What's this scheme called please

Sorry Barmey but I too have always worked very hard, paid my taxes and NI and claimed no benefits other than child allowance (one child as opposed to your five) and State pension. My house is probably worth rather more than yours. Does that mean that if you and I both go into care homes I should subsidise you just so you can leave money to your five children, and to hell with my one?

Kate1949

Thank everyone. Our house is in both names.

But as joint tenants or tenants in common Kate?

My understanding is that if it is as Tenants in Common you each own a specific share of the house and only your share can be used for care costs. The other oerson retains their share.

In the case of Joint tenants tou both own all the house and whole house can be used to pay the care costs of one of you. But the house cannot be sold and the debt paid until the second one dies or sells.

Thank you kitty.

From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. No mention of what the kids might be expecting to inherit.

No, and no mention of any other forms of spending what your ability (or luck) has brought you, either . I don't care if people spend their own money on wine women and song (good luck to them!) or live on gruel so they can give the rest to charity. My interpretation of that quote is that we should all contribute what we can when we are able, and be cared for when we need to be, which we would be able to do with a fairer tax system, whilst still allowing people to do as they choose with their own money.

Some of the fees charged by care homes are ridiculous. Some care in care homes is questionable. We should all pay more taxes throughout our lives to fund care homes run by the NHS which would mean everyone gets equally good care from cradle to grave. But that’s another topic entirely. As it is, the whole system is a minefield.

Why do so many threads end up in arguments these days? I asked if anyone knew what the scheme (probably a poor choice of word) was. I didn't ask you to comment on my morals. Thanks for taking the time to post anyway.

It was obvious that it was going to be a contentious issue Kate.

Not to me it wasn't. I'm a simple soul. Or a bit thick!

On topics like this we are bound to have a variety of opinions. What is frustrating is if some of these are not based on a correct understanding of the law or regulations. Some comments have been misleading. No wonder people get confused.
For facts, it is best to check with Gov.uk, Age UK, Citizens Advice or one of the many other reliable sources information. Armed with facts we can then make up our minds according to our own circumstances.

kittylester

Kate1949

Thank everyone. Our house is in both names.

But as joint tenants or tenants in common Kate?

My understanding is that if it is as Tenants in Common you each own a specific share of the house and only your share can be used for care costs. The other oerson retains their share.

In the case of Joint tenants tou both own all the house and whole house can be used to pay the care costs of one of you. But the house cannot be sold and the debt paid until the second one dies or sells.

No. I don’t think so. Look it up on gov.uk. I’d do a link if I knew how.

If the spouse or civil partner is living in the house it cannot be taken into account when assessing care costs.

So if you each own half your partners half may be taken but if you own it jointly it wi t be taken into account until you move out.

I’m really pretty sure about this. If you live there it won’t be racking up a debt for when you die.

Please check it out at the official source.

There are differences between Scotland and England. Don't know about Wales or N.Ireland but DSil unravelling the rules as his DF is going into care and house jointly owned by his father and mother. She still lives there. House will not be taken into account but his half of savings will. She will get half his work pension but all his actual pension is used and he will get £23 or so pounds a week for sundries. This is in Scotland.

My interpretation of that quote is that we should all contribute what we can when we are able.

Yes, I agree. And if I have a million pounds today and you have £20, I am clearly more able to contribute than you. I won't be jealous of you because you have had a lovely life and spent all your money - that's your choice. (I don't mean you specifically, you know what I mean) Trying to apportion care depending on whether one thinks they have been a good citizen or not, is even more of a minefield that what we have now.

It would be great if we can all be cared for effectively by the state when we are old and we need it. Roll on the day. But right now, that day is not here. So I'm not going to give up my necessary care and treatment so that somebody else's child can buy a house. I'm not that generous.

Trying to apportion care depending on whether one thinks they have been a good citizen or not, is even more of a minefield that what we have now.

Oh, I agree. I would probably do very badly out of that arrangement if it came to pass . It is to remove the element of judging that I think we should all pay in and all take out. The lower paid who could not afford to save would pay less in, and the higher paid would pay more (and I would move resources from catching 'benefit scroungers' to catching tax evaders). I think that's as fair as we can get it without having a single pay scale for everyone, which IMO would be a bad idea for all sorts of reasons largely based on human nature.

