Where did she claim this? I'd be interested to learn more.
As for Katie Price, she pays taxes unlike the majority of millionaires living in the UK who don't. If she was evading taxes that would be a different story and one that Hopkins would have every right to criticise.
And your source for her actually paying her taxes is what? KP by any chance? Everyone of those other millionaires you are critical will claim they pay tax too.
You can guarentee her accountant is employing the exact same tactics to limit liability. I would be extremely surprised if she her total tax bill is much more than the £190k a year she says the driver alone costs based on a standard 190 day school year.
No she wasn't criticising her for using the NHS. This was about a private driver and nurse who will be paid for by the DWP from benefits/entitlements. This has nothing to do with the NHS. This was about benefits.
Ok to be pedantic it wasn't the NHS but the point is still the same that I was responding to.
You talk nonsense because your views are so clouded by your hate for Katy Hopkins, you are the same in every thread.
Do you know how much tax Katy Price pays?
Do you know if she isn't on an avoidance scheme ?
No you do not.
If it was the local bus picking up disabled kids then I agree everyone is entitled to that and it doesn't cost a lot, but she said it cost £1000 per day and that is what people are baulking at. She should move nearer to the school if it is such a good place that it costs so much just to even get there. There are a lot of people with autistic children, I know of 3 and they drive their children to school just like parents with non autistic children do.
If you are a multi millionaire you should not be claiming of the state whether you are entitled in principle or not.
She pays her taxes, of course her son is entitled to all that care, regardless of whether she does or not...he's a British child.
Funny world we live in, where the better off (who pay more taxes btw,) are frowned upon when they take advantage of what's offered, yet those who contribute nothing have no problem in getting their hands on whatever they can.
Ridiculous post, those who tend to earn the most in general have top accountants that get them off with more tax in one year than a normal earner would pay in a lifetime.
There are some people who contribute nothing who scrounge off the system but there are a lot who are disabled, mentally ill, live in an underprivelaged area etc, who will never be lucky enough to earn as much money as someone who made her fame by getting her overinflated tits out and acting in porn movies, so don't bang on about people who put nothing in, you don't know the half of it
I guess you may be quite well off and be a conservative voter.
If you are a multi millionaire you should not be claiming of the state whether you are entitled in principle or not.
Which part of national health service and universal health care do you not understand?
The whole point is that anyone who needs help to function normally because of their health concerns is helped.
I think this is the governments fault anyway. If they didn't close down so many local schools for children with disabilities then they wouldn't end up having to pay regular long term transport costs. It's another case of cuts actually ending up costing more.
Why should KP be expected to pay £200k exta a year or move and therefore disrupt her other children's education because the government decides to close her sons school?
I think you'll find David Cameron and Iain Duncan Smith have cured the majority of Disabled people in the UK. My wife was born disabled & has been all her life, yet Lo and behold shes fine now thanks to these two.
she believes most people on disability allowance are at it
"If people's disability benefit was handed out from the top rung of a ladder I reckon most would climb the ladder to get it."
I don't like Katie Hopkins, but her opinion that richer people should pay for their health care is nothing more than a political opinion that some will agree with and others not. But it's hardly controversial in its own right. The fact she happened to bring the point up to Katie publicly shows she didn't really consider how it might make Katie feel uncomfortable (and IMO more than likely mentioned it intentionally for only that reason) is no big news, as that's what she's about....picking at peoples weaknesses or areas she can criticise about them or their life and publicly trying to degrade/insult/embarrass them with it.
I don't agree with her opinion on this for a number of reasons,but see nothing wrong with it in its own right. If she did say that quote mentioned above though, it shows nothing but ignorance and insensitivity....but as I said, nothing new there.
This is a desperate thread, she in no way criticised her disabled son or his treatment, the criticism was that he gets a government paid for driver to take him not to the local hospital but a top London hospital. Hopkins thinks that Price should pay those transport costs herself and I agree.
