People complaining about paying for their own care again = massive entitlement

[Angilion]

Are you just taking issue on a literal interpretation of a common idiom?

When it's a key point and the idiom is being used incorrectly, yes. Things "taken to the grave" are removed from society. It isn't necessarily literal because it usually refers to intangible things (knowledge, secrets), but it does mean that the thing "taken to the grave" is no longer in society.

The assets are not removed from society. They are given to someone else. So the idiom is being used incorrectly. It's a key part of the point - what happens to the assets. Portraying inheritance as the assets being removed from society props up the idea that they should be seized by the state, but it's at best misleading.

 

[cheesyboy]

I don't blame the boomers, they worked hard, many died through poor health and safety and bad diets. They didn't grow up with central heating, Sky TV, mobiles, the internet. Milk was introduced in schools as so many were poorly nourished.

Much of that, other than the frivolous tech stuff, pre-dates boomers. School milk was stopped as soon as boomers were no longer of age for it.

 

[cheesyboy]

The assets are not removed from society.

When we're literally talking about society paying so that wealthy old people can maintain their wealth, I would say that assets ARE removed from society.

 

[Narj]

I'd rather have a party and the pill...... that's what we should fight for. The right to get off the bus.

Yep it's infuriating. It's traumatic seeing family and friends suffer unnecessarily and some of these care homes barely deserve that description, if at all. Obviously I'm sure there are examples of people who are happy with theirs and it suits them because they still have some degree of independence.

We won't let our beloved pets suffer but we insist on a gauntlet of indignities for humans. It angers me to think of a life's hard work wiped out just because we insist people are made to suffer.

The problem with the likes of Dignitas or any sort of plan for that event is actually being fit enough to travel or to execute it. I've made a plan B should I get anything terminal that would ruin my quality of life. What a miserable thing to research that was!

 

[theone8181]

Yep it's infuriating. It's traumatic seeing family and friends suffer unnecessarily and some of these care homes barely deserve that description, if at all. Obviously I'm sure there are examples of people who are happy with theirs and it suits them because they still have some degree of independence.

We won't let our beloved pets suffer but we insist on a gauntlet of indignities for humans. It angers me to think of a life's hard work wiped out just because we insist people are made to suffer.

The problem with the likes of Dignitas or any sort of plan for that event is actually being fit enough to travel or to execute it. I've made a plan B should I get anything terminal that would ruin my quality of life. What a miserable thing to research that was!

I thought some eu countries did support euthanasia, possibly Switzerland. Surely if someone wanted to do it they could just go there? I agree though, it should be a person's choice. Imo if you end up being a vegetable or can't do some basic things, and you want to end it, that should be that person's choice.

 

[Outcast440]

No? I'm in exactly that position too, 18 years of building our business up just to watch it go down the pan over the last year. I'm just not a bitter and twisted person over it like you. **** happens, you've just got stop whining like a little ***** that it's other peoples fault and get on with it.

You sound like some kind of dilettante, most likely you're happy just living on other peoples' money now, aka 'furlough', or some kind of govt. 'loan'.

 

[Outcast440]

Failure to adapt to change is a failure of personal responsibility.

You clearly should have diversified more, rather than demanding the government changes approach because you failed to make appropriate preparations.

yeah right, coming from some old guy who's probably long retired anyway

 

[Freakbro]

You sound like some kind of dilettante, most likely you're happy just living on other peoples' money now, aka 'furlough', or some kind of govt. 'loan'.

No, I just get off my ass and do other work to bring in money while the business is shut down and don't just whine and moan on the internet about "poor me"

The director of the company is doing 60 - 80 hrs a week temping with HGV driving agency, but yea, you keep sitting there feeling sorry for yourself.

 

[Outcast440]

Just wait until your parents are older and you've been looking forward to the house and money they've left you in their wills but all of a sudden it's all being taken away from you for their care.
You'll soon change your mind.

How about for those people who won't inherit a house? did that ever occur to you, or do you think they should just carry on paying for those that do....that = entitlement!

 

[Outcast440]

Protecting inheritance is a TERRIBLE reason to defend taxing young people to pay for wealthy old people's care.

Agreed - but of course, all those oldies are much more likely to vote Tory with this in mind

 

[Hagar]

I'd rather they just legalised assisted dying, so that those of us who don't want to spend their last days with someone else wiping our bum can get a clean exit and leave the money to family instead.

Nice alliterative allusion. I know what you are saying though and agree with it with safeguards.

 

[Em3bbs]

Much of that, other than the frivolous tech stuff, pre-dates boomers. School milk was stopped as soon as boomers were no longer of age for it.

Wow, I'm in my 40s and apparently a 'boomer'!

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Just think this through for a second though please.

Forget degrees or not degrees for the moment.

Back in the day, a person could have started a job at the bottom of the company, met a girl, got a house, had a family, worked his way up. Gone to the pub on a Friday. That is all there was to do and people were happy enough, knew their place.

Now, it's different. A person needs to immediately start on a good salary, or in expectation of a good position in the company rather than at the bottom, because without those things he cannot get a house. Plus society has changed. Instead of being happy meeting a girl and having a family, now you have constant media and social peer pressure to be 'living life' spending money, doing activities, eating healthy, getting fit, seeing the world...etc etc.

