[....,,,,..,,..]

Originally Posted by 73henny

We have lines drawn every day. You can have car insurance for personal or business use. Why not anything else? I don't see for a moment how some deluded amateur sailor should expect to be rescued 'for free'. Nor do I see why a mountaineer should expect it. Put yourself in harms way, then either pay for it or tough.
I have house insurance, travel insurance, I've even got golf cover in case I hit someone on the head. Why not rescue insurance for pot holers, rock climbers, gorge jumpers etc?

As for 'that's what happens in a modern and compassionate society', therein lies the problem - everyone expects someone else to pay. Its also a bit of an idealistic view. Great in theory, but not in practice.
The reality is everything has a cost. The simplest, and fairest way to fund it is 'if you want to use it you pay for it' I don't expect you to pay for my kids, no one but me should. But neither do I want to pay for some scrounger who has kids to obtain a bigger council house.

Yes but what is the difference between me using my bike to two rural places and someone out mountain biking.

For example taking back road from Rothes to work, and someone on holiday.
I don't want to pay insurance for just commuting to work.

its not a modern and compassionate side of things I am coming from.

I am all for fines for irresponsible people, especially people with boats!

The biggest cost for rescue are pretty much fuel for helicopters and repairs for any thing that breaks.

Mountain and cave rescue teams cover pretty much everything and they usually call in helicopter if required.

Climbers, pot holers etc probably cover the least number of call outs.
Walkers and people with boats the most.

[Tengocity]

Sorry henny I just don't agree with you. What you describe is far too to the right for me I'm afraid. I'm no lefty and never will be, but a society like this is too much like America.

[....,,,,..,,..]

Originally Posted by Tengocity

Sorry henny I just don't agree with you. What you describe is far too to the right for me I'm afraid. I'm no lefty and never will be, but a society like this is too much like America.

Same.

Insurance for everything is not the way ahead, just means more money for those knob heads in insurance (companies)

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by Brigand

Yes but what is the difference between me using my bike to two rural places and someone out mountain biking.

For example taking back road from Rothes to work, and someone on holiday.
I don't want to pay insurance for just commuting to work.

its not a modern and compassionate side of things I am coming from.

I am all for fines for irresponsible people, especially people with boats!

The biggest cost for rescue are pretty much fuel for helicopters and repairs for any thing that breaks.

Mountain and cave rescue teams cover pretty much everything and they usually call in helicopter if required.

Climbers, pot holers etc probably cover the least number of call outs.
Walkers and people with boats the most.

But there's a lot less climbers to be fair. And most climbers are more experienced than the average walker too.

I think it would be a sad day if you couldn't walk in to the hills without worrying first that you had insurance. Or go down the park for a kick about with your mates. It's just not the society I want to live in.

The benefit to society of people being active, in terms of health, or the way that supports the economy of certain areas, far outweighs what the costs are!

But as higher rate tax payer, who is fit and healthy, never claimed welfare, never been rescued, don't have any kids, I'm subsidising considerably... But I accept that's the way it works.

Ps. When I used to do a lot of climbing and skiing I did actually have a BMC worldwide annual policy which covered me for all winter and mountain sports. Not actually that expensive!

I don't climb much these days, but going back to Scotland for a winter hill walk next month hopefully... I will be extra careful!

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by Brigand

Same.

Insurance for everything is not the way ahead, just means more money for those knob heads in insurance (companies)

The issue is insurance isn't always feasible as you need a decent number of people to spread the risk and costs.

But even as a firm capitalist I do accept that certain things need to be subsidised or provided by the state as a free-market approach wouldn't necessarily be best for society more widely.

[JD6]

Originally Posted by NISFAN

I had no idea that locals didn't have to pay.....sounds very un-european union to me.

Don't you think that because it is a free service in the UK that the expectation is significantly higher? And this I feel is the case for many 'free' services. There is no monetary 'value for money' calculation in your head, you just expect the best.

