Paying for Social Care

GrannyGravy13

Every time you pay cash to a window cleaner, builder, cleaner, gardener or similar you have no idea if that sum will be declared.

If posters think only the rich buck the system sorry to say they are either turning a blind eye or woefully deluded.

I don't pay cash to anyone in that way GrannyGravy and no one has asked for years that I do so. Actually, that's not true, my hairdresser doesn't take cards but the money goes through her till and I don't see why everyone who "doesn't take cards" should be seen as a criminal. I don't see her as that and nor do I see it as my job to go round assuming everyone but me will break the law.

What we are discussing is not law-breaking - that should be treated as any crime would be. It is about a system that favours anyone who can gather assets.

Of course we shouldn't. It would be a nightmare to have people having food brought in all the time, and it wouldn't allow staff to ensure that patients who can't cope with it themselves to get a balanced diet (eg diabetics with Dementia).

When my stepfather was in care (with Lewey Body) he and another patient used to argue constantly over a seat they both liked, and patients 'stealing' one another's things was something that took a lot of staff time. Adding in who has fish and chips, and whose was the chicken tikka is only going to make that 100 times worse.

Also, it is a lot cheaper to cook in bulk for large numbers/use leftover ingredients than for each patient to buy their own, assuming that they are either well enough to do so or have people to do it for them.

PippaZ

Of course, to echo Maizie, even those paying no income tax still pay taxes.

Absolutely, there are very few items that we purchase which aren’t subject to tax.

Of course, to echo Maizie, even those paying no income tax still pay taxes.

Theoddbird

I think people should be charged for food they have in hospital. They have to pay for it at home don't they. Think of the money that would save the NHS. I would be more than happy to pay for my food.

When I worked in hospital catering many moons ago I was told by a ward sister that she regarded the food as an important part of a patient's therapy.

Perhaps we shouldn't be mean minded about this.

Alegrias1

I’ve said this before on GN but I think its relevant, I once heard Polly Toynbee speak about some research she had done, which showed that very often people think they are the “average earner”; so if you earn £20k, you think most people are like you and can’t imagine how you can get by on £15k. If you earn £100k you can’t imagine how people get by on £60k.

If you own a house, you can’t imagine that people can’t afford to buy a house, just a little one, if they try hard enough.

Very enlightening, and pretty believable, by the sound of it.

There was that chap in a Question Time audience - I think it turned out he was a builder - who could not believe he was in the top 5% - and was very angry about it. The top five per cent are people who earn a taxable income over £80,000.

43% of adults pay no income tax and to be in the top 1% of all adults (or the top 540,000 people), a pre-tax income of at least £120,000 is required.

To be in the "not paying tax" category, you would have to have a taxable annual income of £12,500 (2021/2022) or less.

The problem lies in the "taxable" income or rather in the "exempt from tax" income.

Every time you pay cash to a window cleaner, builder, cleaner, gardener or similar you have no idea if that sum will be declared.

If posters think only the rich buck the system sorry to say they are either turning a blind eye or woefully deluded.

M0nica

Lets be clear. The number of 'rich' people like Carnegie etc can be counted on the fingers of two hands.

There are 37 million tax payers in this country. Only 1 million earn more than £100,000. Even of you took every penny they earned, the take would be limited.

This wonderful idea that if only we taxed the rich all our national spending problems would be solved is on a par with believing in the tooth fairy.

Sad to say, if you are looking to increase tax takings through income tax, it is the small increase for the many rather than the swinging tax increase for the wealthy that brings the most money in.

Similarly the idea that all those earning over £100,000 are high flyers with huge funds, clever accountants that protect them from paying tax, is also an illusion. Yes, among those with incomes in the millions and those that get their income in large lumps, may be caught up in such schemes, but the majority of people earning up to £600-700,000 are 9.00-5.00 day PAYE earners or people running SME (your local successful builder, high tech company owner, consultant or owner of a small chain of stores), consultants of all kinds. www.gov.uk/government/statistics/income-tax-liabilities-by-income-range

I went through all this with another poster a few weeks ago. Income tax is not the only tax so it is not realistic to reference just that.

