2015 Election season ..........stuff it in here.

[Fox92]

I think that's sort of missing the point I was making, there has been no evidence provided about how many people are coming to Britain with HIV and claiming free treatment, absolutely no evidence. So Matt's point about being able to 'back it up with evidence' is useless if this is the issue.  In response to your question as I say, I'm no economic expert, I want as much as possible to be spent on foreign aid so long as it's going to people in genuine need of it, if it's possible for that 0.7% percentage to be increased, say with cuts to the amount spent on the military, nuclear weapons, increasing taxes on the obscenely rich, then yeah I'm all for it. I probably need to read up on how plausible and sensible that is, but on the face of it it seems quite reasonable to me. I'm fairly young, I don't know a great deal about it and if you think you can convince me that 0.7% is enough or too much then go for it.

There's plenty of genuine people in this country that need aid. Our very own elderly continue to struggle each winter, for one.

[Mark_w]

The fact that its disproportionate to the population tells you they are coming here, unless you think foreigners are more likely to contract it?

 

I don't think 'foreigners are more likely to contract it', but I certainly think that people coming from countries with vastly inferior education about HIV would be more likely to contract it than British born and educated people. I'm sure some are moving here to use the health system, but we don't know what proportion of the people Farage and Matt have referenced are doing that. I'm certainly not saying we can't discuss it, but when no concrete evidence has been provided, on an issue that in terms of finances is relatively small, I don't think there's a great deal to discuss or indeed worry about.

 

 

Can you find anyone denying the facts?

 

Which facts?

[Mark_w]

There's plenty of genuine people in this country that need aid. Our very own elderly continue to struggle each winter, for one.

I'm not just in favour of foreign aid, I think we should cut military spending, spending on nuclear weapons, increase taxes on the highest earners and spend much of that money on welfare and foreign aid where possible.

[Strokes]

That depends where they are coming from: sub-saharan Africa, for example, has a much higher incidence of infection than here.

Edit: Sorry, Strokes, I misunderstood your point, I think.

its fine, I mean they might be more prone to catching it, I really don't know. Sexual habits and cultural differences go hand in hand I guess. Still with all that considered at least 50% of them must have caught it outside of the UK, the figures just wouldn't be like they are otherwise.

[Webbo]

 

 

 

Which facts?

 

 

, there has been no evidence provided about how many people are coming to Britain with HIV and claiming free treatment, absolutely no evidence

I did highlight it for you. Evidence/facts you're just being pedantic. Has anyone said that what Farage said is not true?

[Mark_w]

I did highlight it for you. Evidence/facts you're just being pedantic. Has anyone said that what Farage said is not true?

 

I'm not being deliberately pedantic, I was confused. Farage has provided evidence about Africans in Britain with HIV that could well be a fact it's not what I'm disputing. What I'm saying is there's no evidence to say how many of those had HIV before they entered the country.

 

Now if the argument people are making is that people in Britain who weren't born here shouldn't recieve free health care then that's evidence enough, apologies if that is the argument people are making. But it struck me that people were making arguments about people entering the country with HIV and there's not been concrete evidence to say what that number is. So yes there has been 'evidence' provided, but I'm not sure it's evidence that really provides any proof of the argument being made.

[Captain...]

Bloody EU letting Africans with aids coming to this country...

Hang on Africans aren't part of this free movement, so why are they here? Must be because they deserve to be.

Anyway I would rather treat Africans with aids than pay for boob jobs and stomach staples for English people.

[Alf Bentley]

Interesting article about the HIV issue here: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/reality-check/2015/apr/03/do-foreigners-come-to-uk-to-get-hiv-treatment

 

The figures quoted for foreigners with HIV are slightly lower than those used by Farage and posters in this thread, but not massively so. However, the article cites credible sources (Public Health England; House of Commons; National Aids Trust) to suggest that most foreigners treated for HIV do not seek NHS treatment until they've been in the country for years - hardly the behaviour of people just coming in for free healthcare! Presumably most do not know they are infected?

