FORUMS FORUMS






RLFANS.COM
Celebrating
25 years service to
the Rugby League
Community!

   WWW.RLFANS.COM • View topic - Donald Trump
::Off-topic discussion.
RankPostsTeam
International Star906No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Mar 02 201410 years191st
OnlineLast PostLast Page
28th Mar 24 06:3012th Mar 24 18:00LINK
Milestone Posts
500
1000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530

Re: Donald Trump : Sun Dec 08, 2019 4:22 pm  
sally cinnamon wrote:
Maybe by abuse of the NHS he means people who smoke and drink and eat fatty food and create problems that the NHS has to pick up. They will defend their lifestyle as it's a "free country" and it's "not the role of the nanny state to tell me how I should live my life". However, they're happy to expect the taxpayer to pick up the bill for treatment that they have caused.

Now an insurance based system, where insurers had information about peoples lifestyles (surely achievable in the era of big data and multiple transactions) would enable insurers to price health premiums appropriately. So if you are making transactions purchasing cigarettes, alcohol etc, your insurer gets to find out and can adjust the expected risk and so put your premiums upward. This would be more efficient from a market perspective and would create incentives for people to live more healthy lifestyles. Unfortunately the critics of the NHS don't tend to be too keen on this idea!

If everybody stopped smoking and drinking tomorrow the country would be skint fairly quickly. What about all the tax revenue we get from alcohol and tobacco? I object more to junkies who cost us a fortune and pay no tax on their "habit". Also people who drink and smoke die earlier so they will on average take less pension payments.
RankPostsTeam
International Star5113
JoinedServiceReputation
Feb 23 201410 years83rd
OnlineLast PostLast Page
28th Mar 24 07:4126th Mar 24 21:35LINK
Milestone Posts
5000
10000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530

Re: Donald Trump : Sun Dec 08, 2019 6:02 pm  
This idea is the dumbest I have heard. What you are saying is that because those on low incomes or no incomes who are by circumstances also the least healthy should pay more to access healthcare.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
Club Coach16252
JoinedServiceReputation
Oct 12 200419 years58th
OnlineLast PostLast Page
19th Mar 24 20:0627th Feb 24 19:53LINK
Milestone Posts
15000
20000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Signature
Challenge Cup winners 2009 2010 2012 2019
League Leaders 2011 2016

Re: Donald Trump : Sun Dec 08, 2019 10:40 pm  
Sal Paradise wrote:
To clear this up I am not suggesting we move to an insurance-based system. Health care in the US will be move expensive as there is a profit element plus as has been mentioned before the cost of drugs is higher. Also the US are prepared to push the boundries in terms of clinical treatments i.e. use live humans for practise but charge them massively for taking part in the trial!!


The cost of drugs in the US is higher because you get countries like the UK with monopsony purchasers being able to use their market power to drive down the prices of US drugs that they purchase.

If the UK didn't have this then it would return more money to the US pharmaceuticals which will allow the US pharma companies to lower the prices to US citizens.

Now if this was the other way round, and we were having to pay more because other countries were using their healthcare system's market power to drive down prices of British-invented, British-produced drugs, so other countries were paying less for British drugs than we were, we would be pretty outraged and would be asking why our government wasn't doing something about it.

Which is why Trump will have this as a top priority for the US in trade negotiations to the UK and make sure the UK pays higher sums in drug prices to enable that to cross-subsidise cheaper drugs in the US. From their perspective it is perfectly reasonable. The UK can protest and refuse if it wants, in which case - no deal with the US, or as seems to be fashionable to describe it now, 'we can trade with them on WTO terms'.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
International Board Member18060No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Feb 27 200222 years291st
OnlineLast PostLast Page
11th Jun 23 20:4411th Jun 23 20:53LINK
Milestone Posts
15000
20000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
On the road
Signature
Your job is to say to yourself on a job interview does the hiring manager likes me or not. If you aren't a particular manager's cup of tea, you haven't failed -- you've dodged a bullet.

Re: Donald Trump : Mon Dec 09, 2019 9:53 am  
sally cinnamon wrote:
The cost of drugs in the US is higher because you get countries like the UK with monopsony purchasers being able to use their market power to drive down the prices of US drugs that they purchase.

If the UK didn't have this then it would return more money to the US pharmaceuticals which will allow the US pharma companies to lower the prices to US citizens.

