|
|
Post by funnybunny on Dec 29, 2010 15:10:49 GMT -1
One of the biggest challenges facing society now and in the future is the aging population.
People are living longer and, as a result of this, there are so many more people who need care and this will be increasing in the future.
The questions are - who should be providing the care for the elderly? And who should be paying for it?
In the olden days it was the family who took responsibility for their own and often grannies and grandpas would live with their children when they weren't able to live independently. Now it seems more and more people are either being cared for in their own homes by social services, or in care homes. and all of this has to be paid for.
Should it be the person, the family or the state who pay for this? Should people be taking out insurance in plenty of time to pay for their future care needs? I think this last one will be essential not too far in the future. As well as boosting your pension we'll all have to provide for our old age unless totally incapable.
I have experience of care for the elderly and its first class. Social services have been great and the elderly relative doesn't want for anything. It's cost them t5heir house but why not? It's their property and their asset.
|
|
|
|
Post by bormes on Dec 29, 2010 18:02:04 GMT -1
Good post, very interesting and complex problem.
One point comes to mind is that we who have worked all our lives have contributed to the N/H system, even if some people have taken private insurance.
Personally I would prefer family to look after family.
I looked after my mother for a long time, I am currently looking after a childhood friend who has hit hard times and is not well.
There is a very large pressure on the N/H with thousands and thousands of people who have come into our country often with many children, these people young and old have to be schooled and looked after, certainly many of them will work and contribute but until they do it is a strain on the system. I am not knocking any political party here. Just being factual.
I think your suggestion of any one working will have to take an insurance to help when aged, is the best idea.
However I must again say, it arises because we have not had the wealth we created properly invested, particularly in the last years of Bliar and Brown, but neither did the other mob. When you think very few men live more than 5 years after they retire, and heart attacks account for most of the deaths, there are actually not many men and although more women live longer, there are not that many who live on to be a burden on the state. When we consider how many work all their lives and contribute, then die and never claim, then it would seem if some more live longer there really should be more money to look after them. After all we are being told we will have to work longer to maybe it will balance out.
As regards the care, I am afraid it is not perfect all over the country, a bit of a lottery.
There is another point, the Government get Millions every year from estates of people who die and have no relations, they also get Millions form people who die and leave money as above a fairly small amount in relation to the value of the average house, they take 40% of any moneis left. Again, badly invested by the Govt., That means whichever system is used I worry because I don't have much faith in their ability to get it right. I hope they do though.
|
|
|
|
Post by ozneil on Dec 29, 2010 20:10:51 GMT -1
Good post Fun. You are right. Bourmes I hope to hell you are wrong about dieing within 5 years of retirement. I have been retired 12 years  Mind you I retired early. We work pensions etc a bit different from the UK. I wont comment whether its better or worse, just different. First income tax is lower for average bloke ;D BUTWe pay 1.5% of gross income for health services , if you dont pay an extra £40 per month ( less than the cost of a cup of coffee a day) for Private insurance you are daft. I had an operation a while ago, surgeon of my choice hospital of my choice. private room with en-suite. I think the whole thing cost me about £10 for little extras like TV The employer pays 9% of gross salary into a pension fund of your choice (dont kid yourself it comes straight off your salary). You can opt to pay more if you like. Tax incentives make that a good deal. When you retire you are entitled to a full government pension if your assets and income are less than $x. Your pension is reduced as your income increases until when your total income & assets exceed $y it is then cut out. At the lower end of the income bracket pensioners get all sorts of extra allowances over the basic pension such as medical, rent assistence etc etc. The pension is just about enough to live on. Superannuation is tax free. |
|
|
|
Post by bormes on Dec 29, 2010 20:31:55 GMT -1
Good things in there Oz we could learn from them.
The dying in 5 years thing was an average taken in 2002 I believe.
We are taxed so highly in our country despite being a huge oil producer it takes away the incentive for many people.