From data issued by the Office of National Statistics it is clear that families with the lowest household incomes pay the greatest percentage of their income in taxes, direct and indirect. Those in the lowest 20% pay 42..4% of their income in taxes, those in the highest 20% pay 35.8% of their income in taxes. Oddly, the lowest percentages are paid by those in the 2nd & 3rd quintile (20% groupings) at 32.0% and 32.9% respectively.

Anyway, if anyone cares to follow the enormous link and download the data it's in table 8

www.ons.gov.uk/redir/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJpbmRleCI6MiwicGFnZVNpemUiOjEwLCJ0ZXJtIjoiRWZmZXRzIG9mIHRheCBhbmQgYmVuZWZpdHMgb24gaG91c2Vob2xkIGluY29tZXMiLCJwYWdlIjoxLCJ1cmkiOiIvcGVvcGxlcG9wdWxhdGlvbmFuZGNvbW11bml0eS9wZXJzb25hbGFuZGhvdXNlaG9sZGZpbmFuY2VzL2luY29tZWFuZHdlYWx0aC9idWxsZXRpbnMvdGhlZWZmZWN0c29mdGF4ZXNhbmRiZW5lZml0c29uaG91c2Vob2xkaW5jb21lL2ZpbmFuY2lhbHllYXJlbmRpbmcyMDIwIiwibGlzdFR5cGUiOiJzZWFyY2gifQ.tDMDU-Fbf6UqgkjilmAGaxzZ9KlX5Pgf9CvoUivy8UY

Theoddbird

I think people should be charged for food they have in hospital. They have to pay for it at home don't they. Think of the money that would save the NHS. I would be more than happy to pay for my food.

I guess it depends what it is and how ill people are. During my last stay in hospital, I ate almost no hospital food. Friends and family brought food in for me. I suspect that collecting the money might cost more than it would be worth.

yaiyai

Grow stuff - people who don’t (not can’t) contribute towards the system. There are far too many.

Really? I don't suppose you have any facts to back up your claim .

GrannyGravy13

Accountants are not just for those on a six figure salary growstuff , I know of hairdressers, beauticians, gardeners and cleaners who have them.

So what? That's irrelevant.

Anybody with a £600-700,000 income is very firmly in the top 1% of earners.

In fact, anybody with a six figure income is in the top 3%. Anybody earning over £70,000 is in the top 6%. The average (median) income before tax/NICs in the UK is just over £25,000.

The UK has one of the worst income inequality ratios in the world. And it would be even worse if wealth is taken into account.

www.gov.uk/government/statistics/percentile-points-from-1-to-99-for-total-income-before-and-after-tax

Grow stuff - people who don’t (not can’t) contribute towards the system. There are far too many.

I think people should be charged for food they have in hospital. They have to pay for it at home don't they. Think of the money that would save the NHS. I would be more than happy to pay for my food.

Accountants are not just for those on a six figure salary growstuff , I know of hairdressers, beauticians, gardeners and cleaners who have them.

I’ve said this before on GN but I think its relevant, I once heard Polly Toynbee speak about some research she had done, which showed that very often people think they are the “average earner”; so if you earn £20k, you think most people are like you and can’t imagine how you can get by on £15k. If you earn £100k you can’t imagine how people get by on £60k.

If you own a house, you can’t imagine that people can’t afford to buy a house, just a little one, if they try hard enough.

Very enlightening, and pretty believable, by the sound of it.

Ooops! I meant health component.

Silvertwigs

The thing is it’s only Health care that the NI increase will pay for, not food and lodging, I think so many people don’t realise this?

