Social Care Reform

[Yel]

Maybe worth a thread on this.

I do think national insurance is a ridiculous system as is. It tries to pretend it's not a tax when it absolutely is and the money goes in the exact same place as income tax.

It should have been abolished a long time ago and rolled into income tax or a replacement.

If they do increase national insurance it will disproportionately affect younger people who already have so much to deal with (less secure jobs, working longer, high house prices, huge debt for higher education, worse pensions etc).

Those who are older and still working won't have to pay it, those receiving their income via limited company's (and this is usually the better off) won't have to pay it and those who receive their money from investments also won't have to pay it.

 

[Melian]

Maybe they could start with sorting out the tax dodgers. But they won't.

 

[no-no]

Those who are older and still working won't have to pay it, those receiving their income via limited company's (and this is usually the better off) won't have to pay it and those who receive their money from investments also won't have to pay it.

Was hoping there’d be a thread on this @Yel

The bit in bold was my first thought. It won’t even make a dent in social care, that’s just the excuse they’re using to ransack your pay packet even more. There always seems to be pots of money for useless endeavours but no appetite to fix the fundamental problems. Social care contracts have been a cash cow for decades.

Also fed up of hearing adult children (due to inherit sizeable estates) lambasting people for getting their nursing home fees funded as having never worked/squandered their wages. Getting mad at the wrong people.

 

[Elizaaaaa]

So glad to see a thread on this! I thought council tax contributed to social care costs, and an increase had already been agreed for this very purpose... Fully appreciate my knowledge is fairly limited, so hoping to learn from you lovely "trolls"!

It does feel like a kick in the teeth after we've all seen the dodgy spending that's happened the last year or so Pretty sure there will be a loophole to ensure the super rich aren't negatively impacted though, just us lowly citizens who already have to make some horrible financial decisions. My biggest one at the moment is deciding whether to drastically cut my (already frugal) food shopping to pay for counselling, or to keep going and risk being really unwell again and needing to live on ridiculously low sick pay

 

[Rose28454]

So I am fairly newly retired on a moderate state pension and a very small private one. So having paid my national insurance for over 40 years I hear it said it’s not fair to put up
Ni for working people as we as pensioners don’t have to pay it. What with that and the triple lock probably being taken away what was the point of working all my life and paying my tax and ni?

 

[Saddlesoap]

So I am fairly newly retired on a moderate state pension and a very small private one. So having paid my national insurance for over 40 years I hear it said it’s not fair to put up
Ni for working people as we as pensioners don’t have to pay it. What with that and the triple lock probably being taken away what was the point of working all my life and paying my tax and ni?

I could say the same thing. I'm 37 and I'll unlikely receive any state pension at all. So that's not fair either. I don't want my payments to go up to support people more now when I'm not going to benefit from it. Yep, call me selfish, but I'd rather keep it myself and use it for my old age.

 

[Yel]

Boomers can't really play the unfair card, as just about everyone else has it worse.

I hear a lot from them "we've paid our dues" when the problem is they haven't as it's been underfunded for decades. You maybe paid all that was asked, but it wasn't enough sadly. There needs to be some collective responsibility as those in power did what was popular then and let the obvious problem build up.

Also keep hearing young people should see it as "an investment in their future" which sounds like a con - a Ponzi scheme. There's no chance putting it up now secures it for the future. I'm sure it'll all be eaten up and back to square one before the decade ends.

The fairest people to pay it are older people on high incomes, decent income from investment or pensions and they'll all avoid it.

For lots of people it's about protecting their inheritance to pass on. For the vast majority this will be lots of unearned money from house price increases. Is it really fair for the working population (many of those have the narrowest shoulders) to subsidise this inheritance?

 

[no-no]

For lots of people it's about protecting their inheritance to pass on. For the vast majority this will be lots of unearned money from house price increases. Is it really fair for the working population to subsidise this inheritance?

This is getting a lot of peoples’ backs up. Shifting everything like nursing/youth homes to not-for-profit so the patients are prioritised not the shareholders, would have more of an impact. Why aren’t they breaking down these extortionate costs if they want us to pay for it we should be demanding to see where it goes.

 

[Yel]

It's going mainly to private companies so I'd expect prices to increase which will inflate away the extra money in next to no time. Local authorities often put limits on what they will fund so people could be asked to top up the difference.

It's shocking the huge amounts that goes to private companies and individuals straight from tax payers. A bit like the housing benefit bill that ends up profiteering landlords. It could be done so much better if it didn't go to all these for profit entities.

 

[rainbowlemon]

So glad to see a thread on this! I thought council tax contributed to social care costs, and an increase had already been agreed for this very purpose... Fully appreciate my knowledge is fairly limited, so hoping to learn from you lovely "trolls"!

It does feel like a kick in the teeth after we've all seen the dodgy spending that's happened the last year or so Pretty sure there will be a loophole to ensure the super rich aren't negatively impacted though, just us lowly citizens who already have to make some horrible financial decisions. My biggest one at the moment is deciding whether to drastically cut my (already frugal) food shopping to pay for counselling, or to keep going and risk being really unwell again and needing to live on ridiculously low sick pay

I posted on the depression thread some services offering low cost therapy from £10 a session. I told my sister to email a few to get on the waitlist and go with the one that had space first. I also saw my old therapist for £20 less per session than his normal rate .

 

[Whatspopping]

The problem is that nobody in power saw what their generation will need. A Baby Boom was always going to lead to a lot more people requiring support, yet there has never been a politician who thought, my parents might need that, or for the older ones - I might need social care. Prepare to fail if you fail to prepare.

 

[ATV2021]

I'm sure it's the same as many others but there is a fair contribution in our council tax towards adult social care (which I also happen to work in!). I work with the "working age" adults with disabilities and some of the package fees charged are barbaric. The whole sector is a mess and I don't agree with this increase as effectively paying out more to pay myself?!

 

[Yel]

The problem is that nobody in power saw what their generation will need. A Baby Boom was always going to lead to a lot more people requiring support, yet there has never been a politician who thought, my parents might need that, or for the older ones - I might need social care. Prepare to fail if you fail to prepare.

I think they knew exactly what problems their policys would lead to. But they never look past winning the next election so are happy to kick the can down the road and let someone else deal with it.

 

[Yel]

I guess the announced plans aren't as bad as what they leaked, but that's the idea

Those on good pensions should contribute, especially if they've decided that anyone earning over 10k

 

[Clickbait]

If we argue amongst ourselves we don’t actually get angry at the people who create the problems.

If the services that can be financially regulated are removed so that private enterprise can fill the gap then the rich keep getting richer, the rest of the working population has to pick up the slack.

The money charged for even basic private care homes is obscene and certainly not being passed on to the staff.

 

[Glaschelle]

If we argue amongst ourselves we don’t actually get angry at the people who create the problems.

If the services that can be financially regulated are removed so that private enterprise can fill the gap then the rich keep getting richer, the rest of the working population has to pick up the slack.

The money charged for even basic private care homes is obscene and certainly not being passed on to the staff.

I worked for a voluntary organisation which ran a non for profit care home. The costs were ££££. Staffing a unit 24hrs a day, rent, gas, electricity, replacements etc all were expensive. The residents got a fabulous standard of care but it wasn't financially viable and had to close.

Good quality care costs money and nobody wants to pay.

 

[Yel]

If we argue amongst ourselves we don’t actually get angry at the people who create the problems.

There are so many people responsible for the problems:

There needs to be some collective responsibility as those in power did what was popular then and let the obvious problem build up.

There's a huge segment of society that hold the government to randsome and demand that things like paying less tax once you reach 60 regardless of ability to pay tax remain. I find it hard to place the blame at any one group alone.

I'm not a huge fan of this don't argue with people argument, it's often seems like a shut up and accept it. 'Get angry at the government / multinational tax avoiders / immigrants" depending on political leanings.

Putting this on income tax would have been so much fairer, that's undeniable. But they didn't as they worry about the backlash from the people that vote on mass. It's a sad situation.

 

[ElektraWintour]

Today’s announcement stings to be honest. My husband and I already struggle financially and now we have to struggle further to fund care for pensioners with a higher income than us sitting in houses they own outright worth millions. We should be taxing the rich and by rich I mean those squirrelling their money away offshore but of course those same people sit in government so that was never going to happen.

 

[rainbowlemon]

"The Government is also increasing the rate of dividend tax by 1.25 percentage points to ensure people who receive income from dividends make the same contribution. "

Everyone already has a 2k allowance to begin with, but If you have a stocks and shares ISA and not just a general investment account you won't be paying anything anyway on dividends received as it's automatically protected.

 

[IngressUK]

Isnt if funny that 'those with the broadest shoulders' (rich) never seem to include the MPs themselves?

MPs now earn a basic of £81,932 a year. Add into that thousands in expenses, a final salary pension, plus a 'resettlement' payment if they lose their seat.

Their salaries have increased by over £16,000 in the last 10 years. How many other people in the public sector have had such a lavish increase?

Not to mention many have second, or third jobs in the private sector, further bolstering their income.

Is it any wonder people have little faith in any politician of any political party?

Yet, here we have today a decision that affects all working people, from the very bottom, to the very top. I highly expect MPs to wave themselves through an increase next year that will neutralise these N.I tax increases in their pay.