The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium' tax to pay for care

A cross-party group says the current system is "unsustainable" with billions of pounds of extra funding needed.

https://news.sky.com/story/the-over-...-care-11418170

A joint report from the housing, communities and local government and health and social care committees says the "social care premium" would help address the problem of an "unsustainable" system.

It says the money raised would be held in a dedicated and audited fund to reassure the public it would only be used to provide social care.

Payments would start at the age of 40 and extend beyond 65, but a minimum earnings threshold should be considered to protect those on low incomes.

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

"Social Care" also includes "Social Housing" where rents have been outstripping inflation for many years, to "bring parity between social and private rents".

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

I think every one should pay not just target a select age related group of people. I'm not sure why they suggested starting at 40

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

Social care is a slowly unfolding disaster we need to address. It's at least in part the cause of what's happening with the NHS as it becomes the safety net for the collapse of the other safety net.

It's going to have to be a tax rise such as the idea of taxing inheritance to pay for the care received.

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

We actually need to study how we spend taxpayers' money now. There is so much waste. Let's see how much we can save by that method before we start going on about raising taxes.

Let's start with overseas aid.....:Yes:

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

I don't have an issue with this, as such... but a) I'd want to be sure they weren't suddenly going to move the goal posts again - "yes, you've paid all this extra tax, but we still don't have enough, so because you have some money saved, you need to pay for it all...." and b) I noticed this "They also suggested the money raised could be used to support the care system for younger adults with disabilities, which forms part of the wider social care system." - if that's the case then everyone should pay it - if it affects everyone, then everyone should pay

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

Ring fenced taxes don't stay ring fenced for long especially if there's a surplus.

The treasury prefers to have all the taxes, duties and NI poured into one pot and then doled out as political demands deem it.

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

Also it can end up meaning nothing anyway since they can just reduce the portion of the main budget to something like the NHS anyway.

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

The tax rise is the easy option. I prefer to stand back, stop non-essential spending and then make a decision on how to spend the money you've saved. Taxing people into oblivion drives the wealthier overseas, which means that those remaining pay more still.

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

What would you define as non-essential spending? - you mentioned foreign aid above - what else?

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

Too much to list on here. There needs to be a line-by-line approach to budgets in every government department. The amount of waste and even simply unnecessary expenditure is staggering.

Once that exercise is completed, the government could then turn its attention to making our services fit for the current century. Merging adult social care and NHS care has already started, but using technology to treat more people at home using new technology rather than take up hospital beds is one example of how billions could be saved.

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

You don't have to list them all - just some. I'm interested to know what you think of as non-essential.


I agree that there is massive waste, and poor budgeting within government organisations.

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

Non essential simply means not spending on things the country doesn't need.

You may think this is very vague, but the council I worked for until recently managed to save absolutely millions by this method, and then investing it in transformed services - getting more for less, in the end.

Although it has always been my view that this was the way an organisation should manage its finances, even I was shocked at the changes we were able to make.

Government finances need a dose of this discipline. At government level, the savings and benefits would be monumental.

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

You're still not answering the question.
I'm asking for a few examples - it's not a trick question. I'm just asking what you see as non-essential.

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

No, a better idea. Let's start with the missing off-shored tax revenues and fiddled corporation taxes.

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

That will never be touched... too many beneficiaries in and around government.

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

I have actually answered your question but compiling a list would take too much of my valuable time. I am amazed that you think the government spends the money they collect from you well, but I suppose ignorance is bliss.

---------- Post added at 19:33 ---------- Previous post was at 19:30 ----------

That’s easy to say. Just to remind you, the government is trying to prevent fraud at all levels.

Some on here have an aversion to talking about those without great wealth screwing the benefits system. The truth is, all fraud has to be tackled.

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

That's a side step. He's not asking for a full list just a couple would do..:erm:

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

Well.... firstly, stop throwing around insults - at no point did I say I believe that the government is spending all its money wisely. I even said "I agree that there is massive waste, and poor budgeting within government organisations." - implying that I am ignorant simply because I'm asking for your opinion seems a little asinine.

Secondly, you've still not given an example of what you think is non essential - all you've done is reply with a tautologous statement :"Non essential simply means not spending on things the country doesn't need."

Thirdly, I'm not asking for a list, I'm asking for a couple of items - you listed foreign aid as one, I'm asking for 2 or 3 more items; not a fully documented alphabetised list, with references. I'm asking for your opinion. Surely you can spare some of your valuable time to give your opinion.