Now if this was the other way round, and we were having to pay more because other countries were using their healthcare system's market power to drive down prices of British-invented, British-produced drugs, so other countries were paying less for British drugs than we were, we would be pretty outraged and would be asking why our government wasn't doing something about it.

Which is why Trump will have this as a top priority for the US in trade negotiations to the UK and make sure the UK pays higher sums in drug prices to enable that to cross-subsidise cheaper drugs in the US. From their perspective it is perfectly reasonable. The UK can protest and refuse if it wants, in which case - no deal with the US, or as seems to be fashionable to describe it now, 'we can trade with them on WTO terms'.


In the UK we only use 10% of US sourced pharmaceuticals so the impacts of this need to be put into context. I fully understand Trump's desire to get prices up but nobody in their right mind would add additional costs to a sector already struggling with funding.

There would have to be some significant gains in other areas to justify some movement in pharma.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
Club Coach16252
JoinedServiceReputation
Oct 12 200419 years58th
OnlineLast PostLast Page
19th Mar 24 20:0627th Feb 24 19:53LINK
Milestone Posts
15000
20000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Signature
Challenge Cup winners 2009 2010 2012 2019
League Leaders 2011 2016

Re: Donald Trump : Mon Dec 09, 2019 10:48 am  
The gains will be political - simply 'getting a deal' with the US will be seen as a big feather in Boris Johnson's cap, especially given that 'the establishment' have said that it will take 7 years or more to do a deal with the US.

You can get a deal signed off with the US very quickly if you are willing to concede what they want, as they will basically draft up the deal for you. There aren't that many gains to be made with a US deal anyway as the US isn't particularly keen on opening its markets, they do deals to promote their own industries' opportunities abroad particularly agrifood, pharma and digital tech firms.

But the detail of it won't really matter to most of the public. Even concerns about them lowering food health standards - these will be more than an issue if we get pressed in to lowering standards by India or China, but if it comes to accepting US standards most people would think well if I went to the US I wouldn't mind eating their food etc so what's the problem.

The biggest barrier to a trade deal with the US will be if Boris has conceded everything to get a deal with the EU, because that will tie us to standards that will be incompatible to the Americans and their interest in a deal will drop rapidly. But Boris may figure that it plays well politically to stand up to Brussels and no-deal them at the end of the transition point, and then go for a rapid concession to the Americans to paint himself as the man who took us out of the EU and signed a deal with the Americans when nobody thought he could.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
Club Coach17871
JoinedServiceReputation
Apr 24 201113 years46th
OnlineLast PostLast Page
27th Mar 24 16:1128th Mar 24 10:32LINK
Milestone Posts
15000
20000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530

Re: Donald Trump : Mon Dec 09, 2019 10:55 am  
wotsupcas wrote:
If everybody stopped smoking and drinking tomorrow the country would be skint fairly quickly. What about all the tax revenue we get from alcohol and tobacco? I object more to junkies who cost us a fortune and pay no tax on their "habit". Also people who drink and smoke die earlier so they will on average take less pension payments.


Where have you been ?
There has been a smoking ban in operation for 10 years and although this has killed plenty of local pubs, it's hardly bankrupted the country.
The cost of dealing with health issues massively out weigh the revenue for the exchequer.
Aside from the obvious, such were the rates of tax on cigarettes and booze that, the black market took over anyway, meaning even less tax going into the pot.
As for the junkies, it's a fine line between heavy drinker and alcoholic and for drugs, just what is your solution ?
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
International Board Member18060No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Feb 27 200222 years291st
OnlineLast PostLast Page
11th Jun 23 20:4411th Jun 23 20:53LINK
Milestone Posts
15000
20000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
On the road
Signature
Your job is to say to yourself on a job interview does the hiring manager likes me or not. If you aren't a particular manager's cup of tea, you haven't failed -- you've dodged a bullet.

Re: Donald Trump : Mon Dec 09, 2019 11:00 am  
sally cinnamon wrote:
The gains will be political - simply 'getting a deal' with the US will be seen as a big feather in Boris Johnson's cap, especially given that 'the establishment' have said that it will take 7 years or more to do a deal with the US.

