Paying for social care - good news or bad news?

Home ownership has halved among younger families. So May will need a backup plan as the money runs out as these families age and need care.

I know!! How about an insurance for social care!!!!

Mind you she'll be long gone. So short terminism is the order of the day. So different to the giant politicians we had in the 40s

Very true Anya.
The proposal should increase the debate about the cost of housing in this country. I'm in the northern poor house where house prices are fairly stagnant. Family members living in the South East have seen their homes treble in value in a very short time. All our major cities but particularly London, have many empty houses owned by wealthy people, many of whom don't live in the UK. It's become a sure fire way of making money from capital.
I don't have any easy solution because renting isn't something most people in the UK would choose over buying (for obvious reasons, including security of tenancy) Is it possible to stop people who simply want to exploit our ridiculous housing policies from buying up properties and leaving them empty?

What will happen in reality is that most families will be forced to sell the family home to pay retrospectively for care. Those that can afford to pay out of their savings, doubtless the wealthy, will do that and so be able to keep the family home free of debt.

Those who don't own their homes and have no savings will of course get everything for free.

Those who are somewhere in the middle will lose out. Again.

I think that what actually happened May and Hammond decided to pay for extra cost of social care through raised NI - remember the budget?. Then through their incompetence had to rapidly withdraw that idea.

In fact I think that it was fair and in fact could well have been extended to pensioners.

May then scrabbled around for an alternative idea, and came up with this dogs dinner, forgetting to link the NHS and social care as had been planned.

I'm with the Liberals on tax. 1p on tax could improve things a lot. Northern Europeans with care and health systems to us pay a lot more tax than we do I believe.

ann no they don't - the value of the house becomes part of the estate and subject to IHT rules which as we all know the Tories made even more generous - I wonder why?

Raising the level of Capital Gains tax back to the levels they were at 10 or so years back would go some way to help. I am making the assumption there that when children inherit a house they do in fact pay CGT.

The easy answer is a much higher rate of inheritance tax isn't it. So those who have, through no cleverness or hard work of their own, accrued a million or more 's worth of property in their lifetimes, get to pay a large amount of this back to the government in tax when they die. The more you own, the more tax you pay. Or they have to sell their house to pay for their care when they are alive.
You could also tax property sales more heavily at the top end.
And the revenue raised would allow the government to look after everyone.

Sadly for me,not a very expensive house and a small pension.

Corbyn supporter because there is a pic of him in the item you posted!

Roses, 2013 April 1st, Health and Social Care Bill came in to link them together.
Unfortunately with the STPs the way they are being linked together is that the health side, or NHSE, is being handed to the councils along with social care, not the other way round which would make more sense if the Cons wanted to keep an NHS.

Where's the bit that says it's from a Corbyn supporter?

It's from someone who works in the city who is warning us that the plan is not to let people who have to use the insurance system keep £100,000 from the sale of their house.
There is no floor on the amount of money that the insurance company can take from the plan after you have died.
If you don't want to sell your house when you go into a home, you will have to take out one of these plans.
Good luck with that, roses. Now you are going to tell us that your house is worth over a million and your pension is over £50,000 anyway, so it will not matter.

If you are asking 'why can't all this social care be funded by the NHS' obviously through tax payers money, the answer is that it can't be because of the way it's set up, local councils are given the money to do it, with anyone who needs help in the home or has to go into an actual home paying some of the costs.
But you know this already.
The NHS is already staggering along under a huge burden even though tons of money is poured in, and will be even more, to the tune of 8 billion.
If, in the future Parliament decides to merge the two, it will all need rethinking.
There are record numbers of us oldies out there to take care of.

Because roses I'm trying to understand why those of you happy to fund your own social care seem to think this is conceptually different from funding your own health care - but clearly you are unable to enlighten me

Rigby....... why the hell ask me or anyone on the forum this question.

I did look at your link dj as it happens, and find it's from someone claiming to work in the city, but who is also a Corbyn supporter.
However, even if there is some truth in the purchasing of an insurance product, which may be the case, as when buying any insurance you need to look at the small print beforehand.

<sigh> roses I know NHS care has not been treated like social care - I was asking for an explanation as to why not - saying it never has been is not an explanation - it's a statement of the flipping obvious.

And you would say exactly the same about T May no doubt.
Unfortunately, there is nothing positive to say about Corbyn, the Labour MP's are aghast at the fact that he is now Leading ( I use the the term loosely) their party.
The sooner he is gone the better.
Ongoing NHS care has never been treated the same way as social care costs by any government.

Roses, nothing to do with my wallet.
If I were you, I would read the link I put on. If it's true your children will not even inherit £100,000.

Philip May works as a pension manager for Capita Group. He moved sideways to get away from running Starbucks and Amazon accounts.

Just saying.

roses can you explain why we don't treat health care in the same way? Or do you think we should? Or not make well off parents with children with SEN fund the extra costs of their education? And pathetic, childish comment about a typo - grow up- I expect it's because you've got nothing more sensible to contribute to the discussion - and the idea that you'd ever say anything positive about JC - if he rescued 6/7 babies from a burning building, you'd criticise him for not rescuing the one who died.

This is interesting.

What rubbish Rigby we would be neither sitting,or spitting venom ( whichever word you meant) in fact, I should think that both of us would be saying 'well, at least Corbyn has a plan to help fund the awful cost of social care' and it would sit well with his Socialist views ( whatever anybody now says on here ) this is not a right wing idea.Being able to pass on £100,000 whilst receiving care in a home somewhere until the day you die, is hardly draconian.
Left wing rhetoric goes out the window when they feel their wallets being felt.

Yes dj it's called society but on the whole, the right wing can only think individually.