How should we care for the Elderly?

[observer]

The PM has forcast a ?6billion deficit in the budget for elderly care in 20 years time. It seems currently, that the means tested system means that if you have been thrifty and have assets (your house); they are used to pay for your care; if you have nothing, it costs you nothing! Some argue that this is unfair, but another arguement would be; why should kids inherit something they havn't worked for? At the end of the day we all pay in some way, but what is the fairest way?

[demelzadoe]

In the US everything you have is sold to pay for your care in your old age. But then they take that a step further, when the money pit has run dry then they go after the next of kin to kick in with the payments for the on going care of the aged and infirm. I would have thought that the taxes they have paid all their lives should pay for their care.

[observer]

That should be the case in theory Deme; over here we pay National Insurance, which, if everybody paid throughout their lives, in proportion to their income, we might be able to fill that ?6billion deficit.

[demelzadoe]

I daresay you're right, but I wonder how much of the National Insurance actually gets channelled into the right area.

[Bazj]

America is fundamentaly different because everything there is covered with insurances of one form or another so in theory if you don't pay you get nothing....

 

In UK, as Obs has said, we pay throughout our working lives to fund those already in the system and supposedly after retirement, the next lot of workers pay for us. The big issue is that currently, the system allows for those with assets to be pilaged into poverty and then the state will pay for the care you need, but the feckless and workshy and non-savers get it all for nothing. Now there are those who can't afford to save like others but it does make a mockery of saving for your old age if all you are doing is saving so that the government can take it off you!

 

Care for the elderly should be free and if necessary, should be free at the expense of taking benefits off those who choose to stay at home for a living.

[KeithR]

Care for the elderly should be free and if necessary, should be free at the expense of taking benefits off those who choose to stay at home for a living.

 

Are you saying that the woman who chooses to stay at home to raise her kids should have all her benefits stopped??

[observer]

IF, we had a progresive tax system (and NI), that taxed folk in proportion to their ability to pay, thus closing the wealth gap, I'm sure sufficient resources could be mustered to provide State Care from the cradle to the grave, free at the point of need. Currently, there is a glass ceiling on NI payments, so the super-rich are let off the hook. As for "stay at home Mums"; child rearing should be recognised as an essential feature in the development of stable families and a wider cohesive society. In the case of the "work shy", most folk "on benefits" are currently worse off, if they work, and some graded/phased payment system needs to, be considered that makes them "better off" IF they engage in some form of usefull employment, even if it only a few hours litter picking around their local area.

[Bazj]

Care for the elderly should be free and if necessary, should be free at the expense of taking benefits off those who choose to stay at home for a living.

 

Are you saying that the woman who chooses to stay at home to raise her kids should have all her benefits stopped??

 

No, but a woman who choses to stay at home to look after her kids who are at school can work between 9 and 3 can't she? or she can work a few hours at night if her husband/partner is at home?

 

It just needs a bit of forward thinking.

 

and anyway, what "benefits" are available to someone who choses to raise kids instead of working>? Apart from family allowance I didn't think there were any

[wolfie]

[quote name="KeithR

and anyway' date=' what "benefits" are available to someone who choses to raise kids instead of working>? Apart from family allowance I didn't think there were any[/quote]

 

Child Tax credit, Child Benefit and Working Tax credit for their partner if they earn below a certain amount.

[Peter T]

It's not a bad little earner, and a lot do it on purpose.

[Bazj]

Silly me to forget "benefit Britain"!!

[observer]

The theory is, that babies are brought up by mothers, who breast feed and nurture them, hopefully developing well rounded and healthy personalities - it should be viewed as an essential job; and is much preferable to child dumping.

[Bazj]

But all indications are that women now have to work so their families can afford to pay for all the increases in the cost of living over the last 10 years.....

 

sure beats me!

[demelzadoe]

BazJ

"America is fundamentaly different because everything there is covered with insurances of one form or another so in theory if you don't pay you get nothing"

 

I guess the point I was trying to make was that once they start taking your houses it will only be a matter of time before you find youselves on the same path as the US system. When my father-in-law was taken into the nursing home the government took everything, his bank accounts and safety deposit box was frozen. He was given a 60 page booklet of questions to answer about his finances, one question I had to read a few times to make sure I was reading correctly was - 'Do you or ANY MEMBER OF YOUR FAMILY have any gold fillings in your teeth.'

And after they have finished they turn to the next of kin to bail up.

 

Incidentally, it isn't called national insurance but they still take their share, on my wages they take:- federal tax, Massachusettes tax, social security tax and medicare tax. But I'm still not entitled to any of the benefits.

[Bazj]

one question I had to read a few times to make sure I was reading correctly was - 'Do you or ANY MEMBER OF YOUR FAMILY have any gold fillings in your teeth.'

And after they have finished they turn to the next of kin to bail up.

 

Didn't Hitler and his mates do that a few years back?

[observer]

Could get worse than that Baz; there may come a day (given overpopulation, increasing aged population and care costs); that once you start to become a financial liability, they'll give you the needle - in fact some may argue they're already doing it in our Hospitals [NFR].

[Bazj]

Quite possibly Obs....

 

Mind you I wonder if Gordon has thought about adding that question to the tax return form? Think how much he could take from that one!!!

[observer]

Think they already charge "death duty"?!

[Legion]

Care for the elderly should be free and if necessary, should be free at the expense of taking benefits off those who choose to stay at home for a living.

 

Are you saying that the woman who chooses to stay at home to raise her kids should have all her benefits stopped??

 

Yes, once maternity period ends

 

I was a single dad for 5 years before remarrying, and I worked throughout and took care of my own.

 

now married we both work despite having three children to look after.

 

children are a life choice, you choose to have them and you should support them.

[wolfie]

[quote name="Legion

 

children are a life choice' date=' you choose to have them and you should support them.[/quote]

 

Isn't that exactly what woman who choose to stay at home and look after their kids say???

[Legion]

they might say it, but if they start claiming benefits to do so then they are not supporting them, we are, and the parent.

[observer]

Because of "equal rights" demands, we now have women being driven out to work, and being forced to dump their kids with someone else - so little bonding, little quality time etc. We now have an increase of 25% in teenage female crime, cos girls are trying to ape the boys, all in the name of gender equality - there can be no absolute equality because there is an absolute physical difference - vive la difference! As for supporting kids (child allowance etc): this can be an instrument of State management of demographics, as we're told that the increasing size of the elderly population can become an unaffordable burden for a smaller working generation. Conversly, as in China, over-population can be a consideration in limiting State support for child production.