To ask you to choose between the NHS and subsidising energy bills?

[PersonaNonGarter]

We all know that our DCs are going to be paying off all of this government borrowing until the end of time. The country’s in debt and Liz Truss is about to borrow more.

So if you had to choose, would you borrow more for the NHS?

YABU - the NHS has enough, deal with energy crisis
YANBU - the NHS is the priority always

Why the choice ? Other countries are managing both

I will always advocate for NHS funding but increasing the funding without reform, you may as well just fling the cash off a cliff. Someone needs to do a comprehensive review of NHS funding and change the way funding is used.

Much like the pandemic, there has to be government intervention with this. Even if it is not direct subsidy-too many people are affected to ignore it.

The NHS has been underfunded since it’s second year of existence, it’s three core values are wonderful but unrealistic on a large scale in the long run without a large subsidy from either the public or the government, both of which it cannot have without excessive uproar.
Mix in poorly managed hospitals, services which are NHS contracted as the hospitals are so overwhelmed they cannot see patients which costs more than in-house care and the multiple lawsuits hospitals face in some CCGs, in part thanks to understaffing and extensive cover ups of poor care by medical staff , and it’s a recipe for disaster.

That being said, money shouldn’t be borrowed for either but the companies should be reprimanded and ordered to carry out a duty of care.,
In my view during a time like this, rather than a price cap, a profit cap should be enforced upon energy and water companies to ensure the amount they’re charging isn’t to further line their own pockets, with anything over the threshold taken back by government.
Whilst I know it’s a wildly unrealistic view point and I wouldn’t know where to start implementing it, in my mind this would mean that they would be more inclined to keep prices lower and more consistent across the board and the country would profit off any further greed by paying off debt or putting it back into the system, but again, it’s a pipe dream.

Agree that this is a dangerous and false choice. Repayments to slave owners were only paid off in 2015. Ni reasons at all why government debt can't be as long term as necessary.

Isn’t the NHS getting an extra £350M a week post brexit? Why should they get more?

Exactly

Someone who can be trusted and doesn't have any financial interest in private alternatives

No wealthy exclusively educated privileged life government crony

Yes 100%. Preferably by someone who understands the complexities of the health and social care system as it stands by having actually worked in it.

Borrowing doesn't make sense for a regular expense. It is for rare big expenses, so that paying for them can be spread out over time.

It will never make sense to borrow to fund NHS normal operations. It would only make sense to borrow to subsidise energy if we thought the problem was temporary.

YABU for treating government spending as equivalent to household spending, ie as a debt that had to be paid back. It doesn’t work like that. Government debt isn’t a fixed amount. It varies depending on interest rates and inflation. The govt has several instruments it can use depending on whether interests or inflation are high or low. Also, it can’t reduce the debt if the economy is collapsing and there is no growth.

On your NHS vs energy support point, you are being very very unreasonable by using the NHS to guilt trip people. Both the NHS and the general economy need to be supported. There is an avalanche of business closures coming our way, on top of personal hardship, so doing nothing is not an option. Likewise with the NHS which looks like it might collapse this winter.

I feel this way about any MP to be honest, if you’re so out of touch from the life your constituents live then you shouldn’t be able to run for local office/central government positions.
Nobody can tell me that a person who lives in a million+ pound house and walks around in excessively expensive suits has any idea how the regular person lives. There are plenty of people who would make brilliant politicians who never get the foot up that these rich fools do.

£0.50 on one and £0.50 on the other.

This is a thread about priorities for increased government borrowing.

So more borrowing for NHS? More borrowing for energy? No more borrowing?

We’ve just hit 100% debt to GDP in the UK. Not exactly a great milestone. We are still well behind France (with their lower energy prices).

The last thing the NHS needs is more money - far too much is wasted already. It needs a Royal Commission to investigate other countries' (France, Holland, Switzerland etc) systems & to come up with a successful funding plan that combines some public money with an insurance scheme and an element of personal responsibility.