I favour a progressive tax system too. Unfortunately that's not where we are. But one day, let's hope. ??

Fingers crossed the £85K cap on the 'care' costs does come into force in October 2023.

Isn’t that only for personal care though, not the ‘bed and board’ element of care home fees?

Kate1949

Sorry I don’t see any “arguments “ on here. Discussions, different points of view and helpful advice, yes

Sorry German…… mum I think you need a visit to spec savers, I don’t have five children, I just two2 but I have 5 grandchildren all in their early twenties and two of these were long term foster children. Do you think it’s fair that your taxes go a long way towards paying for the very generous expenses for MPs, aren’t we keeping them when they are perfectly able to buy their own lunches without a subsidy, or to furnish their London home that we the taxpayers have very generously bought them AND then be able to sell them at the end of their term and make a profit. If it makes you feel a lot better I have no intention of going into a care home, my family have said they will always provide my care and if they can’t, then I will sit down with my bottle of morphine, a bottle of red wine and probably a box of chocolates. Just for the record my go are not lazy or spendthrifts, just on low wages with two of them working in care homes

Barmeyoldbat

Sorry German…… mum I think you need a visit to spec savers, I don’t have five children, I just two2 but I have 5 grandchildren all in their early twenties and two of these were long term foster children. Do you think it’s fair that your taxes go a long way towards paying for the very generous expenses for MPs, aren’t we keeping them when they are perfectly able to buy their own lunches without a subsidy, or to furnish their London home that we the taxpayers have very generously bought them AND then be able to sell them at the end of their term and make a profit. If it makes you feel a lot better I have no intention of going into a care home, my family have said they will always provide my care and if they can’t, then I will sit down with my bottle of morphine, a bottle of red wine and probably a box of chocolates. Just for the record my go are not lazy or spendthrifts, just on low wages with two of them working in care homes

Well instead of rudely telling GSM to go to Specsavers, perhaps you could have explained to us all what "5 go" means as I thought you have 5 children as well.

Anyway, there's lots of things all governments spend my tax on that I don't agree with. Biggest thing is the way they spend money on defence, I suppose, but nuclear power is up there too.

But all of us who live in this country buy into the concept that we elect governments to spend money on our behalf. I don't spend a single minute worrying about MPs eat for lunch and how much it costs, because that is a drop in the ocean. We don't get to decide how much of our tax goes to each "pot" and we don't get to decide that our family is more important than anyone else's is, in the grand scheme of things.

By the way, I never even had Child Support. Can I keep that bit of my own money back to fund my life from now on? No, of course not.

It's nice that your family are going to care for you in old age. Some people aren't so lucky.

Apologies for the number of children Barmey but your post was difficult to understand there.

MPs don’t have huge salaries, far less than I earned, and they need a home in their constituency as well as a place convenient for Westminster so I don’t object to the reasonable (and we all know some take the p*ss there) costs of having to buy, equip and maintain a second home being paid by the taxpayer. If that didn’t happen there would be a great many more absentee and/or extremely wealthy MPs. I would be pleased to see the end of heavily subsidised meals though.

I’m sorry your children earn low wages (their choice of career), but it doesn’t mean that anyone else should pay for your care, so that they could buy houses, should you ever find that you can’t carry out your plan (as you will have seen, mine simply involves different drugs).

Thanks volver, glad I wasn’t alone in misunderstanding ‘5 go’!

Sorry about the typo, it should have been gc but my fat fingers and lost glasses just meant a typo. We will just have to agree to disagree. Also their career choice, we can’t all be lawyers, who would do the care in care homes if we did

Very true. A worthy but sadly badly paid career.

And that’s why I intend to help them in anyway I can

Barmeyoldbat

And that’s why I intend to help them in anyway I can

What, even to the extent of defrauding the tax man?

Fair enough. ??

I do apologise if people think I'm being curt but this is such a big thing to me. It's unfair, it's possibly illegal ( GSM? ) and I don't think it should go past without comment. If we want to help younger members of our families, give them the money now.