Grandad losing his house!

Oldernotwiser

goffo wrote: »

Don't you dare insinuate that people with money should or deserve a better standard of life than those without.

So everybody should live in exactly the same brick box and drive exactly the same car whether they earn £10,000 or £100,000?

I'm a Socialist but even I think that's rubbish.

Oldernotwiser

LittleMissAspie wrote: »

That was in the days when couples could afford to buy more than a one bedroom flat.

Very few couples who have parents old enough to need care will still be living in a 1 bed flat.

pelirocco

goffo wrote: »

So what you are saying is that there is a form of discrimination between those residents that are poor and those that are wealthy?

Errr we keep the poor ones in one place and certainly we don't mix them with the others.

Sounds to me just like life itself.

Have you ever been round a rough council estate? Do you associate with them?

Then we have the estates of private housing who for some reason look down their noses at the council house dwellers.

OK yes, you might find a half stripped car on its side in the front garden, dogs chained up to the front door, some having a BBQ in the road using palletts. So what is so wrong with being poor?

I prefer to be with people that are ordinary, happy and genuine.

To be honest having to share a bathroom and a toilet and having to put up with 'screamers' aka drunks kicking a few bins over at 2 in the morning, or a domestic in the early hours with police and dogs all over the place, would be nothing new for me - I was brought up in that envoirnment and still live in it now!

Don't you dare insinuate that people with money should or deserve a better standard of life than those without.

If people feel the need to be kept away from the 'scum' so be it - they aren't my sort of people and good ridance I say!

No one is saying that , sadly the truth is those who have money will have better care

SingleSue

goffo wrote: »

So what you are saying is that there is a form of discrimination between those residents that are poor and those that are wealthy?

Errr we keep the poor ones in one place and certainly we don't mix them with the others.

Sounds to me just like life itself.

Have you ever been round a rough council estate? Do you associate with them?

Then we have the estates of private housing who for some reason look down their noses at the council house dwellers.

OK yes, you might find a half stripped car on its side in the front garden, dogs chained up to the front door, some having a BBQ in the road using palletts. So what is so wrong with being poor?

I prefer to be with people that are ordinary, happy and genuine.

To be honest having to share a bathroom and a toilet and having to put up with 'screamers' aka drunks kicking a few bins over at 2 in the morning, or a domestic in the early hours with police and dogs all over the place, would be nothing new for me - I was brought up in that envoirnment and still live in it now!

Don't you dare insinuate that people with money should or deserve a better standard of life than those without.

If people feel the need to be kept away from the 'scum' so be it - they aren't my sort of people and good ridance I say!

Erm, hate to say this but your post actually sounds quite judemental AGAINST those living in council houses with your stereotypical rantings about what the area or people will be like.

pelirocco

goffo wrote: »

That was never the intention for people that needed care within the NHS.

Yes you have private care homes and hospitals and if you have the money you have the choice. But this should never be at the risk of lower standards of care.

As for having to pay for a council care home because you have a house, is ridiculous. Yes if the OP's grandad wanted to go into a private care home, of course he would have top pay. Why should he have to pay for a council one as well, when others don't?

why would he need a house if he is in care ? to leave to family? , these means tax payers would in effect be paying for an inheiritence

I dont think any of us would argue that the standard of council care is far from ideal and should be better , but its obvious if you have money you will be more comfortable .
The NHS is there to to care for people , it was never meant to cover anything more then the basics , for that you need to pay more tax , and most people seem against that

I dont understand why people work hard to make their lives comfortable , but have no thought to what will happen when they can no longer work or take care of themselves

Errata

There are very few council owned care homes left, and in the current climate those that still exist will close.

SingleSue

goffo wrote: »

Far from it, it may appear that way but I am proud of where I come from and still live.

I object to people saying and thinking that we are scum and 'I would never buy a house near a council estate' brigade.

Yes it is rough and so are the people but they are down to earth and don't pretend to be something they are not.
At least life is interesting when the Old Bill comes round on a Saturday night over a domestic! You just learn to accept it as life.

And yes, my neighbour does have a car on bricks in the front garden, mainly because they didn't build a drive or garage. Besides it can't go on the road as it isn't taxed or insured!

The problem is that because it is that way where you live, you are assuming it is like that on every council estate...when that could not be further from the truth.

monkeyspanner

goffo wrote: »

That was never the intention for people that needed care within the NHS.

Yes you have private care homes and hospitals and if you have the money you have the choice. But this should never be at the risk of lower standards of care.

As for having to pay for a council care home because you have a house, is ridiculous. Yes if the OP's grandad wanted to go into a private care home, of course he would have top pay. Why should he have to pay for a council one as well, when others don't?

I think you are a little behind the curve here. The majority of councils no longer run care homes and rely on private individuals and companies to provide the service. The few council homes that still exist take residents under exactly the same financial system as privately run care homes.

There are differences however in the prices paid for often exactly the same care in the same care home between social services supported residents and self-funded residents as the council are able to pay a bulk rate which is lower than the self-funding residents. So effectively the self-funding residents are subsidising the council. Personally I would not approve of a care home which has first and second class lounges but equally I don't approve of councils paying less for the same service.

Oldernotwiser

goffo wrote: »

No but they should receive the same level of care both from the NHS and the Council!

Why should one poor guy be told to pee his pants because it is not his turn to go to the toilet, whilst those with money have their own private facilities?

Next thing will be segretion on a NHS ward for those with money allowed and given better quality food.

The question of assets should never come into what level of care the OP's grandad gets.
It should be free to all!

There may not be segregation on wards but there are private wards within NHS hospitals with better care, better food and private facilities.

I don't know what sort of world you live in that you don't know this.

Errata

The private rooms in NHS hospitals are called Amenity Beds. Patients pay the 'hotel' costs and all treatment is free.