Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Filippo

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, The Phantom said:

 

However I do agree with Singapore's idea.  If you're unvaxxed you're paying your own Covid-19 hospital bills. 

My gut feeling is similar, however charging the unvaxxed for their covid treatment is in the same ballpark as charging smokers if they get lung disease, charging the obese for just about anything wrong with them, charging drinkers for getting pissed and falling over or fighting...

We either have a health service that is free at the point of delivery or not.  I don't necessarily disagree with charging people for healthcare, but I don't think this single issue discriminatory method is the way forward.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, wrighty said:

My gut feeling is similar, however charging the unvaxxed for their covid treatment is in the same ballpark as charging smokers if they get lung disease, charging the obese for just about anything wrong with them, charging drinkers for getting pissed and falling over or fighting...

We either have a health service that is free at the point of delivery or not.  I don't necessarily disagree with charging people for healthcare, but I don't think this single issue discriminatory method is the way forward.

True.  I was thinking along the same lines.  I think accidents are just accidents - i.e. if I crash my mountainbike and get injured.  But if you've virtually done something to specifically harm yourself... 

What about a failed suicide? 

There is tax on booze and fags that should go to the NHS.  Is that not also the idea behind the sugar tax?

Hey it's certainly not perfect nor a solution, just my thoughts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, The Phantom said:

Yes and no.  It's a tricky one and I very much doubt the money will be going to big Pharma. 

Do you think it's 100% fine for someone to not get vaxxed then end up in hospital potentially costing £1000s in treatment which the rest of us then have to pay for?   I can't remember which country it was, but one was proposing to charge any unvaxxed people that get hospitalised for their covid treatment.  Personally I'd say this seems much more reasonable and equitable. 

EDITED TO ADD:  It's Singapore charging.  Australia are considering. 

We keep hearing this tired old trope but the real world evidence doesn't seem to back it up. If we start to charge individuals for their health decisions then we have to keep going with it and target the obese, the smokers, the heavy drinkers etc... 

It's the thin end of a very dangerous wedge.

 

ETA: Just seen Wrighty's post, which duplicates this.

Edited by Danoo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, wrighty said:

My gut feeling is similar, however charging the unvaxxed for their covid treatment is in the same ballpark as charging smokers if they get lung disease, charging the obese for just about anything wrong with them, charging drinkers for getting pissed and falling over or fighting...

We either have a health service that is free at the point of delivery or not.  I don't necessarily disagree with charging people for healthcare, but I don't think this single issue discriminatory method is the way forward.

You're right. It's the thin end of a wedge. Once they establish a charging mechanism then it won't 'just' be for Covid. It will spread to the examples you have listed then to people who have an 'unhealthy' BMI.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, wrighty said:

We either have a health service that is free at the point of delivery or not.  I don't necessarily disagree with charging people for healthcare, but I don't think this single issue discriminatory method is the way forward.

I don't either though, it's worth pointing out that many of these countries have compulsory insurance schemes, so what they would be basically doing is increasing the premium for those engaged in high risk activity. 

Though I suspect the Quebec scheme will never actually happen and charging unvaccinated individuals for care is going to cause the sort of problems that charging for emergency care normally does.  Most of these measures are actually virtue signalling by the state and the usual government strategy of trying to blame things that go wrong on anyone except the people in charge.

In current circumstances, restricting the movements of the unvaccinated can only be justified clinically for the reason that it's their health that is being protected, not that they might infect others. 

It's astonishing just how much difference vaccination does make though.  Even if you look at local figures of the seven in hospital last week, three were unvaccinated (wildly disproportionate when you consider the Island's high vaccination rates) and the other four hadn't received a booster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

I don't either though, it's worth pointing out that many of these countries have compulsory insurance schemes, so what they would be basically doing is increasing the premium for those engaged in high risk activity. 

 

Good point.  I have to pay extra on my travel insurance if I'm going to do winter sports or certain other high risk sports and don't quibble about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, James Blonde said:

You're right. It's the thin end of a wedge. Once they establish a charging mechanism then it won't 'just' be for Covid. It will spread to the examples you have listed then to people who have an 'unhealthy' BMI.

As others have said, I don't necessarily disagree with this approach though. If someone wants to make poor lifestyle decisions then they should have to pay for them, literally and figuratively. 

However I'd like a reduction in direct taxation to reflect this though. Which won't happen.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Danoo said:

As others have said, I don't necessarily disagree with this approach though. If someone wants to make poor lifestyle decisions then they should have to pay for them, literally and figuratively. 

However I'd like a reduction in direct taxation to reflect this though. Which won't happen.  

It's a slippery slope. Should expectant parents then pay for having a baby delivered? 

Personally I prefer the all inclusive free at the point of need option, but I can see why others would prefer different approaches. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, opusManx said:

Yeah. It looks like a bit of political theatre thus far. Short on details regarding implementation. Already grumblings of court challenges. He may just be waving the stick to elicit some compliance...I guess he never heard of the boy who cried wolf Lol

 

Well Austria are starting fines for unvaccinated soon with Italy adopting for over 60s and Greece over 60s

https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-181673194367

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...