 

I'm not sure what Farage is calling for, anyway. Does he want foreigners diagnosed HIV-positive to pay £25k per year for their treatment - or to be sent home to their birth countries? Presumably most wouldn't be able to afford to pay - but, if these people have been here for years, they could be British citizens and/or settled with British-born families. How would that work? If Mo Farah turns out to be HIV-positive, would we strip him of his British citizenship and send him back to Somalia? Presumably his 2-year-old daughters would have to be allowed to stay....though, in reality, he could afford to pay the £25k, I'm sure. 

 

Or do Farage & co want to stop the problem at source by testing foreigners as they arrive in the country? If so, would we just test for HIV or for other dangerous/expensive diseases? And who would we test? Would we test everyone arriving into the country: French students, American businessmen, Russian tourists, Somali asylum seekers? That would be massively cumbersome, wouldn't it?!   The largest single infected group seems to be Africans, so would we just target Africans for testing? If so, would we test white South Africans as well as black? I assume the infection rate is much higher among black Africans than white, but some white Africans are presumably infected, too...and that's not to mention other groups. Due to intravenous drug use and prostitution, the infection rate in Russia is very high, so would Abramovich be tested or would we let him off as we know that he could afford £25k per year for treatment, if necessary? Then there's the Americans. I presume there are still a fair few HIV-positive Americans, but would we test them all or target particular groups? Once upon a time, gay people could have been targeted, but increasing numbers of straight Americans are infected these days, aren't they....and both white and black? So, targeting black Africans and gay people might not be entirely effective.... 

 

Come on, you UKIP apologists, what practical measures are you proposing - or is it just a nice excuse to moan about scrounging (and generally black) foreigners?

[bovril]

There's plenty of genuine people in this country that need aid. Our very own elderly continue to struggle each winter, for one.

 

And do you believe that is because we treat foreign-born HIV sufferers?

[Webbo]

 

 

Come on, you UKIP apologists, what practical measures are you proposing - or is it just a nice excuse to moan about scrounging (and generally black) foreigners?

I don't know,compulsory health insurance for non citizens? Nobody with any brains travels to America without insurance.

 

It's nothing to do with them being black and I'm sure it's not just AIDS victims we're paying for. I just find the faux indignation a bit tiresome. It's typical of the establishment to be so dismissive of peoples legitimate concerns.

[Strokes]

Bloody EU letting Africans with aids coming to this country...

Hang on Africans aren't part of this free movement, so why are they here? Must be because they deserve to be.

Anyway I would rather treat Africans with aids than pay for boob jobs and stomach staples for English people.

I'd agree with that, your boobs are fine as they are pal.

[MooseBreath]

I was wondering whether the whole furore over this was actually a subtle pulling of the race card, but couldn't believe even the left would be that desperate

[johnny the fox]

Interesting article about the HIV issue here: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/reality-check/2015/apr/03/do-foreigners-come-to-uk-to-get-hiv-treatment

 

The figures quoted for foreigners with HIV are slightly lower than those used by Farage and posters in this thread, but not massively so. However, the article cites credible sources (Public Health England; House of Commons; National Aids Trust) to suggest that most foreigners treated for HIV do not seek NHS treatment until they've been in the country for years - hardly the behaviour of people just coming in for free healthcare! Presumably most do not know they are infected?

 

I'm not sure what Farage is calling for, anyway. Does he want foreigners diagnosed HIV-positive to pay £25k per year for their treatment - or to be sent home to their birth countries? Presumably most wouldn't be able to afford to pay - but, if these people have been here for years, they could be British citizens and/or settled with British-born families. How would that work? If Mo Farah turns out to be HIV-positive, would we strip him of his British citizenship and send him back to Somalia? Presumably his 2-year-old daughters would have to be allowed to stay....though, in reality, he could afford to pay the £25k, I'm sure. 

