . But, as a country, we turn our face against the only short term solution that exists. Immigration.

long term, we appear to be ignoring the reasons for a lack of young people having families. Like the exorbitant cost of child care.

so we have boxed ourselves into a corner. We don't want immigrants, and we don't want to help young familys.

the problem, as I see it, is much deeper than saving the government a couple of £ here and there

If you take that stance, they’ll likely bugger off somewhere else where they are appreciated, then - thus contributing nothing. See: the 1970’s for examples…

They do apply, when someone needs a care home and will not live in their own home again.
There is nothing to be gained from making someone sell the house they live in, or do equity release on the house they live in, to be able to still claim means tested benefits and still need a home to live in.

Neither was I.
Imho assets should be considered if means testing were to be introduced for prescription cost exemptions.

However, I am totally against cutting or means testing free prescriptions for medical conditions.

And if the non-resident parent can’t or won’t, then any benefits paid to the resident parent are treated as a loan to the non-resident parent, paid back in a similar way to student loans.

Here’s another idea. When a couple separate, the government can work out the minimum cost to raise a child per month. Each parent expected to contribute. Both parents expected to maximise income to provide for children, particularly non resident parents. If non resident parent doesn’t work much then money can come out of their pension pot so the children do not miss out. If all non resident parents were expected to financially support their children other than very extreme circumstances then this would help the benefits bill massively.

How about making the Royal Family's fortune public and stop their funding, stop them owning the sea bed and so much more, all of which should be working for the country's benefit, let's stop the 25% of our council tax funding pensions (the low salary excuse no longer applies), let's stop outsourcing services to companies that then charge a ridiculous amount to administer and top slice before they do what they were supposedly to do more cheaply when we have civil servants who should be managing them, let's ban ultra processed foods and be proactive with our health, let's fix roads and not lob tarmac into holes that pops out in days, let's educate and police our country effectively to save funding so many prison places, let's stop benefits till you earn enough to have contributed, let's make those that father children pay for them, let's stop the pig pen of Lord's expenses and MP's additional jobs and ridiculous rent costs when you and I would commute the distance... really I am making the point that we are not managing our country but seem to be unable to stop the rot for fear of offending someone, somewhere and always firefighting and we can't stop multi million pound benefit frauds or recover the money, so free prescriptions are not the issue and yes, administering it would cost more than we recover as we seem incapable of running the country well. Is the real issue that those of us who contribute are funding an increasing number who have never, will never, put anything into the pot (and I am not talking about those with real disabilities and need). Be careful where lines are drawn with who can and who cannot afford something, for fear it hits us all hard and generalisations about those who are well off are allowing our government to make decisions that are squeezing an increasingly number of our population dry. Just wait till this April's bills come in!

a lot are in both camps……due to ageing.
im early 60s……nearing retirement and have some health conditions starting to rear their ugly heads…..
and yes….im still working full time, always have….and due to hypothyroidism I now have an exemption cert.
and no….im not a bloody multimillionaire who can easily sell up or cash in on my many fictional luxury homes 🙄

Whilst the OP was very goady , I kinda of agree

In NI we have a devolved heath service - prescriptions are free - to everyone. Because of that appointments are being taken up by patients who only need an over the counter item , because why pay when I can get ir free?

Our Pharmacies are allowed to prescribe for certain conditions - under the counter - so yes you can get Canistan FOC etc etc

The thing is, with the English programme of who gets charged and who doesnt. its less then 30% who pay a prescription charge , which is why they are so expensive

If everyone paid, apart from those on IC related benefit and those in primary education ( uo to university ) ,the cost per an Item item would drop significantly and we as a nation could afford a prescription

Im cutting my nose to spite my face, I take 3 prescriptions a month at the moment, which diet and lifestyle changes haven't altered so I would be worse off finically. However how may others will be moved to make the lifestyle choice they need to keep their bills low ?

I will be honest if they cut the prepayment certificate I would probably keep my acid reflux medication but as my blood pressure medication is quite low then it would be tempting to stop it as I was in two minds to take it (GP said it was entirely my decision to treat or not). I guess a heart attack or stroke would cost a lot more than subsidising a pre payment prescription.

I guess that’s the issue with making health based decisions only on cost.