?ALL medication is free for those with lifetime conditions - WHY

Patronising "Ellie I don't think you understand the system." - when you actually had failed to understand what I was saying.

I already acknowledged that you have paid more into the system than taken back. - I don't know why you feel the need to bang on about it. You are obviously very bitter about being asked to contribute to society and helping those less fortunate, but it's a different issue than the one I raised here.

My partner is a student so would get free meds anyway.

I have no issues with people who have a problem getting meds for their problem. My mother has mental health issues but chooses not to exercise her right to get a reduction in council tax as she can afford not to take it.

Yes there are worse issues but I only just learnt about this one.

You go ahead and take more from the system - but stop complaining that the government can't give money to others. There is a limited pot to go around - whether people like it or not it's a fact. You can't complain that there are disabled people who can't afford to live then take take take on your free prescription card.

Very 'middle england'

If you're not going to bother reading what I write it's a pretty pointless discussion.

PS - see how annoying it is when someone else closes the discussion before you can reply

Should this topic be open to discussion and debate, yes,, is this how one goes about it, no

When one makes a comment like the one made, then one must accept someone will disagree, that's what debate & discussion is all about.

I'm not angry--I rarely get angry about anything. I could have got annoyed at the comment about your salary of 13 grand a year was perhaps paying for me!!! However--I did not get angry. I have paid for my entitlements--you are paying for yours in the future & that's 1 of the things I meant you didn't understand.

As far as council tax, road tax is concerned--it's like purchasing gas & electric really. All necessary for people to live in todays world, so I am getting what I pay for--not something out of anything. That's what I meant.

Middle England eh? Hmmmm--me thinks not! I'm just a woman from a working class background, who had to start at the very bottom in life & work really hard. My Father was a high earner, but he worked in an engineering factory, working long long, dirty hours. He believed I, like him, had to earn for myself & I did, from a very early age.

I lived in a prefabricated house, belonging to the place my Father worked. I went to the local comp & left with basic qualifications as my Father wouldn't support any of us in further education. He left school & found his way--he expected his children should do the same. I got a job in an office, lived, learned & fought upwards until I had enough knowledge to branch out on my own. I did so by cashing in a pension I started in my 20's. Just 250 quid!

I wasn't lucky. I worked long, long hours--much longer than my Father to make a better life for myself & my family. I brought up my child & 2 others I took on, educated them to & beyond degree level.

I'm still supporting my own grown up child, who is still a student--aged 26.

You & I have 1 thing in common--we're very opinionated. You should go into politics--you'd do very well.

House--mwah!

:D

House - I couldn't agree more.

I became frustrated as you didn't seem to be understanding what I was saying but instead reacted to what you thought I said from a very defensive position. I'm not sure why me stating that someone on a lower wage, who is contributing to a system, would be annoyed that *extra* (not to do with their condition) medicines of people far wealthier than themselves are free - would upset you... ? From what you have said about your background I would think you could empathise with such a sentiment.

You may be from a working class background but given that you said you ran a company and employed 40 people I would suggest you have reached Middle England. - congratulations - it seems you have indeed worked very hard. I find it curious you feel the need to cling to a working class status when you have clearly worked your arse off to get beyond that: as you say "I worked long, long hours--much longer than my Father to make a better life for myself"..... . Are you ashamed of having worked hard, been successful and become middle-class?

That is however a different topic entirely. If your child is 26 and still a student the must be at a level of education to have studied a certain amount of philosophical theory and/or social theory. You might find a chat with them about class and how we define it interesting - there are of course no rights and wrongs in that debate.

I think we both agree you are paying into the system and getting something out of it - and most likely paying in more than it costs to supply what you have used. We're just phrasing it differently.

My original point was in response to you saying that you take nothing out of the system.

That's clearly not true but what you take out you are paying for through your contributions. - I never denied that which is why it's so frustrating you keep having a go at me about it! Particularly as it is some distance from the topic I wanted to discuss.

But it has brought us back to that topic with your statement that " I'm going to stop being daft & not asking for things on my prescription. I pay a lot for skin medication, bathing & otherwise due to the steroids. I'll ask for them next time I go & get them put on repeat".

Given the background you have outlined and your current position - (of being wealthy enough to at least able to support an adult child - although there are numerous funding opportunities for further education - but that's yet another topic) - it baffles me that you feel you should take more from the system. YES you have paid a lot in but surely your upbringing should help you realise that there are those that need help from the system more.

We both agree (i think) that the 'leeches' are a major problem. But, at the end of the day there is a limited pot of money. Ok - you have paid a lot in but the more you take out the less there is for others. No they may not have paid in as much as you but (assuming their need is genuine) does that mean they shouldn't be helped?