 

Or do Farage & co want to stop the problem at source by testing foreigners as they arrive in the country? If so, would we just test for HIV or for other dangerous/expensive diseases? And who would we test? Would we test everyone arriving into the country: French students, American businessmen, Russian tourists, Somali asylum seekers? That would be massively cumbersome, wouldn't it?!   The largest single infected group seems to be Africans, so would we just target Africans for testing? If so, would we test white South Africans as well as black? I assume the infection rate is much higher among black Africans than white, but some white Africans are presumably infected, too...and that's not to mention other groups. Due to intravenous drug use and prostitution, the infection rate in Russia is very high, so would Abramovich be tested or would we let him off as we know that he could afford £25k per year for treatment, if necessary? Then there's the Americans. I presume there are still a fair few HIV-positive Americans, but would we test them all or target particular groups? Once upon a time, gay people could have been targeted, but increasing numbers of straight Americans are infected these days, aren't they....and both white and black? So, targeting black Africans and gay people might not be entirely effective.... 

 

Come on, you UKIP apologists, what practical measures are you proposing - or is it just a nice excuse to moan about scrounging (and generally black) foreigners?

Test all the fookers as they come in..have rubber glove, will travel..

[StanSP]

Interesting article about the HIV issue here: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/reality-check/2015/apr/03/do-foreigners-come-to-uk-to-get-hiv-treatment

 

The figures quoted for foreigners with HIV are slightly lower than those used by Farage and posters in this thread, but not massively so. However, the article cites credible sources (Public Health England; House of Commons; National Aids Trust) to suggest that most foreigners treated for HIV do not seek NHS treatment until they've been in the country for years - hardly the behaviour of people just coming in for free healthcare! Presumably most do not know they are infected?

 

I'm not sure what Farage is calling for, anyway. Does he want foreigners diagnosed HIV-positive to pay £25k per year for their treatment - or to be sent home to their birth countries? Presumably most wouldn't be able to afford to pay - but, if these people have been here for years, they could be British citizens and/or settled with British-born families. How would that work? If Mo Farah turns out to be HIV-positive, would we strip him of his British citizenship and send him back to Somalia? Presumably his 2-year-old daughters would have to be allowed to stay....though, in reality, he could afford to pay the £25k, I'm sure. 

 

Or do Farage & co want to stop the problem at source by testing foreigners as they arrive in the country? If so, would we just test for HIV or for other dangerous/expensive diseases? And who would we test? Would we test everyone arriving into the country: French students, American businessmen, Russian tourists, Somali asylum seekers? That would be massively cumbersome, wouldn't it?!   The largest single infected group seems to be Africans, so would we just target Africans for testing? If so, would we test white South Africans as well as black? I assume the infection rate is much higher among black Africans than white, but some white Africans are presumably infected, too...and that's not to mention other groups. Due to intravenous drug use and prostitution, the infection rate in Russia is very high, so would Abramovich be tested or would we let him off as we know that he could afford £25k per year for treatment, if necessary? Then there's the Americans. I presume there are still a fair few HIV-positive Americans, but would we test them all or target particular groups? Once upon a time, gay people could have been targeted, but increasing numbers of straight Americans are infected these days, aren't they....and both white and black? So, targeting black Africans and gay people might not be entirely effective.... 

 

Come on, you UKIP apologists, what practical measures are you proposing - or is it just a nice excuse to moan about scrounging (and generally black) foreigners?

 

Superb post.

[sphericalfox]

[Tuna]

Who is Leanne Wood, why have I never heard of her before and why am I strangely attracted to her?

[StanSP]

Who is Leanne Wood, why have I never heard of her before and why am I strangely attracted to her?

 

cos you probably want to be down in her valleys

[Alf Bentley]

I don't know,compulsory health insurance for non citizens? Nobody with any brains travels to America without insurance.

