Follow-up to E106 : A worrying development

[max]

hello

well you can always go home [post edited by the moderators]. who do you think is going to pay the shortfall for people who are perhaps in their 50's who do not want to work.

max

The moderators have edited this post as per the forum Code of Conduct:

Users must not post messages which:

• Are insulting, abusive,
  racist, sexist, or derogatory in any way to others, whether they are
  individuals or companies, users of the Forum or not. This includes
  material sent via personal e-mails through this forum.

• Threaten, intimidate, victimise or harass others.

• Use the service in a manner deemed inappropriate by Archant

• Impede or disrupt the flow of the discussions in the Forum

[max]

hello

im sorry for my opinion, but how many of you are under 60 never worked here and expect the french to pay for you

max

[cooperlola]

[quote user="max"]

hello

im sorry for my opinion, but how many of you are under 60 never worked here and expect the french to pay for you

max

[/quote]I expect to, and do, pay.  I who have never been ill in my life, and who have never had any medical treatment here, expect and want to go on paying into CMU so that my contributions may pay for those who are less fortunate - wherever they were born.  That is what the taxes I pay (on income, TVA, CMU contributions, taxe fonciere, habitation and social charges) are for.

Your opinion is, of course, as valid as the next person's, you do not need to apologise for it, as far as I am concerned.

[Rose (& Greyman)]

well max, what a bitter reply. Perhaps the inacifs affected worked 24/7 when they were younger to build up a retirement fund in their business or they may have invested all their spare cash in an early retirement fund. My understanding is that they have been excluded from contributing to CMU. They may only contribute based on a small early retirement income but that is no different to someone contributing to the state based on a low paid part time job. I don't think any of these people want something for nothing, just to be allowed to contribute.

Maybe the people who crow the loudest about the plight of these people are the ones who used to bunk off school and now find they are working themselves into the ground until 65. That won't be me !! [:D]

[krusty]

well said greyman   you summed things up perfectly

[cooperlola]

Mods : I would really like to carry on this discussion, but this is not the place as you say : Any chance of a thread split?...

Greyman - I so agree.  Why, because we are able to (through prudence on the part of our pension providers or ourselves) is it so wrong to take an early retirement?  We had the option of taking a smaller sum early or working for longer and getting more later.  We have never in our lives done less than pay all the taxes and other contributions which are due by law, nor even resented doing so.

Anybody who wants to see the real consequences of putting healthcare into the hands of the private sector should watch Michael Moore's film "Sicko".  Although he certainly has his own agenda, it is sad to see in it that even those who apparently are covered by private insurance, have been known to die whilst those who only have money in mind decide their fate.  That is the sole reason why I for one, am fighting to keep our healthcare a matter for the state and the healthcare professionals, and not those for whom profit is their only motive.  To me, it is nothing to do with getting something for nothing - all I ask is that decisions about health and who should be given treatment, are made by those with our best interests at heart, and not their own.

[woolybanana]

max, don't apologize. you are actually right in your implication that some Brits do expect the French State and citizen to pay for them and they have been screwing the system right royal for far too long. But many, many Brits came to France in good faith, have paid and are happy to pay their dues and are now being screwed by the French State in return. And there are some really, really bad and sad cases which should be before the European Court of Human Rights. Question really is, where do we go from here?

[Clair]

This thread has been split from its original thread (E106 : A worrying development)

You are reminded to abide by the forum Code of Conduct.

Forum Moderators

[cooperlola]

[quote user="woolybanana"]max, don't apologize. you are actually right in your implication that some Brits do expect the French State and citizen to pay for them and they have been screwing the system right royal for far too long. But many, many Brits came to France in good faith, have paid and are happy to pay their dues and are now being screwed by the French State in return. And there are some really, really bad and sad cases which should be before the European Court of Human Rights. Question really is, where do we go from here?[/quote]So true, woolyb.  Those who take the system for a ride deserve what is coming to them, really; if you cheat, you take the chance of getting caught - I have no argument with that.

But really, if you saw what is being done to some who are being caught in the crossfire, Max, I am sure you would be as angry as I am!

