Upcoming Recession and financial Crash

[blackbird]

I can't belive what I am reading some of you guys would rather work all your lives paying a mortgage and would rather see the government sell your homes and take your savings than leave it to your kids 

[grrclark]

9 minutes ago, Sciurus said:

The reality is that those people who have lived modestly, built up savings and own their own home will have to pay for their own care in old age.

However,Those people who live recklessly, or who would rather have fancy holidays but not save for their old age are rewarded by having their care costs paid by the State.

However for me, the final insult is that Local Authorities do not pay the true cost of running the Care Home, so any shortfall is made up by the private fee paying resident. In other words the person who has carefully saved, has to pay for himself out of savings, pay for the feckless through taxation and make up the shortfall of the feckless by paying above the cost of running the Home. A triple whammy!

 

A very accurate summation of the truth.

Despite my prior questions, the current system Is far removed from being fair or equitable.

However, not withstanding that neither is it fair for those who can afford to contribute to their own sustenance to dodge that bullet in order to furnish their kids with cash at the expense of the taxpayer. 

[Newbie to this]

The 'same' state funded care should be provided to all, if you want better care then you should have to fund that yourself. 

IMHO this is the only fair society, why should someone have their care provided (bear in mind some would have put absolutely nothing in) and others have to pay.

[sandspider]

24 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

The 'same' state funded care should be provided to all, if you want better care then you should have to fund that yourself. 

IMHO this is the only fair society, why should someone have their care provided (bear in mind some would have put absolutely nothing in) and others have to pay.

+1

[Yellow Bear]

49 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I can't belive what I am reading some of you guys would rather work all your lives paying a mortgage and would rather see the government sell your homes and take your savings than leave it to your kids 

If the liebour party get in you wont have to wait they will take it straight away

[Retsdon]

Sounds like there are some good arguments here for drinking and smoking yourself into an early grave! Who wants to eke out a few extra years in a care home anyway?

[grrclark]

The argument in paying for care witj accumulated/saved/hard earned wealth is the same as progressive taxation.

Those who work hard to get themselves into a high paying role are absolutely expected to front up more taxes, yet there are those that advocate that others who work hard and get themselves into a good house should be exempt from paying that bit more when it comes to personal care.

What if someone had £250k cash in the bank, but stayed in a pal’s back bedroom, should their cash reserves be left untouched and the tax payer foot the bill?

[Lloyd90]

1 hour ago, Sciurus said:

The reality is that those people who have lived modestly, built up savings and own their own home will have to pay for their own care in old age.

However,Those people who live recklessly, or who would rather have fancy holidays but not save for their old age are rewarded by having their care costs paid by the State.

However for me, the final insult is that Local Authorities do not pay the true cost of running the Care Home, so any shortfall is made up by the private fee paying resident. In other words the person who has carefully saved, has to pay for himself out of savings, pay for the feckless through taxation and make up the shortfall of the feckless by paying above the cost of running the Home. A triple whammy!

 

Most homes these days charge the same to private residents as local authorities. 

I work with them on a daily basis. 

[oowee]

47 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

Sounds like there are some good arguments here for drinking and smoking yourself into an early grave! Who wants to eke out a few extra years in a care home anyway?

All missing the point here. It's right that we all pay our way. If you need anything including care then you should pay for it. 

My answer is to have a young wife that can look after you in your dotage. Stay at home get all the comforts then give her the house.🙂

 

[Retsdon]

13 minutes ago, oowee said:

My answer is to have a young wife that can look after you in your dotage.

Likewise.

[team tractor]

18 minutes ago, oowee said:

All missing the point here. It's right that we all pay our way. If you need anything including care then you should pay for it. 

My answer is to have a young wife that can look after you in your dotage. Stay at home get all the comforts then give her the house.🙂

 

I’ve done just that 

2 hours ago, blackbird said:

I can't belive what I am reading some of you guys would rather work all your lives paying a mortgage and would rather see the government sell your homes and take your savings than leave it to your kids 

Morons aren’t they.

 

ive told my parents to release funds and spend it. It’s not my house so spend away . They earned it.

[team tractor]

3 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

If they do need a Care home,  what do they need their money for when they’re old and possibly have dementia?

You think the tax payer should fund them and their money should just sit in their bank accounts and them not even be able to spend it ... 

 

What your honestly saying is you should have the money if they have any left ... let’s not beat around the bush.

You think tax payers should fund the care, so you can keep an inheritance. 

Just because there are people out there on benefits scrounging doesn’t make that right. That’s like saying we should all try to avoid paying tax because it only gets wasted on benefit scrounges. 

