Where is the money going to come from to meet the UK people expectations?

[Pandersmum]

So assuming that:

• everyone who receives disability benefits needs them and may actually believe they should be entitled to more
• pensioner benefits are non negotiable and again many believe they should be greater than current
• working people (most) believe they are already taxed highly and believe they cannot be taxed any more without further impact to their feeling of unfairness and resentment of the system
• it is unreasonable to expect young people with ADHD or other similar ND disorders / mental health challenges to work, even if they have qualifications and therefore they must be financially supported by the state
• Mental health challenges are very real in any age of person and therefore they must be financially supported by the state and if in work, by their employers
• rent (whatever level) should be supported by the state because it is a basic right to have a home
• NHS treatment (& the best treatment) should be free be all, no matter how expensive it is or whatever their age because people pay their taxes
• businesses are businesses and are there to make profits for their owners - therefore they can choose which country they operate in / pay their taxes in - if they don’t like the UK tax system, they can move somewhere else
• ’in work benefits’ are necessary to support ‘low paid workers, often in essential jobs’ to gain similar amounts of financial remuneration to those on benefits
• high net worth individuals can move if they don’t like the UK tax system

So just where is the money going to come from to fund the UK population of financial expectation of what the state should provide?

NHS needs to sort itself out and it would be possible to fine people. And there needs to be a better online system to those who can opt in for it. I've worked in health care for over 10 years (private and public) patient care and support services. And patients need to sort themselves out and the organisation needs to sort itself out. And the individual trusts needs to sort itself out, cause there are so many minor things that could be done.

Like today, I've done so many ridiculous things that should be some external company's job. We haven't had WiFi in the office for 3 years cause it is too expensive. We have to use fax field to fill in phone number cause it is too expensive to change it to "phone". You can just imagine how efficient the system is when fax is the default?

Both my children are ND, both work fulltime, when they turned 16 their PIP stopped beause they attended mainstream schooling and had taken GCSEs. I do think that PIP needs an overhaul, to make sure the right people are getting what they are entitled too as well as the right support.

Agreed, but they do provide other stuff that blows my mind. I’ve been offered immunotherapy recently for an anaphylactic allergy. Very nice, but very unexpected. Yet there’s a shortage of EpiPens so my GP couldn’t replace my out-of-date ones for months.

I also have varicose veins in my groin caused by pregnancy, but these are not operated on by the NHS (despite being painful) because they are deemed to be cosmetic. But my neighbour’s daughter is having endless taxpayer funded cosmetic trans surgery that has caused her hugely dangerous infections, massive weight gain and a mental health crisis that means she no longer works.

The above priorities don’t make sense to me. I’d expect the NHS to provide an EpiPen and varicose vein surgery, but not allergy immunotherapy or trans surgery.

Unfortunately for most people, the NHS simply can't survive much longer in its current form. Of course, no government is brave enough to state this obvious fact so they persist in privatising it slowly via the backdoor and running things into the ground deliberately so that they can then eventually say 'it's failed, let's privatise it'.

I don't agree with fining trusts or patients but both groups could do much better, so to speak! If the service were privatised, some things would change for the better and some for the worse. There are pros and cons to both systems. Some kind of insurance is likely to become necessary, just as the population is becoming poorer.

It wouldn’t have been because of that. Lots of people in mainstream with GCSEs get it. My dc included. Being ND isn’t necessarily enough to get it anyway. It’s not done on diagnosis but need. 2 of my ND don’t get it because they don’t need it. 1 does.

Well there are plenty of places it should stop going like using our money to help a convicted pedophile and rapist to stay here, apparently 230 grands worth

How many more like that.

What's the consequences for these men? What will ever stop then doing it? Come here, rape and attack and ruin lives and we don't deport you?
Something is seriously askew here.

I agree. My OH was offered ridiculously expensive and risky stem cell transplant for his cancer. He properly thought through the alternative options and basically, his life expectancy was the same whether they did it or not, but the risks were far greater.

It was basically a choice of stem cell transplant which was risky as it was high strength chemotherapy to kill all his cells then transplant his "cleaned" cells back into him without any immunity for anything, which would give him a life expectancy of 10 years, but still on ongoing drug based chemotherapy every month.

OR

Continue on his existing drug based chemotherapy which was working well as his body responded so well to it, he could be on the minimum dose. Where the life expectancy was 10 years!

He couldn't see the benefit of the stem cell transplant. He asked the stem cell consultant, who likewise couldn't really lay out any benefits over what he was already on, just some minor comments about "what if the current drug regime stops working so well" - and he couldn't answer my OH when he said "what if the new drug regime after stem cell transplant" stops working so well?