[max]

hello again,

so as i understand it you only do not qualify, if you have never worked in france, not at retirement age and do not wish to work but have the capacity to work

max

[ali-cat]

[quote user="max"]

hello again,

so as i understand it you only do not qualify, if you have never worked in france, not at retirement age and do not wish to work but have the capacity to work

max

[/quote]

Essentially yes - except :

(a) many have retired at an age appropriate to their occupation (as in France) but not at the UK state retirement age (always rising) which entitles you to an E121;

(b) many retired or had to retire because of ill health and are now unable to meet the requirement to have full private health insurance;

(c) no-one would bat an eyelid at anyone taking early retirement in the UK;

(d) the majority of those affected expected to be allowed to contribute to CMU.  They carried out their 'due dilligence' only to find that that the conditions of residency were changed.

Mr Cat

 

 

[max]

hello

very good points, nobody should be left without cover. however if you worked in england and payed all your ni there and never in france why then should france pay for your cover. there is not enough money for the french.

max

[Will]

Max, I do agree with you.

People are quite happy to leave Britain behind for all sorts of reasons, many of which I disagree with, but that's another topic. But they forget the many good things about living there, like access to a free and universal health service for all residents (OK, the service is far from perfect but that's another topic too). They expect not only that things in other countries should work the same as in Britain - they don't, not even in France - but that having turned their backs on Britain, the British government should bail them out if a new regime in their chosen new home should change the rules. Yes, they may have paid tax and NI for 35 years but that was not in France.

We pay (substantial) tax and social security charges in both countries, and as a French taxpayer I don't see why I should be expected to pay for early retired immigrants to live a life of leisure subsidised by me - and feel the same from the British taxpayer viewpoint. Some of us who contribute to forums looked ages ago at the finances behind the outwardly healthy French health service and said, publicly, that the CMU could not continue as it was for immigrants. Significantly, some of those who said so have been banned from this forum.

However, the way the French have handled this situation has been nothing short of farcical, and nobody really knows yet what the alternative to CMU is for most people, and that is where my objections, and support for the protesters, lies.

[Chassaing]

[quote user="max"]

hello

very good points, nobody should be left without cover. however if you worked in england and payed all your ni there and never in france why then should france pay for your cover. there is not enough money for the french.

max[/quote]

Hi Max,  my wife and I are fit and well and been forced into the private healthcare route. We have really worked hard, in fact so hard, we were able to receive our work pensions early.  Our calculations show that we are about 50 Euros a month worse off than the CMU route. So financially we are not 'dying in a ditch' over this issue.  However, we feel very deeply for the people who have been smacked in the face by the change in policy and don't understand the reasons why, apart from the obvious political glory. Our wish would be for the European Government sort to this issue out pronto. You make a very good point about the French health system deficits, why were fit and healthy people from other Eurpoean States, who have not received any French healthcare, expected to contribute to help pay off the deficit (not our debt). When they could have taken out private healthcare.  Our answer is, because that is how Universal Healthcare works, people who can put in and the people who need the care take out, as part of a civilised society.  The problem is the people who have been paying in all their lives are now getting to a stage in their lives when they need care, but the money has been spent by others. (There is no pot of cash, just a pot of debt)

We will be watching the news for the annual statement on French Government (FG) figures, as we believe the FG has made a really bad decision.

[Scooby]

[quote user="Will"]

Some of us who contribute to forums looked ages ago at the finances behind the outwardly healthy French health service and said, publicly, that the CMU could not continue as it was for immigrants. Significantly, some of those who said so have been banned from this forum.

[/quote]

http://www.completefrance.com/cs/forums/901285/ShowPost.aspx  date 15/03/2007 - Quote Hastobe 'I find it quite amusing that so many retired people, who have never

paid into the French system during their working (aka healthy) life,

but are now happily using the French healthcare system for their

retirement (read ill health) years.....'

[groslard]

Much of this thread has tried to justify early retirement on the grounds of having worked hard etc.

In fact many people have simply cashed in on hugh rises in the price of their, or inherited UK property, and decided to sell up and move to France, because they can buy a property more cheaply.

I have no problem with that as long as they remain independent.

With the average house price in the UK at £230,474, and £353,096

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/in_depth/uk_house_prices/html/houses.stm

that gives 310,698.22 and 475,936.96 euros  at today's lower sterling rates

It is possible find a decent house for 150-200 thousand euros, and invest the rest to provide health cover

The "hard-earned" pension covers living expenses.

Where is the problem?

[Deimos]

[quote user="Will"]

We pay (substantial) tax and social security charges in both countries, and as a French taxpayer I don't see why I should be expected to pay for early retired immigrants to live a life of leisure subsidised by me - and feel the same from the British taxpayer viewpoint.

[/quote]

I don't think any of the "inactifs" is looking to be "subsidised" by other tax payers (at least not most people) - not nobody seems to be listening to that bit and keep going on about "why should I subsidise ...".  CMU-B is a contributory scheme.  You pay and it is expensive (for me far more expensive than private insurance - and even my CPAM realised this).  If the contributions the French government are asking for are not adequate then then can always increase the rate or band it or something.

I do not consider this to be about money and government budgets.  What they are actually achieving is to keep those who need ongoing treatment (i.e. more expensive and long term costs) in the CMU whilst those rejected are the younger (pre-retirement age) and probably healthier without ongoing medical costs.  Thus throw out the net contributors and keep those who represent a net cost.  If they had any grey matter they would realise that insurance type schemes only work when you have a good cross section and the healthy subsidise the ill.  Then the ill then hopefully get better and maybe some unfortunate healthy people get ill and they are subsidising the other way round, etc.  Throw out the healthy and your budget balance gets even worse !!

My major problem is that I am not allowed to join the CMU and NOT ALLOWED TO TAKE OUT PRIVATE INSURANCE.  This is not that I cannot get private insurance (for me having no existing problems it is a telephone call with a credit card).  The problem is that my CPAM 's understanding is that Private Insurance in France is illegal without certain documents and it is going to take them an unknown delay to get me these documents and that in the mean time I am not allowed to have any health cover.  No question about paying anybody - just not allowed to pay anybody.

Ian

[krusty]

[quote user="groslard"]Much of this thread has tried to justify early retirement on the grounds of having worked hard etc.
In fact many people have simply cashed in on hugh rises in the price of their, or inherited UK property, and decided to sell up and move to France, because they can buy a property more cheaply.

I have no problem with that as long as they remain independent.
With the average house price in the UK at £230,474, and £353,096
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/in_depth/uk_house_prices/html/houses.stm
that gives 310,698.22 and 475,936.96 euros  at today's lower sterling rates

It is possible find a decent house for 150-200 thousand euros, and invest the rest to provide health cover

The "hard-earned" pension covers living expenses.
Where is the problem?
[/quote]

All very well talking averages , but my house only sold for £100,000.......thats where the problem is

[cooperlola]

Will, I have much sympathy with your point of view and I know from your history on here that you are a thoughtful person, and that you do not do the "UK good, France bad or vice-versa" thing.  However, I would feel much less angered by the whole debacle if the rules were being applied to everybody, but they are not.  Where is the justification in applying new rules to non-French Europeans only?  If France wants to put its health system in the hands of private companies, then of course, it can - that is a policy decision for the French government, and - like it or not - we would have to accept it.  However, what makes me so angry is the fact that European legislation is being manipulated to put a specific group of nationalities at a disadvantage - and they are easy targets because of the perception that they are rich and lazy because they dared to retire early and could afford to.  And the continued reference to the huge killings which it is perceived have been made because of the difference in property prices is spurious and misleading.

Believe me, we have no capital left from our house sale - it all went to pay off the outstanding mortgage, pay for the cost of the move, and pay French artisans to bring the house up to scratch.  We live on our pensions.  We can do that because we were both senior managers in a company which had a well-run pension scheme and they were happy to let us go so they could employ younger people in our places. There are 200,000 French people working in London alone - so it's likely that at least some who took early retirement, have had their jobs filled by French naitonals! Like a couple of other posters on here, CMU-B is not a very different cost from full PHI - it's a little less, but not much. We are both healthy, and last year got 230€ back from our CPAM -  for dental work and one lot of asthma drugs.  We have four years to go before the UK government picks up our costs again.  There's a good chance (I visited my previous doctor of 28 years once - for tonsilitis - and my o/h goes once a year for one lot of asthma drugs which lasts him the whole twelve months. I have never had to consult any medical professional here) that we will be reasonably fit until the E121 kicks in. 

We're a couple of the lucky ones because we are paying into CMU so can continue it.  However, if we had been thrown out - as was originally the plan - the FG would have lost our contributions and gained a couple of hundred euros.  We would not have been able to get the comprensive Private Health Care we are required to by law, because insurance companies will not cover the cost of the asthma drugs as it is a chronic illness.  Ergo, we could not have conformed to the new (retrospective) residency laws - even though we had been living here legally for three years.  We would therefore have had to live here illegally, or go back to the UK.  We don't dislike Britain and could do it, but our home is here now, thanks very much - and until a few months ago, the French government agreed.  They are, and still would have been, happy to tax our pensions and our spending.

Sorry but that is crackers!  All the TVA would be lost to the FG, so would our income taxes, and the work we give to French artisans would stop, even before the CMU contributions come into it.  Surely better to charge more for CMU if the amount is inadequate to cover its costs?  Honestly, I do not mind paying for a welfare state to operate, in fact, I am a strong believer in such things (as I guess everybody knows by now!) but to be deemed illegal because my husband has a very very mild form of asthma is just inhumane.  If somebody told you that, Will, Max et al, would you think it was right?

 

 

[Benjamin]

[quote user="Will"]

 Some of us who contribute to forums looked ages ago at the finances behind the outwardly healthy French health service and said, publicly, that the CMU could not continue as it was for immigrants.

Sorry Will this is a totally irrelevant point in this context and detracts from an otherwise concise and factual posting in keeping with your normal standards.

What men dressed in robes and long white beards has to do with this I don't understand.

The first I became aware of this was when I read an article in the Sunday Times on, I think it was, 2 September last year. I don't follow EU Directives or try to second guess how individual governments will interpret them (and neither do I suspect does anyone without a special interest in these directives).

The facts remain that anyone moving to France prior to this topic coming into the public domain was well aware of the rules for joining the French health care system although  I do feel very sorry for those people who were committed to moving but hadn't yet done so. In subsequent back tracking the French Government have actually moved that date to 23 (?) November except for those poor souls with E106's.

Significantly, some of those who said so have been banned from this forum.

Unless they were banned for predicting this situation then again totally irrelevant.

However, the way the French have handled this situation has been nothing short of farcical, and nobody really knows yet what the alternative to CMU is for most people, and that is where my objections, and support for the protesters, lies.

I appear, at the moment, to be "in" and covered but I endorse your sentiments wholeheartedly for those left in limbo.

[/quote]


Edit: Sorry my highlighting is poor on this one so I hope other people can follow which bits I've quoted and which bits are my own words.

[max]

hello

there could be a strruggle to get support from the french when the smic is less than 20,000 euros and they lose 35 to 39% just in social charges. they work hard as well. english are perceived to have money as the english often buy big houses and 4+4's. why not do as grosland suggested and put a bit more thought into health cover when selling up in england

max

[Benjamin]

[quote user="max"]

hello

there could be a strruggle to get support from the french when the smic is less than 20,000 euros and they lose 35 to 39% just in social charges. they work hard as well. english are perceived to have money as the english often buy big houses and 4+4's. why not do as grosland suggested and put a bit more thought into health cover when selling up in england

max

[/quote]

I haven't seen anyone on this forum expecting support from "the French".

Sure, anyone now coming to France needs to consider how their health care will be funded (certainly not by the French Government) but the facts remain that this Government has made retrospective changes to their own rules which is morally reprehensible and downright life threatening for some.

[cooperlola]

[quote user="max"]

hello

there could be a strruggle to get support from the french when the smic is less than 20,000 euros and they lose 35 to 39% just in social charges. they work hard as well. english are perceived to have money as the english often buy big houses and 4+4's. why not do as grosland suggested and put a bit more thought into health cover when selling up in england

max

[/quote]Hello.  I don't think you got my point, Max.  Some cannot get health cover, by any means.  You have lived here for 2.5 years.  You have sold your home and live here, and all your ties are now here. You pay your taxes here.  You sunk your capital into doing up your house. You have - say - type 2 diabetes - not life threatening, but you need a few pills a day to stay healthy, possibly alive.  You can't pay into the state system.  You can't get private health care because your condition is chronic.  You can't pay for it yourself, because that's not allowed - it has by law to be covered by your insurance policy.  You can't live here legally.  You have to sell up and go home or break the law.

How were you to plan for such draconian retrospective laws which mean that because you're diabetic and a non-French European, you are not allowed to live here - no matter how much money you have, and how much you are prepared to pay?

[krusty]

I dont think Max is listening , and he has not stated his circumstances , is it just sour grapes because he has to work ?

[max]

hello

i do not know anything about diabetes but dose it stop you from working a few hours taching the local school english? you are then on the system

max