| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
This is a brave political move by Johnson it will be interesting to see how this plays out .
I think it needs to be all under the NHS, local authorities should not be involved.Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY
if the budgets are controlled by the same group then there aren't conflicts of interest and they can focus on better outcomes for patients.
they might be able to redirect some NHS money into care to ensure better availability, meaning less beds are blocked and less hospital acquired infections etc
There's an argument about whether it should NI, income tax or some other form of tax, but I don't see he had much choice - don't forget he was telling us he had a plan for social care before the pandemic was heard about.
the point here is that the NICs paid by today's pensioners were based on life expectancy after retirement of 5 may be 10 years. We are now seeing pensioners live well into their 90s, meaning the cost of their pension is 3x what it was originally thought to be. You factor in social care and health care costs too and suddenly you appreciate today's pensioners have paid in nowhere near enough.
the issue is that pensioners forma huge voting block, and governments are scared of upsetting the block for fear of losing large swathes of votes.
something had to be done, although whether the way to finance it was the way chosen by this government is debatable.
only if they work, which is fair enough
LAs can stipulate that those tendering must meet certain obligations, such as a minimum level of pay. There is no reason why the LAs can't dictate the terms.
As I see it not much has changed and the new arrangements are far from being a solution to the problem of long term care. The government's statement is all smoke and mirrors. Originally I thought the government had at least made a decision about future care but the bottom line is that even under the new arrangements, once savings are exhausted, houses will have to be sold to pay for the housing element of care for a single individual as well as for care itself. This of course pre-supposes that the house is not required to house a partner/spouse who is able to remain as that component is not included.
Many thanks to Carl Dale who has advanced my understanding of the situation.
I'll be worse off by several thousand a year. I won't even notice it and neither will someone losing £1300 a year on a £100k salary. I'd pay more if it meant those earning less paid less.
If we have champagne tastes we can't expect to use beer money.
I think this is sticking plaster
Pensioners tend to vote tory and read the daily mail
If there were tax rises across the board , which is needed to claw things back , then half the country would be up in arms
The tories have been in charge for 11 years now , they have to break out of this no tax increases nonsense
Dividend tax is also going up by 1.5% - so if like me you are a director of your own company I'll pay 1.5% extra NI as an employee, 1.5% extra as an employer and 1.5% extra for dividends.
My wife and I are both employees and directors fo in total thats 9%....
say that with a straight face
they should raise inheritance tax. make it massive. close the loopholes that people avoid paying it.
many older people are sitting on huge property values that by mostly luck have increased incredibly while they've lived there. they've done nothing to create that increase it has just happened.
people inheriting that wealth have done nothing to earn it either other than be born to the right people
Well somethings not right because the carers in South Wales are all on 9 pound an hour
The private companies are making a killing on the backs of the vulnerable and the carers they employ
The council put the contracts out for care to care companies and those that get the work are the cheapest
That's the free market for you 😉
Kin hell
Sludge
this government is collecting more in tax than any government before it. We currently pay around 35% of GDP in taxation. The Tories are not a party of low taxes, a complete myth peddled by the party and its supporters.
People seem to be ignoring that employers will also pay an extra 1.25% NIER and shareholders will also pay an extra 1.25% on dividends.
The devil is in the detail, and if this was Labour announcing these tax rises and spend decisions, those on the left would be hailing it as revolutionary and much needed. which it is.
if you're a director of your own company neither you or the company will pay NICS, if you are you need a better accountant. you'll pay the extra 1.25% on divs though.
inheritance tax is 40%, the second highest rate of tax after surtax on employment income.
why should the state take someone's house after they die?
It's fair to say I wouldn't vote conservative if it were my last act on earth
However what have Labour and the liberals , together stronger .......suggested ?
surely the council can state in the tender what the terms of engagement must be...the council hold all the aces, but they put out to tender for the lowest cost bidder.
its not 9% sludge, that's a little wide of the mark
make it 100%
why?
you don't need it when you're dead and your kids didn't do anything to earn it
Just jumping on this thread as the whole thing confuses me.
My situation is I own 50% of my mothers home as tenants in common. I also have power of attorney set up.
My mother does not need care home etc at the moment but I’m unsure as to what I can do to protect the house ?
I could pay a base salary ( under the NI threashold ) but I don't - I agree I could "avoid" the tax, and maybe not with this change I will - still get clobbered with the div tax ( as well as the CT I already pay which is also going up 2022 or 23? ).
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote