Paying for the care system

[oowee]

The opportunity to financialy look after the elderly in our population is one that we have dodged for some time. The weight of that obligation should be met accross society but the larger part of that burdon should lie firstly with those using the service. 

Is it right to further burdon our younger generation when they are already paying for the unfunded pensions and benefits of their parents?

[TIGHTCHOKE]

11 minutes ago, oowee said:

The opportunity to financialy look after the elderly in our population is one that we have dodged for some time. The weight of that obligation should be met accross society but the larger part of that burdon should lie firstly with those using the service. 

Is it right to further burdon our younger generation when they are already paying for the unfunded pensions and benefits of their parents?

It has to be the current youngsters as they will need other youngsters to pay when they are old and in need.

[bottletopbill]

You are paying more for asylum seekers look after our own and show them respect

[Dave-G]

ISTR we funded our pensions on about fifty years of reciprocal payments, or rather funded our elders pensions and in return get ours funded by our youngsters.

[henry d]

1 hour ago, oowee said:

Is it right to further burdon our younger generation when they are already paying for the unfunded pensions and benefits of their parents?

Many years ago people looked after their elderly family members, however we have given that up to the state so we can have two wage earners in a household, this has benefitted society and individuals with both money and taxes. A retrograde step would not help, what else can be done to fund it?

[Bigbob]

Ive worked since i was 15 years old so i think ive funded and are entitled to something back 

[12gauge82]

1 hour ago, oowee said:

The opportunity to financialy look after the elderly in our population is one that we have dodged for some time. The weight of that obligation should be met accross society but the larger part of that burdon should lie firstly with those using the service. 

Is it right to further burdon our younger generation when they are already paying for the unfunded pensions and benefits of their parents?

I'm not sure the choice is quite so binary. There's alot of wealth generated in this country that isn't seen by those who put the graft in to earn it. Alot of it gets stacked up in off shore accounts when tax is avoided, if the government cracked down on that, along with those who refuse to work and illegal immigrants/economic migrants, our old would be alot better cared for, without burdening the young or robbing those who have worked all their lives to have those savings and or property. 

[clangerman]

when theres 80mil to squander on a clock millions to waste in afghanistan and endless foreign aid i don’t want to hear gump and co crying pauper why should the young pay for the mistakes of idiots 

[redial]

12 minutes ago, clangerman said:

when theres 80mil to squander on a clock millions to waste in afghanistan and endless foreign aid i don’t want to hear gump and co crying pauper why should the young pay for the mistakes of idiots 

You raise some good points.

Edited September 6, 2021 by redial
Error

[Gordon R]

If we cut the foreign aid and stopped paying out Universal Credit to people who don't exist, the funds for care would be easily found. 

At some point, someone will be along to say we don't pay Universal Credit to people who don't exist. That will merely show their ignorance.

[Vince Green]

25 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

If we cut the foreign aid and stopped paying out Universal Credit to people who don't exist, the funds for care would be easily found. 

At some point, someone will be along to say we don't pay Universal Credit to people who don't exist. That will merely show their ignorance.

Absolutely right Gordon

The big question is, where did the assumption come from that I have to fund care for people I have never even met?

BECAUSE I DONT HAVE TO

Or benefits for people I don't know?

BECAUSE I DONT HAVE TO

If they are genuinely needy the church would provide in most countries and we would give money to the church to keep our card stamped in case we need care in the future ourselves. But its hard to pull a flanker on the parish priest

 the idea of state run scheme is just faceless big government. Might as well drive down the High St throwing money out of the window

Edited September 6, 2021 by Vince Green

[armsid]

i am paying £112 per year on my council tax for social care This is done irrespective of the number in house ,As gordon said we should put the money into this country or we risk going broke then who will give us aid?

[Bigbob]

The biggest saving could be to second generation dole birds they or there parent have put nothing into the system so why should they get anything from it ??. 

Then single mothers theres a country if a single mother has  a baby  they get nothing from the state her family has to look after her 

[Mungler]

Tax is always a flammable subject. People think that any perceived shortage in the system is because the big wigs are off-shoring all their money and evading tax but that is actually a fallacy. There is a new cultural drive to get people to accede to the idea of paying tax and more tax because it’s the right thing to do and to try and heap moral blame onto people and companies that are actually acting in accordance with the laws of the land and to lawfully pay as little as possible - the starting pint is that it’s their money after all, right?

If anyone is interested, download as an audio book ‘Daylight Robbery’ by Dominic Frisby it’s all about tax and it’s a massive eye opener. 

Government spending is like pouring water into a leaky bucket - there’s never enough water to put in and if you do have a big push and splash more water in, you won’t notice or see any benefit as it continuously leaks away out the bottom.

As we ever increasingly invite the state in to our lives, and with widening powers over our lives, that big machine keeps needing to be fed with our money. 

8 minutes ago, Bigbob said:

The biggest saving could be to second generation dole birds they or there parent have put nothing into the system so why should they get anything from it ??. 

Then single mothers theres a country if a single mother has  a baby  they get nothing from the state her family has to look after her 

It’s a weird thing - the suggestion that you should only be able to take out of a system that you have actually put into appears to be something no one can dare to suggest anymore. Why? It’s simple physics and economics and it’s a fair approach in dealing with finite resources. It’s not very PC but if I run my life and cut my cloth to suit, why should I or anyone else be asked to support those that abuse the NHS and have never worked a day?

.

Edited September 6, 2021 by Mungler

[12gauge82]

7 hours ago, Mungler said:

Tax is always a flammable subject. People think that any perceived shortage in the system is because the big wigs are off-shoring all their money and evading tax but that is actually a fallacy. There is a new cultural drive to get people to accede to the idea of paying tax and more tax because it’s the right thing to do and to try and heap moral blame onto people and companies that are actually acting in accordance with the laws of the land and to lawfully pay as little as possible - the starting pint is that it’s their money after all, right?

If anyone is interested, download as an audio book ‘Daylight Robbery’ by Dominic Frisby it’s all about tax and it’s a massive eye opener. 

Government spending is like pouring water into a leaky bucket - there’s never enough water to put in and if you do have a big push and splash more water in, you won’t notice or see any benefit as it continuously leaks away out the bottom.

As we ever increasingly invite the state in to our lives, and with widening powers over our lives, that big machine keeps needing to be fed with our money. 

It’s a weird thing - the suggestion that you should only be able to take out of a system that you have actually put into appears to be something no one can dare to suggest anymore. Why? It’s simple physics and economics and it’s a fair approach in dealing with finite resources. It’s not very PC but if I run my life and cut my cloth to suit, why should I or anyone else be asked to support those that abuse the NHS and have never worked a day?

.

While I don't disagree with your points on government spending, are you saying that you believe the likes of amazon pay a fair amount of tax? Or how about the financial crash caused by greedy banking practices that those involved must have known was doomed to fail, causing a global financial melt down. The tax payer picked up the bill while only 2 people did any jail time. 

[Newbie to this]

7 hours ago, armsid said:

we risk going broke

It's too late, we are already there and have been for some time!

[Scully]

9 hours ago, Bigbob said:

The biggest saving could be to second generation dole birds they or there parent have put nothing into the system so why should they get anything from it ??. 

Then single mothers theres a country if a single mother has  a baby  they get nothing from the state her family has to look after her 

And if the family can’t look after her? What happens then? 

Edited September 7, 2021 by Scully

[discobob]

9 minutes ago, Scully said:

And if the family can’t look after her? What happens then? 

There are families that are unable to conceive .....

Remember what used to happened for "single mothers" back in the day. It happened in my family

[Mungler]

2 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

While I don't disagree with your points on government spending, are you saying that you believe the likes of amazon pay a fair amount of tax? Or how about the financial crash caused by greedy banking practices that those involved must have known was doomed to fail, causing a global financial melt down. The tax payer picked up the bill while only 2 people did any jail time. 

Don’t get me wrong, tax is a a necessary evil, but as we bloat the government machine and invite it in to run every aspect of our lives, we can’t be surprised at the cost.

No, the likes of Amazon don’t pay a fair amount of tax, but that’s not their fault that is the fault of the current tax systems being incomprehensible to mere mortals and full of loop holes to the mega corporates. 

Frisby in his book seems to think that (old) Hong Kong had the best tax structure - low, fixed, simple and minimal government interference.

Edited September 7, 2021 by Mungler

[Rim Fire]

[oowee]

To my mind we have to pay through tax. Tax is proportionate to earnings. A NI contribution or a social care contribution that is simply a tax on earnings is not fair it must be proportionate. I also think that personal wealth from home ownership should also be harnesed to contribute with a lien on property values. 

10 hours ago, Mungler said:

 

It’s a weird thing - the suggestion that you should only be able to take out of a system that you have actually put into appears to be something no one can dare to suggest anymore. Why? It’s simple physics and economics and it’s a fair approach in dealing with finite resources. It’s not very PC but if I run my life and cut my cloth to suit, why should I or anyone else be asked to support those that abuse the NHS and have never worked a day?

.

The vast majority of people in this country take out far more than they put into the system. If we paid out according to what was put in most people earning under around £40k would be very disappointed. 