We really need a complete re think regardless of politics or our country will just keep going in a downward spiral.
How can they tell us we should pay £20 extra each way for an annual holiday, to help control climate change. Then, send bloody beans from Guatemala and coffee beans from Africa or South America Etc., etc. by air freight !!
When all our taxes are added up we pay more than almost any nation in the world. If the Govt., don't do something to allow those who work to pay less tax very soon, then we will have a real recession on our hands, no matter who originally caused it.
|
|
|
|
Post by notanimby on Dec 30, 2010 7:18:30 GMT -1
Good things in there Oz we could learn from them. The dying in 5 years thing was an average taken in 2002 I believe. We are taxed so highly in our country despite being a huge oil producer it takes away the incentive for many people. We really need a complete re think regardless of politics or our country will just keep going in a downward spiral. How can they tell us we should pay £20 extra each way for an annual holiday, to help control climate change. Then, send bloody beans from Guatemala and coffee beans from Africa or South America Etc., etc. by air freight !! When all our taxes are added up we pay more than almost any nation in the world. If the Govt., don't do something to allow those who work to pay less tax very soon, then we will have a real recession on our hands, no matter who originally caused it. Nerver mind ra fact that private penshuns in this country are a complete rip aff, if its no' ra pernshun companies rippion yoo aff its ra like of Gordon Broon and ra SCUM party helpin themselves tae cash frae ra penshun funds Companies here also like tae take "penshun holidays" which absolves them of payin in thur share, then moan like fuk when the penshun fund may not be fully apid up and may be in shortfall - which apparently always turns oot tae be ra fault of the worker |
|
|
|
Post by funnybunny on Dec 30, 2010 12:53:03 GMT -1
Good things in there Oz we could learn from them. The dying in 5 years thing was an average taken in 2002 I believe. We are taxed so highly in our country despite being a huge oil producer it takes away the incentive for many people. We really need a complete re think regardless of politics or our country will just keep going in a downward spiral. How can they tell us we should pay £20 extra each way for an annual holiday, to help control climate change. Then, send bloody beans from Guatemala and coffee beans from Africa or South America Etc., etc. by air freight !! When all our taxes are added up we pay more than almost any nation in the world. If the Govt., don't do something to allow those who work to pay less tax very soon, then we will have a real recession on our hands, no matter who originally caused it. Nerver mind ra fact that private penshuns in this country are a complete rip aff, if its no' ra pernshun companies rippion yoo aff its ra like of Gordon Broon and ra SCUM party helpin themselves tae cash frae ra penshun funds Companies here also like tae take "penshun holidays" which absolves them of payin in thur share, then moan like fuk when the penshun fund may not be fully apid up and may be in shortfall - which apparently always turns oot tae be ra fault of the worker Not like you to be so negative and narrow. Join in the discussion, Isa! |
|
|
|
Post by funnybunny on Dec 30, 2010 13:01:58 GMT -1
Good post, very interesting and complex problem. One point comes to mind is that we who have worked all our lives have contributed to the N/H system, even if some people have taken private insurance. Personally I would prefer family to look after family. I looked after my mother for a long time, I am currently looking after a childhood friend who has hit hard times and is not well. There is a very large pressure on the N/H with thousands and thousands of people who have come into our country often with many children, these people young and old have to be schooled and looked after, certainly many of them will work and contribute but until they do it is a strain on the system. I am not knocking any political party here. Just being factual. I think your suggestion of any one working will have to take an insurance to help when aged, is the best idea. However I must again say, it arises because we have not had the wealth we created properly invested, particularly in the