Paying for Social Care

Jillybird that this happens is undeniable, but it is has always been rare. I worked for Age Concern (as was) for 10 years as a Home visitor, only once did I have a client whose poverty was caused by casual extravagence.

Most of my clients were dependent on the state becaue they worked in unskilled labouring and domestic jobs with poor pay and no prospects, many were devastated that try as they might they had not even managed to save enough for their own funerals.

jillybird no need to apologise, unfortunately your post could be replicated U.K. wide.

growstuff tax avoidance is entirely legal, anyone with an ISA is avoiding tax. Tax evasion is illegal.

I said people earning from £100,000 to £600-700,000. So that covers the majority of wealthy people, who earn considerably less than the top figure. A fair number of the ones I know are employees and are on PAYE.

You mix in exalted circles M0nica

Jillybird

My mum was very thrifty - mean to herself. Her best friend worked at the same job in the same office earning the same money. Best friend was not mean, either to herself or others. Best friend gambled, drank and had a riotous time (god knows what they saw in each other!). Mother got very upset when she was told she'd have to go into care and would lose the money she'd so judiciously saved. Best friend went into care free as a bird. She'd never owned her own home, always rented and had no savings.
I write this because it's true, but I've been a tad irritated about some posts implying it doesn't matter if people are reckless and feckless, they'll still get the best treatment for nothing as they have nothing. Those who've scrimped and saved, however, must fork out... there is something very unfair in the system and it's not true that all poor people are hard-done-by and need to be kept by rich people. Some people are poor because they choose to live in the moment and have fun.
Sorry I've gone away from the OP, but needed to point this out.

Ok, so what are you going to do with the ones who are, in your opinion, feckless? Abandon them to their fate?

Jillybird is not saying she wants to abandon people to their fate, and I’m sure you know that.

Saying that we, of the boomer generation, should pay for our care rather than burden the young ....think back ...I left school at 15 and 3 months ......as soon as I was 18 I paid NI which supported those already in retirement, the health service, care and social issues .....never did we complain that our hard earned contributions were being spent on the elderly ...in those days there were still elderly people who had paid no pension, or NI before it was introduced......I had a friend whose father worked on a farm all his life, until he was over 70 ...he never paid into a pension scheme, but when he retired he was given a council house and a pension ....who paid for that ? our generation .....did we complain ....No ......the guarantee was that our generation would be looked after from the cradle to the grave.......whilst our contributions looked after those that came before us ..............simples ......the couple I knew where then, when they became over 80, given a lovely council bungalow in a complex for the elderly ...and every single thing that needed doing, the council came and did it ....even adjusting the whirly linen line !!! when the husband died, the wife went into full time care ..........all free ........in a lovely care home in the same village ...........she once said to me ;We have never been so well off in our lives;....how nice if that could still be the case ! I lived in France, where a deduction is made from all salaries as to : health care, long term old age care, payments for pension (my neighbours received over 2,000 euros EACH IN pension every month and they complained at the retirement age rising from 60 to 62 .......!!!) BUT when my husband became ill with Parkinsons, and eventually had to go into a nursing home it cost me 4,000 euros a month ...........my neighbour;s mother, in the same home, paid only 1,000 euros a month because her contributions throughout her working life paid the rest. I cannot see how being ;allowed !!!!' to keep £86,000 can be worked out ....this figure does NOT include accommodation ...exactly what it would cover has not been detailed ....my solicitor said to me, when I made a PoA , and asked her ...If any money I may have left when / if/ I may need care, what happens when it has all gone paying for my care ? she said Oh, the local authority will pay !!!!!! oh yes.......I think not ...how about if I irresponsibly spend spend spend ........so I have nothing ....I imagine myself and many others, would end up homeless on the streets ..............what a society to live in !!!! mind you, if I arrived in a boat I would immediately get free care, housing, etc etc ..............I am off to Dover.... so angry we are constantly being painted as the rich, privileged, elderly ....who paid 15% for a mortgage, had two jobs each , plus an evening job, to pay our way ....never claimed a penny from the unemployment .....no free childcare, and saved hard to be able to afford a modest house. No wonder Thatcher encouraged people to buy their council houses ....some government Actuary came up with that ...ha ha ...jolly japes ...lets sell off our housing stock and THEN we can take it back when those that purchased their council houses need care ! wizz idea ...just the kind of thing I can hear Boris saying ! Of course it is not just care for the elderly, but social care for everyone one, disabled, disadvantaged, etc etc that needs help .including our own ex military some of whom are living on the streets ...............well done Boris .............let's hope you are never found living in a cardboard box in a doorway ....would I give you a £1.....what do you think

