Social Care overhall

When I was a SW I always used to look first at care homes run by the local authority. I knew that their staff had stringent training and (more important) on-going support. They were employed by the LA, as was I, and I could easily approach their managers if I had any concerns. I knew that internal as well as external monitoring was in place. There was a uniform high quality that gave me reassurance and confidence in them. Their sole aim was to care.

The privately-run homes were out on a limb, especially as regards monitoring, training and staff support. Giving feedback or expressing concerns was difficult. The quality was/is extremely variable. The main aim of their owners was profit.

Doodledog

I don't think I would have objected to paying more tax at 40 if I knew it would cover me and mine for social care in the future. Better to spread the load than to whack on a tax in later life, when a lot of people's earnings are declining because of going to part-time hours, or being less able to get work.

My concern is that there will be a generation of older people (probably including most of us on here) who are no longer earning a regular salary and won't be able to contribute a lot. Will we be excluded from the scheme and expected to fund our own care? We are the generation who missed out on childcare grants, mortgage tax relief, pensions at 60 (often without contributing NI) bus passes and many other things for which we were either too young or too old, and who are simultaneously blamed (as 'Boomers') for everything from global warming to economic decline.

We are also the generation who had free education up to degree level, brought our houses in our twenties, were able to afford a mortgage with only one person working, and had child benefit for all our children, regardless of income.
So you might very well not have objected to paying more at 40. Todays 40 year olds are struggling and trying to balance finances at a time when many of them have young children. A new tax would be too much for many.

This is a difficult nettle for any political party to grasp for it is fundamentally raising taxes, something which the Tories have promised they won't do and Labour get criticised for if they suggest it, therefore it really needs to be something discussed in a non-political group, with some level headed grown ups who are prepared to face up to it. A lot of expensive decisions are not made because they may not be popular with a section of the electorate important to the incumbent party, and thus these difficult items are 'kicked into the long grass'. Most sensible people acknoweldge that social care needs a serious sort out; too many elderly people are in hospital beds when what they need is care, convalesence, looking after, not expensive hospital nurses. I would like to see this proposed in HoC, not used as a stick to beat any party with, but as a means of dealing with a very important and expensive part of health. It should never have been separated out, but that ship has sailed, and I for one, would be happy to pay some sort of tax and be assured that my children would not have the worry and/or expense of care for me.

I don't know where this "40" came from and why "40"?

My DS is 40 and is just about to lose his home . He has 3 children . Are the government assuming that at 40 everyone is nicely settled with a comfortable income ?

And there is already a 2 tier system for social care. those who can afford to go into a pleasant home with the best of care and the rest of us .

We are also the generation who had free education up to degree level, brought our houses in our twenties, were able to afford a mortgage with only one person working,

Not sure how old you are, trisher but the mortgages in my day weren't easy to get at all.

Early 80s I was wanting to buy a house with my first husband. In my 20s. We could only get a mortgage if we had a top-up loan which were popular with the banks at the time. Extortionate.

Interest rates were astronomical. Up to 15%. Holidays were 3 times the price. I used to fly back and forth to the Canaries a lot to visit family. Return flights would be about £200. By today's standards that would be about £600

Inflation was also sky high

www.moneywise.co.uk/opinion/jasmine-birtles/do-you-remember-days-when-bank-england-interest-rate-was-double-digits

Then we got stung with endowment mortgages in the late 80s. It wasn't all good by any means.

As for this idea of getting 40+ to pay towards care, it's been denied today by Number 10. According to the Mail that is. Who knows what the truth is

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8564761/Downing-Street-dismisses-claim-wants-40s-pay-tax-fund-social-care.html

You are so right about LA residential care Luckygirl I was a manager for many years and the staff training and care was second to none. A lot of things went wrong when privatisation took place.

I understand everyone's concerns about paying more tax but we have to start somewhere, I pay UK taxes and would understand if more was levied for this reason.