 

What actually happens when your left with the state to fund your care is, you have to move into the cheapest placement available at the time, and trust me some of them I wouldn’t want to leave my dog in. 

People who have funds to privately pay actually get to choose their care home, they get to pick one close to their families and friends, with the staff that they want with the facilities and support that they want. 

People seem to think paying for your care is a bad thing. They seem to miss the point that you actually get to be treated with a bit more respect and decency if you’ve been fortunate and worked hard throughtout your life. 

Yes I should keep the inheritance as that’s why my parents have made sure they’ve provided for me all my life. I’ve put plans in place for my 4 kids to have my house too if /when I die.

 

ive actually told my parents to release the equity in the house and spend it but they won’t. 

What your saying is spend your money on holidays , fast cars , meals etc as you think it’s right to remove their money instead of save.

 

my mrs step mum has never worked since she’s 19 and has just became a pensioner. How’s it right she would get the same care but for free.

 

honestly once your a parent you think differently and all you want to do is think about your kids . My either of my parents will be welcome to live with me as my house is big enough. 

 

If everyone spent worrying about loosing everything the world would stop and not bother trying.

[Walker570]

I was a lucky on back in 1989/90 when house crashed to almost 50% of their value.  The chap who bought ours a month before at the inflated price was a jobbing builder who moved every two years renovating as he went. Took him ten years to manage to break even.  Yes, we were lucky.  Look back over the last 100yrs and you will fund it goes in ups and downs according to the stupid people mainly borrowing and spending above there means.  I remember when I used to have towalk two miles either way to watch a 9inch screen on a TV owned by my grandfather, probably only one of two dozen at that time in Polesworth village if that. My lunch would be a slice of bread spread with beef dripping and we lived well in those times as farmers. My grandmother would tell me to take two eggs to someone because she knew they could not afford them.  Heh!!  Count your blessings.

As Prime Minister Callahan once said, "You've never had it so good."

[winnie&bezza]

I’m 32 and I’ve got around £130 in a pension 😔

Edited October 12, 2018 by winnie&bezza

[team tractor]

I’ll also add I know a local estate owner that’s worth £20+ million.

he claims his pension. Should he ? 

Dam right he should as he’s paid in to it.

1 minute ago, winnie&bezza said:

I’m 32 and I’ve got around £130 I’m a pension 😔

Lol more than me Nath  

[Walker570]

1 minute ago, team tractor said:

I’ll also add I know a local estate owner that’s worth £20+ million.

he claims his pension. Should he ? 

Dam right he should as he’s paid in to it.

Plus one...and he has paid his taxes  over the odds local rates etc etc, and employed/employs a number of people both full time and part time.

[Newbie to this]

1 hour ago, grrclark said:

The argument in paying for care witj accumulated/saved/hard earned wealth is the same as progressive taxation.

Those who work hard to get themselves into a high paying role are absolutely expected to front up more taxes, yet there are those that advocate that others who work hard and get themselves into a good house should be exempt from paying that bit more when it comes to personal care.

What if someone had £250k cash in the bank, but stayed in a pal’s back bedroom, should their cash reserves be left untouched and the tax payer foot the bill?

But Taxes are equal, everyone who goes over the thresholds pay, yes there are those who find creative ways to not pay fully, but again this is equal, everyone could do the same.

Yes I know some people pay absolutely no tax, but that is a completely different topic.

When it comes to care, what you are suggesting is not equal, some get it for free, but those who have worked and put in, then get to pay not only for their own care, but for other's care as well through their tax.

If one person gets state funded care, then this should be available for ALL regardless of how much wealth you have.

Next it will be if you have money in the bank you have to pay for your medical treatment, even though you pay Tax. But others will get it for free.

Edited October 12, 2018 by Newbie to this

[winnie&bezza]

10 minutes ago, team tractor said:

I’ll also add I know a local estate owner that’s worth £20+ million.

he claims his pension. Should he ? 

Dam right he should as he’s paid in to it.

Lol more than me Nath  

That’s made me feel a bit better 😂

[amateur]

2 hours ago, Newbie to this said:

The 'same' state funded care should be provided to all, if you want better care then you should have to fund that yourself. 

Would that that were so. I don't think that anyone would object to spending their savings on an upgrade, but whether you are in a decent care home or in a ****-hole you get nothing until you have spent up

39 minutes ago, Walker570 said:

As Prime Minister Callahan once said, "You've never had it so good."

Harold Macmillan, back in the 1950's

[Whatmuff]

1 hour ago, grrclark said:

The argument in paying for care witj accumulated/saved/hard earned wealth is the same as progressive taxation.

Those who work hard to get themselves into a high paying role are absolutely expected to front up more taxes, yet there are those that advocate that others who work hard and get themselves into a good house should be exempt from paying that bit more when it comes to personal care.

What if someone had £250k cash in the bank, but stayed in a pal’s back bedroom, should their cash reserves be left untouched and the tax payer foot the bill?

I get this however, how is it that Amazon only paid 15m tax on 19.8bn on european revenues? Once again the rich and powerful coming out on top.

[Walker570]

15 minutes ago, amateur said:

Would that that were so. I don't think that anyone would object to spending their savings on an upgrade, but whether you are in a decent care home or in a ****-hole you get nothing until you have spent up

Harold Macmillan, back in the 1950's

I stand correctedbut even back then in the late 50s we did have it very good compared to the previous 40yrs and it basically continued into the 80s.

11 minutes ago, Whatmuff said:

I get this however, how is it that Amazon only paid 15m tax on 19.8bn on european revenues? Once again the rich and powerful coming out on top.

Because they had some  #####y good accountants and successive governments did not fence up the loop holes

[Lloyd90]

1 hour ago, Newbie to this said:

But Taxes are equal, everyone who goes over the thresholds pay, yes there are those who find creative ways to not pay fully, but again this is equal, everyone could do the same.

Yes I know some people pay absolutely no tax, but that is a completely different topic.

When it comes to care, what you are suggesting is not equal, some get it for free, but those who have worked and put in, then get to pay not only for their own care, but for other's care as well through their tax.

If one person gets state funded care, then this should be available for ALL regardless of how much wealth you have.

Next it will be if you have money in the bank you have to pay for your medical treatment, even though you pay Tax. But others will get it for free.

Taxes and the care home fees similar in that those who earn very little pay no tax. 

Those who have no money don’t pay their care home fees. 

When you earn loads of money and you pay 40% tax you get the same benefits as the person who pays 0% tax. You both get to use the roads, the infrastructure, the NHS etc. 

What would your alternative be? People who’ve spent their money should just be left to die because they can’t afdord care? 

Maybe they should be - at least then they’d take some responsibility over planning for the future. 

The big thing with this is similar to taxation - people who earn plenty of money complain about paying taxes and benefit scrounges having everything for nothing, but when it comes down to it, would you want to swap lives with them? 

Would you want to live on a council estate and live off your “free” £40 a week spending money etc. 

Edited October 12, 2018 by Lloyd90

[Lloyd90]

1 hour ago, team tractor said:

 

What your saying is spend your money on holidays , fast cars , meals etc as you think it’s right to remove their money instead of save.

I don’t believe I said that at all ... although feel free to quote the post that I did. 

What I actually said was - if your parents need care then they can go to a nice home where they’re treated better - not the cheapest horrible one providing the bare essentials. 

1 hour ago, team tractor said:

 

my mrs step mum has never worked since she’s 19 and has just became a pensioner. How’s it right she would get the same care but for free.

What’s the alternative? Should we throw her out onto the street in her old age to die?

“Sorry luv, but you didn’t save any money for your old age!” 

We’d all be on here ranting and raving about what a disgrace it is to let an old woman be treated like that if they actually did 😂

 

Edited October 12, 2018 by Lloyd90

[Mice!]

21 minutes ago, Whatmuff said:

I get this however, how is it that Amazon only paid 15m tax on 19.8bn on european revenues? Once again the rich and powerful coming out on top.

Because governments are scared to death of treating them the same as other companies, and as walker says good accountants and loop holes.

Plus if you give ordinary folk lots of money they can't cope, look at some of the lottery winners. 

[Whatmuff]

19 minutes ago, Mice! said:

Because governments are scared to death of treating them the same as other companies, and as walker says good accountants and loop holes.

Plus if you give ordinary folk lots of money they can't cope, look at some of the lottery winners. 

Ha, agreed. I think they should be made to pay full tax rates regardless and if they threaten to move their business, then they should be no longer allowed to trade whatsoever in the U.K. Without the customers buying their products, they wouldn't be earning. Massive corporations and famous folk continue to find loopholes to reduce their tax, meanwhile the rest of us fork out full rates. Makes my blood boil. Not to mention individuals like Gary Barlow tax avoiding (legally) and then trying to get public cash for his charity work! And here we are on the borderline of another crisis.

Edited October 12, 2018 by Whatmuff