M0nica

growstuff tax avoidance is entirely legal, anyone with an ISA is avoiding tax. Tax evasion is illegal.

I said people earning from £100,000 to £600-700,000. So that covers the majority of wealthy people, who earn considerably less than the top figure. A fair number of the ones I know are employees and are on PAYE.

MOnica Anybody earning over £100,000 is in the top 1-2% of earners. Yes, there's a considerable difference between £100,000 and £700,000 but the fact is that anybody earning a six figure sum is in that top group.

PS. I am well aware of the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion, so no need for a lecture.

PPS. ISAs aren't tax avoidance because the government set them up deliberately to encourage saving. TBH they pay so little interest now that they're not avoiding anything.

Jillybird

My mum was very thrifty - mean to herself. Her best friend worked at the same job in the same office earning the same money. Best friend was not mean, either to herself or others. Best friend gambled, drank and had a riotous time (god knows what they saw in each other!). Mother got very upset when she was told she'd have to go into care and would lose the money she'd so judiciously saved. Best friend went into care free as a bird. She'd never owned her own home, always rented and had no savings.
I write this because it's true, but I've been a tad irritated about some posts implying it doesn't matter if people are reckless and feckless, they'll still get the best treatment for nothing as they have nothing. Those who've scrimped and saved, however, must fork out... there is something very unfair in the system and it's not true that all poor people are hard-done-by and need to be kept by rich people. Some people are poor because they choose to live in the moment and have fun.
Sorry I've gone away from the OP, but needed to point this out.

I'll tell you a little anecdote too. There was this married couple. The wife had scrimped and saved and had a mortgage since she was in her late 20s and was single. Unfortunately, she married a waster. When they divorced after two children, the wife had always worked full-time, but the husband had had periods of unemployment and brought nothing financially to the marriage. The husband hasn't worked since the divorce 20 years ago, so squirmed out of paying any maintenance. However, he had a wealthy mother, who had always disliked the wife, who worked with her son to buy and develop property. On paper, it looked as though the son had nothing, so the ex-wife still couldn't claim anything, but he built up a property portfolio worth millions. While his ex-wife was working full-time, looked after two growing children and was really struggling financially and with her health, he was off on holidays and having a great time. The ex-wife was forced to sell her house and now lives in rented property and has virtually no assets. She's reached state pension age, but still has to do paid work. She didn't choose to live in the moment and certainly didn't have fun.

Maybe you'd like to tell me who the feckless scrounger is.

GrannyGravy13

jillybird no need to apologise, unfortunately your post could be replicated U.K. wide.

Maybe there's no need to apologise, but she could do with being less judgmental and opening her eyes.

maddyone

Jillybird is not saying she wants to abandon people to their fate, and I’m sure you know that.

So what is she saying?

That care should be free for all who need it, and paid for out of taxes?

Doodledog

That care should be free for all who need it, and paid for out of taxes?

Not the way I read the post.

She seems to be implying that some people don't deserve care because they've squandered their money and been "feckless".

Doodledog

That care should be free for all who need it, and paid for out of taxes?

Not the way I read the post.