 

It's nothing to do with them being black and I'm sure it's not just AIDS victims we're paying for. I just find the faux indignation a bit tiresome. It's typical of the establishment to be so dismissive of peoples legitimate concerns.

 

Compulsory health insurance might work for some people - foreigners with the cash and motivation to pay for it. It certainly wouldn't work for asylum seekers, and might easily be off-putting for some foreign students and even foreign employees or business people whom we might want to attract. Nor would it deal with people already in the country, as it couldn't be imposed retrospectively - particularly on people who had become citizens.

 

I imagine that health insurance covering something as expensive as HIV would be pretty expensive, too.

 

I'm sure colour doesn't come into it for you - and maybe not even for Farage, as he seems to worry about foreigners in general, regardless of colour (strangely, for someone of French immigrant stock with a German wife ). It's a fact, though, that most of the people concerned are black Africans....was this "dog whistle" politics, Farage knowing that potential UKIP voters might not be well-disposed to (mainly black) foreigners?

 

If Farage was raising "legitimate concerns", then presumably he'll have some responsible policies for dealing with those concerns. Presumably he'll come out and say whether foreigners should have compulsory health insurance, should be tested on arrival, should be expected to pay for treatment, should be repatriated if they fall ill or whatever. It would certainly be grossly irresponsible to raise the concern and not have a policy to address it.....and Nigel wouldn't do that, I'm sure. 

 

Who is this "dismissive establishment"? It was the Plaid Cymru leader who objected at the time. HIV/AIDS charities are bound to join in - and rival political parties, I suppose. I'm assuming that you don't mean the likes of me as I'm not indignant at all about the issue being raised - just interested to see what policies are being proposed to deal with it. Anyway, about the only establishments that would accept me are LCFC and the local boozer!

 

 

I was wondering whether the whole furore over this was actually a subtle pulling of the race card, but couldn't believe even the left would be that desperate

 

Farage isn't on the left now, is he? It was him who started the furore, after all, complaining about people of other races coming over here to get us to pay for their meds on the NHS?

 

If you see this as a problem, how do you think that it should be dealt with? Universal testing of foreigners? Selective testing of foreigners? Compulsory health insurance? Repatriation of HIV victims to their countries of birth unless they can find £25k per year, even if they've become citizens? I repeat....I've no problem with such issues being raised, so long as practical solutions are being offered that people can form a view on.

[MooseBreath]

Farage didn't start the furore. He made a perfectly legitimate point regarding the prioritisation of government spending. Never mind a furore that's one of the most fundamental questions any government needs to address. Because he mentioned HIV, people claimed to be shocked, which makes no sense whatsoever to me because I wasn't aware that HIV had been adopted by offendotrons but thinking about it from the race perspective, it makes more sense. The left heard "HIV", immediately thought of black people, immediately entered a delicious, toe-curling state as they thought their bias about farage was confirmed. Ironic.

As for the solution, I imagine farage's solution would be to reduce the number of immigrants. If there are specific countries from which we are receiving a high number of people with HIV, test everyone from that country or just outright ban them. We do still have some border control after all, there's nothing immoral about using it to help prevent the spread and cost of treatment of HIV.

[sphericalfox]

For discussion:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ramesh-patel/growth-cameron-austerity_b_2007552.html

 

"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on"
- Winston Churchill

As a Conservative I have no pleasure in exposing David Cameron's deficit claims. However, as long as the party continues to talk down the economy via the blame game, confidence will not be given an opportunity to return. For it is an undeniable and inescapable economic fact: without confidence and certainty there can be no real growth.

Below are the three deficit claims - the mess. The evidence comes from the IMF, OECD, OBR, HM Treasury, ONS and even George Osborne. The claims put into context are:

CLAIM 1 
The last government left the biggest debt in the developed world.

