For those against FG/Labour

leincar

I've been away working for the last couple of weeks and arrived back yesterday. I was struck by the air of depression that hit me on arrival at Dublin airport. A feeling I have not experienced for the previous fortnight even when I was in Eastern Europe and Russia. I have spent the last couple of hours catching up on the recent events in the country including looking at the different threads on Boards.

I have been struck by how many people while despising FF seem to have little confidence in Enda Kenny for Fine Gael and Labour in general. I remember in 1994(I lived abroad at the time) people were not overly confident of John Bruton leading a FG/Labour coalition. I remember my Father on the phone to me talking about the country being truly shagged now.(He was a raving marxist)

However, when the general election in 1997 was held it was won by FF. The election was held on June 6th 1997. The countries finances were in a good state there was the beginnings of an upsurge in employment and there seemed to be a good feeling about the country. (I got this impression from talking to family and friends. My Father sent me a copy of the Economist magazine from May 17th 1997 showing how well Ireland was held in the international community. In fact I kept the magazine and I attach the cover. Even my Father was impressed.

As someone who has always had a deep hatred for FF but otherwise have been a floating voter I think this should give people heart and if nothing else a chuckle. It shows that the few good years we had were started by FG/Labour and ruined by FF.

My apologies in advance for the photos. I am not the greatest photographer.

ei.sdraob

That cover is rather famous now, used to be on the Celtic Tiger wikipedia page



heres a more recent picture floating about, illustrating how the country came about full circle

Bottle_of_Smoke

Well I know some people who canvassed for labour last time. One very common theme was - I'd give you my vote but you'll go into power with fine gael.

Maybe that will be different this time around of course.

What I see as a major issue is health. FG want to bring in the Dutch system. What they don't mention is the dutch pay 80-120 euro per month in insurance. mandatory.

I don't think Irish people as a whole are rational enough to accept that. Maybe in a FG majority it could work but Labour would have to be populist and object to it. Major stumbling block for the coalition.

Also the netherlands has a much better economy. I think unemployment of 4%. How could we sell insurance to an irrational public at 80-120 per month when half a million people are on the dole?

ei.sdraob

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

What they don't mention is the dutch pay 80-120 euro per month in insurance. mandatory.

Considering that someone on average industrial wage would be paying much more than that in PRSI + Social charges + having to pay for private insurance
that seems like a great deal

Sulmac

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Well I know some people who canvassed for labour last time. One very common theme was - I'd give you my vote but you'll go into power with fine gael.

Maybe that will be different this time around of course.

What I see as a major issue is health. FG want to bring in the Dutch system. What they don't mention is the dutch pay 80-120 euro per month in insurance. mandatory.

I don't think Irish people as a whole are rational enough to accept that. Maybe in a FG majority it could work but Labour would have to be populist and object to it. Major stumbling block for the coalition.

Also the netherlands has a much better economy. I think unemployment of 4%. How could we sell insurance to an irrational public at 80-120 per month when half a million people are on the dole?

Labour and Fine Gael have almost identical health policies - it's called universal health insurance. The only difference is that Fine Gael have come out in favour of the Dutch system in which you buy the insurance yourself (at a set price, or with a voucher for children, elderly, unemployed, low incomes, etc.) from insurance companies (be they for-profit or credit union-type operations). Fine Gael haven't tried to hide this, and a PDF on the plan can be found here. The other option is you pay insurance (or use a voucher) to a single state-owned company like a lot of other European countries have. Labour haven't decided yet which they prefer, but effectively they're the same system (the insurance is mandatory in either system by the way).

And around €100 per month per working adult seems reasonable when it covers all hospital care, GP visits and prescription drugs (and even dental care in some cases!). The Dutch system makes sense here since around half the population have experience with private insurance companies (or the VHI) already.

At least that way we'd have a decent single-tier system instead of the awful situation we have now whereby we pay for the public system that is ineffective and, if you have insurance, a private system that isn't much better!

