Health Care reforms!

[Maricopa]

I was hopefully trying to point out, by using myself as an example, that I think there are probably many people in my situation.  It was not a personal attack on yourself, or anyone else who has made similar posts.  We do all need to pull together in this, and to everyone who is doing their bit, including yourself, well done and keep it up.[:D]  And I sincerely apologise for the last bit, very unneccessary[:(], which I have now edited, as I have the rest of my post to tone it down.[:)]

[Deimos]

For example, when people talk about the "asset rich, cash poor" in the context of tax and health system they refer to those whose lifestyle way exceeds their declared income.  When they do leave their swimming pools they tend to be driving their Range rovers, etc., etc.  The reason they are described as such is that they are supposedly living off savings.  i.e. the money they spend in Super U is not generated from income/interest but rather is being taken from a massive heap of savings.  Owning you house does not allow you to do this.

Thus my point holds and it is not wise to raise this group as they do not exist.  The closest they can come to existing is by hiding their savings behind a life assurance scheme.  However, this if completely legal and allowed (by both French and UK and most other EU countries).  The income is still taxed but not as badly - and its the income (the cash this group supposedly don't have) that is not taxed as much not the capital.

(I was using real figures, just not necessarily mine).  Look at the supposed numbers of people who are selling-up in the UK and downsizing to France.  Large place in Surrey to smaller place in France leaves capital.

Ian

[Russethouse]

For example, when people talk about the "asset rich, cash poor" in the context of tax and health system they refer to those whose lifestyle way exceeds their declared income.

Are you sure? Doesn't this apply to people who have their own property, probably quite nice, but just live off interest on savings - I don't personally see it as having anything to do with declared income, thats a different category[;-)]

[Dominique]

Hello Tony F, 

RE : the French have effectively covered their backs by including their own

national inactifs in this as well so they will be treated in exactly

the same way.

I have not seen any evidence so far that the French inactifs cannot join CMU.  I have read that Sarkosy wants to increase taxation on pre-retirement packages from private businesses.

Is not an "inactif" person someone who does not work AND  is not registered as unemployed and looking for work ?    

Dominique

[Deimos]

[quote user="Russethouse"]

For example, when people talk about the "asset rich, cash poor" in the context of tax and health system they refer to those whose lifestyle way exceeds their declared income.

Are you sure? Doesn't this apply to people who have their own property, probably quite nice, but just live off interest on savings - I don't personally see it as having anything to do with declared income, thats a different category[;-)]

[/quote]

You are right and there are alternatives (or variants).  The income you can generate from your capital will depend on how risk averse you are.  Depending on what age people give up work, some might live of interest and spending some of the capital slowly (i.e. the capital gradually gets smaller).  This is where the comment about "declared income" comes in.  Rumour (e.g. on this forum) is that a few people are starting to be investigated by the authorities as they appear to be living beyond the income they declare (on tax returns).  This is quite possible if you spend the capital as well as the interest.  When people comment on the "asset rich, income poor" (in this context) they tend to be referring to the group who appear to have very low income (low tax and low CMU contributions) yet live fabulously - because they are spending their capital.  And this is where the equation breaks down because, for "inactifs" to have enough capital to last there has to be a lot and that will generate a lot of interest so they would no longer be considered "cash poor".

For most people who give up work before retirement age ("inactifs"), the money they spend in Super U has to come from somewhere.  Most people cannot start drawing their pensions early (military people being one exception).  Thus, for others the cash has to come from somewhere.  Given that you are "inactif" and thus not employed that leaves things like running gites/B&B and similar or having savings and interest.

Savings and interest is a challenging one for people to calculate as most people will not have inflation adjusted pensions so have to make allowances for their income requirement and effective capital depreciation for inflation.

Ian

[Tony F Dordogne]

Trying to clarify this about Sarkosy and French inactifs.

I followed the French Presidential quite closely and saw quotes from Sarkosy and/or his UMP team about French inactifs and the belief that if the French inactifs chose to be that - retired early, not working and not looking for work - that their access to the CMU was going to be/may be restricted.  It may not be that the French who are already in the system will be excluded but those looking to take early retirement in the future are in Sarkosy's sights, that's why he and his party have raised the issue.