Firstly if he needs hospital treatment, he is more then likely to go to St Ormand's Street, he did when he scolding his legs because that is the hospital with the expertise and the specialists, he did not go private. Private hospitals are not equipped for someone with Harvey's needs and he would never get private insurance........But this is about getting Harvey to school, people say that Katie should drive him herself but Princess and Junior also go to school, a different school. Finding school for Harvey would mean one that isn't local and she would still need a nurse with him, she is not getting any old care, she getting a driver that his experience of driving children with severe disabilities. It may be hard to find if it was not provided.
I was at school with Louise Clifford (Max's daughter), it was a state school and every surgery she had was on the NHS because that is where the specialists for her condition were...And she had a car, as at that time she was wheelchair bound....
Katie Hopkins is apparently rich too but the NHS keeps her alive and treats her epilespy (she too would not get private health insurance). She should know better.
Katie Hopkins has revealed the ignorance in people, often her comments come from ignorance, she has no idea what Katie Price has to do for Harvey and how much she has to pay to give him a life. She has no idea what it is like to have a child that will always be dependent on her and she will have to support.
]
I'm sure a lot of 70 year olds would agree with the original poster. Children deserve priority over those who have already had their life (or the best part of it) over and done with. Just the same way as a rich celebrity should not be getting help from the government for transport costs. The NHS is not a bottomless pit that everyone can endlessly dip into (though you would think it was with the advice given on these forums :cool:)
At the family home, the television is protected with reinforced Perspex, because Harvey has a tendency to butt the screen when the frustration that bubbles up in many autistic children overwhelms him: he has broken three to date.
In his bedroom everything is bolted down and Price has lost count of the number of scented candles that have been flung through windows.
“A lot of it is frustration because he can’t communicate what he wants to say, so he takes his anger out by throwing or smashing things,” she says.
Price fears that, although safeguards have been put in place to protect him in the house, his behaviour will present him with new dangers when he grows up and goes out into the world.
Which is why he needs a carer and a specialist driver to take him to school.....it maybe hard to get privately....
A simple job, thinks Amy, would be good for Harvey; stacking shelves or similarly repetitive work. But that seems a long way off: he only recently learnt to make his bed and is now learning to cross the road safely, although Price is unsure how far she would trust his instincts to let him cross alone.
But she is optimistic that he will continue to make progress. Recently he has learnt to read, he is a gifted artist and he is having regular treadmill sessions to control his weight. “He’s more forward than we thought he’d be by now,” says Price.
Katie is working very hard with him and has got him into a school that will give him a chance to achieve something...
The pressures of home life with Harvey would be alleviated by a good school — but such schools are thin on the ground in Britain. Price and her mother were among 30 families who applied to open a free school, the Visually Impaired and Special Needs Academy in Kent, this autumn after a school in Sevenoaks where Harvey had been enrolled — the Royal London Society for the Blind School — announced it was closing. Twenty-six pupils were planned for the first intake of the free school, eventually expanding to 90, but the project was vetoed by ministers. Harvey now has a 3-hour round trip to a school in south London that can cater for his complex needs.
Price visited four different schools before deciding on one. “The first one we went to, we went up to the classroom and there was an autistic child there and one of the staff said, ‘He’s going to kick off.’
“And we said, ‘Well, can we see how you handle it?’ But they said, ‘You gotta go.’ Well, that’s no good for a start,” says Price.
Issues with school and why he goes to one in South London...which is why it costs so much for a driver and a nurse. She tried to set up a Free School....
“I did ask his teachers about Harvey, about whether I should withdraw him , but they said it’s good because there are so many people who have disabilities and I can show that you shouldn’t be ashamed and give them an eye opener. It helps.”
This is the Katie Price that people should see more of...
