₦airaland Forum

jedisco:
You and cherrypicking. You'd soon tell me Kemi has a 100% approval among her family members. She should convert her approval into better fortunes for her party.

As badly as labour has performed, the fact that the cons have continued to languish should tell you something. Their performance in elections so far has been woeful What's worse is that their underperformance is now being expected and not even making the news.

Two things can be true at same time. Starmer has had kemi locked in a cupboard. Unfortunately, Nigel Farage also locked KS in a wardrobe.
Now that Starmer may be on his way out, Kemi's focus should be on retrieving the keys to her cupboard and improve the fortunes of her party


BTW, I see you carry Kemi for head. You forget I was a fan of hers (until she joined bad gang) and have always wished her well. What exactly does she stand for? I worry about my interests not about politicians.

jedisco:
She should convert her approval into better fortunes for her party..

A brief study of UK political history will show you that even King Charles could not save the Tories right now. They have to spend a certain amount of time in the electoral wilderness, probably till at least 2034 GE, before the public forgives them for their failings, including the "Boriswave" which has become mainstream and even has its own Wiki page lol

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boriswave

jedisco:
BTW, I see you carry Kemi for head. You forget I was a fan of hers (until she joined bad gang) and have always wished her well.

Not particularly, but I will call out misinformation and double-standard that I see directed at her.

Lol, you were her fan until your friends here started bashing her relentlessly and you decided to join "bad gang".

Oh, and the only person SKS has put into the cupboard is himself. Hopefully he is able to find his way out very soon, for the good of the country.

Zahra29:
Surely this cannot be correct. We've been told numerous times that immigrants don't use the NHS.

Yes they are not using it enough considering the fact that they paid in far more than British citizens

justwise:
Yes they are not using it enough considering the fact that they paid in far more than British citizens

To quote Blair, the bolded is a quixotic fantasy lol.

Many British citizens have paid into the system for decades, and/or are the children of British citizens who paid into the system all their lives. Also, let's not forget that many migrant families do not pay the IHS.

Goodenoch:
You seem to be conflating a few different things so I just want to correct them so others aren’t misled:

1. Your reference to 200 per week makes me think you’re referring to the state pension. That’s different from your workplace pension and you’re paying for it via your NI contributions whether you want to or not.

2. There’s no requirement for you to wait till you’re 68 or 70 to access your workplace pension. That’s for the state pension. You can access your pension from the National Minimum Pension Age which is 57 (will be 58 from 2028). This applies to all pensions including private ones so you don’t gain anything by not getting your employer contributions into your pension pot.

3. Heading home before your 60s or whenever again has nothing to do with whether your pension is a private one or a workplace one. You can get paid abroad the same way, and the same restrictions on moving pensions to a foreign provider apply to both so again just like in point 2 above you’re just needlessly depriving yourself of the employer contribution for no benefit.

I'm really interested in this topic because I've been contemplating stopping my NHS pension. Is paying NI not enough? That extra 8.5% is somehow jare! Many immigrants in my trust have opted out but I'm still unsure 🤔

ehizario2012:
I'm really interested in this topic because I've been contemplating stopping my NHS pension. Is paying NI not enough? That extra 8.5% is somehow jare! Many immigrants in my trust have opted out but I'm still unsure 🤔

There's nothing wrong with opting out from your NHS pension scheme if you need the extra money in the here and now as opposed to when you've retired. As long as you understand what you're doing. Some people opt out because they're trying to save for an expense they need to meet, others because the extra money is needed to make ends meet.

Basically, the UK has a 3 pillar pension regime, as opposed to Nigeria where we had just the one. The 1st type of pension is the state pension, which everyone who has worked for up to 10 years in the UK will receive from the government at retirement age. This is the one which in theory your payment of taxes (NI is just another tax) entitles you to. That amount is set at a level to cover recipients' basic living costs and assumes that recipients are no longer paying rent or a mortgage at pension age. It's currently about £12,500 for those who have worked and paid tax in the UK for 35 years. The amount people will receive varies by how long their working life in the UK will be, and if you can get state pension "forecasts" letting you know how much you can expect as the state pension when you retire based on your current age. You can't "opt out" of the state pension by deciding not to pay NI.

The second type is the workplace (employer-run) pension scheme in which your employer deducts from your pay a fixed amount and adds its own fixed percentage and puts that in a retirement scheme in your name. This is the one we've got in Nigeria, and that's what your NHS pension scheme is. You can opt out of that one and save the monthly contribution you make every month, as long as you understand that this means that you will also lose the employer contribution and the tax relief as well and will only be building up an entitlement to the state pension.

And as you will be aware, the public sector pensions schemes (NHS, civil service, council, police, forces, etc) are known as gold plated pensions schemes, because they are final salary pensions and are backed by the government, which has a great deal of credibility.

The 3rd type is a private pension. Self -employed people who work for themselves and as such only have entitlement to the state pension and some employed high earners who want to reduce their tax bills can set up private pensions and pay money into them. Private pensions also have tax relief on contributions, but of course do not have employer contributions.

The important thing to understand, as per the chain of discussions in this thread is:

1. You can opt out of a workplace pension, but it doesn't make sense from a financial perspective to do so in order to set up a private pension because you lose the employer contributions (and if you are working for the NHS those are very good).

2. If you desperately need the money you are paying as contributions from your salary now and have no other way to raise it, then of course it also makes financial sense to opt out and use that money now. However, before you decide, it is advisable you consult with someone to understand what the exact pros and cons are, how long you will retain your benefits (if at all) when you're not contributing, etc. Benefits include the death in service provision, which is effectively life insurance, whereby if you die the pension scheme pays a lump sum of a multiple of your salary to your beneficiaries, for example.

Given the quasi-guaranteed nature of these schemes for public sector employees and the high (notional) employer contributions you get from the government, in most cases you'll be ultimately financially better off picking up extra shifts or getting an additional part-time job if you can than opting out of the NHS pension scheme.

Zahra29:
To quote Blair, the bolded is a quixotic fantasy lol.

Many British citizens have paid into the system for decades, and/or are the children of British citizens who paid into the system all their lives. Also, let's not forget that many migrant families do not pay the IHS.

No its not.

No British citizen pays Immigration Health Surcharge AND national insurance at the same time for the period of 5yrs at least.

If the new immigration policy comes into effect many migrant families will pay IHS for 5-15yrs

Let's not forget that there are millions of British citizens who pay nothing but still get free medical treatment.

ehizario2012:
I'm really interested in this topic because I've been contemplating stopping my NHS pension. Is paying NI not enough? That extra 8.5% is somehow jare! Many immigrants in my trust have opted out but I'm still unsure 🤔

Rather than stopping it ...maximise it so that NHS will match it, it's pretty much free money.

ehizario2012:
I'm really interested in this topic because I've been contemplating stopping my NHS pension. Is paying NI not enough? That extra 8.5% is somehow jare! Many immigrants in my trust have opted out but I'm still unsure 🤔

Don't stop your NHS pension. Look at it as free money from your employer cause they will match the pension.

ehizario2012:
I'm really interested in this topic because I've been contemplating stopping my NHS pension. Is paying NI not enough? That extra 8.5% is somehow jare! Many immigrants in my trust have opted out but I'm still unsure 🤔

Just to add my 10 kobo, you won’t be young forever o and old age can be financially devastating, you may think the pension doesn’t make sense now until then.

If you’re going to stay in this country for the long term and not a mobile migrant like some of us don’t even dare opting out of any pension e get why o!

Still surprised this conversation keeps popping up.

justwise:
No its not.

No British citizen pays Immigration Health Surcharge AND national insurance at the same time for the period of 5yrs at least.

If the new immigration policy becomes into effect many migrant families will pay IHS for 5-15yrs

Let's not forget that there ate millions of British citizens who pay nothing but still get free medical treatment.

Yes it is.

Of course no British citizen pays IHS and tax at the same time, because the IHS is specifically for migrants who are not yet permanently settled i.e. who have lived in the UK for less than 5/6 years in most cases.

Compare a migrant at 40 who has worked in the UK for 2 years and paid £2,000 IHS + income tax - there is *absolutely* no way he has paid more into the system than his British peer who has been working since 21 (and part time since he was 16 / 17 years) and has thus paid into the system for >20 years.

justwise:
Let's not forget that there ate millions of British citizens who pay nothing but still get free medical treatment

1. The vast majority of adult Brits have paid something at some point.
2. They are British and are entitled to the NHS. It was created to serve the British.
3. Let's not forget that there are tens of thousands of migrant dependents who pay nothing (exempt from IHS and don't work) but still get free medical treatment.

ehizario2012:
I'm really interested in this topic because I've been contemplating stopping my NHS pension. Is paying NI not enough? That extra 8.5% is somehow jare! Many immigrants in my trust have opted out but I'm still unsure 🤔

Don’t do it. Cyberknight’s analysis is very comprehensive so hopefully you have a clearer idea of the pension system overall.

My simple direct answer on the subject of the NHS pension specifically is that unless there’s a gun to your head or some other situation in which you will be in severe peril if you don’t take that money, keep contributing. If you have to borrow to sort out whatever it is you want to do, do it.

The NHS pension is one of the best (although it’s offset by lower wages overall) and broadly speaking you would need to invest a lot more elsewhere to match the income it guarantees ( and you can retire early + get that income wherever you are in the world when the time comes). It’s likely to be changed soon to be less valuable so this is the time to maximise the benefits, not lose out on them.

Later when I’m done with this game of tennis I’m heading to I’ll try to find some resources that go into much more detail.

Goke7:
Just to add my 10 kobo, you won’t be young forever o and old age can be financially devastating, you may think the pension doesn’t make sense now until then.

If you’re going to stay in this country for the long term and not a mobile migrant like some of us don’t even dare opting out of any pension e get why o!

Still surprised this conversation keeps popping up.

Before, I used to be surprised too but I’ve realised that being fully aware of these things is the exception and not the norm, although I’m not sure why.

Personally I’ve been obsessed with early retirement following the FIRE method for a long time so have been particular about learning all I can about some of these things. it’s amazing how much opportunity there is to optimize one’s current and future financial position under the standard layer of work throughout your life, pay taxes, and retire when almost dead. I guess it’s good that these conversations crop up once in a while so that people can be sign-posted to learn more.

Goodenoch:
Before, I used to be surprised too but I’ve realised that being fully aware of these things is the exception and not the norm, although I’m not sure why.

Personally I’ve been obsessed with early retirement following the FIRE method for a long time so have been particular about learning all I can about some of these things. it’s amazing how much opportunity there is to optimize one’s current and future financial position under the standard layer of work throughout your life, pay taxes, and retire when almost dead. I guess it’s good that these conversations crop up once in a while so that people can be sign-posted to learn more.

I think the cost of living is also what’s worrying lot of folks but like I’ll always say if the uk is not meeting up with your aspirations any longer then it’s time to have a rethink if you want to stay longer here instead of adding to your woes by giving up your pension. You pay more taxes, bills and you want to part ways with pension again? aaah

blank:
Don't stop your NHS pension. Look at it as free money from your employer cause they will match the pension.

Looooong time

blank:
Don't stop your NHS pension. Look at it as free money from your employer cause they will match the pension.

My darling. Long time. How are you?

Zahra29:
Yes it is.

Of course no British citizen pays IHS and tax at the same time, because the IHS is specifically for migrants who are not yet permanently settled i.e. who have lived in the UK for less than 5/6 years in most cases.

Compare a migrant at 40 who has worked in the UK for 2 years and paid £2,000 IHS + income tax - there is *absolutely* no way he has paid more into the system than his British peer who has been working since 21 (and part time since he was 16 / 17 years) and has thus paid into the system for >20 years.





