Poll: Poll: Prime Minister Theresa May calls General Election on June 8th

Who will you vote for?

  • Conservatives

  • Labour

  • Lib Dem

  • UKIP

  • Other (please state)

  • I won't be voting

Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
And throw in shortly 3.9 more million people are going to need social care in one form or the other and it will never get repealed. Which is why we should get it right from the start.

Whats going to happen eventually once there are 10 million people in social care, getting paid for with equity from their houses, and then next generation repeats, and we have 10 million people working in social care looking after them on just above minimum wage and hence barely paying any tax is that peoples all the wealth in the middle income will be eroded away.
 
dowie said:
well this is the thing... people's assets are already considered when providing care - if the government didn't take assets into consideration then that means the working population is going to be footing the bill

seems to me that it is a bit unfair for these kids struggling to raise their own amid crazy rent prices and trying to get onto the property ladder should also be funding the social care of those elderly property owners who have far more in assets than they do
Click to expand...

All that will happen..... the elderly will sell up while they are still well, hand the wealth off to the kids and then go into social housing. People are already doing it.

How do you make it illegal to do that? You can't and it will create a far worse situation that what we already have.

At the very least, the cap should be done in accordance to regional house prices.
 
Arthur Hucksake said:
All that will happen..... the elderly will sell up while they are still well, hand the wealth off to the kids and then go into social housing. People are already doing it.

How do you make it illegal to do that? You can't and it will create a far worse situation that what we already have.
Click to expand...

Great for all the BTL landlords and demand for rented property will shoot up.
 
Arthur Hucksake said:
The same kids struggling to raise their own amid crazy rent prices and a property ladder almost impossible for the younger generations to get on?

Nah, might work that way for some but overall it's slim pickings.

I would have no chance of providing social care for my parents now as it stands, none whatsoever. Suppose i've got 10 grand equity in our house. Could make my children homeless temporarily and go into rented accommodation that costs more.

I swear half the dimwits on this forum are living in a parallel universe with no sense of what life actually is for the majority in this country.
Click to expand...
You know what social care is right? It's cooking, cleaning, washing, brewing up etc - all the stuff your parents did for you when you were a kid. Anyone can do it, it's by definition unskilled work. All the medical care is provided free of charge by the NHS. I agree it'd be nice if the state picked up the tab for social care as well but unfortunately in case you missed it the country's finances aren't in great shape right now.
 
Arthur Hucksake said:
All that will happen..... the elderly will sell up while they are still well, hand the wealth off to the kids and then go into social housing. People are already doing it.

How do you make it illegal to do that? You can't and it will create a far worse situation that what we already have.

At the very least, the cap should be done in accordance to regional house prices.
Click to expand...

The other thing is that this is a one-off.

Stripping the assets of the elderly middle classes might help pay for their care, but it will not pay for the future needs of their children and grand children.

People can only sell off the family silver once. Another solution will have to be found for the future generations (And stripping the middle classes of their assets will have other knock on effects too, likley for long term harm for the economy)

In any case, it isn't about money, it is about priorities. Fully funded social care for all could be provided for a fraction of the foreign aid budget.

Which does our government (And the general population) think is more important.
 
Orionaut said:
The other thing is that this is a one-off.

Stripping the assets of the elderly middle classes might help pay for their care, but it will not pay for the future needs of their children and grand children.

People can only sell off the family silver once. Another solution will have to be found for the future generations (And stripping the middle classes of their assets will have other knock on effects too, likley for long term harm for the economy)

In any case, it isn't about money, it is about priorities. Fully funded social care for all could be provided for a fraction of the foreign aid budget.

Which does our government (And the general population) think is more important.
Click to expand...

I've been saying this to everyone I know. Its only a temporary soloution. Once the asset is sold... and is no longer passed on. Once the future generation do not have housing to sell for their social care... you have another black hole. As usual this is tackled and cobbled together last minuite (like brexit) to make out the tories are thinking about the future. All it has really shown is how inept they are.
 
Arthur Hucksake said:
All that will happen..... the elderly will sell up while they are still well, hand the wealth off to the kids and then go into social housing. People are already doing it.

How do you make it illegal to do that? You can't and it will create a far worse situation that what we already have.

At the very least, the cap should be done in accordance to regional house prices.
Click to expand...

this is like the 6th time in this thread someone has suggested the 'genius' idea of retirees disposing of assets to avoid paying for care... as though the local authorities aren't already aware of this

I'm not sure that my parents would really fancy selling up their detached house and then deciding to end up in whatever council estate the local authority decide to house them in - not to mention that it is rather obvious

dalehitchy1 said:
I've been saying this to everyone I know. Its only a temporary soloution. Once the asset is sold... and is no longer passed on. Once the future generation do not have housing to sell for their social care... you have another black hole. As usual this is tackled and cobbled together last minuite (like brexit) to make out the tories are thinking about the future. All it has really shown is how inept they are.
Click to expand...

Is our current housing stock just going to vanish into thin air then? What makes you think the future generations of retirees won't have assets?
 
I do wonder if May was taking a nap during the tuition fee and IHT debacles. The social care proposals certainly have hallmarks of those policies. They're emotive, easily exploited for political gain. Surely someone must have seen the backlash coming?

My main issues are the proposal's disproportionate impact on the moderately wealthy, the impact it has on inherited wealth (inequality between the healthy and the sick), and the rather distasteful way we're going about dividing the cost of the genetics lottery. We (as a nation) spend a fortune treating terminal diseases. Individual cases can reach hundreds of thousands of pounds. Get a degenerative terminal disease though, and you'll have to bare a disproportionate chunk of the cost compared to other diseases.

IMHO, Labour's old IHT proposals weren't quite as unappealing. At least they ignored the genetics lottery. I'd prefer to see a flat rate though, rather than a tiered system.

Also, when it comes to future generations, I think it's more likely they'll get screwed by paying proportionately more. That £100k floor isn't going to increase anything like in line with inflation, let alone house price inflation.
 
Last edited:
Lartyconshayo said:
they won't be able to afford them
Click to expand...

who is they? If houses are priced too high to sell then prices fall... that is sort of how a market works. And no, lots of Rich Russians and Chinese investors aren't going to start snapping up that 3 bed semi detached you wanted in some random suburb.
 
dowie said:
Is our current housing stock just going to vanish into thin air then? What makes you think the future generations of retirees won't have assets?
Click to expand...

Because the smart ones anyway, will work to a different model that will avoid accumulating them.

What happens in Europe where it is far more common for people to rent rather than own their homes??
 
dowie said:
this is like the 6th time in this thread someone has suggested the 'genius' idea of retirees disposing of assets to avoid paying for care... as though the local authorities aren't already aware of this

I'm not sure that my parents would really fancy selling up their detached house and then deciding to end up in whatever council estate the local authority decide to house them in - not to mention that it is rather obvious
Click to expand...

What about putting your child's name on the mortgage when they're older and paying you rent?

By the time they're ready to buy a place of their own the house may have been paid off and so wouldn't count against them when trying to get a mortgage of their own.
 
I think the Tories have lost the ability to gain a significant majority now, just going by this poll. Which overestimates the Lib Dem vote generally, Tory vote is usually correct and underestimates both the non-voting block and Labour block.

Who knows though, but May will have a hell of a lot of explaining to do if she barely scrapes more MPs, wasting all this time and effort on a pointless election.
 
StriderX said:
I think the Tories have lost the ability to gain a significant majority now, just going by this poll. Which overestimates the Lib Dem vote generally, Tory vote is usually correct and underestimates both the non-voting block and Labour block.

Who knows though, but May will have a hell of a lot of explaining to do if she barely scrapes more MPs, wasting all this time and effort on a pointless election.
Click to expand...

I wonder how much money would have been wasted during the process too.
 
She is being grilled on BBC1 now.

e: Same answer 5 times now, rinse and repeat, she is and now looks and sounds like a ****.
 
Moses said:
Although the better off pensioners could gift it and afford to then rent it back from their children... eg. my father could easily afford to live his current lifestyle if he gifted everything to us and had to live off his pension.
Click to expand...
Only if you truly cease to own it, and pay a market rate rent, and don't die within 7 years.

/tax nerd
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom