I would love someone to define to me what 'we look after our own first' means??

[SnipeBird]

Whenever I have political or brexit driven discussions this is a constant arguement thrown back at me - and genuinely I'd love to know what it means? Does it mean those who pay taxes here (includes people here and abroad, but not those on benefits maybe?), does it mean if you live here (all expats are out then), does it mean if you're British? (What does that mean? I'm half English, half German?), does it mean if you have a passport (well my 2yr old ds is out?)
What does it actually mean, who are 'our own'?

As a newborn baby in the UK, you'll have contributed nothing to fund the NHS, yet you get access to it. There are absolutely no guarantees your parents will have paid into the system either. That doesn't matter, it's still your birthright.

In other countries, people toil too probably work a damn site harder than many here yet they don't get an opportunity to 'pay into' a system like this. They still pay taxes though.

Why should you get greater benefits from your hard work and taxes than they do? Accident of birth, nothing more or less. There's no underlying justification for that, imo. We're just lucky.

So there's no justification for trying to shore up that luck simply for ourselves (i.e. "looking after our own"). Being born British shouldn't give anyone extra rights.

I voted Leave and stick by it. i think the twat Farrage made this kind of statement and it is a nonsensical one which appeals to the ignorant. Brexit won't funnel taxes on investment into this country exclusively. We will still have to make some kind of deal and it may involve tariffs.

I guess an element is we won't have to support countries like Greece who cooked the books to get into the EU. The issue (for me) is also being a net contributer year in year out. It's also the huge costs involved in the European Parliament. So I suppose if your statement is taken alone it means to me that the money can be better channelled.

The eastern countries are the poorer ones we are supporting from our taxes and where I have no issue at all with people coming here to work (welcome it in fact) my taxes would be better spent on our NHS and elderly. Yes migrant workers pay taxes but statistically it is small.

So to me the statement is qualified as look after people within our own country but also look at the bigger picture. We do have a very high overseas aid budget quite apart from the EUs budget which I support, but I want control over the rest of it, which we currently do not have.

Disgusting, disgraceful (and predictable) calls of racist (yet again) and calling people on benefits 'scroungers'. Most people on benefits are there because they need to be and we are lucky enough to support them.

If the statement means do I think people who have worked and paid taxes all their life and been stricken with illness in this country should be paid benefits, rather than pay for a development in Romania, then guilty. And it's ridiculous to say there is plenty of money to do both look at the crisis in the NHS and MH services.

And somebody please justify the huge, monolithic, unnecessary spending the EU indulges in? E.g. Moving to and from Brussels each year.

Laurie
Your argument has nice idealology but no solution. Yes we benefit from the systems set by our forfathers in our country and yes, many in other countries do not have such a system set up but what do you suggest? That we pay for the health needs of the world from our NHS budget? It's not possible, there isn't enough money so yes, if you live here you have a great NHS and if you don't live here then you don't, unless you have a similar set up in your country of residence. Because that's the only way it can work. And yes we do get good healthcare value for tax money in our country and we sustain it through taxes and no, we can't afford to extend this service worldwide on the tax payments and boudget of our country. So compared to some we are lucky and privileged to live here - are we supposed to beat ourselves up over that?

Why don't you ask the person who says it? The debate over whether someone we have never met is a racist twat on the basis of an out of context phrase is ridiculous.

Another chance for a load of posters to say how racist they are NOT simply by saying others must be.

An interesting thread, because it does raise the question, What is the role of a national government? Is its primary role to act in the interests of its nationals, or is it broader than that? (Obviously there will be secondary roles as well, such as to act in the interests of other countries hence aid, but that is only to a limited extent it seems.)

But as to op's question, well the answer can only be provided by the person saying it!

Ciutadella - that is the point. the answer can only be provided by the person saying it! - However the question about the role of a national government is certainly one worth discussing.

For me it means those born and bred here who pay taxes into the pot, not those who come and visit and try and take out. Don't think that's racist, just what most other Countries do too.

Laurie Marlow, you say there is no justification for trying to shore up the luck for ourselves.... yes there is. The justification is that as a Country we can't afford to pay for non British people to benefit from it. The NHS is on its knees as it is.

"Charity begins at home" means that if you treat those close to you well, that's a starting point to treating other well. i.e. if you learn "at home" to be generous and charitable, then you will behave in the same way toward others out side the home/all over the world. Unfortunately almost no-one understands that and it's usually used incorrectly, making the user ignorant as well as racist

It's a way of seizing the moral high ground whilst simultaneously refusing to provide any help (or even sympathy) for other human beings.