And for the vast majority of people it won't even pay for that. The average stay in a residential home is 30 months. People will still have to find the first £86,000. The care component multiplied by 30 will not exceed £86,000 for the majority of people, so they will have to find the money themselves.

GrannyGravy13

growstuff not everyone earning a six figure salary avoids as much tax as possible

Similarly not everyone claiming benefits is ^feckless and work shy^

More fool anybody earning £600-700,000 who doesn't have an accountant, who doesn't know every loophole in the book! Come off it! Of course they avoid (not necessarily evade) tax.

If everyone over 60 paid for their prescriptions - maybe a nominal amount like £3 per item - then it would raise so much more money. It seems so unfair to burden the younger generation who are already having to pay back their Student Loans whereas those of us who are 'a certain age' had their University fees paid for them.

Income tax rise would be better or actually collecting tax from big business!

growstuff not everyone earning a six figure salary avoids as much tax as possible

Similarly not everyone claiming benefits is feckless and work shy

The thing is it’s only Health care that the NI increase will pay for, not food and lodging, I think so many people don’t realise this?

M0nica

Lets be clear. The number of 'rich' people like Carnegie etc can be counted on the fingers of two hands.

There are 37 million tax payers in this country. Only 1 million earn more than £100,000. Even of you took every penny they earned, the take would be limited.

This wonderful idea that if only we taxed the rich all our national spending problems would be solved is on a par with believing in the tooth fairy.

Sad to say, if you are looking to increase tax takings through income tax, it is the small increase for the many rather than the swinging tax increase for the wealthy that brings the most money in.

Similarly the idea that all those earning over £100,000 are high flyers with huge funds, clever accountants that protect them from paying tax, is also an illusion. Yes, among those with incomes in the millions and those that get their income in large lumps, may be caught up in such schemes, but the majority of people earning up to £600-700,000 are 9.00-5.00 day PAYE earners or people running SME (your local successful builder, high tech company owner, consultant or owner of a small chain of stores), consultants of all kinds. www.gov.uk/government/statistics/income-tax-liabilities-by-income-range

Sorry, but that's nonsense! Somebody earning up to £600-700,000 is not a run-of-the mill PAYE earner. I don't believe that anybody earning that much doesn't have an accountant, who avoids as much tax as possible.

Hetty58

growstuff, I failed to point out that I'm bitterly disappointed with the proposed changes (so called) - and certainly not a fan.

I'm not surprised either, though. It's exactly what I'd expect from our current government.

What really puzzles me is - why do so many people vote for them, when so few benefit?

Because they rarely read beyond headlines. Quite honestly, you only have to look at GN to see that there are people who think the latest NICs rises will go towards social care. Most people agree that health and social care are underfunded and don't mind paying a bit extra. What they don't realise is that this latest rise won't go towards social care and only provide a sticking plaster on the cuts which have been made in healthcare over the last 11 years. It was announced today that only a sixth of the money raised over the next three years will go towards social care - and that will be to preserve the inheritances of people whose parents have high-value homes. We've already seen that Johnson expects people to take out insurance policies to cover the shortfall - more profits for his cronies.

The pandemic is being used as an excuse to downgrade GP services. There are already companies offering online consultations. People don't seem to realise that if they sign up for those services, their GP will lose funding. They won't cover chronic illnesses either, so the NHS is going to be left with the expensive patients. The money raised will end up in the pockets of private providers. It's all part of a plan, but short, snappy headlines assure people that social care is sorted - so that's alright then!

I have always seen the "comfortably off" as the middle-classes GrannyGravy and the "rich" as both income and asset rich and a lot more than comfortable .

People are talking only about taxing income. Those with the broadest shoulders and often under-taxed are, to quote from Rachel Reeves speech in Parliament for a second time on this forum, those who get their income from financial assets, stocks and shares, sales of property, pension income, annuity income, interest income, property rental income, inheritance income.

To call the poor who work for their poverty feckless is not only a misnomer, it is blind and cruel as well.