Several people here have said that what the French Government is saying it will do the non-French national inactifs is discriminatory.  What I've been saying is that if Sarkosy brings in the same legislation for the French, it's not discriminatory because the Brits affected will be being treated the same way as the French inactifs.

Dominique, you're right, inactifs are people who are early-retired and not looking for work - seems to cover many of the early-retired people on here who are living off their assets or pensions prior to statutory retirement age without registering for work here, or those people who have businesses, gites etc, which for their own reasons they have chosen not to register so they appear to be inactif to the State.

Somebody on here raised this French inactif issue prior to me but I don't have the time or inclination to go through every thread to find where it originated from a Brit poster. 

And it doesn't detract from my general piont - we need to get the French on-side with this campaign, regardless of what the Government does or doesn't do for the French inactifs.

[cooperlola]

[quote user="Dominique"]Hello Tony F, 

RE : the French have effectively covered their backs by including their own national inactifs in this as well so they will be treated in exactly the same way.

I have not seen any evidence so far that the French inactifs cannot join CMU.  I have read that Sarkosy wants to increase taxation on pre-retirement packages from private businesses.

Is not an "inactif" person someone who does not work AND  is not registered as unemployed and looking for work ?    

Dominique
[/quote]I, like you, have seen nothing which suggests that French "inactifs" are being ejected from the CMU.  The thing is that there probably aren't so many of them, in the same circumstances as non-EUs.  They are more likely to be "signed on" (without prospects of employment), or are covered by employment schemes with long payment histories within France.  What happens to French nationals who have made their careers elsewhere (200,000+ in London alone) if they return here to retire, nobody seems to know.  One assumes that the CMU would be their only way of getting medical cover too?

Ian, I suspect that there are rather more people who have pensions which are available to them before state retirement age than you think - police, services, civil servants, railway workers (that includes me and my o/h - both able to take early retirement.) Also, I take issue with the amounts of capital those who sold up may have left - are we untypical?  By the time we sold and paid off our mortgage, paid removal expenses etc, did a few renovation jobs on our property (which now will have to go on hold until we get back into the CMU at whatever date), there is no capital left. Like Maricopa, we live on our pensions - private healthcare, plus paying for asthma drugs out of our pockets, is going to make a massive dent in them!  And if the o/h gets another bout of pneumonia - as has happened - we'll probably need to mortgage the house to pay for hospital treatment.  Not what we envisaged when we moved!

Edit (simultaneous posting) : And Tony is right - we need to work on the French (particularly the opposition) too.

btw, this was the thread about the disbanding of the CMU

http://www.completefrance.com/cs/forums/1057761/ShowPost.aspx

but it seems to be an unfounded rumour... unless anybody knows differently.

[Richard]

As I see it, there will be no 'winners' if these proposals go through unreformed. No one will be 'better off', certainly not in the true sense of the words. OK, some folk who are in good health, and have healthy incomes to boot, may save a few hundred Euros by 'going private' but whatever they save in the short-term will be outweighed a hundred times if they become chronically sick. Who in their right mind wants to take that sort of gamble - with their health??!! This is not like 'going private' in the UK where, if your insurer won't pay, you can always fall back on the NHS. Here there will be no fall-back, no catch-all. If your insurer won't pay and you CAN'T pay, that's it. Tough luck, ring the undertaker!! Losing the right to access the state health service is a massive blow to everyone concerned and shouldn't be viewed in terms of winners and losers. Everyone is a loser when healthcare becomes dependent upon the say-so of a money-making enterprise, more interested in profits than people. Is it really a myth that these companies employ more people to invesigate ways of avoiding making payment than they do to settle claims?? They are not benevolent societies - they will not pay unless they HAVE to, and they will explore any and every avenue that might allow them to avoid making payment. On top of which, with typical excesses of €120 Euros per claim, what are you actually getting for your money? Visits to the doctor won't be covered, nor the dentist, routine x-rays, scans. How ill do you want to be before you start to get something back? For any kind of peace of mind there is absolutely no alternative but to remain in the State system - at almost any price.

[cooperlola]

No agrument there, Richard.

 

Please sign the petition http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/healthinFrance/

[Tony F Dordogne]

Cooperlola, could I suggest that all French MPs and Senators are included in the contact list, if we target just the opposition we'll make it a partisan issue and we need to try to get as many people on board as possible.

