Help with Parent's money

pollypenny

Money_Saving_Dude wrote: »

Well done. You are simply spreading the message of the rich -- look after yourself. Don't ask the taxpayer (= the wider society) to fund it. That way, as I earn a *lot* more than you (in fact, that should be lots and lots and lots and...) no one is going to come to me and ask me to pay, proportionally, the same of my income as you pay.

Brilliant! You are getting the message of the rich out loud and clear!

So all the effort you've put in all your life to build assets is taken away at a stroke, because of ill health. Meanwhile, the rich look at you and think £30k a year, peanuts. As long as you are not forcing me to pay what should be my rightful contribution to society I may only have to pay £30k a year later in life.

Wow, winner! The British are so stupid.

As I said -- well done for falling for the propaganda.

Have you read all my posts on this thread? Obviously not.

I am well to the left, mate, as you'd know if you went on DT.

Paying taxes is a mark of being a member of a civilised democracy. However, we pay those taxes, willingly in my case, to contribute to the well-being of the country as a whole.

This means that we help those who need help. Again I do that willingly.

I do not willingly pay tax, from my pension, to support anyone who can support themselves. That includes the royal family and those, who by trickery and clever accounting evade/avoid taxes or care home fees.

All our 'assets' are not going to 'be taken away at a stroke because of ill-health' as we have a good NHS, at present. However, if I or OH can no longer live in our house I don't expect someone else to pay for us, so that our kids can have the house. If we can afford it , we pay.

littlemissbossy

pollypenny wrote: »

Have you read all my posts on this thread? Obviously not.

I am well to the left, mate, as you'd know if you went on DT.

Paying taxes is a mark of being a member of a civilised democracy. However, we pay those taxes, willingly in my case, to contribute to the well-being of the country as a whole.

This means that we help those who need help. Again I do that willingly.

I do not willingly pay tax, from my pension, to support anyone who can support themselves. That includes the royal family and those, who by trickery and clever accounting evade/avoid taxes or care home fees.

All our 'assets' are not going to 'be taken away at a stroke because of ill-health' as we have a good NHS, at present. However, if I or OH can no longer live in our house I don't expect someone else to pay for us, so that our kids can have the house. If we can afford it , we pay.

Well said, I'm with you sister.

Errata

Money_Saving_Dude wrote: »

Just look around you. We live in a pay-for-everything culture. What amazes me is so many people seem to think that's a good thing.

Is that because education is so poor these days that people don't understand finance?

What amazes me is so many people think that's a new thing, and have no knowledge of history.

margaretclare

One phrase which has been used in MoneySavingDude's recent post:

'So all the effort you've put in all your life to build assets is taken away at a stroke, because of ill health'

How so?

Since DH and I got together in 1997 before and after our marriage, we have had nothing but 'in sickness and in health'. Not a year has passed by without one or other, or both, of us having surgery or at least treatment, in care of the NHS. He, most certainly, would not be here now but for their care, knowledge and expertise. At the very least he wouldn't still have 2 legs to stand on.

At no time have any of our 'assets' been threatened. In fact, I'm glad we had some assets. Being able to have the bathroom remodelled was done because I was able to call on those assets.

One must ask the question, in addition, WHY put in 'effort all your life to build assets'. Surely the most obvious answer would be: 'to give us greater comfort, choice and security at a time when we can no longer put in a lot of effort'? For what other purpose would you consider those assets to be worth using?

Pollypenny, you're well to the left. I don't know where I am, right, left or centre. I've recently been called a 'right-wing extremist shaven-headed drunken football hooligan'! Take what you can of that.

pollypenny

margaretclare wrote: »

One phrase which has been used in MoneySavingDude's recent post:

'So all the effort you've put in all your life to build assets is taken away at a stroke, because of ill health'

How so?

Since DH and I got together in 1997 before and after our marriage, we have had nothing but 'in sickness and in health'. Not a year has passed by without one or other, or both, of us having surgery or at least treatment, in care of the NHS. He, most certainly, would not be here now but for their care, knowledge and expertise. At the very least he wouldn't still have 2 legs to stand on.

At no time have any of our 'assets' been threatened. In fact, I'm glad we had some assets. Being able to have the bathroom remodelled was done because I was able to call on those assets.

One must ask the question, in addition, WHY put in 'effort all your life to build assets'. Surely the most obvious answer would be: 'to give us greater comfort, choice and security at a time when we can no longer put in a lot of effort'? For what other purpose would you consider those assets to be worth using?

Pollypenny, you're well to the left. I don't know where I am, right, left or centre. I've recently been called a 'right-wing extremist shaven-headed drunken football hooligan'! Take what you can of that.

We can still discuss thing logically, MC, and have often agreed.