Clearly if you were to fall into a category whereby you couldn't afford any medication then it should be there for you. But I would hope that we do not live in a society where everyone claims back what they put in and leaves everyone else to cope. If that were the case those paying 40% tax would be entitled to most of everything.

Perhaps that's the way it is but that's not how I think it should be.

If people have a lifetime condition then yes, their medication should be provided for that and any associated illnesses. However, if they can afford it, I do not think they should get non-associated medications free. If they are in a state where they cannot afford it then they would have an exemption certificate anyway.

If there were free prescriptions for all then this discussion would be redundant. The argument that there can't be free prescriptions for all due to there being only a limited fiscal pot of resources is based on the premise that money is real, limited and intrinsically valuable but this is not the reality, money today is not real, limited or intrinsically valuable it is what's called Fiat Money and it is arguably the basis (hand in hand with Fractional Reserve Banking) of the biggest fraud in human history (but that's another story)... It is estimated that the UK as a whole (taking into account all debt, Government and Personal) is £2.25 Trillions in debt, given such levels of debt £500 Millions or even £1 Billion here or there is a drop in the ocean, if the Bank of England can create £300 Billions plus out of thin air (such as in it's Quantitative Easing strategy) or our Government can pledge £10 Billions to the IMF to help save the World then it's just a administrative / policy matter to allow free prescriptions for all within the UK.

I thank you :D

OMG! My brain capacity cannot take in all you've said.

Middle England I am not, but I might have been considered to be when I had 40 staff. Life, health, economy, the world, & earning capacity change. I have been poor on a couple

of occasions in my life & I never ever forget my roots--it's what made me what I am.

I've lived long enough to remember when all prescriptions were free, then a small charge was incurred & grew. My Father was in his 40's when I was born & I have been brought up to tales of pre-NHS.

My Mother lost her 15 year old Brother, who died because they couldn't afford a Doctor--he had stood on a

rusty nail & antibiotics would have saved him. It was not possible as they couldn't afford it.

I am aware about the current economic state of this country, NHS, world--probably more than most as I have the time.

You make assumptions about my wealth etc. Just because I've been self employed, had 40 staff, doesn't mean I'm rolling in it. I have been in most positions in life & can see life from all directions. It's the only thing about being my age I value.

Thanks for your input--I will still take my free prescriptions to stop my diminishing savings going down any further.

I could be swayed into accepting some level of means testing regarding free prescription eligibility

I think all the uk should have the same, regardless of what it is & I think chronic condtions should be free anyway.

It's only recent that cancer patients have free prescriptions. A friend of mine had to pay for all her anti-cancer meds. She had to travel a long way for treatment, costing her a fortune & she had to leave her job as she couldn't cope with her job, the sickness & having to look after her young Son.

She's certainly not well off, but fortunately has made a full recovery. Unfortunately, the cancer is genetic & her Son is now suffering with it--it's back for the 3rd time with him. :-(

Prescriptions are means tested.

I have said all along those with lifetime conditions should get free presceiptions for their condition and associated illnesses. I would agree those with chronic conditions should also get free drugs.

I cannot agree that if you can afford prescriptions for things not associated with your condition you should get them free while others pay. If you have been poor in your life you should appreciate that those people are more in need of free prescriptions than someone who has money - and if you have savings you have money.

Yes in an ideal society everyone would get free meds. House - if you want to turn this into a discussion about society and ideology there are political forums out there. Have you read much Foucault?

Apologies for typos the buttons on my phone are small. Sometimes I miss the old chunky ones.

This could have taken some time but instead I'll simply cut to the chase. It is my humble opinion that what you propose is in fact unworkable

Woah - I didn't propose anything....

I said it would be nice if we all got free prescriptions but I conceded it is an unrealistic ideal.

Other than that my point is.... there is already provision for low income people to get free prescriptions.

I have no problem with people who are chronically ill or who have lifetime conditions getting medication for their conditions or illnesses that arise from them.

I object to them getting free medication for non-related medications.

Of course you are proposing something, I'm merely saying that when you fully realise it into writing it'll actually be unworkable This is not saying you are wrong. I can see the injustice in the state of affairs you are complaining about Prove me wrong, loosely outline the administrative process that would be required to rectify this discrepancy ???

A GP has to write a prescription there could be a simple tick box to indicate that prescription should be free due to chronic illness or it being a lifetime condition.

If the prescription isn't ticked there the person pays (unless some other factor applies).

So it would require a box on a prescription....