And of course, rather than keep playing the poor us card, we need to be talking about the economic impact that a loss of British residents would be, especially in rural areas.  Down here in Acquitaine, it's mainly socialist so we'd be speaking to the opposition anyway, but we need to spread our net as widely as possible, at every level, national, departmental, canton and commune.

[cooperlola]

No argument there either, Tony, but one might word the approaches slightly differently!

 

 

Please sign the petition http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/healthinFrance/

[Joshua]

Tony,

Picking up on your point regarding economic impact.

I've written to the MD's of Ryanair and the big three DIY Warehouse Chains stressing not just the impact with an mass exodus but also the implications of a reduced disposable income for the many who stay.

You never know who they have dinner with.

Its only stamps and ink !

We've had in excess of 35 flights this year with us going back and forward and family / guests in and out of Limoges.

Multiple that by everyone affected ?

Joshua[:D]

[Nickel]

"l'instauration des franchises médicales" 

slightly off topic but relevant as it is about health care change. Apparently, this was opposed by 70% of the population, there have been demonstrations throughout France and opposition from the unions but yesterday the députés (UMP)approved it. Now I am not sure it is in itself a bad thing but I just wanted to highlight the fact that the government didn't seem to take much notice of any opposition. 

http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0,36-971839,0.html

[Dominique]

re: What happens to French nationals who have made their careers elsewhere (200,000+ in London alone)

I suppose some of them contribute to the C F E (Caisse des Français à l'étranger), although I have no idea how many expatriates take up this option

Dominique

[rothrugby]

The recent raft of postings seem to be taking this forum away from Factual information & into the realm of speculation, some of which seem to only cause additional worry & distress.

Everyones situatuation will be to some extent unique, & it will be up to each person to decide the best course of action for themselves

My main concern is that any items of hard fact could be missed amongst the masses of postings so I propose to start a new thread called:

THE LATEST FACTS ABOUT THE HEALTHCARE REFORMS

By all means have agood rant on the other threads, it does us all good sometimes but only post hard news on this new one.

I hope you all understand my reasons & concerns

[Cat]

There is already a sticky, at the head of the health changes forum, dedicated to the hard facts, The Story so Far http://www.completefrance.com/cs/forums/1035025/ShowPost.aspx

As far as I know it is up to date (although Cooperlola has promised to take another look at it, as she is the one feeding me the information [:)] ).

There have been several threads started before about "hard facts", which have gradually turned into speculation and discussion, which is why Cooperlola requested that we make the Story so Far a sticky, which is locked.

If we've missed any changes, decisions or legislation let me know by PM and I will update the sticky.

Thanks

[Eleanorsgrandad]

Looking through Google re Healthcare and saw your comments. Are you saying he was wrong and not telling the truth?

[Eleanorsgrandad]

Sorry, not used to this. Previous message was for Cooperlola and message of 27/10/07.

[Russethouse]

Sadly Cooperlola is out of action at present after a serious road accident, perhaps you could contact someone at FHI ?

[Will]

Take little note of these old postings. At the time the comments were written, there was a lot of speculation and conjecture because nobody knew what effects Sarkozy's desired health reforms might have on non-French nationals. Since then things have developed considerably, with the effect that anybody who was French resident before 23 November 2007 is not likely to be disadvantaged. Others, who took up residence after that date, will have to take out private health assurance unless they qualify to join the French system by virtue of taking up work and paying in to the system, by acquiring resident status through being legally in France for five years, or through an E121 form issued to those over state retirement age.

The current situation is fully outlined on the www.frenchhealthissues.eu web site.

[Eleanorsgrandad]

Thanks Will.Very helpful and have looked on suggested websites and taken notes. Also looked at offending article that prompted this thread which does suggest he was right after all. Shades of mystic meg

[Cat]

Out of interest Eleanorsgrandad, where could I find a copy of the article that prompted this thread?  I searched the FPN site, but although I found quite a bit on the French healthcare reforms, I couldn't find the "offending article"?

[Eleanorsgrandad]

Cathy

I was talking to my neighbour over a glass of wine (as you do) and he had hard copy of November 2007 issue.

[Cat]

Crikey, that was handy.  Are you thinking of moving to France then Eleanorsgrandad (I so want to put an apostrophe in there) or have you found yourself caught up in the healthcare changes?

[Eleanorsgrandad]

When I sell my house............ I still have 5 years to my state pension so yes I am caught up