Aberdeen BT Facebook account claims food banks are "normal"

[Carl Cort's Hamstring]

You're shouldering it either way. It's not like Alex Salmond shits free packets of penicillin. The difference is that by charging at point of use it becomes a flat tax and thus regressive.

I take the view that me paying for prescriptions benefits the Health Service as a whole, and so I don't mind doing it.

In terms of it being regressive, there are already a whole raft of exemptions (as people have pointed out, 90% of medicine dispensed is free). Also, when you compare it to our European neighbours, England comes out pretty well in terms of the burden on the patient. France, Germany, Spain, Belgium, Denmark, Ireland and Norway all charge for prescriptions, and in some of those countries operate with nowhere near the patient subsidy that the NHS does (Ireland for example charges much much more for a whole range of medical services). Sweden charges you to see your GP, and the Netherlands make everyone take out their own health insurance.

England's system is just as, if not more progressive in terms of the cost to the patient than almost everywhere else in Europe. People who present prescription charges as some great evil don't appreciate just how lucky we are.

[Thumper]

People who present prescription charges as some great evil don't appreciate just how lucky we are.

People who don't view prescription charges with great suspicion are on the path to a great many less savoury notions regarding the universality of the free health service.

[Carl Cort's Hamstring]

People who don't view prescription charges with great suspicion are on the path to a great many less savoury notions regarding the universality of the free health service.

If that's the ultimate goal they're taking their sweet time about it, bearing in mind the charges were introduced in 1952. I view prescription charges as a much lesser evil than the practice of charging to see your doctor like they do in super progressive Sweden.

[Crùbag]

I take the view that me paying for prescriptions benefits the Health Service as a whole, and so I don't mind doing it.

In terms of it being regressive, there are already a whole raft of exemptions (as people have pointed out, 90% of medicine dispensed is free). Also, when you compare it to our European neighbours, England comes out pretty well in terms of the burden on the patient. France, Germany, Spain, Belgium, Denmark, Ireland and Norway all charge for prescriptions, and in some of those countries operate with nowhere near the patient subsidy that the NHS does (Ireland for example charges much much more for a whole range of medical services). Sweden charges you to see your GP, and the Netherlands make everyone take out their own health insurance.

England's system is just as, if not more progressive in terms of the cost to the patient than almost everywhere else in Europe. People who present prescription charges as some great evil don't appreciate just how lucky we are.

I'm all for it. A few people I know who don't have the much dosh save loads by not having to pay for repeat prescriptions. I don't need any, yet, so am happy to pay for them through taxes.

Plus, I did read a few years ago that means testing would cost more than charging.

Anyway, we all pay for Trident and the House of Lards but see eff-all in return for it.

[Crùbag]

As to health, seems like Darling wants it both ways. In 2010 the Tories in London would threaten Scotland's NHS. Now they're gonna save it!!

http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/referendum/9589-yes-scotland-challenges-alistair-darling-on-nhs-funding-hypocrisy

The Scottish Labour Party’s 2010 General Election Broadcast warned that a Westminster Tory government has and would cut Scotland’s health spending and that this is a 'risk' that Scotland faces. The broadcast states:

"They [the Tories] starved our schools and hospitals of funding and there’s a real risk they’d do the same again".

"They wouldn’t fight for the NHS, they call it a 60 year mistake."

"The Tories would ... slash funding for schools and hospitals ... The Tories haven’t changed."

[Carl Cort's Hamstring]

I'm all for it. A few people I know who don't have the much dosh save loads by not having to pay for repeat prescriptions. I don't need any, yet, so am happy to pay for them through taxes.

Plus, I did read a few years ago that means testing would cost more than charging.

The first line I've got no issue with. It's an ideological point of view, and a completely reasonable one.

The second bit I'm not sure about. Like I said in a post before, you always hear people say means testing would cost more than it brings in, but I've never seen any evidence to back it up. Obviously if your principles say that a universal system is the way to go then that argument doesn't really matter anyway.

[Thumper]

The second bit I'm not sure about. Like I said in a post before, you always hear people say means testing would cost more than it brings in, but I've never seen any evidence to back it up.

WOS did this two years ago. Short and sweet.

[Casual Bystander]

So, so far we have BT Aberdeen trying to claim that food-banks are an advancement in humanity or Scotland as a country, or a demonstration of "faith" (whatever that is meant to mean). We have the No camp trying to dismiss food-banks as a bad thing because other places have them which is an interesting line of argument (gun murder is OK in the UK because there is a lot of it in the US?) and finally we have McVey (the Tory MP) claiming that food-banks are not reflective of the economic conditions and to do with supermarkets handing food to them instead of throwing them out and thus trying to avoid waste - possibly one of the most batshit crazy attempts to dismiss the problem.

It seems to be that the majority of those saying, "food-banks are a bad thing and we shouldn't have a society where they are necessary", are from the Yes camp. That's a generalisation there are obviously No voters how find their existence saddening and their increase in use worrying, but why is it so difficult for the No campaign and/or Tories to just accept that they are simply not a good thing? Why do they feel the need to defend poverty and misery?

This whole, "nothing is broken, nothing to see here, don't worry your pretty little heads about anything, it's all a land of milk and honey", attitude is sickening imo. It doesn't matter which side of the debate you come from, food-banks should in no way ever be seen as "normal" and people should have the conviction to be honest rather than be scared to break the political line.

If/When there is a Yes vote, and food-banks were prolific within Scotland but not the rUK, I would be one of the first to pour scorn on those responsible regardless of the political colours they wrap themselves in.