Fourthly, I think you're confusing 'non essential' with 'poor budgeting' & 'wasteful spending' - non essential is spending money on things that are not considered to be 'needed' - like foreign aid in your example - poor budgeting and wasteful spending would be things like spending £60 on a ream of paper from one supplier that would cost £15 if they purchased from Amazon - which is a documented example of how badly their budgets are managed.

---------- Post added at 20:46 ---------- Previous post was at 20:46 ----------

^^^ wot she said :)

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

no, he's offering him a shovel to dig himself into a hole :D

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

No, it's not a side step. If he really wanted to know, he could have Googled it. Had I got into the politics of it, that would have started another argument outside the scope of this thread.

I guess that if people genuinely are clamouring for me to answer, I could do worse than drawing to a pretty big list on the Taxpayers' Alliance website.

This is one of their offerings from 2014, but you will get the idea. I'm sure I could find you a better one, but I'm running out of time tonight.


https://www.taxpayersalliance.com/ne...teful_spending

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

.... surely what I wanted was your opinion. If I wanted to read someone else's opinion, I'd would have (and have) googled it.
I also note that foreign aid isn't on that list.....
You seem to be looking for issues where there are none. All I wanted to know what you thought of as non essential spending.... but if you don't want to give your opinion, fine... <shrugs/>

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

It MAY be trying to prevent fraud, but its not fraud if it's legal.

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

You wanted some more examples. There are many on the list I linked to, most of which I agree with. Take your pick. Why do you want my opinion about what I think should be cut?

Make up your own mind, you don't need my permission to form an opinion on whether there are many opportunities to reduce waste. The evidence is before you. You choose what looks like unnecessary levels of expenditure. I would be interested in your view!

All I'm saying is that the knee-jerk reaction to increase taxes to fund the NHS betrays rather a lack of backbone and imagination.

---------- Post added at 23:41 ---------- Previous post was at 23:39 ----------

Agreed, and I think we all know that.

I would certainly have no objection to tax perks allowed by the government to be outlawed. I'm not defending that.

---------- Post added at 23:42 ---------- Previous post was at 23:41 ----------

No hole here, mate. Are you sure you are standing on solid ground? :D

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

It's called having a discussion; that's generally how these things work. We can all post links and say read that, take some of it, and that's my opinion.
I was asking what you thought, but clearly you seem to have some issue sharing it. Fine, whatever - if you don't have the ability/desire to express your opinion, up to you; but you shouldn't be surprised when people ask for it when you seem happy to comment on things.

Gee thanks. I'm glad I don't need you permission to form an opinion, I might have faced difficulties in life without your condescending advice otherwise. Guess it makes a change from the insults.
I've already made up my mind. Again, as mentioned many, many times in this thread, I was asking for your view point, something you've failed to do, again and again.

I've already given you my view. My view is my view, which has been given, and that is my view.

That also pretty much echoes your entire input to this conversation, nothing more than pointless tautologous statements, with no actual content.
Let me know when you actually have something of value to add to this conversation, if you can fit it into your busy schedule

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

I don’t know where you think you are going with this. I pretty well agree with what the Taxpayers’ Alliance is saying. That is my opinion.

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

Still waiting for your examples.

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

You won't get it as its more the straw man approach rather then the real facts approach l generally find.

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

I'm not going anywhere, I'm just asking for your opinion - pointing me to a website and saying I agree with most of that (and where the very first example/opinion you gave isn't on the list) isn't your opinion. I'm not entirely sure why you want to obfuscate the conversation...

Anyway, I'm done with this particular circular/pointless argument - if at any point you need any more input from me, go to this link : https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=re...less+arguments I agree with most of the things that come up

Re: The over-40s should pay a 'social care premium'
 

My examples are those set out by the Taxpayers' Alliance, and I have long advocated sorting out the overseas development budget in addition to that. My point is that if you address all the waste that goes on in government, you would be able to find extra money for public services without needing a tax increase.

I really don't need to provide anything else to make that argument. That is my view. I am afraid all this business about giving my 'opinion' is simple mischief making and I'm done with that game.

---------- Post added at 08:40 ---------- Previous post was at 08:28 ----------

I made my point and gave examples. You don't need any more.

---------- Post added at 08:41 ---------- Previous post was at 08:40 ----------

You're a fine one to talk about straw men, Den! :p: