Govt to allow 6% council tax hike to plug social care funding gap

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Iirc the aid to the rich country with nuclear weapons and a space programme had caveats in it that it had to be spent on security intelligence and sorting out madrasas, you know things for our benefit and didn't we kick up a stink when they had the temerity to purchase their fighter planes from someone else. There's always a caveat, normally to do with trade.



Why not stop and think about it for a second, the slime balls in charge of this country would like us to believe we really are that generous but we don't give nothing for nothing and we or our companies make money out of aid.
Don't let them fool you.

http://www.globaljustice.org.uk/myth...d-fairer-place

Yep ,and i've been arguing for a while now that governments should give up the pretence of giving pots of money to any country with a begging bowl as an act of good will and tell it like it is .I would have no issue whatsoever with giving some African nation aid in return for something they can provide that we want .Giving Billions per year as good will to foreign countries whilst our own people are struggling with mental health ,and social care issues is only asking for trouble ,that's my view on Foreign aid anyway.
As for raising council tax to pay for more social care then fine do it but make sure that extra money does go towards social care and not simply swallowed up by local authority mis management

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Anypermitedroute

Absolutely correct, it's the elderly that keep on abusing the NHS, having their pensions increasing, holding on to property bigger than they need, not putting enough cash away, expecting others to everything for them, living longer than they should, voting out of the EU etc

I think anyone of 55 should be paying for this as they are the ones who will benefit so make them pay for it, remove triple lock and put direct to NHS as I bet that is worth more than 0.7%

Assuming this isn't sarcasm, anyone who has any significant assets whether savings or property is, in England, already paying for their social care, many have been forced to use their savings and sell the homes they worked to buy in order to do so. It's those who haven't saved and/or been property owners (whether by choice or otherwise) whose social care is funded and I doubt this extra charge will be raising anything much from them.

Abusing the NHS? You mean like A&E which is full of young idiots who're out every weekend protesting about their abject poverty by getting paralytic who're wasting a whole lot of precious police time and NHS resources in the process.

If you're single, childless and lucky enough to be doing well enough to have (or be aiming at having) your own property, I'm assuming you're practising what you preach and living in a small flat/bedsit. Surely anything larger (even if affordable) would be bigger than you 'need'. Likewise, if you have kids and 'need' a suitably large home for now, I'm sure you'll be setting the right example and be moving out into something much more suitable the minute they leave home. One bedroom room ought to be enough.

What's voting to get out of the EU got to do with this by the way or is it your belief that doing so in some way renders the individual fair game for discrimination?

[Taf]

Social Care money was reduced from central taxation budgets, and preplanned to be added to local taxation budgets. They have just given the go-ahead for it be be added at 3% per year for 2 years instead of 2% per year over 3 years.

Locally, a day centre for the elderly has been turned into council offices, and our local old folks home has been closed and demolished. Our council does not want to be in the social care business (for many reasons, but mostly pensions) so is passing it on to private companies who want to make a profit.

And that is going to cost us. A lot.

Originally Posted by Taf

Social Care money was reduced from central taxation budgets, and preplanned to be added to local taxation budgets. They have just given the go-ahead for it be be added at 3% per year for 2 years instead of 2% per year over 3 years.

Locally, a day centre for the elderly has been turned into council offices, and our local old folks home has been closed and demolished. Our council does not want to be in the social care business (for many reasons, but mostly pensions) so is passing it on to private companies who want to make a profit.

And that is going to cost us. A lot.

My mother-in-law spent the last 10 months of her life in a care home, we found these people to be very helpful.

[Arthurgray50@blu]

That's it, blame the elderly. I will 65 in two weeks time. I have paid into the system. Therefore l expect to be looked after when l retire or become ill.

For people to say where does this money come from. We are the MOST taxed country in the world. We have tax for this, and a tax for that. Now we have the 'Poor Tax'


When this damn Government think up an idea. It always hits the poor or the vulnerable.

[mrmistoffelees]

Perhaps as the Russians are doing we can introduce a real life hunger games. Apart from ours could be filled with those over 65 years old.


Quite simply Arthur, It is the elderly fault, people are living longer and therefore there are more people alive that require more care.

Your contributions in Tax and NI don't guarantee your expectation to be looked after, they paid for those who needed the care at over your contribution period. And your attitude quite bluntly stinks.

The UK is not the most taxed country in the world, for once in your life stop talking utter drivel

[Taf]

I get the distinct feeling that HMG is moving from central taxation to local taxation for more and more. That keeps the headline Income Tax rate lower than it should (for propaganda purposes). Police funding is going the same way, yet another cut from central coffers for 2017, to be made up by Council Tax increases.

[OLD BOY]

Or, put another way, the money is raised by the councils providing the service.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by denphone

l think l need to sit down as well as l agree with Mr K as well.

Me too! I think funding should come from central Government via tax or NI or VAT but not Council tax. This is because certain areas of the country have high populations of old people and Council tax would penalise people living in these areas whilst other areas eg London don't.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Anypermitedroute

Absolutely correct, it's the elderly that keep on abusing the NHS, having their pensions increasing, holding on to property bigger than they need, not putting enough cash away, expecting others to everything for them, living longer than they should, voting out of the EU etc

I think anyone of 55 should be paying for this as they are the ones who will benefit so make them pay for it, remove triple lock and put direct to NHS as I bet that is worth more than 0.7%

What rubbish! The older generation generally have been a hard working lot, and even when retired give up their time to support communities. You need to ask yourself which age group is predominently relying on benefits rather than seeking work.

The longevity of people these days is enabling more productivity as more and more people over 65 elect to continue working beyond normal retirement age. Unfortunately, some organisations hold on to the sense that older members of the workforce are only fit for the scrap heap. They forget that in many areas, they are the ones with valuable experience, which they will lose if they are forced to retire before they are ready.

As for saying that older people are living longer than they should, what a charming thing to say. Have you calculated what age you will be when you live for the same number of years again? I can tell you that once you hit your 40s, time goes very fast indeed. It won't be as long as you think before you are staring retirement and ageism in the face, and it will be interesting to know what your opinions on the subject are then!

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

That's it, blame the elderly. I will 65 in two weeks time. I have paid into the system. Therefore l expect to be looked after when l retire or become ill.

For people to say where does this money come from. We are the MOST taxed country in the world. We have tax for this, and a tax for that. Now we have the 'Poor Tax'


When this damn Government think up an idea. It always hits the poor or the vulnerable.

No, we are not Arthur.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

What rubbish! The older generation generally have been a hard working lot, and even when retired give up their time to support communities. You need to ask yourself which age group is predominently relying on benefits rather than seeking work.

The longevity of people these days is enabling more productivity as more and more people over 65 elect to continue working beyond normal retirement age. Unfortunately, some organisations hold on to the sense that older members of the workforce are only fit for the scrap heap. They forget that in many areas, they are the ones with valuable experience, which they will lose if they are forced to retire before they are ready.

As for saying that older people are living longer than they should, what a charming thing to say. Have you calculated what age you will be when you live for the same number of years again? I can tell you that once you hit your 40s, time goes very fast indeed. It won't be as long as you think before you are staring retirement and ageism in the face, and it will be interesting to know what your opinions on the subject are then!

i think he was being sarcastic ...........i hope he was being sarcastic

[Anypermitedroute]

Clearly missed on some....

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Anypermitedroute

Clearly missed on some....

Which is why I mentioned it. There's a useful emoticon which might help in any future sarcastic posts, you might want to use it.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Anypermitedroute

Clearly missed on some....

It was missed by me. Sorry.