In the Alps you get a Eurocopter 145 or even a squirrel, here we get a Sea King. I'm sure someone like Brigand can give you an rough cost difference on operating a Sea King versus a small EC145 or equivalent.....I bet it is huge. The Sea King is required if you run a military type 'fool proof' service, but can we afford it?

To me hikers in notorious areas should have to carry a transponder, to at least take the Search part out of the rescue service, it costs thousands to actually find a missing hiker.

I will try and confirm the free rescue for locals in France as it surprised me too.

I have to say that we were seriously impressed with the Mountain Rescue and Air Ambulance service and they exceeded our expectations. Our friend just had a badly broken leg, but that created the risk of exposure as we couldn't get him into a survival bag without causing more damage/pain. The injury wasn't pretty, so he was beginning to go into shock and getting very cold, even though we had borrowed a survival tent (bothy bag) from a passing walker. Another 30 mins without medical attention and it may have ended quite differently.

I agree that being lost is ridiculous when any smartphone can give you a precise location even without a mobile signal. I also received a SARLOC text, with a link to click which gives them access to your GPS location. This works with very limited data but does require at least a weak 2G signal. I suggest people install a free app such as GridPoint GB on their phones to get a grid ref without a mobile data signal.

The air ambulance was a large Eurocopter.

[73henny]

Originally Posted by Brigand

Same.

Insurance for everything is not the way ahead, just means more money for those knob heads in insurance (companies)

Don't have insurance then - simply pay the bill when it comes through.
As I mentioned. Everything has a cost, so someone has to pay for it.

Thats whats wrong - we want everything as long as we don't have to pay. All I've heard is reasons not to do something. No answers. Bit like the green party.

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by 73henny

Don't have insurance then - simply pay the bill when it comes through.
As I mentioned. Everything has a cost, so someone has to pay for it.

Thats whats wrong - we want everything as long as we don't have to pay. All I've heard is reasons not to do something. No answers. Bit like the green party.

But we have paid for it. It's called my taxes.

[73henny]

Originally Posted by Tengocity

But there's a lot less climbers to be fair. And most climbers are more experienced than the average walker too.

I think it would be a sad day if you couldn't walk in to the hills without worrying first that you had insurance. Or go down the park for a kick about with your mates. It's just not the society I want to live in.

The benefit to society of people being active, in terms of health, or the way that supports the economy of certain areas, far outweighs what the costs are!

But as higher rate tax payer, who is fit and healthy, never claimed welfare, never been rescued, don't have any kids, I'm subsidising considerably... But I accept that's the way it works.

Ps. When I used to do a lot of climbing and skiing I did actually have a BMC worldwide annual policy which covered me for all winter and mountain sports. Not actually that expensive!

I don't climb much these days, but going back to Scotland for a winter hill walk next month hopefully... I will be extra careful!

I agree with almost all of that. I'm the same, but with kids, though having a kick about in the park isn't the same as mountaineering.
You had worldwide insurance, and it wasn't expensive. Perfect.
We all pay insurance - National insurance. The problem is its based on what you earn not your risk. So it not an insurance at all, its a tax.

All I'm saying is we should pay for what we use.

[73henny]

Originally Posted by Tengocity

But we have paid for it. It's called my taxes.

No we haven't! Thats part of the reason why theres a huge deficit!

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by 73henny

No we haven't! Thats part of the reason why theres a huge deficit!

I can assure you, I have. I'm paying way more in than I'm ever going to take out!

[jusdorange]

Originally Posted by NISFAN

What would working for benefits do? :

1. Help those with confidence issues (and this is a massive issue) to get them into a 'confident enough to work' state of mind.
2. Reduce the requirement for unskilled workers from other countries.
3. Get the lazy types that are against work trained out of that habit.
4. Reduce the opportunity for the types that 'work illegitimately' cleaning windows for cash, or selling drugs, or robbing houses, and get them into a legal (socially responsible) form of work.

Maybe some other benefits too.....

You've ignored the fundamental point of

If you have a job for them to do, why not just employ them at full wage?

[....,,,,..,,..]

Originally Posted by 73henny

I agree with almost all of that. I'm the same, but with kids, though having a kick about in the park isn't the same as mountaineering.
You had worldwide insurance, and it wasn't expensive. Perfect.
We all pay insurance - National insurance. The problem is its based on what you earn not your risk. So it not an insurance at all, its a tax.

All I'm saying is we should pay for what we use.

Funny you should mention that, kick about in park.

Two occurrences

1. Mate playing footing in garden with his son, slips, falls and he snapped his Achilles tendon. Off work ages and needed ambulance, also child minder as his wife was away at time.

Place I am at now, one of the lads in stores again messing around with son, has just been for hip replacement due to accident while doing family stuff.

The first lad actually pays insurance for handgliding and indemnity stuff as he runs/works at a club.

We want more people out doing stuff and not less.

We have people not paying car insurance never mind going for a stroll in cannock insurance.

So if someone does not have insurance no call out?
Or Bill them ?

Yes there should be something risk orientated, however the biggest ratio is for low risk stuff.

[73henny]

Originally Posted by Tengocity

I can assure you, I have. I'm paying way more in than I'm ever going to take out!

Me too. At least, so far. Who knows what you or I will need from the NHS in the future.

I meant we as a country aren't paying for what we use.
So what to do? Tax more?, and punish you and I for example, or do everything possible so that everyone pays their way on an efficiently run country?
We as a country don't pay enough tax and we pay way too much in benefits. Have you seen the cars available on Motobility for example? Why not a range of cars from Ford or Kia?, or better still cars that are built in the UK.
Similarly, why do we need BMW police cars? Why not JLR / Toyota / Nissan products? Any publicly funded body should use UK built vehicles where possible.

What we're doing is unsustainable. Something has to change.

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by 73henny

Me too. At least, so far. Who knows what you or I will need from the NHS in the future.

I meant we as a country aren't paying for what we use.
So what to do? Tax more?, and punish you and I for example, or do everything possible so that everyone pays their way on an efficiently run country?
We as a country don't pay enough tax and we pay way too much in benefits. Have you seen the cars available on Motobility for example? Why not a range of cars from Ford or Kia?, or better still cars that are built in the UK.
Similarly, why do we need BMW police cars? Why not JLR / Toyota / Nissan products? Any publicly funded body should use UK built vehicles where possible.

What we're doing is unsustainable. Something has to change.

I totally agree about the size of the welfare state. This is the issue- both a significant reason for our debts and a major reason for them getting larger.

They should be a safety net, and nothing more in my opinion. For too many it's a tantamount to a career choice.

I have private healthcare and expect I will always have it, whether provided by my employer or paid for myself. And similarly I put as much away in my pension as possible as I don't expect to have a state one by the time I retire, as it's never going to be sustainable.

[....,,,,..,,..]

Originally Posted by 73henny

Me too. At least, so far. Who knows what you or I will need from the NHS in the future.

I meant we as a country aren't paying for what we use.
So what to do? Tax more?, and punish you and I for example, or do everything possible so that everyone pays their way on an efficiently run country?
We as a country don't pay enough tax and we pay way too much in benefits. Have you seen the cars available on Motobility for example? Why not a range of cars from Ford or Kia?, or better still cars that are built in the UK.
Similarly, why do we need BMW police cars? Why not JLR / Toyota / Nissan products? Any publicly funded body should use UK built vehicles where possible.

What we're doing is unsustainable. Something has to change.

We use BMW, Volvo, JLR, due to costs, reliability.
They do use vauxhall, ford.

We tried the UK built vehicles thing, they were crap, British Leyland I belive it was.

Why can't someone on motobility have th full range of cars ?

That's totally out of order!

[73henny]

Originally Posted by jusdorange

You've ignored the fundamental point of

If you have a job for them to do, why not just employ them at full wage?

Because invariably they'll say 'the jobs not suitable' or intentionally miss or mess up the interview as its just easier to stay at home and get paid benefits. The fundamental point is they need to be pushed off benefits into a job. They get 'paid' too much to stay at home so figure 'why go to work'

Originally Posted by Brigand

Funny you should mention that, kick about in park.

1. Mate playing footing in garden with his son, slips, falls and he snapped his Achilles tendon. Off work ages and needed ambulance, also child minder as his wife was away at time.


The first lad actually pays insurance for handgliding and indemnity stuff as he runs/works at a club.

We want more people out doing stuff and not less.

We have people not paying car insurance never mind going for a stroll in cannock insurance.

So if someone does not have insurance no call out?
Or Bill them ?

Yes there should be something risk orientated, however the biggest ratio is for low risk stuff.

Absolutely agree we need more people out and about. But a kick about (even though they ended badly) isn't the same as mountaineering is it. Why are we happy to have insurance for some things, like travel insurance, but not extreme sports for example. And your mate who was off work - either his company paid for his sick pay and/or the state, or he had sickness / unable to work insurance. Either way, someone had to pay.

[jusdorange]

Originally Posted by 73henny

We as a country don't pay enough tax and we pay way too much in benefits. Have you seen the cars available on Motobility for example? Why not a range of cars from Ford or Kia?, or better still cars that are built in the UK.
.

Ok let me stop you there

The most expensive cars have advanced payments, that is privately funded

The monthly payments come out of their disability allowance

It is no way a "free car"

We are eligible because of my mother, but we said no because fortunately we have the means to buy our own above the range offered, under 25s (me) are limited to 116bhp which is nothing

I can see how if we werent financial as secure it'd be of great benefit, not everywhere is wheelchair accessible

bmw are on there because if people want to elect a decent automatic with space for a,wheelchair and paraphernalia they can pay extra to do so

[73henny]

Originally Posted by Brigand

We use BMW, Volvo, JLR, due to costs, reliability.
They do use vauxhall, ford.

We tried the UK built vehicles thing, they were crap, British Leyland I belive it was.

Why can't someone on motobility have th full range of cars ?

That's totally out of order!

I never said they shouldn't have the full range of cars. Apologies if it was misinterpreted. I just think that there should be incentives to use UK sourced vehicle to help sustain British jobs.
And I remember only too well the BL cars etc. But the vehicles that are built here now aren't rubbish like that. Honda / Toyota / Nissan etc make reliable cars here in the UK.

[NISFAN]

Originally Posted by jusdorange

You've ignored the fundamental point of

If you have a job for them to do, why not just employ them at full wage?

Because some don't have the confidence to 'take on a job'.

Others are unwilling to take a job, the alternative is to dos around at home.

Some work illegally (cash in hand) and still claim.

They won't be getting a full wage, or for long (hopefully).

We as a country need to get tougher on who claims benefits. The fact is there are plenty of jobs in the UK......people come from afar to take them up, so no excuse for our indigenous population.

An example, I know someone that used to hold a managerial position in a company. He now thinks that he deserves to be 'a manager', and in his job hunting, will accept nothing less. In reality he couldn't manage a fart on a diet of baked beans. But thanks to benefits, he has the luxury of holding out for that perfect job.

Making him turn up and do something else, would soon adjust his 'aspirations'.

[73henny]

Originally Posted by Tengocity

I totally agree about the size of the welfare state. This is the issue- both a significant reason for our debts and a major reason for them getting larger.

They should be a safety net, and nothing more in my opinion. For too many it's a tantamount to a career choice.

I have private healthcare and expect I will always have it, whether provided by my employer or paid for myself. And similarly I put as much away in my pension as possible as I don't expect to have a state one by the time I retire, as it's never going to be sustainable.

Couldn't agree more.

[....,,,,..,,..]

Originally Posted by 73henny

I never said they shouldn't have the full range of cars. Apologies if it was misinterpreted. I just think that there should be incentives to use UK sourced vehicle to help sustain British jobs.
And I remember only too well the BL cars etc. But the vehicles that are built here now aren't rubbish like that. Honda / Toyota / Nissan etc make reliable cars here in the UK.

Okay, agreed yes their should be incentives for UK manufactured cars.

The EU would have apoplexy lol.

The motobility bit was in reference to those at Headly Court etc.

There was a move a while ago to limit types, prices etc.