Foreign aid isn't charity, and can bring benefits to the UK as well as the recipient country.

For me it means those born and bred here who pay taxes into the pot, not those who come and visit and try and take out.

I love this mumzypopz, so in your view nobody who wasn't born in the UK is entitled to use the NHS? Everyone who comes here to live is "on the take"? What an ignorant viewpoint. I'm a non-British national living in the U.K. I'm also a higher rate tax-payer who has paid a hell of a lot into the "pot" over the last 20 years (not that I believe you should only benefit from government services if you have paid taxes, just taking mumzypopz 's ridiculous point to its conclusion).

As i understand it only a very small % of the population actually "pay in" in anyway. The vast majority receive more from the state than they put in over their lifetime. Certainly if they've had much use out of the NHS, they'd have to have been a very high taxpayer to have covered the cost of their care, so the whole "I'm a tax payer" argument is nonsense anyway.

So OP you are completely bemused by this commonly used cliche and are still at a loss to know what it means? You do not ask the person who says it? You wonder "if I am missing something"? Really? Do you??

Goady post designed to get the Racist/Brexit/Virtue Signalling/ /Xenophobes etc all making posts. And you have not been back.

Come back OP and tell us whether you are still so bemused.

There have been one or two very clear definitions of the phrase. What it really means, as I suspect you know, is that Charity, (which was an old word for love not a word for donations to Oxfam), begins at home. It is learnt there and modelled there, (but does not end there), and no amount of pretending to "do good" will compensate for the fact that you do not show love and compassion to those you have daily contact with.

It is much more likely to refer to the "Pillar of Society" who beats his wife and bullies his children or the Nuns who profess to love God but treat the children in their care with cruelty or the adult daughter who "does so much for the school" but is nasty, unforgiving and neglectful of her elderly parents. That's what it really means.

Figure 17a there were some stats published about a year ago, which showed a surprisingly high number of taxpayers do pay more than they 'take' - I think it was just under half of earners, but that is from memory. I had expected it to be lower. Although obviously you will never really know until the end of that person's life whether they've been a net payer overall!

mathematically, I've never seen how it could be the case that only a very small % of people pay more than they take, as someone must be paying for it all! Unless of course those very few were 'overpaying' to a truly massive extent - or unless it is all financed by borrowing (which to some extent it is, of course.)

HighHorse - well then you not a visitor are you. Mumsyp was referring to visitors here exploiting the system for health tourism which is imo wrong. She was not referring g to you if you live herd and are part of the UK economy ad you well know.

I'd assumed corporate taxes cover most of it TBH.

If just under half pay their way (which seems believable to me) that means "most" don't and (I'd guess) a large proportion of the demographic most likely to be misusing "charity begins at home" aren't in fact covering their own costs.

38cody, it was the "born and bred" bit that made me think she was referring to people who were, you know, born here.

I took it to mean anyone who lives in England? Meaning everyone regardless of race or religion?

Corporate tax is about 8% of total tax revenue, according to an internet site I've just found! But in any case corporation tax is paid by individuals ultimately - shareholders in the form of reduced profits, and therefore lower dividends. (Yes the majority of shareholders may be insurance companies, pension funds etc, but those funds are all made up of individuals' assets. Ultimately it all belongs to the people! (sort of))

I don't think I've heard anyone say "we look after our own" though, so have no idea what it means. I think it does raise an interesting question - in whose interests should a national government act? If like some pp on this threads you think nationality should confer no rights at all on individuals, that would imply very different policies from the ones governments currently have!

It means there's no point spending money looking after others unless you're in a financial position to do that

Minesnotahighhorse, you are rude aren't you. In the first place, if you have been here 20 years and paid into the pot, you have a point....However and it's a big however, other Countries do not afford us Brits the same courtesy. We really cannot pay for the whole world. That is my main point. We cannot, should not, and should not feel as responsible or guilty as we do.

I have a friend who was born in Iran but has lived here since she was 18, so 20 years. Her husband is in the same position. They are working here, had children here, shop here etc - part of the system so of course the quote rightly use the NHS.
She has a cousin who lives and had always lived in Iran. For each of her two children she flew in from Iran and stayed with my friend for the last few months and gave birth to her children here - that's wrong. It's not all about paying taxes, some people may never pay taxes for health reasons or other not be able to work but they are still part of our UK society and rightfully have access to all the benefits of living in the U.K. If you don't live here, then you should not have free NHS provision nor any other benefits.