1. The vast majority of adult Brits have paid something at some point.
2. They are British and are entitled to the NHS. It was created to serve the British.
3. Let's not forget that there are tens of thousands of migrant dependents who pay nothing (exempt from IHS and don't work) but still get free medical treatment.

You are making it look as if all Nigerians that came here with work or student visa came at the age of 40, many are in their 20s and 30s.

Yes British citizens are entitled to use the NHS because its their country just as migrants are also entitled to use NHS because their paid for it, i mean OVER paid for it.

The British should be the last country on planet earth to complain about immigration, the same people that went around the world shop lifting countries now have the gut to complain about immigrants that paid to be here.

People i have issues with are those who came here to commit crime and break the law, apart from those set of people ..the rest should enjoy what they paid for.

justwise:
You are making it look as if all Nigerians that came here with work or student visa came at the age of 40, many are in their 20s and 30s.

Yes British citizens are entitled to use the NHS because its their country just as migrants are also entitled to use NHS because their paid for it, i mean OVER paid for it.

The British should be the last country on planet earth to complain about immigration, the same people that went around the world shop lifting countries now have the gut to complain about immigrants that paid to be here.

People i have issues with are those who came here to commit crime and break the law, apart from those set of people ..the rest should enjoy what they paid for.

typical gaslighting as usual, pick a subset and use it to put everyone in the same basket. Let's even agree that some came in at the age of 40, what they are paying in should have been rejected na and kuku give them a discount or make it free.

This is even the best way to answer this right here below

justwise:
You are making it look as if all Nigerians that came here with work or student visa came at the age of 40, many are in their 20s and 30s.

Yes British citizens are entitled to use the NHS because its their country just as migrants are also entitled to use NHS because their paid for it, i mean OVER paid for it.

The British should be the last country on planet earth to complain about immigration, the same people that went around the world shop lifting countries now have the gut to complain about immigrants that paid to be here.

People i have issues with are those who came here to commit crime and break the law, apart from those set of people ..the rest should enjoy what they paid for.

justwise:
You are making it look as if all Nigerians that came here with work or student visa came at the age of 40, many are in their 20s and 30s.

It is a valid example - many came in their 40s or late 30s. It applies in the same way to those who came their 20s and early 30s. Your statement - that migrants have paid more into the NHS than Brits - is still grossly wrong. A migrant worker at 25 , 26, 29 etc who has paid £2 -3k in IHS has *absolutely not* paid more than his British peer who has been working since graduation at 21 - and most typically start working full or part time before 21- and making tax and NI contributions. It is fantastical to believe otherwise 😊

justwise:
Yes British citizens are entitled to use the NHS because its their country just as migrants are also entitled to use NHS because their paid for it, i mean OVER paid for it.

Lol, no one said that migrants shouldn't use and enjoy the NHS- both those who have paid the surcharge and those who haven't paid anything are able to access full NHS services.

However,no migrant has OVER paid except those who paid the 150% NHS charge

Goke7:
typical gaslighting as usual, pick a subset and use it to put everyone in the same basket. Let's even agree that some came in at the age of 40, what they are paying in should have been rejected na and kuku give them a discount or make it free.

This is even the best way to answer this right here below

Typical emotional response as usual.

To the bolded, you know that it is already free for many migrants. And for those who pay the surcharge, the government's (reasonable) position is that it is a fair contribution to access the comprehensive range of NHS services, compared to the private insurance model used by migrants in AUS and other countries which typically does not include coverage for pre-existing conditions.

I think you would find that private insurance or paying out of pocket would be far more expensive than the IHS flat fee - do you know how much an NHS birth and ante/post natal care costs? (Hint - A lot more than £1,035 especially if there are any complications).

Zahra29:
Typical emotional response as usual.

To the bolded, you know that it is already free for many migrants. And for those who pay the surcharge, the government's (reasonable) position is that it is a fair contribution to access the comprehensive range of NHS services, compared to the private insurance model used by migrants in AUS and other countries which typically does not include coverage for pre-existing conditions.

I think you would find that private insurance or paying out of pocket would be far more expensive than the IHS flat fee - do you know how much an NHS birth and ante/post natal care costs? (Hint - A lot more than £1,035 especially if there are any complications).

But that they came at 40 is not emotional ba?

Even if the fees are increased to 5k it still wouldn’t satisfy folks like you! All we hear it’s to collect more from migrants and still bastardise them for causing heatwave! It’s all beginning to sound like comedy! Fleece people and still talk about fair contributions!

Goke7:
But that they came at 40 is not emotional ba?

Even if the fees are increased to 5k it still wouldn’t satisfy folks like you! All we hear it’s to collect more from migrants and still bastardise them for causing heatwave! It’s all beginning to sound like comedy! Fleece people and still talk about fair contributions!

Goke7:
All we hear it’s to collect more from migrants and still bastardise them for causing heatwave

Eh?? Sounds like you've been spending too much time on Nigerian X 😂

Goke7:
But that they came at 40 is not emotional ba?

I don't understand? What's wrong with 40? In the west, 40 is classed as young-ish, (ever heard that life begins at 40?) and many people migrate at 38,39,40 and older.

I apologise if you are somehow offended by the example of the 40 y/old migrant; however as stated in my previous post, the principle is the same for a 25 y/old migrant.

The bolded - Not sure that is correct, the reason for allowing 20hrs a week work for students is to enable them earn for part of their upkeep and not primarily to pay their fees. Their fees are meant to have been covered by the proof of funds which also includes for their upkeep and that of their dependents.

Goke7:
Are you sure? There is a reason why students are allowed to work 20 hours a week and full time when on holidays, some of these things were actually factored in including allowing dependents or spouses to work full time until recently but still PhD and research students spouses can still work full time.

These things are not as straightforward as we think, the western world financial system is a credit based system and where flexible payments are allowed this is the credit they are also extending to international students just like they allow domestic students to get loans to pay up sch fees and for up keep expenses. The shift in policy now is all related to the current mood and national discourse and has nothing to do with principles even financial principles and of course in due time we will see a shift again when in reality it will no longer make financial sense for the schools themselves but this idea that uk education is a luxury and not a necessity cannot hold as education remains one of the major export and forex earner for this country and they still need to compete globally if we don’t want to see more job losses and economic damage.

Are you transitioning from one SOC to another with a different employer? That might be the reason for their being unable to sponsor

Grace321:
Please help me out. I got this email from a job I applied for. I got my first COS before April 2024 which I believe enables me to transition. Going through gov.uk website, I qualify for the lower going rate for the job. The job salary is more than the lower going rate but in their email they said it’s not high enough (which I don’t understand) and can only sponsor via new entrant, in which I do not meet the requirements.

Please see below email
“You have been verbally offered the above role and, as you are currently on a Sponsored Visa with your employer, you will need new Sponsorship with the Trust.
 
The role you have been offered comes under Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) Code 3111 Laboratory technicians.
 
This is a Medium Skilled role and, as the Trust do not require 3 years’ experience, we are only able to Sponsor this role as it is on the Temporary Shortage List.  The salary required to Sponsor means that we can also only Sponsor someone who is eligible to apply as a New Entrant, as otherwise the Band 3 Salary is not high enough to Sponsor”.
 
Please how can I go about this?

Thank you

Taal17:
This does not make sense
You get admission
School tells you your tuition and cost of living expenses
You present funds stating you have enough to meet these requirements of school
Then you say you can't pay TUITION in FULl?
So if you can not pay TUITION in full what will you about living expenses


There's a reason why places like Germany insist your funds are out in a bloc account where you can only access in the country.

I really hate it when people dismiss someone else’s opinion as not making sense, just because it doesn’t line up with theirs, especially when we’re talking about things that don’t even have a clear right or wrong. Take someone like Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos. Do people actually think they just have billions of dollars sitting somewhere in a bank account, doing nothing? That’s not how real-world finance works. If you look at how Musk bought Twitter, you’ll start to get a clearer picture of how money actually moves at that level. Just because someone has money doesn’t mean they’re eager to throw all of it into one thing. That’s not smart, and most people who understand money don’t operate that way. So when I see schools asking for part payments, I don’t get why people act like they’re clueless. These institutions know exactly what they’re doing. In fact, I’d argue the opposite. The schools insisting on full tuition upfront are basically sending a message, whether they realise it or not. They’re indirectly telling international students, this might not be for you. And honestly, it’s really that simple.

Zahra29:
It is a valid example - many came in their 40s or late 30s. It applies in the same way to those who came their 20s and early 30s. Your statement - that migrants have paid more into the NHS than Brits - is still grossly wrong. A migrant worker at 25 , 26, 29 etc who has paid £2 -3k in IHS has *absolutely not* paid more than his British peer who has been working since graduation at 21 - and most typically start working full or part time before 21- and making tax and NI contributions. It is fantastical to believe otherwise 😊



Lol, no one said that migrants shouldn't use and enjoy the NHS- both those who have paid the surcharge and those who haven't paid anything are able to access full NHS services.

However,no migrant has OVER paid except those who paid the 150% NHS charge

How do you mean people are not overpaying?
You’re paying about £2k or more for an 18‑month period, and in that time you might only see the GP once or twice. How does that not show that you’ve paid a lot for something you barely use?
The way you’re putting it makes it sound like every migrant uses the NHS in the same way, and that’s just not true. There are people who have been here for four or five years and have only been to the GP maybe twice. And even then, they’re still paying for their medication out of pocket.
The bigger issue, if we’re being honest, is the government underfunding the NHS. The population has grown, but the system hasn’t expanded to match it. Instead of taking responsibility for that gap, it’s easier to point fingers and blame immigrants, especially the legal ones who are actually paying into the system.
And yes, some dependents don’t pay the Immigration Health Surcharge. But whose decision was that? They didn’t set those rules themselves. If the exemption wasn’t there, do you really think they wouldn’t pay?
It just feels like people are focusing on the wrong problem.

bigtt76:
The bolded - Not sure that is correct, the reason for allowing 20hrs a week work for students is to enable them earn for part of their upkeep and not primarily to pay their fees. Their fees are meant to have been covered by the proof of funds which also includes for their upkeep and that of their dependents.

That’s why dependents were also allowed to work full time as well and students themselves on holidays, see those who made the rules understood what they were doing and when they wanted reduce the influx or subscriptions they simply ban dependents, it’s simply a business decision based on credit system and not necessarily academics so It’s not black and white as we see it. See in the US dependents of students are not even allowed to work no matter the level of degree and there is no way the uk can compete internationally if they go that route so it’s competition and business hence the tweaks here and there.

Someone has suggested earlier the block fund system like Germany does, the question is why is the uk not looking into that direction? For me the answer is Germany sch fees is little or almost nothing for international students while the uk fees are astronomical so if you do block fund and also do astronomical fees again how do you compete? It’s left to the uk to do whatever they like sha in their own economic interests.

Mcleo007:
How do you mean people are not overpaying?
You’re paying about £2k or more for an 18‑month period, and in that time you might only see the GP once or twice. How does that not show that you’ve paid a lot for something you barely use?
The way you’re putting it makes it sound like every migrant uses the NHS in the same way, and that’s just not true. There are people who have been here for four or five years and have only been to the GP maybe twice. And even then, they’re still paying for their medication out of pocket.
The bigger issue, if we’re being honest, is the government underfunding the NHS. The population has grown, but the system hasn’t expanded to match it. Instead of taking responsibility for that gap, it’s easier to point fingers and blame immigrants, especially the legal ones who are actually paying into the system.
And yes, some dependents don’t pay the Immigration Health Surcharge. But whose decision was that? They didn’t set those rules themselves. If the exemption wasn’t there, do you really think they wouldn’t pay?
It just feels like people are focusing on the wrong problem.

It’s all gaslighting, the ihs thing is simply a crowdfunding thing. One thing I have noticed and I don’t blame anyone that much for some of these views is that they just see things mostly too directly and don’t understand the business and value chain behind many policies.

The immigration business and value chain is a multibillion dollar thing but when it’s reduced to culture wars and all sorts of agenda then it’s too easy to take a lot of things for granted and focus on the wrong problem as you have said

Goke7:
That’s why dependents were also allowed to work full time as well and students themselves on holidays, see those who made the rules understood what they were doing and when they wanted reduce the influx or subscriptions they simply ban dependents, it’s simply a business decision based on credit system and not necessarily academics so It’s not black and white as we see it. See in the US dependents of students are not even allowed to work no matter the level of degree and there is no way the uk can compete internationally if they go that route so it’s competition and business hence the tweaks here and there.

Someone has suggested earlier the block fund system like Germany does, the question is why is the uk not looking into that direction? For me the answer is Germany sch fees is little or almost nothing for international students while the uk fees are astronomical so if you do block fund and also do astronomical fees again how do you compete? It’s left to the uk to do whatever they like sha in their own economic interests.

Exactly. The last time I checked, tuition in Germany is largely free, even for international students. When you compare that to the UK, it’s not even close.
That contrast alone says a lot. In one place, the system is set up to make education accessible. In the other, it often feels like a barrier you have to figure out how to climb, especially as an international student.

Mcleo007:
Exactly. The last time I checked, tuition in Germany is largely free, even for international students. When you compare that to the UK, it’s not even close.
That contrast alone says a lot. In one place, the system is set up to make education accessible. In the other, it often feels like a barrier you have to figure out how to climb, especially as an international student.

The biggest catch in all of this for the uk is faster turnaround in the visa application process just imagine the uk is like the us that does interviews for visa applications (though they do in rare cases but how much sef) how many students will they see? That’s why Canada at a time had to improve their visa processing time for students exclusively to Nigeria to compete and now for even Germany to compete they had to outsource their visa process to vfs the same organisation that also process for the uk and Canada so they are all in business and once any of them try to make things harder the next available country is there to take advantage. People will aways have their money to study no matter all this agenda of proof of funds and what have you, the question who is more serious to do business?

Mcleo007:
How do you mean people are not overpaying?
You’re paying about £2k or more for an 18‑month period, and in that time you might only see the GP once or twice. How does that not show that you’ve paid a lot for something you barely use?
The way you’re putting it makes it sound like every migrant uses the NHS in the same way, and that’s just not true. There are people who have been here for four or five years and have only been to the GP maybe twice. And even then, they’re still paying for their medication out of pocket.
The bigger issue, if we’re being honest, is the government underfunding the NHS. The population has grown, but the system hasn’t expanded to match it. Instead of taking responsibility for that gap, it’s easier to point fingers and blame immigrants, especially the legal ones who are actually paying into the system.
And yes, some dependents don’t pay the Immigration Health Surcharge. But whose decision was that? They didn’t set those rules themselves. If the exemption wasn’t there, do you really think they wouldn’t pay?
It just feels like people are focusing on the wrong problem.

Mcleo007:
You’re paying about £2k or more for an 18‑month period, and in that time you might only see the GP once or twice. How does that not show that you’ve paid a lot for something you barely use? The way you’re putting it makes it sound like every migrant uses the NHS in the same way, and that’s just not true

Newsflash: That's how a tax or insurance system works.

Do you know how many millions of people have paid into the NHS for decades and have not/ barely used it in that time? Tax contributions that amount to tens of thousands of pounds for a service they've not personally used, but they keep paying. That's why the service exists for people who do use it.

Mcleo007:
And even then, they’re still paying for their medication out of pocket.

So do adult Brits who live in England 🫤
This isn't a migrant issue. The same rules apply to everyone.

The system you are advocating for is a completely private one where you pay out of pocket at the point of use. However:
1. £2k wouldn't get you very far in such a system. One GP consultation alone is £250, if you need blood tests and a CT scan or MRI - your money has finished before they even start talking about treatment or further investigation.

2. That's not the system that the UK has chosen to adopt and this has been widely known since the IHS introduction in 2015.

Mcleo007:
And yes, some dependents don’t pay the Immigration Health Surcharge. But whose decision was that?

Actually, a significant proportion of migrant families - i.e. main applicant and their dependents - don't pay. And it is a government decision to continue to extend this COVID era waiver. It's just funny that this exemption is never mentioned whenever migrants complain about the IHS or the evil UK government. Even those who don't pay the IHS join in the complaining 😂

Mcleo007:
The bigger issue, if we’re being honest, is the government underfunding the NHS. The population has grown, but the system hasn’t expanded to match it. Instead of taking responsibility for that gap, it’s easier to point fingers and blame immigrants, especially the legal ones who are actually paying into the system.

This Labour government has significantly increased funding into the NHS and introduced cost saving measures to tackle waste. There is always more that can be done but there isn't a magic money tree in Downing Street.

No one is blaming migrants, but it is reasonable to ask migrants to make a contribution towards a health service which they can access on Day 1 on exactly the same terms as a British citizen or resident who has paid into the service for several years and decades.

Zahra29:
Newsflash: That's how a tax or insurance system works.

Do you know how many millions of people have paid into the NHS for decades and have not/ barely used it in that time? Tax contributions that amount to tens of thousands of pounds for a service they've not personally used, but they keep paying. That's why the service exists for people who do use it.



So do adult Brits who live in England 🫤
This isn't a migrant issue. The same rules apply to everyone.

The system you are advocating for is a completely private one where you pay out of pocket at the point of use. However:
1. £2k wouldn't get you very far in such a system. One GP consultation alone is £250, if you need blood tests and a CT scan or MRI - your money has finished before they even start talking about treatment or further investigation.

2. That's not the system that the UK has chosen to adopt and this has been widely known since the IHS introduction in 2015.



Actually, a significant proportion of migrant families - i.e. main applicant and their dependents - don't pay. And it is a government decision to continue to extend this COVID era waiver. It's just funny that this exemption is never mentioned whenever migrants complain about the IHS or the evil UK government. Even those who don't pay the IHS join in the complaining 😂



This Labour government has significantly increased funding into the NHS and introduced cost saving measures to tackle waste. There is always more that can be done but there isn't a magic money tree in Downing Street.

No one is blaming migrants, but it is reasonable to ask migrants to make a contribution towards a health service which they can access on Day 1 on exactly the same terms as a British citizen or resident who has paid into the service for several years and decades.

The exemptions you keep talking about are those who work in the healthcare sector again the maths is simple let the uk govt start charging healthcare workers ihs and let’s see how they will fare and compete with other G7 nations. It will be interesting to see where doctors even in Australia can get refunds on their house rents.

The other group exempted are asylum seekers and refugees who at the initial stage can’t work (I wonder how they will pay) until they get their refugee status I will also suggest after refugee status have been granted let ihs also be charged and let’s see again how that will go perhaps that would be seen to be fairer but again how does that comply with international norms and conventions. But for some of us who have been contributing from day 1 till now to always be made to feel we are not contributing our fair share is an insult to our sensibilities especially when we do very little or no visits to the GP.

Goke7:
FYI

https://blog.investengine.com/rachel-reeves-tax-cash-in-stocks-and-shares-isa/

The more harder it is to come to the uk, get ready to part more with your money as a resident! Simple

Even your dividends, rental income they are all coming for it even state pension.

Happy viewing 😂

Hehehe...
After limiting cash ISAs for those under 65, it appears they are just trying to close a loophole for those who'd leave uninvested cash in the S&S ISA and still get similar risk-free gains on it.

If it pushes folks towards market investing, then it'd be better however, my worry is that with all the recent changes and how they are framed by the media, it likely would put alot of people off investing.