Although I'm glad you had an easy ride trisher many of us wouldn't recognise the picture you paint.

We couldn't have paid a penny more in tax. As it was we couldn't afford to heat the house, ever have a holiday and my children s clothes came from jumble sales.

I worked evening jobs when they were small and went back to full time work when my youngest was 2.

I don't recognise the one salary, a house in your twenties etc at all.

Perhaps because you were comfortably situated you assumed everyone was.

I think people forget that there is a variation in ages here on Gransnet trisher .

I was in my twenties in the 70s but didn't have children until the late 70s early 80s because we spent 8 years saving enough deposit for a house.

The 80s were horrendous with the sharp rise in mortgage rates. Two thirds of my husbands take home pay was mortgage interest. Not even repayment.

The concept that I had an 'easy ride' always amuses me.
Just because I recognise the difficulties that 40 year olds are currently experiencing doesn't mean my life has been easy but quite frankly my personal experiences have little to do with it. The evidence is there. In the 1960s first time buyers were aged 23 on average, they are now 30. Many already have student debts. It takes longer to save a deposit and longer life mortgages are becoming more common. Most FTB also receive help from relatives (usually mum &dad).

GillT57

This is a difficult nettle for any political party to grasp for it is fundamentally raising taxes, something which the Tories have promised they won't do and Labour get criticised for if they suggest it, therefore it really needs to be something discussed in a non-political group, with some level headed grown ups who are prepared to face up to it. A lot of expensive decisions are not made because they may not be popular with a section of the electorate important to the incumbent party, and thus these difficult items are 'kicked into the long grass'. Most sensible people acknoweldge that social care needs a serious sort out; too many elderly people are in hospital beds when what they need is care, convalesence, looking after, not expensive hospital nurses. I would like to see this proposed in HoC, not used as a stick to beat any party with, but as a means of dealing with a very important and expensive part of health. It should never have been separated out, but that ship has sailed, and I for one, would be happy to pay some sort of tax and be assured that my children would not have the worry and/or expense of care for me.

Well said Gill ?
This has been a hot potato for various governments and it has to be sorted out as soon as is humanly possible.
I know age 40 up people still have things to pay out for, mortgages and so on, but it has to start somewhere.They will all be old one day.

Oh the 60s. Yes I'll give you that. I was married in 1971. If we'd had a deposit we could have bought a flat for a thousand. Eight months later later the same flat sold for £8000.

My husbands take home pay was £78 a month. Mine was £57.

Things changed very quickly in the early 70’s.
We got married in 1970 & bought a 2-up 2-down for £1750, which was about MrA’s annual salary. I was still a student.
My sister got married in 1972 and bought a similar property, although much further south, for £8000.
Needless to say, salaries hadn’t similarly gone up.

It will be difficult to work out a system that’s fair to everyone, but I hope that for once, party political point-scoring can be put aside and the politicians work in the country’s best interests instead of their own.

We bought our first house in the 80s. The price seems cheap now, but it cost twice as much as it was three years earlier when a friend bought an identical one. 6 months after we moved in, mortgage rates shot up to 16%. Inflation was high, and although we did manage to pay, many lost their homes or ended up in negative equity.

Those who went to University may have had no fees, but by no means everyone could afford to go, as they were expected to contribute to the household income, and things like rent and living expenses while studying were beyond their reach.

I knew of few people who managed on one salary - I always worked, and at times was the breadwinner, as during the 80s there was a lot of unemployment where we lived, and my husband was made redundant.

As others have said, endowment mortgages were the norm, and we ended up with a shortfall on ours, which cost a lot to make up. On top of that, we had two children who went to University, and we did as much as we could to help them financially, so the notion of our generation as having had it easier than they did just doesn't ring true for me at all.

When I said I wouldn't have objected at 40 to paying more tax, what I meant was that starting earlier would mean paying less per month, not that we were awash with money - we were still paying a mortgage and supporting the children throughout our forties.

