[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 585: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 641: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
Debate on the Care and Support Green Paper - Page 2 - Carers UK Forum

Debate on the Care and Support Green Paper

Share information, support and advice on all aspects of caring.
62 posts
I wonder why they didn't simply come up with a change to death duties?
Rather than only charge death duties above £300,000 (or whatever), and given they need to raise say £30,000 per older person, it might make more sense to have death duties of say 20% of the first £300,000 of anyone dying after they reach retirement age. (the actuaries amongst you can work out that as some people leave nothing at all, you would need to take the money from those who have left some, but at least it would be fair). You could adjust the rate from time to time according to the actual income and payments made from the "Ten in the bed" scheme. Image
Thats a JRF link i just put up Image
Great minds etc., peteraf, posted simultaneously at 6.33 pm Image .
hehe yes Image
I noticed from Matt that there was 5 proposals re paying for the residential social care bill can we assume that the removal of the attendance allowance was not a proposal.

How dare they say carers are the bedrock of the social care system yet they dont say anything about helping carers and their disabled relatives stay out of the residential social care system in the first place not a mention of the idea of paying carers a living wage to reward us just for that keeping the elderly out of the residential social care system instead we are under the threat of losing our carers allowance if and when our caree loses their A.A.

the compulsory insurance scheme for the funding of residential social care = iam going on record now and saying the compulsory insurance will cost believe it or not the same as the ATTENDANCE ALLOWANCE so to me its obvious you will lose the A.A. but it will be paid into your insurance scheme .
When will all this start from what i gather those of us on A.A/C.A. will not be affected but future claimants will is there a date for the implementation of this rediculous bill .

1% on V.A.T. would do it end of argument me owld pal
It is a consultation document at this stage, George, not a Bill before Parliament, nevertheless what sort of consultation is it if the government has ruled out two of the five options? Furthermore, the government is talking about funding shortfalls in 20 years time, etc. but this will be based on computer-modelling not on any reliable prediction of future needs, to the best of my knowledge no-one can reliably predict what will happen in the next 20 minutes let alone 20 years Image
It is a consultation document at this stage, George, not a Bill before Parliament, nevertheless what sort of consultation is it if the government has ruled out two of the five options? Furthermore, the government is talking about funding shortfalls in 20 years time, etc. but this will be based on computer-modelling not on any reliable prediction of future needs, to the best of my knowledge no-one can reliably predict what will happen in the next 20 minutes let alone 20 years Image
At this point in the debate there is nothing wrong with telling them to put the options back in.
One thing that gets me going is this statement of some now elderly people have worked hard to buy a home and have saved all their lives why have they saved for their old age no doubt and the house well nowt against that you gotta live somewhere - but many elderly people have been disabled/ill unemployed from an early age and have therefore generaly had a lower income all their lives and could not save or buy a home they may have helped their chilldren over the years yet they who do not have property or savings they are now being asked to fund the residential social care for the 60% or so elderly who do own their own home it`s a cock up from start to finish.

with the general election just months away why have they brought this bill forward they aint gonna get any votes from it asking pensioners to pay more insurance or a care tax its tax again by stealth and the possible loss of the A allowance will scare many elderly pensioners who now see the A.allownace as part of their pension entitlement and as the O.A.P. is so low who can blame them

the only ones who stand to gain are the sons / daughters of the elderly who have a home and savings reason being the quicker they get into the residential social care scheme the quicker they get their hands on the inheritance believe me it will happen same reson as many dont want assisted suicide come on mum this way to Switzerland .

i know it`s me the synic i just cant help it .
One thing that gets me going is this statement of some now elderly people have worked hard to buy a home and have saved all their lives why have they saved for their old age no doubt and the house well nowt against that you gotta live somewhere - but many elderly people have been disabled/ill unemployed from an early age and have therefore generaly had a lower income all their lives and could not save or buy a home they may have helped their chilldren over the years yet they who do not have property or savings they are now being asked to fund the residential social care for the 60% or so elderly who do own their own home it`s a cock up from start to finish.
I am not sure that is correct, an estimated 45,000 older people per year have to sell their homes to fund residential care so it would appear that they have been economically active prior to retirement. It is also worth remembering that the care home fees paid by self-funders are loaded to cover the shortfall in income from LA-funded residents, so not only are self-funders finding that their contract with the State, which promised care from the cradle to the grave in exchange for fulfilling their duty to pay Income Tax and NI, has been breached but they are also subsidising the poorer members of society.


It is interesting that it is stated in the consultation paper that it is the younger members of society who are averse to funding care through taxation yet our and our parents' generations funded the generations before us and also funded the health, education, etc. of this younger generation out of our taxes and NI contributions.
Basic politics Lab have a reputation for tax and spend An election is coming up so go for something that does not increase tax and looks good in theory. If it works thats a plus but not the name of the game.
62 posts