She seems to be implying that some people don't deserve care because they've squandered their money and been "feckless".

growstuff I can see why the single mother in your anecdote would be angry at the injustice of her circumstances, but I hope that it would not skew her view of anyone who has managed to buy their home and accumulate savings.

growstuff I can see why the lady in your anecdote feels that her circumstances are totally unjustified and that her ex has behaved like a cad, but I do hope that her circumstances haven’t skewed her opinions regarding decent folk who have bought their homes and accumulated savings.

growstuff I can see why the lady in your anecdote feels that her circumstances are totally unjustified and that her ex has behaved like a cad, but I do hope that her circumstances haven’t skewed her opinions regarding decent folk who have bought their homes and accumulated savings.

I have a problem posting this morning, first post wouldn’t post at all, retried a new one and then hey ho three come along ???

maddyone

Jillybird is not saying she wants to abandon people to their fate, and I’m sure you know that.

I echo growstuff. What is she saying, then?

She is clearly unhappy about the situation she describes and disapproving of her mother's friend. It sounds to me as though she wants some sort of retribution for the feckless one; as do the other 'it's not fair' posts that have been made on this thread.

What is irritating me is that the posts about feckless scroungers are coming from the people who put the most feckless, idle, scrounging, arch freeloader in Britain into no. 10. Not a single moan from them about the man who expects those around him to pay for all his (and his wife's) extravagences...and maintain his rapidly increasing tribe of children...

GrannyGravy I have just posted a similar comment on another thread, where after seemingly not posting at all, my post appeared several times.

GrannyGravy I have just posted a similar comment on another thread, where after seemingly not posting at all, my post appeared several times.

I think we need to be very clear about something. The people who are able to buy their own homes and build up a stock of funds as they enter old age are not the victims here. Nobody is being punished for having a nest egg.

While it may be annoying to see and hear people saying they don't care about saving because they'll be looked after anyway, having a moan about them is just missing the point.

Instead of moaning about them, moan about the scroungers who think a day's work involves visiting a museum and shaking a few hands. Or telling their broker to buy a new set of shares worth a couple of million. Or invest in some dodgy, offshore venture which will minimise their tax payments.

Instead of moaning about them, moan about the scroungers who think a day's work involves visiting a museum and shaking a few hands. Or telling their broker to buy a new set of shares worth a couple of million. Or invest in some dodgy, offshore venture which will minimise their tax payments.

But they are The Rich, Alegrias, so they're different. For some reason it is entirely virtuous to monopolise a nation's collective wealth and resources. Asking them to repay a portion to the society they have leeched it from is outrageous...

GrannyGravy13

growstuff I can see why the lady in your anecdote feels that her circumstances are totally unjustified and that her ex has behaved like a cad, but I do hope that her circumstances haven’t skewed her opinions regarding decent folk who have bought their homes and accumulated savings.

The thing is GrannyGravy is that she's one of the "decent folk" too and objects to being called "feckless" and other names by people who haven't worked half so hard as she has during her life. Her circumstances have certainly opened her eyes to the hypocrisy, selfishness and smugness of some others.

There is an awful lot of ascribing motives to others going on on this thread. That happens a lot on here, and it derails so many conversations.

I can’t speak for Jillybird, so but I posted a similar story not long ago, about my grandparents who were in a similar situation to the one Jillybird describes. I was accused of being ’superior’ and judgemental too, and my grandparents were accused of the same. I don’t think I am either of those things - my argument was very definitely that care should be free for all who need it and paid for out of taxes - but I know for certain that my grandparents weren’t anything of the sort.

On another recent thread I was accused of looking down on a friend because I questioned the right of people who chose not to work to have a pension paid for by the poor - the very same argument currently being used against the increase in NI - and much as I denied it, I was not allowed to know my own mind. I left the thread, as it was like talking to a (rather abusive) wall.

This sort of thing stifles debate. Jillybird might come along and say that she fully intended to suggest that renters should be on the streets or in workhouses, but at least give her a chance to say so, and argue with what she says, not what you think she might mean. There is nothing in her posts that says she feels that way - just that it is not fair to make some people pay and others not. And IMO, that is a reasonable point of view.