I'm sure a lot of 70 year olds would agree with the original poster. Children deserve priority over those who have already had their life (or the best part of it) over and done with. Just the same way as a rich celebrity should not be getting help from the government for transport costs. The NHS is not a bottomless pit that everyone can endlessly dip into (though you would think it was with the advice given on these forums :cool:)
I find your comments totally lacking in empathy and quite frankly ludicrious. Every human being irrespective of gender age or race deserves humane medical treatment. Don't think it says anywhere in the Hippocratic Oath that age should be a determining factor in who is treated first.:(
I don't like Katie Hopkins, but her opinion that richer people should pay for their health care is nothing more than a political opinion that some will agree with and others not. But it's hardly controversial in its own right.
It's very controversial. No private policy in the world would cover a child with her sons extensive and lifelong needs for medical care and social help. It's for people like him that the NHS is essential. It's coverage means that a family that has a child like this will still have a lot to cope with but might have other options than be financially ruined and overwhelmed or put him into care.
Do you really think she would be able to support herself and her other kids very long if she had to pay £1000s in travel alone plus medical costs every week? He will need care for the whole if his life.
You talk nonsense because your views are so clouded by your hate for Katy Hopkins, you are the same in every thread.
Do you know how much tax Katy Price pays?
Do you know if she isn't on an avoidance scheme ?
No you do not.
If it was the local bus picking up disabled kids then I agree everyone is entitled to that and it doesn't cost a lot, but she said it cost £1000 per day and that is what people are baulking at. She should move nearer to the school if it is such a good place that it costs so much just to even get there. There are a lot of people with autistic children, I know of 3 and they drive their children to school just like parents with non autistic children do.
If you are a multi millionaire you should not be claiming of the state whether you are entitled in principle or not.
She doesn't even need to move, just used less extravagant method of transport than what must be a luxury car service. Where I went to school there was a special needs school next door that shared some of our facities including access road and car park. Every morning you would see a number of taxis roll up with the kids in them and often a carer so this seems to be the normal method if they can't go on a school bus or the parents car. Brighton to London in a taxi seems to be around £175 according to Google so even each way that's much lower than £1k. And if it was a regular thing you would almost certainly get a discount anyway
And your source for her actually paying her taxes is what? KP by any chance? Everyone of those other millionaires you are critical will claim they pay tax too.
You can guarentee her accountant is employing the exact same tactics to limit liability. I would be extremely surprised if she her total tax bill is much more than the £190k a year she says the driver alone costs based on a standard 190 day school year.
Maybe you should listen to Katie's answer to Hopkins again where she states quite clearly that she pays taxes. Or do you think she is lying? Equally, how is it you think you can speculate about what her accountant is or is not doing? While I think taxes should be higher for people in her bracket I do not begrudge Harvey's right to access what is his right as I wouldn't begrudge any one else's right.
What has happened to people in this country that they can be so mean-spirited about the vulnerable and the needy? The service is for Harvey NOT Katie. It's sickening that people stoop that low. It displays a complete lack of empathy and ignorance. Precisely what people on this forum have been accusing Hopkin's of ... now on display for all to see.
Which part of national health service and universal health care do you not understand?
The whole point is that anyone who needs help to function normally because of their health concerns is helped.
I think this is the governments fault anyway. If they didn't close down so many local schools for children with disabilities then they wouldn't end up having to pay regular long term transport costs. It's another case of cuts actually ending up costing more.
Why should KP be expected to pay £200k exta a year or move and therefore disrupt her other children's education because the government decides to close her sons school?
You can guarentee if she was paying for it she would find a more affordable form of transport. There is nothing wrong with her getting help but acting like she is too good to use a standard taxi like most parents with kids who need such transport do is just taking the piss. A ONE OFF round trip between London and Brighton is £350, a regular booking would be less. So that's below £66k a year and actually for that she could hire a driver to drive one of her cars and take him
You can guarentee if she was paying for it she would find a more affordable form of transport. There is nothing wrong with her getting help but acting like she is too good to use a standard taxi like most parents with kids who need such transport do is just taking the piss. A ONE OFF round trip between London and Brighton is £350, a regular booking would be less. So that's below £66k a year and actually for that she could hire a driver to drive one of her cars and take him
Your ignorance is showing. Harvey has special needs and therefore requires something other than an ordinary taxi to get him to school and back. You do know that Cameron's disabled son needed a special taxi to get him to school and availed himself of this service as a millionaire tax payer too? That was the Cameron that promised to make sure the disabled were protected from the cuts and then reneged on that once in No.10. If you take this universal right away from one, it is not long before it is taken away from others, as we're seeing now and it's helped along by the mean and bitter readers of the Daily Mail.