After continuously stating the UK had the biggest debt in the world George Osborne admits to the Treasury Select Committee that he did not know the UK had the lowest debt in the G7? Watch: Also, confirmed by the OECD Those who use cash terms (instead of percentages) do so to scare, mislead and give half the story.

Its common sense, in cash terms a millionaire's debt would be greater than most people. Therefore, the UK would have a higher debt and deficit than most countries because, we are the sixth largest economy. Hence, its laughable to compare UK's debt and deficit with Tuvalu's who only have a GDP/Income of £24 million whilst, the UK's income is £1.7 Trillion.

Finally, Labour in 1997 inherited a debt of 42% of GDP. By the start of the global banking crises 2008 the debt had fallen to 35% - a near 22% reduction page 6 ONSSurprisingly, a debt of 42% was not seen as a major problem and yet at 35% the sky was falling down?

CLAIM 2 
Labour created the biggest deficit in the developed world by overspending.

Firstly, the much banded about 2010 deficit of over 11% is false. This is the PSNB (total borrowings) and not the actual budget deficit which was -7.7% - OBR Economic and Fiscal Outlook March 2012 page 19 table 1.2

Secondly, in 1997 Labour inherited a deficit of 3.9% of GDP (not a balanced budget ) and by 2008 it had fallen to 2.1% - a reduction of a near 50% - Impressive! Hence, it's implausible and ludicrous to claim there was overspending. The deficit was then exacerbated by the global banking crises after 2008. See HM Treasury. Note, the 1994 deficit of near 8% haaaaaah!

Thirdly, the IMF have also concluded the same. They reveal the UK experienced an increase in the deficit as result of a large loss in output/GDP caused by the global banking crisis and not even as result of the bank bailouts, fiscal stimulus and bringing forward of capital spending. It's basic economics: when output falls the deficit increases.

Finally, the large loss in output occurred because the UK like the US have the biggest financial centres and as this was a global banking crises we suffered the most. Hence, the UK had the 2nd highest deficit in the G7 (Not The World) after the US and not as a result of overspending prior to and after 2008- as the IMF concur.

CLAIM 3 
Our borrowing costs are low because the markets have confidence in George Osborne's austerity plan and without it the UK will end up like Greece.

Yes, the markets have confidence in our austerity plan and that's why PIMCO the worlds largest bond holder have been warning against buying UK debt.

The real reason why our borrowing costs have fallen and remained low since 2008 is because, savings have increased. As a result, the demand and price for bonds have increased and as there is inverse relationship between the price of bonds and its yield (interest rate) the rates have fallen. Also, the markets expect the economy to remain stagnate. Which means the price for bonds will remain high and hence, our borrowing costs will also remain low.

Secondly, the UK is considered a safe heaven because, investors are reassured the Bank of England will buy up bonds in an event of any sell off - which increases the price of bonds and reduces the effective rate. Note, how rates fell across the EU recently when the ECB announced its bond buying program. Thirdly, because, we are not in the Euro we can devalue our currency to increase exports. Moreover, UK bonds are attractive because, we haven't defaulted on its debt for over 300 years.

David Cameron would like people to believe the markets lend in the same way as retail banks lend to you and I.

Overall, when the facts and figures are put into context these juvenile deficit narratives and sound bites ("mere words and no evidence") simply fail to stand up to the actual facts. The deficit myth is the grosses lie ever enforced upon the people and it has been sold by exploiting people's economic illiteracy.

So, David Cameron when are you going to apologise?

Cameron is playing the blame game to depress confidence and growth to justify austerity. Secondly, to use austerity as justification for a smaller state to gain lower taxes. Thirdly, to paint Labour as a party that can not be trusted with the country's finances again. Therefore, we Conservatives will win a second term because, people vote out of fear. The latter strategy worked the last time in office (18 years) and will work again because, in the end, elections are won and lost on economic credibility. Hence, as people believe Labour created the mess they won't be trusted again.

