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

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

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.

Neither.

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

Don't confuse wealth and income.

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?

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

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.

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 What is your definition of 'rich'?

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Nothing is being done to help unpaid carers

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

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.

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.

Hetty58 - I think some right wingers don’t care. Many people don’t watch ch4news or listen to good radio news stations. So many get their ‘news’ from the daily Mail on line, of course distorted, slanted to the right and steeped in false reports about Starmer, the Lib Dem’s. Etc
It’s hard not to feel ‘we’re all doooomed’

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?

Iam64

Shocking useless ineffective duplicitous way to pretend to raise money for care costs.

It’s another way of encouraging employers to have thei workforce self employed. No national insurance, no sick or holiday pay.

Why didn’t they increase income tax and ring fence the money raised for social care.
The NI money is to be funnelled to local authorities by the nhs. The l.A’s have been undermined and underfunded and this won’t help. It’s another con trick, another way for this government to ‘prove’ l.A’s are not efficient or trustworthy
40 plus years ago social work teams had s.w assistants, home helps in house, they ran the residential care homes. It was co-ordinated and good relationships between staff groups and service users possible. None of the 15 mins to get an isolated, infirm person out of bed, then no pay for the cater as the run between appointments
Johnson said he had a care plan ready when he was elected….. pants on fire

Welcome back?!

GillT57

It has also been pointed out today that this is not 'just a 1.25% rise on NIC' as claimed, it is close to 10% ie 12 to 13.25, or it was when I was at school. Shape shifting chancers at work again. Anyone happy about this? Like to give their support?

I thought I would just copy and paste this as it is interesting for all:

The government has said in 2022-23, more than a third of the overall tax increases and over half the increase in dividend tax rates will come from the top 10% of households, with the majority coming from the top 20% of households.

Despite what the government says, the increase will impact the young and the average worker the most for several reasons.

Firstly, people of pension age will only be paying 1.25% National Insurance while the working-age population will be paying the full 13.5%.

National Insurance's progressiveness is also not entirely linear.

Under the current system, you pay 12% on your earnings between £9,568 and £50,270, and 2% (rising to 3.25% under the new plan) on any income above £50,270 meaning the more you earn the less of a percentage of your wage will be spent on National Insurance.

On top of this people who earn their incomes through other ways like dividends or rent do not pay National Insurance - although today's policy did also include a 1.25% rise in dividends taxes.

Furthermore, many workers have suffered pay cuts, wage freezes and job losses during the coronavirus pandemic.

The government has also said it is committed to cutting Universal Credit by £20 which will also impact workers on the lowest wages.

Rises in living costs are also affecting households, with the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) measure of inflation up by 2% annually in July.

Housing costs are also squeezing people’s finances, with the average UK house price hitting a record high of £262,954 in August, according to Halifax.

www.itv.com/news/2021-09-07/how-much-will-the-new-tax-for-nhs-and-social-care-cost-you

I think some of you might be shocked if you knew how my daughter's 'care' was funded

It has also been pointed out today that this is not 'just a 1.25% rise on NIC' as claimed, it is close to 10% ie 12 to 13.25, or it was when I was at school. Shape shifting chancers at work again. Anyone happy about this? Like to give their support?