Tory Voters In HuffPost UK-Edelman Focus Group Say Theresa May’s Social Care Policy Is ‘Not Fair’

Raggamuffin wrote:That's what I've been saying - it's largely the relatives who lose out when the person dies. It's not their house, it belongs to the person who needs care, so it could be said that they have no right to the house or the value of it.

On the other hand, it seems a little unfair on those who have bothered to save up or who paid for a house in order to provide for their children later on.

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:That's what I've been saying - it's largely the relatives who lose out when the person dies. It's not their house, it belongs to the person who needs care, so it could be said that they have no right to the house or the value of it.

On the other hand, it seems a little unfair on those who have bothered to save up or who paid for a house in order to provide for their children later on.

How is the later unfair Rags? Maybe felt so by the individuals involved They have chosen to selfishly look to their needs and not the nation Rags. The nation will still fork out far more than most put back into the system. The question to ask is why are they looking to save for others (their kin), when they achieved their goals. By offering up an olive branch to their kin with inheritance. Talk about taking away responsibility for people to work hard and have goals. Its an utter selfish outlook, especially when we are reliant on  the system to pay for many of our needs.

Completely on board with your first point

Angry Andy wrote:So you work all your life. Earn money, pay tax and NI almall  your life to fund the NHS and social care, save the rest. That money belongs to the family. NOT the government, payable to them upon death. That money has already born tax.
How do you think the fabulously wealthy, landowners and owners of huge eatates still have them?
If Thorin thinks it is good policy, then it is sure to be a real vote loser. 
Its a terrible idea.

Angry Andy wrote:You pay National INSURANCE all your working life to cover the NHS and health concerns. Which is all medical needs. As far as I know, denentia is still an illness. Perhaps the tories will classify cancer and heart disease as non treatable on the NHS and will privatize that too.
You have already paid tax to buy your property, is it just wrong to want to grab most of the money from it's  sale after death.

It's  a real vote loser for the tories.
The young hate it.
Their parents and grandparents hate it.
Keep touting it, that way Labour have a good chance.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:

How is the later unfair Rags? Maybe felt so by the individuals involved They have chosen to selfishly look to their needs and not the nation Rags. The nation will still fork out far more than most put back into the system. The question to ask is why are they looking to save for others (their kin), when they achieved their goals. By offering up an olive branch to their kin with inheritance. Talk about taking away responsibility for people to work hard and have goals. Its an utter selfish outlook, especially when we are reliant on  the system to pay for many of our needs.

Completely on board with your first point

I suppose those who never bothered to save, or didn't bother to work and had their rent paid via benefits, still get care - all paid for by the tax payers. Perhaps they spent all their money on relatives earlier on, so they don't have any savings or property by the time they need care.

I kind of agree with you though. I've seen the kind of fallout which can happen with inheritance, and sometimes I think it's a lot easier if nobody has any expectations of inheriting anything.

Angry Andy wrote:The solution. Increase  NI to 15% on earnings over £26000, the national average.
Those on less pay no more.
Those earning a little over pay a little more. Those on much more pay more. But it is a flat % increase so it is fair.
No idea how much it would raise, but it ought to cover the ill thought out dementia tax.

Angry Andy wrote:So you want people who are ill to pay for their illness.
That is the American model.
A privatized NHS.
The conservatives hidden manifesto promise.
That will be a popular votewinner.
Not.

Angry Andy wrote:So you want people who are ill to pay for their illness.
That is the American model.
A privatized NHS.
The conservatives hidden manifesto promise.
That will be a popular votewinner.
Not.

Thorin wrote:

Angry Andy wrote:So you want people who are ill to pay for their illness.
That is the American model.
A privatized NHS.
The conservatives hidden manifesto promise.
That will be a popular votewinner.
Not.

How would they be paying for their illness?

That is covered by the NHS

What a stupid point

This is about the cost for "care" not treatments.

Now again answer me why people should not pay for their care costs, when they can afford to do so?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Angry Andy wrote:So you want people who are ill to pay for their illness.
That is the American model.
A privatized NHS.
The conservatives hidden manifesto promise.
That will be a popular votewinner.
Not.

But you want a lot of people to pay more in NI so the relatives of other people can inherit a nice load of dosh.

Angry Andy wrote:

Thorin wrote:


How would they be paying for their illness?

That is covered by the NHS

What a stupid point

This is about the cost for "care" not treatments.

Now again answer me why people should not pay for their care costs, when they can afford to do so?

So dementia isn't  an illness covered by the NHS?

Angry Andy wrote:If you have kids, or live in a homw rhat has been in the family for generations,  would YOU be prepared to lose it to pay for your own illness, knowing your partner and family will lose their home.

Angry Andy wrote:If you have kids, or live in a homw rhat has been in the family for generations,  would YOU be prepared to lose it to pay for your own illness, knowing your partner and family will lose their home.

HoratioTarr wrote:People are living longer, they say.   Well, that's true because of a variety of factors.    But one factor is also that people are being kept alive way beyond their natural span.    I'm currently experiencing this with my FIL.   He has advanced Parkinsons, dementia with Lewy Bodies, doubly incontinent, being fed through a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) directly through his abdomen, crying in pain because Parkinson's affects the muscles and joints, emaciated, choking on even the softest foods, including water.  Wracked with Diabetes.  The other day we visited he was smothered in his own shit, and nobody had cleaned him up.  Items are being taken by other dementia patients from his room because they are allowed to wander the nursing home.  

Before he got into this state, he stopped eating and drinking.   He also got sepsis.  But he was pumped full of antibiotics and fed through a tube.  He's 83.  

I do believe that it was nature's way to stop his appetite, and that without medical intervention, he'd be gone by now and his suffering over.

I can't tell you what torture this is to watch.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Todays "Austerity budgets" are a total lie...

"Balancing the budget" is a Conservative fallacy..

IF the conservative governments of the world were in any way genuine in their stated aims, the 'gross national debts' of all developed nations would have been significantly reduced over recent years..


The REAL reason for recent cuts to government spending, along with the demonizing and targetting of average workers, the poor, retirees and pensioners, and especially the disabled, has been to enable massive tax cuts for corporations and millionaires.

Pushed along by the eternal lie that big businesses "create jobs" and "power the economy" whereas the simple truth is that the big business sector has actually shed over a third of its workforce over recent years, while paying less to those left (hence the stagnating wages of the workforces in most western economies..).

Most new jobs in recent times have been created among small businesses, especially the self employed and sole traders, with more part-time and casual positions replacing full-time workers..


As long as Conservative governments are dominated by the ever-shrinking "big business" sector, the more they will be attacking health, welfare and education spending, while sucking up to their parasitic corporate bosses...          

Raggamuffin wrote:That's what I've been saying - it's largely the relatives who lose out when the person dies. It's not their house, it belongs to the person who needs care, so it could be said that they have no right to the house or the value of it.

On the other hand, it seems a little unfair on those who have bothered to save up or who paid for a house in order to provide for their children later on.

Angry Andy wrote:So you work all your life. Earn money, pay tax and NI almall  your life to fund the NHS and social care, save the rest. That money belongs to the family. NOT the government, payable to them upon death. That money has already born tax.
How do you think the fabulously wealthy, landowners and owners of huge eatates still have them?
If Thorin thinks it is good policy, then it is sure to be a real vote loser. 
Its a terrible idea.

Angry Andy wrote:If you have kids, or live in a homw rhat has been in the family for generations,  would YOU be prepared to lose it to pay for your own illness, knowing your partner and family will lose their home.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Todays "Austerity budgets" are a total lie...

"Balancing the budget" is a Conservative fallacy..

IF the conservative governments of the world were in any way genuine in their stated aims, the 'gross national debts' of all developed nations would have been significantly reduced over recent years..


The REAL reason for recent cuts to government spending, along with the demonizing and targetting of average workers, the poor, retirees and pensioners, and especially the disabled, has been to enable massive tax cuts for corporations and millionaires.

Pushed along by the eternal lie that big businesses "create jobs" and "power the economy" whereas the simple truth is that the big business sector has actually shed over a third of its workforce over recent years, while paying less to those left (hence the stagnating wages of the workforces in most western economies..).

Most new jobs in recent times have been created among small businesses, especially the self employed and sole traders, with more part-time and casual positions replacing full-time workers..


As long as Conservative governments are dominated by the ever-shrinking "big business" sector, the more they will be attacking health, welfare and education spending, while sucking up to their parasitic corporate bosses...          

Original Quill wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Todays "Austerity budgets" are a total lie...

"Balancing the budget" is a Conservative fallacy..

IF the conservative governments of the world were in any way genuine in their stated aims, the 'gross national debts' of all developed nations would have been significantly reduced over recent years..


The REAL reason for recent cuts to government spending, along with the demonizing and targetting of average workers, the poor, retirees and pensioners, and especially the disabled, has been to enable massive tax cuts for corporations and millionaires.

Pushed along by the eternal lie that big businesses "create jobs" and "power the economy" whereas the simple truth is that the big business sector has actually shed over a third of its workforce over recent years, while paying less to those left (hence the stagnating wages of the workforces in most western economies..).

Most new jobs in recent times have been created among small businesses, especially the self employed and sole traders, with more part-time and casual positions replacing full-time workers..


As long as Conservative governments are dominated by the ever-shrinking "big business" sector, the more they will be attacking health, welfare and education spending, while sucking up to their parasitic corporate bosses...          

 for this post.  

Not only is increased employment (at today's wages) bad for big business, but it turns out that wars are good for it.  An energetic war is not only profitable for business in and of itself, but it opens up new markets and resources for a greedy and ever-expanding mercantile class.

Also, consider that dead soldiers may well be a way for big business to reduce and dispose of the unemployed...who knows?  Better to be in Arlington Cemetery, at minimal cost, then to be joining a trade union, and forcing the cost of production upwards.

Angry Andy wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:People are living longer, they say.   Well, that's true because of a variety of factors.    But one factor is also that people are being kept alive way beyond their natural span.    I'm currently experiencing this with my FIL.   He has advanced Parkinsons, dementia with Lewy Bodies, doubly incontinent, being fed through a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) directly through his abdomen, crying in pain because Parkinson's affects the muscles and joints, emaciated, choking on even the softest foods, including water.  Wracked with Diabetes.  The other day we visited he was smothered in his own shit, and nobody had cleaned him up.  Items are being taken by other dementia patients from his room because they are allowed to wander the nursing home.  

Before he got into this state, he stopped eating and drinking.   He also got sepsis.  But he was pumped full of antibiotics and fed through a tube.  He's 83.  

I do believe that it was nature's way to stop his appetite, and that without medical intervention, he'd be gone by now and his suffering over.

I can't tell you what torture this is to watch.

Genuine sympathy HT. Been there, done it, got 3 tee shirts. A slow and bleak way to fade away.

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

 for this post.  

Not only is increased employment (at today's wages) bad for big business, but it turns out that wars are good for it.  An energetic war is not only profitable for business in and of itself, but it opens up new markets and resources for a greedy and ever-expanding mercantile class.

Also, consider that dead soldiers may well be a way for big business to reduce and dispose of the unemployed...who knows?  Better to be in Arlington Cemetery, at minimal cost, then to be joining a trade union, and forcing the cost of production upwards.

well you are right about wage costs forcing prices up.
You dont make people prosper by making sure they are all "have nots"