Can you afford this?

PLUG71

According to the radio if we do not buy our own cover it will be stopped at source!

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/reilly-s-proposals-would-radically-change-the-irish-healthcare-system-1.1699344

MODS:- Please move if this is in the incorrect place!

reprazant

I already have my own so yes, I can and do afford it.

SEPT 23 1989

So its just another tax then

keeponhurling

This is what they do in the Netherlands and I believe it actually works quite well

maximoose

I'd need to know what it's going to cost before I can answer your question...

vitani

I presume that will be on top of PRSI contributions :rolleyes:

Tazz T

It's essentially a new tax to pay for healthcare. Ridiculous.

He seems to be omitting the fact that we already pay this through PRSI. Will this be cut?

uck51js9zml2yt

Works well in Slovakia as well. Everyone pays a private company and they get cover in the public system. prescriptions are also a lot less if you can show your card.
If you've no insurance, you pay for the hospital service.

Frosty McSnowballs

Fcuk off Reilly!

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.

Gone Drinking

This is how its done in all the countries in Europe, pretty much. Works really really well. No doubt they'll manage to make sihte of it somehow.

I'm lucky, the company I works for pays for my and my girlfriends health insurance.

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.

darkpagandeath

So PAYE is getting lowered then .. as your paying for your own health cover ? You know just like the property tax went to local services like they said........ Oh and like the water charge will go to the production of our water....

RainMaker

Well what exactly do you get for the tax you already pay?

Do you think another tax will actually improve the health service? Or like everything else will they just squander it on consultants and administration that's not needed in the first place. If he really wanted to improve the health service, he would dismantle the monstrosity that is the HSE - serves no purpose that I can see other than to drain resources and to ensure there is no accountability.

Just another example of the elite sharing Ireland's resources out among their buddies and then charging you for the privilege.

Davarus Walrus

It can't be any worse than the current system where you pay thousands in tax every year for a bloated and inefficient health service, then also have to pay for private health insurance to actually get some use out of it.

Arthur Beesley

We need clarity on how it fits in with the current funding of the Health system.

Not sure if PRSI funds health system, I thought it was funded by PAYE, with PRSI ring fenced for social welfare and pensions etc.

Riskymove

Tazz T wrote: »

It's essentially a new tax to pay for healthcare. Ridiculous.

He seems to be omitting the fact that we already pay this through PRSI. Will this be cut?

PRSI? No

although PAYE and taxation generally is paid into the healthcare service

if done correclty (big IF) if everyone had insurance and was treated as a private patient we would need to put a lot less of general taxes into the system

of course its still a case of us paying for it and indeed...paying for others etc

Tilly

My employer pays for mine and if they didn't I wouldn't buy my own so this is totally unfair to those who cannot afford it. Are they going to abolish the property tax and water charges so people can afford it? Nope. Another way to bleed us dry.

Arthur Beesley

Davarus Walrus wrote: »

It can't be any worse than the current system where you pay thousands in tax every year for a bloated and inefficient health service, then also have to pay for private health insurance to actually get some use out of it.

I wouldn't be do sure of that. A significant % of people won't be paying this (think the number of people getting free travel etc). The taxpayer will fund their cover.

Arthur Beesley

Riskymove wrote: »

PRSI? No

although PAYE and taxation generally is paid into the healthcare service

if done correclty (big IF) if everyone had insurance and was treated as a private patient we would need to put a lot less of general taxes into the system

of course its still a case of us paying for it and indeed...paying for others etc

Exactly. If you can afford it, you will pay for yourself and those that can't afford it.

ScumLord

I not against restructuring the way our health system works, I think it's misleading that some people call it a free health service, it's not. We pay for it now one way or another so if the government want to rearrange the way they collect and pay for the health service I'm not against it.

It might be beneficial for the entire country to go through private health insurance. Maybe they'll be better at managing it than the government have been to date. But I think it should be a case we stop paying current taxes and instead get to spend that money directly on our health insurance instead of doubling up on it with a private company.

Private companies deal with this stuff on a daily basis, it's their bread and butter, maybe it's time we handed it over to the experts instead of waiting for the government to figure out a way of doing it.

Riskymove

Arthur Beesley wrote: »

Exactly. If you can afford it, you will pay for yourself and those that can't afford it.

yes but in this plan we all pay it

(I believe subsidies for low paid workers are included)

Uriel.

I look forward to seeing the white paper on this.

To try to fix the health system in any country, especially Ireland, is mammoth task.

Healthcare has to affordable for the citizen and the state.
it has to be quality healthcare - there's no point in abolishing a two tier system to be replaced with a system where everyone has to sit on trollies or wait a year (or more) for important diagnostic and treatment services.

Personally, I wouldn't even know where to begin in developing such a coherent and quality system, so it'll be an interesting read as to how this is gonna work and the books or gonna balance.

Uriel.

ScumLord wrote: »

I not against restructuring the way our health system works, I think it's misleading that some people call it a free health service, it's not. We pay for it now one way or another so if the government want to rearrange the way they collect and pay for the health service I'm not against it.

It might be beneficial for the entire country to go through private health insurance. Maybe they'll be better at managing it than the government have been to date. But I think it should be a case we stop paying current taxes and instead get to spend that money directly on our health insurance instead of doubling up on it with a private company.

Private companies deal with this stuff on a daily basis, it's their bread and butter, maybe it's time we handed it over to the experts instead of waiting for the government to figure out a way of doing it.

No issue with that in principle. But while the private insurance companies who have the expertise in this area can manage certain parts of the system, the system itself, as in stuff from how hospitals are ran, to doctor's/nurse's wages, the equipment used, the location and amount of hospitals/clinics needs to be better ran too.

How to get a coherent all singing and dancing system is difficult and that's before you even bring in the pharma companies etc.

darkpagandeath

Uriel. wrote: »

I look forward to seeing the white paper on this.

To try to fix the health system in any country, especially Ireland, is mammoth task.

Healthcare has to affordable for the citizen and the state.
it has to be quality healthcare - there's no point in abolishing a two tier system to be replaced with a system where everyone has to sit on trollies or wait a year (or more) for important diagnostic and treatment services.

Personally, I wouldn't even know where to begin in developing such a coherent and quality system, so it'll be an interesting read as to how this is gonna work and the books or gonna balance.

Well the governments view is chucking increasingly large amount of tax payers money into a black hole.

Arthur Beesley

Riskymove wrote: »

yes but in this plan we all pay it

(I believe subsidies for low paid workers are included)

What about the unemployed, pensioners, those on disability etc.

They won't pay. We will pay extra to cover them. Or their state subsidies will be increased to take account of and offset any payment they are expected to make. Either way the taxpayer subsidies them.

SEPT 23 1989

How much is this going to cost the taxpayer in consultancy fees peddling their best international practice horse****e before this is eventually scrapped?

Lawrence1895

Tilly wrote: »

My employer pays for mine and if they didn't I wouldn't buy my own so this is totally unfair to those who cannot afford it. Are they going to abolish the property tax and water charges so people can afford it? Nope. Another way to bleed us dry.

May I ask, who that generous employer is? Or what sector? I only know, that the costs for schemes like this are halved between employer and employee.

quickbeam

And here's another reason not to vote for this shower next time around!

ScumLord

Uriel. wrote: »

No issue with that in principle. But while the private insurance companies who have the expertise in this area can manage certain parts of the system, the system itself, as in stuff from how hospitals are ran, to doctor's/nurse's wages, the equipment used, the location and amount of hospitals/clinics needs to be better ran too.

That's true but I also think private health insurance companies could help improve things there. They're much more aggressive about targets and could light a fire under hospitals forcing them to improve.

The big worry with private companies is that they'd just cheapen everything and go for the profit, but companies today have kind of gone through that era of profit above people and have put in practices to control themselves better due to being more closely watched.

darkpagandeath

quickbeam wrote: »

And here's another reason not to vote for this shower next time around!

But But the Troika made us do it .....

For Forks Sake

quickbeam wrote: »

And here's another reason not to vote for this shower next time around!

I'm fairly certain this was part of FGs manifesto in the last election...which the people voted for?

Push Pop

His is copying Obamacare! Come up with your own ideas O'Reilly, surely you can do that.

Tilly

Lars1916 wrote: »

May I ask, who that generous employer is? Or what sector? I only know, that the costs for schemes like this are halved between employer and employee.

Private sector and I don't pay a cent towards it.

Daith

Lars1916 wrote: »

May I ask, who that generous employer is? Or what sector? I only know, that the costs for schemes like this are halved between employer and employee.

My previous private company employer paid for our health insurance bar BIK

Riskymove

Arthur Beesley wrote: »

What about the unemployed, pensioners, those on disability etc.

yes correct but thats the same as now anyway

Uriel.

ScumLord wrote: »

That's true but I also think private health insurance companies could help improve things there. They're much more aggressive about targets and could light a fire under hospitals forcing them to improve.

The big worry with private companies is that they'd just cheapen everything and go for the profit, but companies today have kind of gone through that era of profit above people and have put in practices to control themselves better due to being more closely watched.

I hope you are right, I really do.

I remember reading the FG election manifesto with this proposal broadly outlined. In principle it sounds great (not sure if this actual proposal has amended the manifesto proposal).

Time to wait and see though.

Uriel.

quickbeam wrote: »

And here's another reason not to vote for this shower next time around!

This proposal was a headline item in the FG election manifesto and campaign. :rolleyes:

For Forks Sake

Lars1916 wrote: »

May I ask, who that generous employer is? Or what sector? I only know, that the costs for schemes like this are halved between employer and employee.

I work for an american MNC here, and all employees are covered by Aviva, fully paid by the company. You can opt out if you wish, and the value is divided by 12 and added to your monthly salary.

Arthur Beesley

Riskymove wrote: »

yes correct but thats the same as now anyway

Exactly, but we won't all pay was the point.

Lawrence1895

I think, I'm working with the wrong crowd then

Riskymove

Arthur Beesley wrote: »

Exactly, but we won't all pay was the point.

well ok, but all workers would, albeit with some subsidies

it could still be a far better way of funding the cost than the current setup

noodler

Reilly, in his opinion piece in the Time on Tuesday, was adamant that this would not cost more than our current system (HSE spend plus what people spend on private health insurance).

The point is always raised that these systems are expensive as other countries have found outthem but Reilly quoted public policy in the article who apparently argue that other countries incur these costs due to their elss than favourable demographics which is less of a concern for us in the immediate future.

Like Uriel, I look forward to the White Paper's publication.

quickbeam

For Forks Sake wrote: »

I'm fairly certain this was part of FGs manifesto in the last election...which the people voted for?

Uriel. wrote: »

I remember reading the FG election manifesto with this proposal broadly outlined. In principle it sounds great (not sure if this actual proposal has amended the manifesto proposal).

I don't remember specifically but I do remember O'Reilly on a TV show a week before the last election saying that he'd clear all waiting on trolleys within the first 100 days of the new government, and that hasn't happened.

Still don't like it, and still won't vote for them next time (though I'm running out of people I can vote for).

daheff

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

So its just another tax then

Nope. same tax just paid twice

keeponhurling wrote: »

This is what they do in the Netherlands and I believe it actually works quite well

We sure as hell arent the Netherlands.

vitani wrote: »

I presume that will be on top of PRSI contributions :rolleyes:

What abou USC?

Davarus Walrus wrote: »

It can't be any worse than the current system where you pay thousands in tax every year for a bloated and inefficient health service, then also have to pay for private health insurance to actually get some use out of it.

Why not? How will a private health insurance tax make things any different? Its not the money going in thats the problem, its what happens when it gets into the system.


Reform is whats needed, not another way to get drink the well dry.
I heard on the radio that people would be paying 1600 per person per year for the private health insurance. I dont pay that now ....why am I going to pay MORE for this? Will my other taxes drop by the same amount to compensate for the fact that health is being funded differently? I dont see that happening. This looks (to me) to be the next step in the privatisation of our health service. Force everybody to buy private health insurance ...couple of years down the road health will be spun out of Govt expenditure just like water has this year.

If this bolloxolgy continues i'm taking myself & family and leaving the country.

Pumpkinseeds

I have 3 severe pre-existing medical conditions, who exactly do they think will give me health insurance? If they push this through they will never be re-elected. This smacks of giving people a worst case scenario, then introducing something less severe in the hope that people will accept it.

darkpagandeath

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

I have 3 severe pre-existing medical conditions, who exactly do they think will give me health insurance? If they push this through they will never be re-elected. This smacks of giving people a worst case scenario, then introducing something less severe in the hope that people will accept it.

You mean like the ruse of were cutting funding/help and all that for Disabled people so there was public outcry. Then them doing what they were going to do in the first place and people not having any leg to stand on as "you did not like the first option".

Diemos

Wow, this could finally be the straw that breaks the camel's back.


A cynic might say the timing of this is perfect to take heat from our glorious minister Shatter.

daheff

Diemos wrote: »

A cynic might say the timing of this is perfect to take heat from our glorious minister Shatter.

I dont think thats working..hes fecked

Pumpkinseeds

darkpagandeath wrote: »

You mean like the ruse of were cutting funding/help and all that for Disabled people so there was public outcry. Then them doing what they were going to do in the first place and people not having any leg to stand on as "you did not like the first option".

What they're proposing makes no sense. Young people are the ones who are giving up health insurance because they can't afford it, thus the waiting lists for public patients waiting to see a consultant or have a proceedure are getting even more insanely long.

Government, and it really doesn't matter which one it was, pushed through a 2 tier health service, actively encouraging the building of private hospitals and now people can't afford their premiums anymore. So now they have a 2 tier system that young people and famillies can't afford and a public health service with higher and higher demands on it that it just can't cope with.

I'd love to know what they propose for people with pre-existing conditons who won't be covered by insurance. I'm not really sure how that would work.

The_Valeyard

I see legal challenges in the European courts over this. Could be an issue of double taxation or something like that.