Once again you speculate on matters you know nothing about. I'd back away from this topic until you can provide receipts for Harvey's transport costs.
Maybe you should listen to Katie's answer to Hopkins again where she states quite clearly that she pays taxes. Or do you think she is lying? Equally, how is it you think you can speculate about what her accountant is or is not doing? While I think taxes should be higher for people in her bracket I do not begrudge Harvey's right to access what is his right as I wouldn't begrudge any one else's right.
What has happened to people in this country that they can be so mean-spirited about the vulnerable and the needy? The service is for Harvey NOT Katie. It's sickening that people stoop that low. It displays a complete lack of empathy and ignorance. Precisely what people on this forum have been accusing Hopkin's supporters of ... now on display for all to see.
I heard her answer but as I said that means very little. Lots of people reckon they pay a fair amount of tax as they pay what their accountant says they owe BUT that figure rarely correlates with what the masses think they should be paying (or what the media or politicians who want someone to beat with a stick think they should be paying). As citizens when it comes to tax our duty is to pay as little as we can while abiding by laws and standard accountancy practices and when you hire an accountant you do so to ensure you achieve this duty. No accountant of worth just ignores things that will reduce their clients tax liability.
And no-one on here seems to think she doesn't deserve some help towards it but it's the blatant piss take that's as bad as any benefit scrounger. Normal parents don't spend £1k a day on a driver, she has a nurse/carer who travels with him so all this 'he needs a specialist driver' excuse that people put up is ridiclous. As I have said my secondary school had a special needs school next door and those kids were arriving with their carers in a standard taxi. As I keep saying if KP was paying she wouldn't be spending £1000 a day, she would find a cheaper option.
Ridiculous post, those who tend to earn the most in general have top accountants that get them off with more tax in one year than a normal earner would pay in a lifetime.
There are some people who contribute nothing who scrounge off the system but there are a lot who are disabled, mentally ill, live in an underprivelaged area etc, who will never be lucky enough to earn as much money as someone who made her fame by getting her overinflated tits out and acting in porn movies, so don't bang on about people who put nothing in, you don't know the half of it
I guess you may be quite well off and be a conservative voter.
I.Am.Not.A.Tory!!!! >:(
Does it matter how she made her money? Why all this seething jealousy?
Of course I didn't mean ppl who have no choice whether they work or not, 'cause of other extenuating circumstances.
Also, accountants don't wave a magic wand, and your tax disappears.... *cough*
I don't like Katie Hopkins, but her opinion that richer people should pay for their health care is nothing more than a political opinion that some will agree with and others not. But it's hardly controversial in its own right. The fact she happened to bring the point up to Katie publicly shows she didn't really consider how it might make Katie feel uncomfortable (and IMO more than likely mentioned it intentionally for only that reason) is no big news, as that's what she's about....picking at peoples weaknesses or areas she can criticise about them or their life and publicly trying to degrade/insult/embarrass them with it.
I don't agree with her opinion on this for a number of reasons,but see nothing wrong with it in its own right. If she did say that quote mentioned above though, it shows nothing but ignorance and insensitivity....but as I said, nothing new there.
Odd post you say KH has a right to an opinion (clearly shared by others) then berate her for stating it.
You talk nonsense because your views are so clouded by your hate for Katy Hopkins, you are the same in every thread.
Do you know how much tax Katy Price pays?
Do you know if she isn't on an avoidance scheme ?
No you do not.
If it was the local bus picking up disabled kids then I agree everyone is entitled to that and it doesn't cost a lot, but she said it cost £1000 per day and that is what people are baulking at. She should move nearer to the school if it is such a good place that it costs so much just to even get there. There are a lot of people with autistic children, I know of 3 and they drive their children to school just like parents with non autistic children do.
