Elderly care – who should pay?

It’s a broken society when the children don’t look after their parents in the time of need.

One major thing about Southern Cross, is that it was bought by a private equity company who essentially asset stripped it, then walked away with a bucket-load of cash, then left it to ‘the market’ to sort out. Or barring that, those other mugs. You know the ones…. the one’s who always pick up the tab. The idiots. Taxpayers. That’s the one!

Maybe one idea would be to legislate to stop rich institutional investors regarding ‘care’ as a cash cow to be exploited to make obscenely large profits and bugger the consequences

Oh…. hang on a minute. That smacks of socialism a bit. Sorry. As you were

Binners – southern cross was never really profitable – I worked for them ten years ago and the writing on the wall was clear then.

I had a think about this last night and even had a chat with my GF (I know, rivetting comnversation as ever, I decided not to tell her is was a STW thread…) and have come up with this:

How about we have a system in place where by we each pay a percentage of our earnings each month (or week) into a pot to fund the care? That way the high earner pay more (they can afford to) and the lower earners pay less. This also means that if you’ve skrimped and saved to buy your house and/or have some money in your savings account then you still keep that and are not punished for being careful with your money. It would mean we all receive a good level of care and that no one is left without.

Yes, it may mean an increase in income tax but I think it could work. The higher earners would pay substantially more to help make up for the shortfall paid by the lower earners.

I would suggest setting it at a fixed rate for everyone but I think I might be pushing my luck…

Very good lunge. We could consider it as a sort of state run insurance. Maybe call it national insurance?

In all seriousness its a difficult issue with no obvious solutions no matter where you sit on the political spectrum

TJ, exactly, seems like a good solution to me. Means tested without punishing those who are careful, free at the point of service, all inclusive.

I fail to see a problem unless the underlying concern is in fact inheritance and healthcare is a ruse to stop that.

Someone made an awful lot of money somewhere along the line though TJ. To be precise: £425million. That’s what it was floated for after an evaluation by Morgan Stanley, who trousered £10 million in consultancy fees

And doubtless disappeared off back to their tax haven with it. It certainly wasn’t ploughed in to anyone’s care. That’s for sure

bill hicks got it right

warning language is a bit blue!

Binners I don’t really understand all the finances but – that money is now lost is it not – the people who sold it took the money off the people who bought it I think – is that not how it is?

They manipulated the capital assets – the actual bricks and mortar and some folk have now lost a lot of money. There is no great profit out of the actual turnover from fees. certainly not an excessive profiteering.

The Southern Cross sale & leaseback scheme wasn’t inherently immoral. It was a case of smart greedy people making a deal to stupid greedy people and the stupid greedy people lost. As usual.

The occupants of the homes were just prawns in the game, but with any luck most of the care homes will be on a viable ongoing business footing so they shouldn’t be inconvenienced any more. But it did give them a nasty fright, which isn’t nice in their position.

Binners – southern cross was never really profitable – I worked for them ten years ago and the writing on the wall was clear then

😀

Cause and effect….

TandemJeremy – Member
Binners – southern cross was never really profitable – I worked for them ten years ago and the writing on the wall was clear then.

Posted 3 hours ago # Report-Post

And you FAILED TO HELP THEM,im really disapointed in you now.

the beggers sacked me! All I said was …………
.
.
.
.
.
.You don’t want to do it like that

Somethings and some people never change.