Shea O'Meara

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

....it could work but Labour would have to be populist and object to it. Major stumbling block for the coalition.

One issue which comes up is Labour being dismissed as populist, like they drift with the wind for votes. I would like to see further detail when posters dismiss them so casually.
The only party we have like that is FFail.
We can't say Labour are populist, pander to the unions and are champagne socialists.

I recall the last election, I know some FG, labour and FFail people. The word on the street was everything is great, leave as is.
Some people saw the warnings of the 'live in the now' or on the lack of providing for the future, in education and health as sour grapes.

johnnyskeleton

Sulmac wrote: »

And around €100 per month per working adult seems reasonable when it covers all hospital care, GP visits and prescription drugs (and even dental care in some cases!). The Dutch system makes sense here since around half the population have experience with private insurance companies (or the VHI) already.

At least that way we'd have a decent single-tier system instead of the awful situation we have now whereby we pay for the public system that is ineffective and, if you have insurance, a private system that isn't much better!

The system we have here is that we pay lots of taxes for health and pay for private health insurance and we still get a fairly mediocre health system as a result of it.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Shea O'Meara wrote: »

One issue which comes up is Labour being dismissed as populist, like they drift with the wind for votes. I would like to see further detail when posters dismiss them so casually.
The only party we have like that is FFail.
We can't say Labour are populist, pander to the unions and are champagne socialists.

I recall the last election, I know some FG, labour and FFail people. The word on the street was everything is great, leave as is.
Some people saw the warnings of the 'live in the now' or on the lack of providing for the future, in education and health as sour grapes.

Lads chances are I will vote labour. Just I'm not optimistic about the Irish public coughing up 1000-1400 a year for health. Most I've ever spent on doctors in a year was 400 - some of which I got a tax refund on. Other years I've spent 0-150

As a group we are a lot more like the yanks than the dutch. Obama's just about got his universal plan through and he's(was?) a lot more popular than Kenny or Gilmore will be.

Sulmac

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

As a group we are a lot more like the yanks than the dutch. Obama's just about got his universal plan through and he's(was?) a lot more popular than Kenny or Gilmore will be.

Obama's system isn't that far off the Dutch model itself.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Sulmac wrote: »

Obama's system isn't that far off the Dutch model itself.

Thats my point. He only barely got that through. I know its a different system but he doesn't have a FG/Lab coalition to deal with. Even if they're both in agreement to begin with they'll be under different pressures as time goes on. This is gonna be one seriously difficult term no matter who gets in

Anyway. Hope I'm wrong. Would be great if a proper health system did work out.

mistermouse

Doesn't really matter how the Health System is funded if quite a large portion of the money continues to be completely wasted. Only a radical reform of the HSE will make the system work and work fairly. Its difficult to see if FG/Labour will agree on that part of the problem.

nesf

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Lads chances are I will vote labour. Just I'm not optimistic about the Irish public coughing up 1000-1400 a year for health. Most I've ever spent on doctors in a year was 400 - some of which I got a tax refund on. Other years I've spent 0-150

Really you you paid far, far more than 400 quid. It just was taken out of your pay packet as tax rather than being taken out of your wallet. We end up paying for the health service either through tax or through a mandatory insurance scheme like the Dutch model.

You can't escape it so long as we have universal access to healthcare and I can't think of any candidate or party no matter how small or crazy that actually argues we move away from a universal healthcare model.

southsiderosie

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Thats my point. He only barely got that through. I know its a different system but he doesn't have a FG/Lab coalition to deal with. Even if they're both in agreement to begin with they'll be under different pressures as time goes on. This is gonna be one seriously difficult term no matter who gets in

Anyway. Hope I'm wrong. Would be great if a proper health system did work out.

Well Kenny/Gilmore won't have Sarah Palin shrieking about death panels, and the general public is already used to government-sponsored medicine, so while it may be contentious, I doubt it will be as much of a circus as the US case. The main sticking point will be health services for OAPs, and once they are on board, it should be ok.