If you are a multi millionaire you should not be claiming of the state whether you are entitled in principle or not.
Katie did not say it cost a £1000 per day to take Harvey to school. She said it would cost a lot. She actually said when she is working it can cost up to a £1000 to hire a car.
It's on C5 catch up, perhaps some people should really watch to hear what she said.
The problem with such debates is that peoples own personal bias and prejudices come into play and they just don't listen to other points of views - eg. those who hate KH immediately leap on anything she says and twist it "KH attacks KPs Kids" is not what happened - sure she has said plenty of things that have made me wince both in content and delivery but this wasn't one of them.
Equally those who support KH will jump to her defense even when she is in the wrong.
People should watch and listen to the conversation - KH did not say Harvey shouldn't get treatment on the NHS (as stated by numerous people on here) she didn't say that KP wasn't entitled to benefits what she calmly asked was if she had thought of going private when it came to Harvey's transport, during an open conversation with KP.
Its not about whether Harvey needs or deserves care - that's without question and no one is saying that. The point is to whether KP as a multi millionaire, should pay for his transportation to his school. Its a valid question and doesn't make a person uncaring or heartless to ask it.
How would people feel if Queen claimed winter heating allowance - she is entitled as she is an OAP and pays taxes.
As for the nonsense that is circulating about KP paying or not paying her taxes - I am sure she does just as I am sure she hires an accountant who will do his best to legally reduce her liability. Its what accountants do.
Odd post you say KH has a right to an opinion (clearly shared by others) then berate her for stating it.
Nothing odd about it. The opinion of whether you think rich people should spend more on health care or not is a political opinion and I don't view her as a 'baddy' or a 'goody' for holding either viewpoint. Shes entitled to her political opinion as much as anyone else.
But equally we're entitled to comment on her opinion too - free speech does go both ways. My point was that as much as there was nothing bad about the viewpoint itself (even if you disagreed with it)... in terms of motives for voicing it to Katie at this time is another issue, and while some might have the view that she did it because she felt so strongly about the issue she had to speak about it, I'm more likely to believe her motives were more linked to 'getting at Katie P'. Its all subjective, and I'm sure some will believe the former while others believe the latter. The fact she felt the need to speak out about Alicias dumbness, Katie Ps unlikeliness of getting a man, Nadias fat arse, Perez whale-like back, Patsys mannerisms etc etc leads me to suspect she spoke out about Katies driver for similar reasons. Only my opinion, which I'm allowed to have as much as Katies, especially since we're on a forum which basically deals with our opinions on the housemates opinions.
Didn't Katie P said that because she has no FIXED income as it can vary from year to year, that it allowed her to use the gov funding for her disabled son ? can't see what's wrong with that -she is self-employed, but I think Katie H was referring to her having earned enough money to pay for it herself, but I'm not sure when she said that that Katie H knew how much money it would cost Katie P to pay for the same services herself. All seemed like a reasonable argument from both sides, and Katie H didn't pursue it, as Katie's response was fair enough.
I think you'll find David Cameron and Iain Duncan Smith have cured the majority of Disabled people in the UK. My wife was born disabled & has been all her life, yet Lo and behold shes fine now thanks to these two.
I think you'll find that Camoron and IDS 'cured' those people by withdrawing funding, not providing it. ;-)
I find your comments totally lacking in empathy and quite frankly ludicrious. Every human being irrespective of gender age or race deserves humane medical treatment. Don't think it says anywhere in the Hippocratic Oath that age should be a determining factor in who is treated first.:(
Where did I say that people didn't deserve humane medical treatment I was simply saying that - if there are limited resources - then the young should be prioritised over the elderly. The older I get the more I agree with this. Of course there are other factors that come into play - such as quality of life. But these are issues that have to be taken into consideration as NHS resources aren't infinite ...
Where did I say that people didn't deserve humane medical treatment I was simply saying that - if there are limited resources - then the young should be prioritised over the elderly. The older I get the more I agree with this. Of course there are other factors that come into play - such as quality of life. But these are issues that have to be taken into consideration as NHS resources aren't infinite ...
I never ever suggested that you said people didn't deserve medical treatment.
Re read my post, what I questioned was what I perceived as a lack of empathy that you would recommend that a younger person be treated before an older one, just because of their age.
and I quote your post that I responded to:
I'm sure a lot of 70 year olds would agree with the original poster. Children deserve priority over those who have already had their life (or the best part of it) over and done with.
We are all going to get older, it's a fact of life and for anyone to suggest that treatment be proffered on the basis of age is just wrong. It just doesn't sit well with me whatsoever.:(
Comments
And your source for her actually paying her taxes is what? KP by any chance? Everyone of those other millionaires you are critical will claim they pay tax too.
You can guarentee her accountant is employing the exact same tactics to limit liability. I would be extremely surprised if she her total tax bill is much more than the £190k a year she says the driver alone costs based on a standard 190 day school year.
Ok to be pedantic it wasn't the NHS but the point is still the same that I was responding to.
You talk nonsense because your views are so clouded by your hate for Katy Hopkins, you are the same in every thread.
Do you know how much tax Katy Price pays?
Do you know if she isn't on an avoidance scheme ?
No you do not.
If it was the local bus picking up disabled kids then I agree everyone is entitled to that and it doesn't cost a lot, but she said it cost £1000 per day and that is what people are baulking at. She should move nearer to the school if it is such a good place that it costs so much just to even get there. There are a lot of people with autistic children, I know of 3 and they drive their children to school just like parents with non autistic children do.
If you are a multi millionaire you should not be claiming of the state whether you are entitled in principle or not.
Ridiculous post, those who tend to earn the most in general have top accountants that get them off with more tax in one year than a normal earner would pay in a lifetime.
There are some people who contribute nothing who scrounge off the system but there are a lot who are disabled, mentally ill, live in an underprivelaged area etc, who will never be lucky enough to earn as much money as someone who made her fame by getting her overinflated tits out and acting in porn movies, so don't bang on about people who put nothing in, you don't know the half of it
I guess you may be quite well off and be a conservative voter.
The whole point is that anyone who needs help to function normally because of their health concerns is helped.
I think this is the governments fault anyway. If they didn't close down so many local schools for children with disabilities then they wouldn't end up having to pay regular long term transport costs. It's another case of cuts actually ending up costing more.
Why should KP be expected to pay £200k exta a year or move and therefore disrupt her other children's education because the government decides to close her sons school?
I think you'll find David Cameron and Iain Duncan Smith have cured the majority of Disabled people in the UK. My wife was born disabled & has been all her life, yet Lo and behold shes fine now thanks to these two.
I don't like Katie Hopkins, but her opinion that richer people should pay for their health care is nothing more than a political opinion that some will agree with and others not. But it's hardly controversial in its own right. The fact she happened to bring the point up to Katie publicly shows she didn't really consider how it might make Katie feel uncomfortable (and IMO more than likely mentioned it intentionally for only that reason) is no big news, as that's what she's about....picking at peoples weaknesses or areas she can criticise about them or their life and publicly trying to degrade/insult/embarrass them with it.
I don't agree with her opinion on this for a number of reasons,but see nothing wrong with it in its own right. If she did say that quote mentioned above though, it shows nothing but ignorance and insensitivity....but as I said, nothing new there.
Firstly if he needs hospital treatment, he is more then likely to go to St Ormand's Street, he did when he scolding his legs because that is the hospital with the expertise and the specialists, he did not go private. Private hospitals are not equipped for someone with Harvey's needs and he would never get private insurance........But this is about getting Harvey to school, people say that Katie should drive him herself but Princess and Junior also go to school, a different school. Finding school for Harvey would mean one that isn't local and she would still need a nurse with him, she is not getting any old care, she getting a driver that his experience of driving children with severe disabilities. It may be hard to find if it was not provided.