You can get a deal signed off with the US very quickly if you are willing to concede what they want, as they will basically draft up the deal for you. There aren't that many gains to be made with a US deal anyway as the US isn't particularly keen on opening its markets, they do deals to promote their own industries' opportunities abroad particularly agrifood, pharma and digital tech firms.

But the detail of it won't really matter to most of the public. Even concerns about them lowering food health standards - these will be more than an issue if we get pressed in to lowering standards by India or China, but if it comes to accepting US standards most people would think well if I went to the US I wouldn't mind eating their food etc so what's the problem.

The biggest barrier to a trade deal with the US will be if Boris has conceded everything to get a deal with the EU, because that will tie us to standards that will be incompatible to the Americans and their interest in a deal will drop rapidly. But Boris may figure that it plays well politically to stand up to Brussels and no-deal them at the end of the transition point, and then go for a rapid concession to the Americans to paint himself as the man who took us out of the EU and signed a deal with the Americans when nobody thought he could.


I don't disagree with anything you have written - I do think it would be political suicide to increase costs in the NHS without a more positive outcome somewhere else that covers the costs and some. I do think no deal is a distinct possibility especially if the Tories have a working majority.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
International Board Member18060No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Feb 27 200222 years291st
OnlineLast PostLast Page
11th Jun 23 20:4411th Jun 23 20:53LINK
Milestone Posts
15000
20000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
On the road
Signature
Your job is to say to yourself on a job interview does the hiring manager likes me or not. If you aren't a particular manager's cup of tea, you haven't failed -- you've dodged a bullet.

Re: Donald Trump : Mon Dec 09, 2019 11:03 am  
wrencat1873 wrote:
Where have you been ?
There has been a smoking ban in operation for 10 years and although this has killed plenty of local pubs, it's hardly bankrupted the country.
The cost of dealing with health issues massively out weigh the revenue for the exchequer.
Aside from the obvious, such were the rates of tax on cigarettes and booze that, the black market took over anyway, meaning even less tax going into the pot.
As for the junkies, it's a fine line between heavy drinker and alcoholic and for drugs, just what is your solution ?


All good points - the country is awash with class A drugs - kids use them every weekend and very few get addicted are will building up a medical crisis in the future?
bren2k 
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
Club Coach15521
JoinedServiceReputation
Mar 24 201014 yearsN/A
OnlineLast PostLast Page
5th May 20 12:495th May 20 08:10LINK
Milestone Posts
15000
20000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Ossett

Re: Donald Trump : Mon Dec 09, 2019 12:02 pm  
Sal Paradise wrote:
All good points - the country is awash with class A drugs - kids use them every weekend and very few get addicted are will building up a medical crisis in the future?


Unlikely - and if so, certainly one that would pale into insignificance alongside the impact of the perfectly legal alcohol, which costs the NHS, Police and Social Services a huge amount in terms of reaction, clean-up and ongoing issues.

We have a quaint and puritanical attitude towards drug use in this country, which comes from a position of government ministers being wilfully uninformed about the whole issue - and a desperate desire to appease those people who want to see (some) drug users punished; resulting in disproportionately long prison sentences for young, working class kids, particularly black kids, for doing exactly what journalists and politicians have admitted to doing themselves. It seems we perceive the harms are much less when it involves posh people snorting it up behind closed doors?

Anyhow - it's a whole other subject - but there are some models, most notably Portugal, that demonstrate that a shift in public policy towards drug use can have some really positive effects; I would like to think that we'll get there, if for no reasons other than very practical, economic ones.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
International Board Member18060No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Feb 27 200222 years291st
OnlineLast PostLast Page
11th Jun 23 20:4411th Jun 23 20:53LINK
Milestone Posts
15000
20000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
On the road
Signature
Your job is to say to yourself on a job interview does the hiring manager likes me or not. If you aren't a particular manager's cup of tea, you haven't failed -- you've dodged a bullet.

Re: Donald Trump : Mon Dec 09, 2019 2:25 pm  
bren2k wrote:
Unlikely - and if so, certainly one that would pale into insignificance alongside the impact of the perfectly legal alcohol, which costs the NHS, Police and Social Services a huge amount in terms of reaction, clean-up and ongoing issues.

We have a quaint and puritanical attitude towards drug use in this country, which comes from a position of government ministers being wilfully uninformed about the whole issue - and a desperate desire to appease those people who want to see (some) drug users punished; resulting in disproportionately long prison sentences for young, working class kids, particularly black kids, for doing exactly what journalists and politicians have admitted to doing themselves. It seems we perceive the harms are much less when it involves posh people snorting it up behind closed doors?