last years of Bliar and Brown, but neither did the other mob. When you think very few men live more than 5 years after they retire, and heart attacks account for most of the deaths, there are actually not many men and although more women live longer, there are not that many who live on to be a burden on the state. When we consider how many work all their lives and contribute, then die and never claim, then it would seem if some more live longer there really should be more money to look after them. After all we are being told we will have to work longer to maybe it will balance out. As regards the care, I am afraid it is not perfect all over the country, a bit of a lottery. There is another point, the Government get Millions every year from estates of people who die and have no relations, they also get Millions form people who die and leave money as above a fairly small amount in relation to the value of the average house, they take 40% of any moneis left. Again, badly invested by the Govt., That means whichever system is used I worry because I don't have much faith in their ability to get it right. I hope they do though. Have to disagree with you about the age bit. The following figures are from here: www.statistics.gov.uk/STATBASE/Product.asp?vlnk=8841Country / Government Males Females Office Region At birth At age 65 At birth At age 65 United Kingdom Males at birth: 77.9 Males at 65: 17.8 Females at birth: 82.0 Females at 65: 20.4 Scotland Males at birth: 75.4 Males at 65: 16.5 Females at birth: 80.1 Females at 65: 19.1 and it shows there's going to be an increase more and more of older people. I think one way to deal with it is to expand the public sector provision of care for the elderly and ensuring quality. I'd rather pay increased taxes for the security of care in my twilight years and good healthcare for all than paying taxes for all the unnecessary shite such as defence (not getting rid of it - just reducing it). |
|
|
|
Post by funnybunny on Dec 30, 2010 13:13:27 GMT -1
|
|
|
|
Post by notanimby on Dec 30, 2010 13:16:18 GMT -1
Nerver mind ra fact that private penshuns in this country are a complete rip aff, if its no' ra pernshun companies rippion yoo aff its ra like of Gordon Broon and ra SCUM party helpin themselves tae cash frae ra penshun funds Companies here also like tae take "penshun holidays" which absolves them of payin in thur share, then moan like fuk when the penshun fund may not be fully apid up and may be in shortfall - which apparently always turns oot tae be ra fault of the worker Not like you to be so negative and narrow. Join in the discussion, Isa! how much is your care in teh community costing ra tax-payer? its obviously another failed project as you appear tae be withoot yer carers again keep takein yer meds - they may work wan day |
|
|
|
Post by funnybunny on Dec 30, 2010 13:20:41 GMT -1
Not like you to be so negative and narrow. Join in the discussion, Isa! how much is your care in teh community costing ra tax-payer? its obviously another failed project as you appear tae be withoot yer carers again keep takein yer meds - they may work wan day lol |
|
|
|
Post by ozneil on Jan 2, 2011 23:25:15 GMT -1
[color=Red ]HAPPY BIRTHDAY MAGGIE[/color]    |
|
|
|
Post by westender on Jan 2, 2011 23:28:19 GMT -1
Have to disagree with you about the age bit. The following figures are from here: www.statistics.gov.uk/STATBASE/Product.asp?vlnk=8841Country / Government Males Females Office Region At birth At age 65 At birth At age 65 United Kingdom Males at birth: 77.9 Males at 65: 17.8 Females at birth: 82.0 Females at 65: 20.4 Scotland Males at birth: 75.4 Males at 65: 16.5 Females at birth: 80.1 Females at 65: 19.1 What the feck is this supposed to tell us? |
|
|
|
Post by maggie on Jan 2, 2011 23:35:26 GMT -1
[color=Red ]HAPPY BIRTHDAY MAGGIE[/color] [/quote] Thank you Oz, another notch nearer reading Fucking Francis Gay, but no quite yet  |
|
|
|
Post by ozneil on Jan 2, 2011 23:39:45 GMT -1
Thank you Oz, another notch nearer reading Fucking Francis Gay, but no quite yet Who the hell is Francis Gay ...... a sexual athlete? |
|
|
|
Post by maggie on Jan 2, 2011 23:43:54 GMT -1
Thank you Oz, another notch nearer reading Fucking Francis Gay, but no quite yet Who the hell is Francis Gay ...... a sexual athlete? Hahaha no it/he is a weekly poster in a Sunday newspaper, full of goodness and light |
|
Mind you I retired early.