Finally, as the truth is the greatest enemy of the a lie I urge you to share this on Facebook, Twitter, blogs, text and email etc etc. So the truth can be discovered by all. Finally, have no doubt, people have been mislead by the use of the following strategy:

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it" Joseph Goebbels

[MooseBreath]

Wonder if the author of that is the Labour councillor Ramesh Patel? Or else who is he? When i googled his name most of what I got were blogs calling him out for lying in that article like this one:

http://brackenworld.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/did-ramesh-patel-get-paid-for-this.html?m=1

Huffington Post hiding behind pseudonyms to tell lies? Very cheap.

[Dr The Singh]

Wonder if the author of that is the Labour councillor Ramesh Patel? Or else who is he? When i googled his name most of what I got were blogs calling him out for lying in that article like this one:

http://brackenworld.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/did-ramesh-patel-get-paid-for-this.html?m=1

Huffington Post hiding behind pseudonyms to tell lies? Very cheap.

Propaganda wars have began, who can the public trust.. ... .. No one, this is why people have lost all trust with politics

[Guest MattP]

Can't believe what I'm reading here. The race card pulled out?

Yet again some of the left hear immigration and in their own mind hear 'black people' - I really thought we'd got beyond this, Farage is correct to bring it up, it certainly should at least be debated whether it's correct the British taxpayer should be funding foreign nationals with HIV to the tune of over a billion pounds a year.

That long post mentioning Mo Farah just looked like an attempt to tie the argument up in knots to try and make it look like we can't do anything, the legal equivalent of drowning a case in paperwork, of course you can do things, you put procedure in place like the US and Australia do, we put procedures for screening in place just a few months ago from countries with high Ebola rates - did you miss that? Even in Britain in 2015 I really hope we don't have an attitude of 'If something is hard to do then we may as well do nothing or not even try'.

Mark - I don't want to sound patronising but I simply have to ask this as it doesn't seem like you do.

Do you actually realise the country is 1.400 billion in debt and still running at a deficit of 80 billion a year? I'd love to hear some of your thoughts on reducing the deficit as every policy you mention would increase it.

It's lovely, liberal and idealistic - but it simply isn't possible in the real World.

[Guest MattP]

Wonder if the author of that is the Labour councillor Ramesh Patel? Or else who is he? When i googled his name most of what I got were blogs calling him out for lying in that article like this one:

http://brackenworld.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/did-ramesh-patel-get-paid-for-this.html?m=1

Huffington Post hiding behind pseudonyms to tell lies? Very cheap.

Given Medhi 'I applied for a job at the Mail and call white people infidels in private' Hasan is the political editor of it I can imagine the depths they'd stoop too.

[Dr The Singh]

Can't believe what I'm reading here. The race card pulled out?

Yet again some of the left hear immigration and in their own mind hear 'black people' - I really thought we'd got beyond this, Farage is correct to bring it up, it certainly should at least be debated whether it's correct the British taxpayer should be funding foreign nationals with HIV to the tune of over a billion pounds a year.

That long post mentioning Mo Farah just looked like an attempt to tie the argument up in knots to try and make it look like we can't do anything, the legal equivalent of drowning a case in paperwork, of course you can do things, you put procedure in place like the US and Australia do, we put procedures for screening in place just a few months ago from countries with high Ebola rates - did you miss that? Even in Britain in 2015 I really hope we don't have an attitude of 'If something is hard to do then we may as well do nothing or not even try'.

Mark - I don't want to sound patronising but I simply have to ask this as it doesn't seem like you do.

Do you actually realise the country is 1.400 billion in debt and still running at a deficit of 80 billion a year? I'd love to hear some of your thoughts on reducing the deficit as every policy you mention would increase it.

It's lovely, liberal and idealistic - but it simply isn't possible in the real World.

I find it ironic the guys accusing garage of being racist, decide to bring More Farah's race into the equation, are there no white people with HIV?