Anyhow - it's a whole other subject - but there are some models, most notably Portugal, that demonstrate that a shift in public policy towards drug use can have some really positive effects; I would like to think that we'll get there, if for no reasons other than very practical, economic ones.


Do you if legalised it and the government supplied these drugs that would help or would this simply push this underground or cause problems with organised crime as you cut off a major source of revenue for them?

I agree with all you put by the way
PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 160 guests

REPLY

Subject: 
Message:
   
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.
Use the FULL EDITOR to better format content or upload images, be notified of replies etc...

Return to The Sin Bin


RLFANS Recent Posts
FORUM
LAST
POST
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
2m
Saints a
Azul
18
3m
The official Leon Hayes Thread
ratticusfinc
15
3m
Squad for Catalan
Kevin Turvey
8
9m
Stats article
tad rhino
3
12m
ALL NEW 49ERS ERA LEEDS UTD THREAD
tad rhino
1386
13m
2024 Southstandercom Prediction Competition Week 6
rugbyleague8
26
29m
Game - Song Titles
Wanderer
34269
31m
BORED The Band Name Game
Wanderer
55983
36m
Smith out ASAP
Backwoodsman
138
Recent
The Good Friday Derby Massacre
Armavinit
124
FORUM
LAST
VIEW
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
56s
TV Games - Not Hull
Armavinit
1379
1m
No grade A for 2025 for Trinity
Khlav Kalash
22
1m
Squad for Catalan
Kevin Turvey
8
1m
Smith out ASAP
Backwoodsman
138
1m
Challenge Cup
stpatricks
37
1m
2024 Southstandercom Prediction Competition Week 6
rugbyleague8
26
1m
Game - Song Titles
Wanderer
34269
2m
Squad for Sheffield
AdamH
1
2m
This weeks disciplinary
sir adrian m
1007
2m
BORED The Band Name Game
Wanderer
55983
FORUM
NEW
TOPICS
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
TODAY
Stats article
tad rhino
3
TODAY
21 man Squads - Devils v Leopards
Septimius Se
2
TODAY
Squad for Catalan
Kevin Turvey
8
TODAY
The Wigan Way - New Podcast - Chairman Special
Jukesays
1
TODAY
Dons v Swinton Lions 30 June 2024
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Squad for Sheffield
AdamH
1
TODAY
London Away
Fartown58
1
TODAY
The Bulls away
Hudd-Shay
8
TODAY
The official Leon Hayes Thread
ratticusfinc
15
TODAY
Saints a
Azul
18
TODAY
Leon Ruan signs on loan
Jemmo
2
TODAY
Wardle
Jo Jumbuck
3
TODAY
Huddersfield - Home
Fartown58
6
TODAY
Max Wood on loan to Bradford 2 weeks
rubber ducki
7
TODAY
Jake Wardle 5 Year deal
Zig
22
TODAY
No grade A for 2025 for Trinity
Khlav Kalash
22
TODAY
Cup Quarter Final TV Arrangements
RLFANS News
1
TODAY
Rd 6 I Cas A
Rockinhorse
21
TODAY
WIRE YED Prediction Competition Catalans Home
karetaker
14
TODAY
Spare Tickets Friday
post
4
TODAY
RL Podcast
AgbriggAmble
1
NEWS ITEMS
VIEWS
Cup Quarter Final TV Arrangeme..
486
2024 Challenge Cup Quarter Fin..
610
Easy Does It For The Dragons A..
538
Warrington Demolish London For..
647
Leigh Leopards Beat Plucky Fea..
699
Saints Triumph Over Disappoint..
674
Easy Win for the Wolves Over L..
922
Dragons Condemn Castleford To ..
902
Leigh Leopards Secure First Po..
1045
St Helens Tame The Rhinos To W..
1018
Wigan Warriors Come From Behin..
1074
Betfred Championship and Leagu..
1064
2024 Challenge Cup Sixth Round..
3835
Featherstone Win Extra Time Cu..
1185
Dragons Triumph Over Hull FC t..
1063
RLFANS Match Centre
Matches on TV
Table 'boards.stats_fixtures' doesn't exist