Well Doodledog today's first time buyers will still be paying their mortgage at 60. The average age FTB in 2020 is 32 and many mortgages now last 29or 30 years (we usually had 25). www.zoopla.co.uk/discover/first-time-buyers/first-time-buyers-zoopla/
Add to that a student loan repayments, small children in late 30s, university fees in late 40s or early 50s. And how can anyone say 40 year olds are better off?
You might have helped your children at Uni but so do today's parents. The difference being people are having children later, getting onto the housing ladder later, repaying their own student loans and now apparently will be taxed for their future care. If you consider the student loan repayments as a sort of tax they will be the most taxed generation ever.

Exactly trisher

I’m 58 and my DH is 68 (soon to be 69) and we are still paying a mortgage . We have had to extend this twice now and our house is effectively owned by our business overdraft anyway .

I’d like to see far more community nursing. Obviously this would need to be paid for out of taxes, but in the long run would probably save people deteriorating quite so quickly and going into nursing homes. I agree care homes should be local authority run.
As to who should pay, well the whole NHS is a can of worms. It needs money spent to modernise properly. Interesting that visits to urgent care centres/ A&E dropped when Covid appeared. I think we should perhaps offer a basic level of care with the NHS and insurance based products on top, like private medical packages some workers get now. At least until the NHS gets back on its feet.

GillT57

This is a difficult nettle for any political party to grasp for it is fundamentally raising taxes, something which the Tories have promised they won't do and Labour get criticised for if they suggest it, therefore it really needs to be something discussed in a non-political group, with some level headed grown ups who are prepared to face up to it. A lot of expensive decisions are not made because they may not be popular with a section of the electorate important to the incumbent party, and thus these difficult items are 'kicked into the long grass'. Most sensible people acknoweldge that social care needs a serious sort out; too many elderly people are in hospital beds when what they need is care, convalesence, looking after, not expensive hospital nurses. I would like to see this proposed in HoC, not used as a stick to beat any party with, but as a means of dealing with a very important and expensive part of health. It should never have been separated out, but that ship has sailed, and I for one, would be happy to pay some sort of tax and be assured that my children would not have the worry and/or expense of care for me.

Yes, a good post GillT57.

We really need a cross party cabinet committee to sort out the best way forward as it is something that is going to affect all of opus for generations. It is possible to do this and this could avoid too much political wrangling which could cause delays.

Razzy yes, more community nursing and social care is needed too.

All of us

I agree with Whitewave and she is right, this type of scheme works well in other countries, I think Germany is one such country.
I understand the points you’ve raised Maisie, and they are valid points, but I hope as the details are thrashed out, those points will be addressed.

Good post GillT
I also wouldn’t mind paying more tax if this scheme could be introduced.

Trisher, I didn’t say that 40 year olds are better off. I am also aware of the problems faced by twenty and thirty-somethings, as I have two of my own. You are being very selective the things you pick on in my posts.

Again, my point about people paying in their 40s towards social care is to reduce the monthly spend, not to add to the overall cost.

I said at the start that older people might not be able to contribute enough to be included in the scheme - I am not expecting to be carried by the younger generation, although I do hope that the fact that many older people have paid decades’ worth of NI will not be forgotten when the details are decided.

Why can't income tax and other progressive taxes be increased?

This morning it is being reported that there are plans to look at the possibility of the NHS taking over social care.

Blimey that will make a massive institution.!

Social care would be taken away from LA and the budget incorporated into the NHS.

It makes it better for the elderly, vulnerable children and disabled to access care, which would be a good thing.

But I am left with a bit of unease and a lot of questions.

My biggest worry is that social care as well as health care will now be open to the world to buy.

There could be advantages, such as better integration. Some social care, such as for people with learning disabilities, was transferred from the NHS to local authorities a few years ago, then was outsourced to private companies. It would, however, mean transferring staff back on to NHS pay and conditions - I wouldn't mind betting there'll be some catch.