So is the person to blame, really, for a set of expectations that have been installed into him by our modern lives?

Yes the person is to blame for being a sheep.

I know plenty of materialistic folk who all they talk about is money, cars, salary, etc. They even lie about their own stuff to make them look fancier. Like I can't believe how one idiot lied about how much their house was they added an extra £100k on like I couldn't easily google exactly how much they paid.

Such and such is marrying such and such and their family is even richer and valued at £60m. Like who cares?

Did you see what such and such bought their wife as a "push" present? I wonder what my husband will get me. It's a competition because of sheep and idiots tbh. 10 years ago did push presents exist? 50 years ago did eternity rings exist? 100 years ago did diamond engagement rings exist?

It's like why the majority of the market buys diamond engagement rings. Marketing is a powerful tool and social media is just that marketing for yourself and likley the brand's you are using to upmarket yourself.

If anyone is basing financial decisions and life choices based on social media then yeah it is their fault tbh. Social media isn't real life it's the person's vision of what they envision life to be like or what they want their life to be like.

 

[Angilion]

When we're literally talking about society paying so that wealthy old people can maintain their wealth, I would say that assets ARE removed from society.

We're talking about people who are too frail/ill to be able to take care of themselves. It'll make no difference to them personally where the profits for the care businesses come from. It'll make a difference to their heirs, though. No house. No tuition fees. Nothing. All the money went to the care home business. Which charges huge fees to private residents, pays buttons to overworked employees and pockets the rest.

Are you also opposed to the NHS? Would you replace it with a USA-style healthcare system? If not, why not? That's also about care and how it's funded.

Are you also opposed to inheritance tax, on the basis that obligations go both ways or not at all? Or would you make it 100%? That would be fairer in some ways - at least the money would go to the state rather than to private companies.

Would you allow assisted suicide so people who are frail/ill can at least have killing themselves as the only way to ensure some of their money (after tax) goes to their heirs rather than to a private business?

 

[Geodude97AD]

No they don't.

They pay for the care of people currently being cared for.

The idea that the enormous Boomer generation, the largest voting block in history it seems relevant to mention, who had barely anyone old to pay for during their working lives, who had the greatest social mobility the country has seen, who swallowed up the housing market to deny it to those following.... To now have that vampiric generation looking to once more leech the blood of the young to maintain their advantages.... It's shocking.

**** this government, and the opposition who have now equally abandoned the young.

Can't help but feel that this is the driving force behind the Covid response, the Boomers have been affronted with a challenge to their realm and everyone most pay to protect them.

 

[Hagar]

Can't help but feel that this is the driving force behind the Covid response, the Boomers have been affronted with a challenge to their realm and everyone most pay to protect them.

How many boomers are in power in your fantasy? Nearly every boomer age politician is safely in the House of Lords where they can do little damage. The civil service, they probably retired at 60 or less. Similarly with the health services and most public companies if senior enough.

Unless you think the Queen got onto the government and said, 'here is what you must do.'

 

[BowdonUK]

As more and more people are not employed, those who are need to do more 'work'. And while you might be reading about automation and think its all very well and good, the reality is most people are useless as it is.

Due to the fact that we, the UK collectively are useless, we cannot actually afford to keep paying benefits and social care.

Others say we can do it, and that we are a rich country, but that is entirely wrong.

I think a lot of the problems are a lack of funding and direction by the government. In my town there are two new housing areas are being built. But yet there is no increase in new schools, gp surgeries or general local amenities.

It can't be a healthy society that 1. discourages people from saving, and 2. fails to give good opportunities to invest in projects. At the moment people are being encouraged to spend everything they have, get in to debt, then the state as to pay 100% for your health care, whether that is in a care home or hiring people to come out and see you in the home.

As an addon, unlike Russia, which your spoiler bit was referring to, we not only defended Britain. But in our history have taken over more than a 3rd of the worlds countries. So we have the strength of character when led properly. But we're very much like what the old phrase says, we're lions led by donkeys.

Spoiler

"Lions led by donkeys" is a phrase popularly used to describe the British infantry of the First World War and to blame the generals who led them. The contention is that the brave soldiers (lions) were sent to their deaths by incompetent and indifferent leaders (donkeys).

 

[BowdonUK]

Can't help but feel that this is the driving force behind the Covid response, the Boomers have been affronted with a challenge to their realm and everyone most pay to protect them.

How old do you think boomers are?

 

[Geodude97AD]

How many boomers are in power in your fantasy? Nearly every boomer age politician is safely in the House of Lords where they can do little damage. The civil service, they probably retired at 60 or less. Similarly with the health services and most public companies if senior enough.

Unless you think the Queen got onto the government and said, 'here is what you must do.'

Given that the baby boomer generation was 1945 to 1965, that would be anyone aged of 56 and over is part of the boomer generation. So, lets start at the top, Boris Johnson?

 

[cheesyboy]

Really? I got milk at school and I am nowhere near being a boomer

Stopped for over-7s in 1971, then over-5s in 1980. Your parents could pay for it, if they had the cash.