Its a funny one isn't it' whilst i agree generally that if you have 10s of thousands in the bank you should contribute' playing devils advocate it can also be argued that you're being penalised for working hard ' paying taxes and saving money all your working life ' you may be in the residents lounge having had to pay with everything you ever worked for whilst joe bloggs in the next chair has never worked in his life never contributed to the system yet he's getting exactly the same care that you're getting and its costing him absolutely nothing' surely that can't be right either...
It’s a care home , they are there to look after the vulnerable regardless of how much money they had during their lives , but don’t worry if Joe Bloggs family can’t afford the top up fees he’ll be chucked out and end up in a home of 80 residents with 2 staff on
That's going to happen more and more if people can't afford to buy their own homes. But if you have the money you can choose the home whereas if the state decides for you you could end up anywhere.
Don't know if I'm reading this right but there's going to be a cap of 86k on the amount paid for old age care I think ? So if you live in Barnsley with a house worth 120k you ll get to keep 34k should that money need spending . Live in a leafy village like Chipping Norton just like Samantha and David Cameron ( estimated value of house 1.5 million ) then they get to protect 1.414 k of assets courtesy of the state . Sounds more upwards transfer of wealth to me but I might be reading it wrong .
It usually takes a day or two for the detail to get leaked and it unravel. From what was announced today, it seems much of the £36bn over 3 years isn't even going towards social care, its to allegedly cover for the covid backlog and the extra 50,000 nurses he alleged he already had, or were in an oven, or something. The other thing, they've wrapped in an employers NI amount too, that doesn't seem to have been mentioned, but thats not progressive at a time when many businesses are struggling due to covid and brexit. They've also upped dividend taxation, which many small businesses use, though any tax advantage is pretty much gone nowadays. The wording before was "financial assets" for the levels of where state assistance kicked in or was capped, but I'm not sure if thats still the same, or if that would still include your house. I'd guess it should still be financial assets so ringfences houses, but if someone is moving out of their home, there has to at least be a debate as to what good is it for them anyway?
Hancock getting laughed at was a joy. As for him going on about dignity I think that ship has sailed.
Just take a look at John Trickets question in the debate. Nailed it in one. But as the PM doesn't ever directly answer a question he is ever asked, it basically went straight under the carpet.... He pointed out his constituents (Hemsworth) typically had a house worth about 130k. A person would lose maximum of 80k (cap set by the policy).... Whilst pointing out that the 20k buffer people were expected to be grateful for was complete horse ****. He then compared the same circumstance to the PMs own constituents. Where house prices where worth in excess of 500k.... So guess who the maximum cap protects.... It ain't the north
They seem to be trying to solve the issues they created in the first place but trying to sell it as something new and revolutionary . Only an average 1.4 % per year rise in NHS funding during the austerity years despite an ageing population plus unlimited immigration further bolstering the population which has grown by 8 million since the turn of the century . I'm of the opinion 36 billion over three years won't even touch the sides . Then there's the whole housing issue to sort ......
You could make the same argument about the NHS. The bloke in the next bed to you might not have worked or contributed in his life so why is he having the same surgical procedure as you?
Funny, isn't it - I'd say that anybody who owns a fully paid off house (terraced or not) was pretty wealthy!
Because we are supposed to be a caring country that looks after the less fortunate. Not live in the USA
Yaay, I'm wealthy! And actually if my house needs to be sold for me to go into a home when the time comes I don't have a problem with that.Still is the same as poll tax though so maybe the fairest way is a proportion is used for care above a certain figure.
All I can say is that it's pretty much my main financial goal! I'm not saying it makes everybody who's paid off their mortgage part of the super rich, but it's easy to forget what being a couple of bad months away from homelessness feels like, and if you rent that's the default position.
