What will life be like under Reform?

[Easipeelerie]

I have accepted the likelihood of the next government being Reform. I don’t think the government after that will necessarily be Reform. But in the 4 Reform years, what do people think life will be like for the different groups in our country? Will we see very immediate changes?

This chart shows that every government has increased NHS finding in real terms. There have been reductions as a percentage of gdp, but that's hardly 'starving' it. Other countries with functioning health care services like France pay very little more.

The problem is the usual socialist philosophy:
a) make no effort to actually apply sensible constraints to stop waste
b) instead remove the universal provision - which allows those people who actually fund it to benefit - because 'they can afford' to pay for it themselves.

Redistribute, redistribute, redistribute to those the socialists deem more deserving.

Here's the graph

When was universal provision of healthcare removed? The lack of NHS dentistry is due to “the market” - dentists are voting with their feet because the NHS doesn’t pay enough.

Have you tried getting any non-critical care through the NHS recently?

Yes. Both of us have received excellent care in the last six months. One of us for early stage cancer, the other for preventative treatment.

The screening programmes are still running and critical care like cancer still usually works, but anything else just doesn't happen. So people pay privately - even if they don’t have medical insurance - because their quality of life is so impacted.

I don’t know . Farage can promise to end illegal immigration, but can he ? He says he’ll turn the boats around ? But how practically can he do that ?

But the cancer wasn’t picked up through a screening programme and it wasn’t critical because it was early stage. My experience is that it’s working well - I filled in a triage form on a Tuesday, was given a GP appointment on Wednesday and had bloods taken on Friday. Who could possibly complain about that?

Glad it's working well for you. It absolutely isn't working well for my family - and is in shockingly stark contrast to the care other family members in one of the countries mentioned upthread are recieving.

Maybe you need to change your GP surgery. 🤷‍♀️

Simply because the Netherlands is less unequal than the UK. The UK needs to pull an entire cohort of people up before it can afford to be less redistributive - it cannot afford the current levels of inequality because it creates societal division and instability. The UK has to do the hard yards first.

I also don't understand why you would call better pensions and higher benefit payments not redistributive. They very much are.

And any privatisation that has happened - railways, utilities etc. - has been done under much stricter rules than in the UK, so there hasn't been the level of asset stripping that has gutted public services.

I also don't understand why you would call better pensions and higher benefit payments not redistributive. They very much are

Pension: UK state pension is very low, and is the same as income support for someone who has never worked and contributed nothing. So someone who has worked at a moderate/highly paid job effectively gets nothing more from all the money they've contributed over their lifetime - it's all shared out equally regardless of contribution. A decent state pension system where the amount recieved is linked to how much tax the person contributed throughout their lifetime (like most of Europe has) is far less redistributive

Benefits: In the UK if you have built up any savings at all (likely if you've worked professionally for more than a few years) then you get absolutely nothing from the state if you lose your job. You need to use up everything you've built up your whole life before you get any support. Ie there is effectively zero state safety net for someone who works and is over the age of about 30. Whereas if you've never worked, you get everything paid for your whole life. Not sure that can really be called a 'safety net' . The system you describe in the Netherlands - which also matches most of Europe - is far less redistributive. It recognises that someone with a higher salary has set their life up with higher outgoings, and actually supports them to get their life back on track. It's also recognising that it's only fair that when you've been paying tens of thousands in tax every year for decades, the state bloody should help you when you temporarily fall on hard times. But that's not socialist enough for the UK. Let the person who has paid hundreds of thousands of tax to support other people over the years lose their house, have their kids thrown out of school, before they get given back a single penny: state support should only ever be given to 'poor' people.

The UK gives a spectacularly shit social deal to mid/high-earning people, compared to pretty much any other country. You pay European taxes, and get nothing back: no safety net, no state services, and to rub salt in the wound you're vilified by the Left despite funding everything..

I didn't really notice it for a very long time. You kind of get used to your country as it is - and you're busy working and living your life. Once you see it, you can't un-see it.

I would need to move out of the SE - most hated region by socialists.

But my life and family are here. Why should we need to move, just because socialists hate us?

I think the difference for Reform voters is that they believe Nigel Farage is sincere about wanting to control immigration and lower numbers.

When they watch Starmer and his crew fail, they cannot tell if it is just that the task is so challenging, or that they actually don’t want to do it.

Stuff like this makes Starmer look pretty open boarders, by his own admission:

https://spectator.com/article/why-is-alaa-abd-el-fattahs-return-a-top-priority-for-keir-starmer/

Simply because the Netherlands is less unequal than the UK. The UK needs to pull an entire cohort of people up before it can afford to be less redistributive - it cannot afford the current levels of inequality because it creates societal division and instability. The UK has to do the hard yards first.

Well I suppose we'll see whether another 3 years of Left wing policy: destroying jobs, increasing taxes and welfare - so that there's even less incentive to work - driving productive young people and businesses away from the UK, will be 'the hard yards' needed to improve UK living standards, or whether it will drive us yet further down the living standards index. I mean, we'll all be equally poor. I guess that's what the socialists really want.

Did your GP function well under the previous government?

And under the socialists in the 2010?

NHS budget over the years

There is a bizarre hatred for rich people in the UK by the far left- yet it’s the rich people paying for the country ! Who don’t think pays for the the NHS, social care, schools?

I earn £32 k and pay the basic tax rate gets it’s still a quite a lot of my pay. Higher earners pay a lot in income tax.

If all the rich people thought , sod this and actually left the UK, we’d be screwed.

Theres so many British born people on welfare who make it a lifestyle choice , it’s those people that are bankrupting us.

It’s not immigrants that are bankrupting us and I say that as someone who’s quite right wing..

That shows the increase in budget every year. In real terms too - ie allowing for inflation already. Notice that it's always positive: ie always increasing in real terms.

@TopPocketFind

When the global economy was booming, the UK could get away with vast amounts of inefficient socialist redistribution. London was the most exciting place in the world to work, and salaries were high enough that high tax didn't matter.

But as the UK's economy has deteriorated (even more than globally), the socialists have doubled down - redistributing ever more. We have the highest tax burden since the years rebuilding immediately after WW2 and the highest welfare spending ever.

And now they're driving away business and ambitious young people. It's no longer worth staying. And that means that the degradation of the UK's situation will snowball.

The NHS though was never designed to cater for what it does now though. So many illnesses have been discovered and treated since then , so many more people diagnosed with cancer and treated for it. Obviously that’s a great thing , but not something they thought about in the 1940s.

You can’t just keep pumping money into a system that’s model has changed.

From what I understand,Reform never said anything about getting rid of the NHS, they said they work with the private sector and look at how other countries work.

We can’t put our fingers in our ears and not change anything because sooner or later there’s going to be less money going into the public coffers.

We have an ever increasing ageing population and many working age people not working.

Eventually they’ll run out of people paying enough tax. We need to look at every long term option, not just worry about the next parliament.

Evan paying money into a health insurance policy , such as Farage suggested ,if it’s long term solution why not explore it?

He already said that nobody will not be treated, so if you don’t pay into it you’ll still be looked after like the NHS does now.

Wasn't Brexit supposed to solve that?

We either pay people decent wages or not.

Did you support the doctor strikes?

Your party had 14 years, but keep blaming the socialists/left

Any suggestion of how Reform plans to fund all their ideas?

The trouble is doctors are vitally needed. You can’t just say to them, ok you want strike ? Crack on then..
Other than pay them what they want I can’t see how you can change it..

Nope none whatsoever. What did they say ?