I was at school with Louise Clifford (Max's daughter), it was a state school and every surgery she had was on the NHS because that is where the specialists for her condition were...And she had a car, as at that time she was wheelchair bound....
Katie Hopkins is apparently rich too but the NHS keeps her alive and treats her epilespy (she too would not get private health insurance). She should know better.
Katie Hopkins has revealed the ignorance in people, often her comments come from ignorance, she has no idea what Katie Price has to do for Harvey and how much she has to pay to give him a life. She has no idea what it is like to have a child that will always be dependent on her and she will have to support.
]
Which is why he needs a carer and a specialist driver to take him to school.....it maybe hard to get privately....
Katie is working very hard with him and has got him into a school that will give him a chance to achieve something...
Issues with school and why he goes to one in South London...which is why it costs so much for a driver and a nurse. She tried to set up a Free School....
This is the Katie Price that people should see more of...
I find your comments totally lacking in empathy and quite frankly ludicrious. Every human being irrespective of gender age or race deserves humane medical treatment. Don't think it says anywhere in the Hippocratic Oath that age should be a determining factor in who is treated first.:(
It's very controversial. No private policy in the world would cover a child with her sons extensive and lifelong needs for medical care and social help. It's for people like him that the NHS is essential. It's coverage means that a family that has a child like this will still have a lot to cope with but might have other options than be financially ruined and overwhelmed or put him into care.
Do you really think she would be able to support herself and her other kids very long if she had to pay £1000s in travel alone plus medical costs every week? He will need care for the whole if his life.
She doesn't even need to move, just used less extravagant method of transport than what must be a luxury car service. Where I went to school there was a special needs school next door that shared some of our facities including access road and car park. Every morning you would see a number of taxis roll up with the kids in them and often a carer so this seems to be the normal method if they can't go on a school bus or the parents car. Brighton to London in a taxi seems to be around £175 according to Google so even each way that's much lower than £1k. And if it was a regular thing you would almost certainly get a discount anyway
Maybe you should listen to Katie's answer to Hopkins again where she states quite clearly that she pays taxes. Or do you think she is lying? Equally, how is it you think you can speculate about what her accountant is or is not doing? While I think taxes should be higher for people in her bracket I do not begrudge Harvey's right to access what is his right as I wouldn't begrudge any one else's right.
What has happened to people in this country that they can be so mean-spirited about the vulnerable and the needy? The service is for Harvey NOT Katie. It's sickening that people stoop that low. It displays a complete lack of empathy and ignorance. Precisely what people on this forum have been accusing Hopkin's of ... now on display for all to see.
edited
You can guarentee if she was paying for it she would find a more affordable form of transport. There is nothing wrong with her getting help but acting like she is too good to use a standard taxi like most parents with kids who need such transport do is just taking the piss. A ONE OFF round trip between London and Brighton is £350, a regular booking would be less. So that's below £66k a year and actually for that she could hire a driver to drive one of her cars and take him
Your ignorance is showing. Harvey has special needs and therefore requires something other than an ordinary taxi to get him to school and back. You do know that Cameron's disabled son needed a special taxi to get him to school and availed himself of this service as a millionaire tax payer too? That was the Cameron that promised to make sure the disabled were protected from the cuts and then reneged on that once in No.10. If you take this universal right away from one, it is not long before it is taken away from others, as we're seeing now and it's helped along by the mean and bitter readers of the Daily Mail.
Once again you speculate on matters you know nothing about. I'd back away from this topic until you can provide receipts for Harvey's transport costs.
I heard her answer but as I said that means very little. Lots of people reckon they pay a fair amount of tax as they pay what their accountant says they owe BUT that figure rarely correlates with what the masses think they should be paying (or what the media or politicians who want someone to beat with a stick think they should be paying). As citizens when it comes to tax our duty is to pay as little as we can while abiding by laws and standard accountancy practices and when you hire an accountant you do so to ensure you achieve this duty. No accountant of worth just ignores things that will reduce their clients tax liability.