Bottle_of_Smoke

nesf wrote: »

Really you you paid far, far more than 400 quid. It just was taken out of your pay packet as tax rather than being taken out of your wallet. We end up paying for the health service either through tax or through a mandatory insurance scheme like the Dutch model.

You can't escape it so long as we have universal access to healthcare and I can't think of any candidate or party no matter how small or crazy that actually argues we move away from a universal healthcare model.

So what would be different, ok sure I paid PRSI and taxes, but if one starts paying mandatory health insurance are our taxes going to go down? Somehow I don't think so.

What will change(and this is a genuine question as I don't know, not a rebuttal) when we go Dutch so to speak? If it were that simple why hasn't it been done already?

Sulmac

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

So what would be different, ok sure I paid PRSI and taxes, but if one starts paying mandatory health insurance are our taxes going to go down? Somehow I don't think so.

What will change(and this is a genuine question as I don't know, not a rebuttal) when we go Dutch so to speak? If it were that simple why hasn't it been done already?

If we brought in the Dutch system there would be no 'out-of-pocket' payments as such, except for insurance obviously! It was also mean everyone is treated equally on basis of need and not wealth, unlike the current two-tier system. There would also be more local decision-making as hospitals would be run by local boards/trusts, which also means that they would be more accountable should things go wrong. Finally, hospitals have to compete for patients as they don't get any money until they treat someone (unlike now when they get a block grant for the year), so waiting lists would be dramatically reduced.

We haven't "gone Dutch" already because those currently in power have no interest in changing it (Harney, in particular doesn't want her HSE 'project' to fail, even though it has). That and the fact there are many vested interests who find the current arrangement comfortable, especially those in the medical unions - who I think will be the biggest opponents of any change along Dutch (i.e. private insurance) lines.

If you've more questions, Fine Gael have their own FAQ section on it here and the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport have a good video on it here (and some general information here).

nesf

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

So what would be different, ok sure I paid PRSI and taxes, but if one starts paying mandatory health insurance are our taxes going to go down? Somehow I don't think so.

Taxes are unlikely to go down but those taxes are freed up to be channeled to other areas like Education etc. In theory anyway you get more services with the switchover but in reality a good deal of it gets eaten by the bureaucracy of the public service and only a fraction gets turned into actual frontline services.

Still, some new services are better than none.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

If it were that simple why hasn't it been done already?

One word: unions. Basically all those public sector health workers suddenly are working for private industry and may not be guaranteed jobs anymore. Same reason why not one job was lost when the HSE was formed from the amalgamation of the Health Boards. That'd be why it hasn't been done already plus a psychological barrier about making anything in the health sector "private" due to the crap system they have in the States.

This is why I'm sceptical of FG actually implementing this, despite wanting to see it quite badly.

Count Dooku

Sulmac wrote: »

Labour and Fine Gael have almost identical health policies - it's called universal health insurance. The only difference is that Fine Gael have come out in favour of the Dutch system in which you buy the insurance yourself (at a set price, or with a voucher for children, elderly, unemployed, low incomes, etc.) from insurance companies (be they for-profit or credit union-type operations). Fine Gael haven't tried to hide this, and a PDF on the plan can be found here. The other option is you pay insurance (or use a voucher) to a single state-owned company like a lot of other European countries have. Labour haven't decided yet which they prefer, but effectively they're the same system (the insurance is mandatory in either system by the way).

And around €100 per month per working adult seems reasonable when it covers all hospital care, GP visits and prescription drugs (and even dental care in some cases!). The Dutch system makes sense here since around half the population have experience with private insurance companies (or the VHI) already.

unions will ruin any system, because there is no way that country will be able to get rid of useless clerks and managers in HSE, because they have "jobs for life" and effectively privatised public healthcare
The only choice is to start building new health system from scratch