Social Care - So nothing has changed - or rather only one small item and even that's a con.

Hetty58

Surely, people must realise that this only goes a tiny way in redressing the balance - caused by ten plus years of underfunding - don't they?

How can Johnson be seen as rescuing the NHS? We all saw him clapping the refusal of a pay rise for nurses. Fix social care? What about the drastic cuts to local authority funding? Who are the people that believe this drivel?

Most people are not as interested as we are - yet.

I was thinking about you and your DD Janejudge I imagine this smoke and mirrors flummery will be of no help or advantage to your family.

Nothing is being done to help unpaid carers

www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-58491628

Thanks Gill

There is zero support for family carers. We were told there was 'no respite' when our dd went into adult services. At this point I had had to give up paid employment anyway. People cannot survive on fresh air. I've been fed up for a long time, which might be quite clear.

I really am amazed that anyone thinks this nonsense will be of a benefit to anyone at all. Sadly, but predictably, those Tory MPs who are unhappy are the low tax, low state help types. A few desperate attempts also to hold covid19 responsible for the desperate state of the NHS and the Care Sector. Truly disgusting lack of integrity and honesty.

Whitewave you an relax. So few people in care, rich or poor will benefit from these measures, the effect on thhe ability of wealth to be passed from one generation to the next will be unaffected.

Why Whitewave? She's hardly written anything on this thread.

MOnica That's not quite true. You are correct that very few will benefit, but those who do, will be the wealthiest (or at least their inheritances), who could most afford to pay more. There are a number of worked examples on social media which demonstrate this.

Unfortunately, I wouldn't mind betting that a general election will be called before most people realise they've been conned.

It’s hard to even comment on this thread as we all know it’s a totally empty plan.
It’s actually not a plan.
Nothing to see here about improving Social Care.
So depressing.

And, of course, the triple lock on pensions has been stopped for a year. Maybe…..? Or, as is usual with Johnson, it’ll be a broken pledge, it will never cone back, but he will bluff and bluster his way through it.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58476547

My Aunt was having to pay almost £6,000 per month for her care, it included a nursing element but was still a huge amount of money every month. The home was very good but I was surprised when I saw the breakdown, they only had £20 per week for food! How can they justify such astronomical charges. Carers are not paid enough for the extremely important job that they do and they need to be recognised as key workers, what would we do without them? The money has to be raised somehow, only way is NI or tax increases, the government cannot borrow any more after the pandemic borrowings, not a popular choice but absolutely necessary. It is not enough, but better than nothing.

Tax increases, especially increasing income tax on the rich, would be fairer. I think we should also look again at inheritance tax. No-one has the absolute right to a tax free inheritance.

Most importantly we need an international agreement on taxing huge international conglomerates in the juristdiction where their revenue is raised.

varian What is your definition of 'rich'?

Shropshirelass I only spend £20 a week on food for myself - and I eat well. Economies of scale mean that it wouldn't be difficult to feed people nutritious food for that amount.

varian I disagree about income tax. In the UK, wealth is relatively undertaxed, so I'd devise a system which taxed wealth more and taxed those with incomes below the median (currently about £25,000pa) less. I'd slowly combine income tax and NICs because both end up in the same pot anyway and I'd scrap income tax relief on pension contributions - or at least make it a flat rate for all. Currently, higher rate taxpayers are effectively receiving a subsidy of over £8 billion from tax contribution tax relief.

I'd leave people with more of their earned income, but tax those who use money as a toy, but don't actually do much to earn it.

If money had to be raised it would have been fairer to raise general taxation, not NI.

How do you define wealth?

There are people in London who own a modest three bedroomed semi which they could sell for £I million or more. They need to live in London to commute to a job which is relatively well paid but a lot of their earnings are going to pay the mortgage.

There are other folk living in a much bigger and better home in a beautiful part of the country, earning less, but enjoying a better standard of living although their home is worth much less.

Which of these people is wealthier?

Neither.

If both were to monetise their wealth, they would both have the same.

Don't confuse wealth and income.

varian

How do you define wealth?

There are people in London who own a modest three bedroomed semi which they could sell for £I million or more. They need to live in London to commute to a job which is relatively well paid but a lot of their earnings are going to pay the mortgage.

There are other folk living in a much bigger and better home in a beautiful part of the country, earning less, but enjoying a better standard of living although their home is worth much less.

Which of these people is wealthier?

Wealth isn't a defined level. It's simply what you own in assets and income. Wealthy may imply a lot of it.

I should have added we all have wealth but we are not all seen as, nor do we necessarily feel, wealthy.