You really don’t understand how the NHS works. The “government” doesn’t make decisions about how patients are treated. The doctors make those decisions. When the parents disagreed, they sued the hospital. Then the judges decided that the doctors knew more about the child’s condition than the parents did. It works the same way here in the USA, except that the insurance company always has more money and lawyers than the person filing suit.
You clearly have bought into a different view of the world than most of us. Therefore, I will not be able to persuade you, and you will not be able to persuade me. In view of that circumstance, I will not be spending any more time on this exchange. Please do post something more so you can feel victorious.
In the case of Alfie Evans, nowhere in the BBC coverage of his case is cost or expense mentioned. It was determined by an MRI scan that he had suffered “catastrophic degradation of his brain tissue” and that further life support was futile and inhumane. He was never going to recover from the neurodegenerative brain disorder that caused him to be hospitalized in the first place. Every physician who had examined him agreed with his diagnosis. Basically, all of the higher function centers of his brain had been destroyed by the disease. Why keep his body going without a functioning brain?
This was never a matter of how much it would cost to “treat” the boy further, regardless of the noise raised by people who had never examined him. Your argument has no basis in fact.
The top tax rate only applies to the highest level of income. You have to get through other tax rates before you reach that highest rate. The wealthiest pay the same rate as anyone else on the first $50,000, then $100,000 and so forth. If you had a good tax accountant, you would pay less in income tax, too, regardless of loopholes. There are a lot of perfectly legal deductions that most people have no idea about.
I don’t recall any rush of the rich to leave the country back in the 50s when the top tax bracket was above 70%. The truly wealthy may not think the same as a bunch of burnt out rock and roll musicians.
Nobody wants anything for free. We understand that taxes pay for services. We also understand that countries with universal health care pay less over all for what they get. Total up your current taxes, plus the cost of your health insurance, and add in the deductibles and co-pays. Then compare that to the tax rate of someone in the UK, or any of the Scandinavian countries with a similar income. They pay less than your total, and get university tuition, childcare and so forth included.
The bottom line for me is that I will not vote for a convicted felon who can’t talk for 30 minutes without becoming incomprehensible.
How about the dosage levels of those bad things? After all, too much salt or water will kill you. Or too much salt water, for that matter. Regardless, neither of us is going to convert or convince the other. Good sparring, though.
You really don’t understand how the NHS works. The “government” doesn’t make decisions about how patients are treated. The doctors make those decisions. When the parents disagreed, they sued the hospital. Then the judges decided that the doctors knew more about the child’s condition than the parents did. It works the same way here in the USA, except that the insurance company always has more money and lawyers than the person filing suit.
You clearly have bought into a different view of the world than most of us. Therefore, I will not be able to persuade you, and you will not be able to persuade me. In view of that circumstance, I will not be spending any more time on this exchange. Please do post something more so you can feel victorious.