The cost on the stem cell transplant wasn't explicitly said to him, but they were talking a couple of hundred thousand!

What we gleaned was that the hospital had been set up with a stem cell transplant unit, and they wanted patients to fill it, as the hospital got the funding from central funds "per patient". I think there was also an element of wanting "guinea pigs" for research purposes to improve the stem cell transplant procedures etc!

OH is now 7/8 years into his ongoing chemotherapy without the stem cell transplant and the drugs are still working well and he's still on minimum dose, so highly likely to hit the same 10 year lifespan target as if he'd had the risky stem cell transplant.

Human Rights Act as loved (and partly instigated) by Starmer!!

Chickens coming home to roost for him!

Sadly, I think unlike the population and politicians accept the need for the NHS to change, we'll end up with the worst of all options, i.e. something akin to the US system where those who can afford it go private and the rest suffer with a substandard system which the NHS is sleep walking into. More and more employers are providing private healthcare as a benefit in kind. More and more "normal" people with savings are using private healthcare to by pass the NHS.

Such a shame because if we accepted we had to change it and moved the NHS towards a European style of co-funding or state backed insurance system, the NHS could be "saved" in something like it's current form.

But sadly, sleep walking into the US style of system is what will happen if we don't all accept the NHS needs radical reform.

I think you are v likely right on both counts.

As I said before, we need radical reform in many areas but no one is brave enough to do this and they would be voted out at the next election in any case. The population does not want to accept the pain. That was blatantly obvious when Labour tried to cut the WFA and there was a massive uproar. Whatever u-turn/mishmash/compromise they are doing wrt PIP also looks to be unfit for purpose and unfair.

Seriously that was what they put on the paperwork, and I know of several others that had the same, my friend lost points because she was on time for an appointment that was conducted in her own house!

I hope that you are declaring this health insurance benefit on your tax return, nothing is free and tax is due.

The employer should be declaring it on the yearly P11d return of benefits in kind to HMRC. From next year, such benefits will have to be "payrolled", i.e. taxed through the monthly payslip. It's really not for the employee to declare - it's the employer's responsibility to declare taxable benefits in kind like private healthcare and HMRC will adjust the PAYE code accordingly.

Yes sorry, I know that this is the correct procedure, just wanted people to be aware that this is not 'free' as such.

Excuse me? I don’t need to do a tax return as I am PAYE. Why are you coming at me? 🙄

I.know.that.already.

Stimulating the economy instead of hoarding the wealth. Excellent plan!

I think charging people for appointments is a good idea, and then paying them back. Also think parents should be charged and then paid back for appointments with professionals. The number of parents who don’t turn up to appointments with professionals is shocking. Yet again, the tax payer meets the cost.
A politician ( sorry cannot remember who) once said ‘ those who benefit from something are never as grateful as those who pay for it are angry.’ No truer word was ever spoken.
I think we have reached a stage where those having to make sacrifices, whether that be someone who cannot afford to buy a house, or cannot live abroad due to Brexit, or has to work into old age, or sell their property and lose all their savings, whatever it is, are now angry and have got to the point where they really, really resent paying for the benefit of others.
We should never have reached a stage where hard work is punished. Never.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jul/01/whitehall-ambition-to-cut-costs-using-ai-is-fraught-with-risk

It's ok. AI and big tech will sort it all out. For a price.

I agree - there are little benefits to the working person in this country these days.

The admin costs of that would be astronomical. We should be aiming to reduce admin and direct the savings to the front line. The tax payer pays those “professionals” the same regardless of whether appointments are missed or not. Hard work isn’t punished, by the way.

It’s not really rewarded though. I was speaking to a young bloke who was doing community payback who reckoned he’d only be about £40 a week better off in full time work than on UC as would have to pay rent/ council tax. I do think you should be substantially better off in work than out of it.

I don’t think unemployment is terribly good for people, often bored people turn to drink/ drugs which can lead to anti social behaviour.

My son is constantly at appointments due to his medical needs and I always turn up and on time. Why should I be punished due to those who don't turn up and likely don't need regular appointments for their child?

Also, what happens if you can't afford the appointment charge? Paying it back makes no difference if the person doesn't have the money in the first place.

He’d be 40% better off. How much better off do you think people should be?

I don't think paying for appointments, then paying back would work.

Plus, have you ever tried calling to cancel an appointment? Noone picks up, you leave messages which noone gets etc. Its also pretty common to be notified of an appointment after the time has elapsed. So you get a letter saying come yesterday.