So, in the short term, money to support small businesses with energy costs would probably help the economy and protect some jobs.

Fortunately I have private healthcare so if Mumsnet want to have jam today instead of the long term investment in the health services then those that don't have private healthcare can pay the cost. it is a choice of one or the other we have spend too much money on the wrong things piling up a mountain of debt for our children to pay back (over 100 bn in interest last year). We need to be more brutal and prioritise spending defense hand healthcare being the most important. The COVID spending was a disaster furlough cost a fortune alongside those stupid bounce back loans you cannot pump that much money into the system and expect no inflation. The pot is empty there is no more money. we cannot just nationalise our energy producers just because they make profit set at the market rate are you suggesting we nationalise EDF or the under sea cable and power generation system connected to it in France and Norway? We don't make enough energy in the UK we have a too big population (something mumsnetters have been unconcerned about) we have bowed to globalization to make ourselves dependent on foreign energy and food. That is our issue. Too many people for the infrastructure to cope with.

we absolutely should have a national energy company that would make us independent and that we could use to export influence on others if needed like Russia can. But that ship has sailed a long time ago.

It needs a Royal Commission to investigate other countries' (France, Holland, Switzerland etc) systems & to come up with a successful funding plan that combines some public money with an insurance scheme and an element of personal responsibility.

Unfortunately not enough will vote for it. I would say those countries are more socialist than us, too many believe they've paid their "stamp" & shouldn't pay anymore.

National insurance

We already have it

The vast majority don't pay enough NI to fund the NHS

or haven't paid enough

Basic sociology,health is affected by poverty,education, and housing so fsr too simplistic to say one or the other..

If you don't address the poverty created by the energy crisis then the nhs will need more money

You forgot option 3:

defund the armed forces
sell the crown jewels and all the palaces
stop MP’s pissing money up the wall for their mates

YABU this is not a choice I want to make and if our government, elected by us to distribute our taxes to our benefit, put this forward after wasting so much money with PPE contracts Brexit etc I will be furious.

Thats because its not. Its not like a household budget. Govt can always find more money if they want to to pass to their supporters via dodgy contracts.

Are you a tory party plant trying to change the public perception to soften society up to the inevitable destruction of the NHS.
Eg. It's your fault as we had to give you so much money for your bills that we can't afford the NHS anymore. Making out like govt spending is like a credit card and what is borrowed has to be paid back!

Stop giving taxpayers money to private companies to make massive profits and start to re-nationalise public services and the provision of essentials like utilises and water!

PersonaNonGarter

This is a thread about priorities for increased government borrowing.
So more borrowing for NHS? More borrowing for energy? No more borrowing?

You've again put up a false, straw-man argument (NHS or energy) when the choice is not binary. There are numerous things that the taxpayers' money is spent on, much of it spaffed by useless politicians on their particular hobby-horse projects or for the benefit of their donors and sponsors.

There is also an assumption that borrowing has to be paid back through personal taxation. This too is incorrect.

Businesses can also be taxed - whether it is windfall taxes on the billions that energy companies stand to earn because of the energy crisis, or through insisting that companies that trade in the UK also pay tax in the UK. Most vital UK utilities are foreign-owned - the profits are sent abroad instead of benefitting the UK consumers. The NHS directly and indirectly spends billions with Boots the Chemist - a "British" company based in Switzerland in order to avoid paying billions in taxes in the UK. Amazon and other have a huge turnover in the UK but pay little tax. The government could legislate for this to change - Amazon, Boots etc are not going to walk away from "the 5th largest economy on the planet" over a few percentage points in tax.

Instead Truss wants to cut taxes even further - something that cannot be done without having a negative impact on the vital services that everyone depends on.

Are you a tory party plant trying to change the public perception to soften society up to the inevitable destruction of the NHS.

First thought as well. It's always happened on mn but this seems more blatant.