And no-one on here seems to think she doesn't deserve some help towards it but it's the blatant piss take that's as bad as any benefit scrounger. Normal parents don't spend £1k a day on a driver, she has a nurse/carer who travels with him so all this 'he needs a specialist driver' excuse that people put up is ridiclous. As I have said my secondary school had a special needs school next door and those kids were arriving with their carers in a standard taxi. As I keep saying if KP was paying she wouldn't be spending £1000 a day, she would find a cheaper option.
I.Am.Not.A.Tory!!!! >:(
Does it matter how she made her money? Why all this seething jealousy?
Of course I didn't mean ppl who have no choice whether they work or not, 'cause of other extenuating circumstances.
Also, accountants don't wave a magic wand, and your tax disappears.... *cough*
Odd post you say KH has a right to an opinion (clearly shared by others) then berate her for stating it.
Katie did not say it cost a £1000 per day to take Harvey to school. She said it would cost a lot. She actually said when she is working it can cost up to a £1000 to hire a car.
It's on C5 catch up, perhaps some people should really watch to hear what she said.
The problem with such debates is that peoples own personal bias and prejudices come into play and they just don't listen to other points of views - eg. those who hate KH immediately leap on anything she says and twist it "KH attacks KPs Kids" is not what happened - sure she has said plenty of things that have made me wince both in content and delivery but this wasn't one of them.
Equally those who support KH will jump to her defense even when she is in the wrong.
People should watch and listen to the conversation - KH did not say Harvey shouldn't get treatment on the NHS (as stated by numerous people on here) she didn't say that KP wasn't entitled to benefits what she calmly asked was if she had thought of going private when it came to Harvey's transport, during an open conversation with KP.
Its not about whether Harvey needs or deserves care - that's without question and no one is saying that. The point is to whether KP as a multi millionaire, should pay for his transportation to his school. Its a valid question and doesn't make a person uncaring or heartless to ask it.
How would people feel if Queen claimed winter heating allowance - she is entitled as she is an OAP and pays taxes.
As for the nonsense that is circulating about KP paying or not paying her taxes - I am sure she does just as I am sure she hires an accountant who will do his best to legally reduce her liability. Its what accountants do.
Nothing odd about it. The opinion of whether you think rich people should spend more on health care or not is a political opinion and I don't view her as a 'baddy' or a 'goody' for holding either viewpoint. Shes entitled to her political opinion as much as anyone else.
But equally we're entitled to comment on her opinion too - free speech does go both ways. My point was that as much as there was nothing bad about the viewpoint itself (even if you disagreed with it)... in terms of motives for voicing it to Katie at this time is another issue, and while some might have the view that she did it because she felt so strongly about the issue she had to speak about it, I'm more likely to believe her motives were more linked to 'getting at Katie P'. Its all subjective, and I'm sure some will believe the former while others believe the latter. The fact she felt the need to speak out about Alicias dumbness, Katie Ps unlikeliness of getting a man, Nadias fat arse, Perez whale-like back, Patsys mannerisms etc etc leads me to suspect she spoke out about Katies driver for similar reasons. Only my opinion, which I'm allowed to have as much as Katies, especially since we're on a forum which basically deals with our opinions on the housemates opinions.
I think you'll find that Camoron and IDS 'cured' those people by withdrawing funding, not providing it. ;-)
Roll on election time, eh?
Where did I say that people didn't deserve humane medical treatment
I never ever suggested that you said people didn't deserve medical treatment.
Re read my post, what I questioned was what I perceived as a lack of empathy that you would recommend that a younger person be treated before an older one, just because of their age.
and I quote your post that I responded to:
I'm sure a lot of 70 year olds would agree with the original poster. Children deserve priority over those who have already had their life (or the best part of it) over and done with.
We are all going to get older, it's a fact of life and for anyone to suggest that treatment be proffered on the basis of age is just wrong. It just doesn't sit well with me whatsoever.:(