So someone, @gail_brand, is happy to state that 'if someone is in UK, I wouldn't deny them medical treatment on the grounds of money.' but unwilling to think about where this might lead. This country already has a problem with medical tourism, I think I can see why. How much worse would it be if we followed @gail_brand's open doors policy?
Now @gail_brand had a little on-line helpmate by the name of Steve Berry. Steve goes by the very apt Twitter handle of @unloveablesteve. Here's my conversation with him:
Off of my timeline Steve was even less complementary of me:
There seems to be a type of, usually left-wing, tweeter who makes a statement but refuses to face uncomfortable facts that would arise from adopting such a position. The tweeter in question will often try to take a high moral stand and accuse anyone of pointing out the flaws in their statement of being one overly concerned with money, having a hidden agenda, of being a racist or just so beyond the pale that they 'lose the right to talk to them'. Such tweeters will also resort to such epithets as 'ignorant' and 'selfish' and accuse their interlocutor of 'idiocy'.
I don't expect any better from such people but am surprised how often such people embarrass themselves online.
It is just about feasible that @gail_brand and/or @unloveablesteve will reconsider their positions and actually answer my questions but based on previous experience somehow I doubt it.