[discobob]

They need to look at the area's of the welfare state that are costing the huge amounts of money and start trimming from there. There is also the disconnect that you can end up - having paid in all your life into the system - sitting in a chair next to someone who has paid in nothing at all, meanwhile all you have been allowed to have is a (or was) £16k while everything that you have worked for has been stripped to pay for your care......

 

Don't get me wrong - there are people who just can't work due to physical or mental/psychiatric disabilities and they should be "covered" by the state

[RockySpears]

On the news was a bloke crying because he had to sell his parents house to pay for their care.  Dad is deceased and Mum has dementia and in a home.

Why not sell the house?  They saved their money and it will now fund their care, why not?  Oh, maybe he was crying because he was not getting his inheritance?

The fact is almost nobody can afford to pay for their care.  You may have contributed Tax and NI for 50 years or more, but that is still not enough.

"The average weekly cost of living in a residential care home is £704, while the average weekly cost of a nursing home is £888 across the UK. The monthly average cost of residential care is £2816 and receiving nursing care in a care home costs on average £3552."

Source: https://www.carehome.co.uk/advice/care-home-fees-and-costs-how-much-do-you-pay

• Over a lifetime, an average household will pay £107,045 of Employee’s National Insurance Contributions."

Source: https://www.taxpayersalliance.com/average_household_will_pay_826_030_in_taxes_over_a_lifetime

So a whole household only pays enough NI to pay for a care home for about 3.1 years for a single individual.  That without putting anything into the NHS or any of the other myriad things NI pays for!  The rest is general taxation.

People who make the claim "I've paid in all my life and deserve my care to be paid for", no, no you don't, unless your earnings have been way up with the 1% of earners in the UK.

Company NI contributions and Corporate taxes pay for most everything.

Yes there are the doleys who just make it all look so unfair, well if that makes you unhappy, get into politics and change it.  Put the single mums on the streets, let the children of doleys go hungry.  The World is not a fair place.

Yours,

RS

 

 

[Rewulf]

3 minutes ago, RockySpears said:

On the news was a bloke crying because he had to sell his parents house to pay for their care.  Dad is deceased and Mum has dementia and in a home.

Why not sell the house?  They saved their money and it will now fund their care, why not?  Oh, maybe he was crying because he was not getting his inheritance?

A good friend of mine worked all his life , doing various jobs, but eventually settled on the last 25 years as a window cleaner, he did 3-4 days a week , and the the round being in a reasonably affluent area, took around £400 a week , he was quite proud of the fact he never paid any income tax, as his 'expenses' nulled them out.
He counted the money he spent in the pub as his paid taxes , as each pint had an amount of duty on it.

He retired some 5 years ago , just as his wife started to show signs of dementia (at 65) 
They had inherited some £150k , owned their house (£170k) and had a share portfolio worth another £50k, there could also have been some cash and savings but he never told me how much.
He was diagnosed with cancer 3 years ago , just as the wife entered a nursing home, and he went downhill fast, and was dead within a year.

Not a penny has been paid toward her care , and the kids inherited everything, no taxes paid at all, Im not sure how they did it , but just an example of how stupid the system is .

15 minutes ago, RockySpears said:

Yes there are the doleys who just make it all look so unfair, well if that makes you unhappy, get into politics and change it.  Put the single mums on the streets, let the children of doleys go hungry.  The World is not a fair place.

Trouble is those doleys have a vote, and theres lots of them, so any government that tries to reform the social care system gets hammered, hence the stagnation.

A system of citizenship , where a vote is earned by service or employment , would concentrate resources, and make slackers think twice before embarking on a life of lazyness.
And no, Im not joking despite the meme.

[discobob]

@RockySpears

I understand what you are saying - but it is the case that there are people that don't amass anything in their lives and don't contribute - rather just taking from it all their lives. There are people that my wife knew at School and have never worked for all their life - they can be seen regularly outside the pub that my wife passes when she goes to her parents - got a flat/house etc all through the welfare state - and if they end up in care they have nothing to contribute as it all went on beer and fags.

I have also raised before on here about my wife's friend - got pregnant - hid money - then went to 16 hours a week working- but had her daughter in care in the top local independent child care place from 8 until 6 every day and has kept that up for 18 years - now she has gone back to work.

Her daughter now goes to a "military" college and gets paid £50 per week plus expenses for going. My 16 year old has started college and gets jack - my 18 year old in 6th form gets jack. 

In that time she has paid off her house (she bought it before getting pregnant), invested tens of thousands into the Harlequin scandal and then got it all refunded with 8% from FSA

It was her choice to open her legs and have the child - and before you say it the father was a French contractor at a local car plant and was only her for 3 months or so so he never contributed.

I have to bite my tongue when people say "oh hasn't she done well - single parent"