NHS pensions are bleeding the taxpayer dry

stephennt

uk1 wrote: »

It would be an appalling idea in the UK, but in Singapore it is a natural extension to what is considered normal and proper in their Asian culture. It is difficult for a Brit to understand the difference. Children not looking after needy parents in Singapore would be reviled by their peers and it would be considered a disgrace to the children for their parents needing to take their kids to court.

There is a lot in other cultures we have to learn if we simply open our minds and accept the challenge they pose.

Jeff

I believe there is a similar law in Italy (Alimenti), though there it extends to children, siblings and parents. I quite like the general idea that family should have to support you before the state has to step in, though there are certain obvious extreme cases where it would be unfair (drug dependency, etc).

uk1

stephennt wrote: »

I believe there is a similar law in Italy (Alimenti), though there it extends to children, siblings and parents. I quite like the general idea that family should have to support you before the state has to step in, though there are certain obvious extreme cases where it would be unfair (drug dependency, etc).

Oddly, closer to home one country where the EU has made it impossible to do this but where it previously naturally existed would be Greece.

Let us imagine that you were a simple Greek pensioner. In the past, your vote would have been bought by a government some time ago that promised you that membership of the EU would make your life and the lives of your children and grandchildren better. You want that. You have survived WW2 and saw many of your counytrymen sacrifice their lives to to resist the ambitions of Germany. But now you are offered a better life for you and your family.

So what has happened?

The EU offered your government the "drugs" of easy cash knowing full well, when you didn't, that actually you couldn't service those loans and could never pay them back, but were sucked in. Now they want their cash. "They" have reduced your pension increased austerity and put your grandchildren out of work. You are now effectively ruled by your banker ie Germany and it is now you that are ensuring from your reducing pension that your children and grandchildren eat.

If you were an elderly Greek, would you not feel in your twilight years a bit duped and miffed and wondered how you had agreed to a political situation that you had resisted with tremendous costs a generation or so ago?

Anyway, these are clearly the thought of a xenophobic, unbalanced extremist isn't it? Political correctness doesn't allow such thoughts. Or perhaps in time people holding these views might seem sensible but only when it is too late perhaps?

I digress.

Jeff

agarnett

So your old boss, uk1, was "roped" in as opposed to rowed in. Forgive me if you indeed feel I have erred wide of a particular mark I should have heeded.

Re: the lot of the elderly Greeks - funny you should draw the comparison with Singapore, and then remind us of the variation to it as demanded by EU, and yet still we might once more contrast both with the actual situation - I just happen to have learned in the last 24 hours of the plight of one such who has urgent need now of residential care in Greece. His children working in other countries in Europe (one EU and one not) will largely foot the bill as despite what used to be adequate pensions for the elderly Greek and his wife, and despite the fact they own property they have always rented to local people who have become almost family, the income streams have dried up (rent payments have become intermittent (how do you tell "family" or friends that you want money from them that you know they don't have?), pensions reduced, property tax increased), and state nursing services within hospitals and outside almost abolished.

So whatever the EU rules and laws, perhaps Greeks are already back to a needs must/family comes first basis, which of course is how the Singaporean and Italian models were formed.

How far from that situation do we imagine we in the UK might be? Or are we already there, except public sector pensions are still haemorrhaging the system with no obvious signs of abatement? How do our private sector pensionists tell us that they continue to require promises to pay to be kept even when they know that we don't have the money to pay? Well we do see in these forums how they do that, don't we? They are entitled.

Also recently, I found myself contacting a charity to ask if some other very elderly relatives (continuous uk residents apart from service abroad in WW2) might qualify for help that would give them what seems now to be preferential treatment (in their case, treatment which would keep them as a married couple together instead of in separate local authority expensed care homes where they have recently found themselves - and that despite perhaps no more than a night apart previously in 65 years!). It is simply a quirk of fate that they as a couple (who happen to be childless) have no assets to their name yet have never previously been a burden to anyone, nor have they blown money on anything. Nor are they less intelligent than those contributing to this thread. But now they are needy. What should we do? What should they expect? To what are they entitled?

We should not over congratulate either ourselves as a country or those we hold up as role models in public service - at least not until we have built systems that are truly safe and are not, shall we say, "ropey".

uk1

The generational obligations enshrined either in law or in "moral law" only confirms what they have been doing for generations anyway, and the pressure is their only way to ensure that traditional role of what they feel is right.

In many of those societies it normally goes something like this.

You are brought up by your parents in a household - normally your grandparents home - that also houses your grandparents. Grandparents would basically look after you when your parents went to work. When you are old enough to go to work, get married and have your own kids, your kids would be cared for whilst you and your parents were at work by the grandparents. When your parents retired they would then look after your kids. Kids were therefore expected to continue the cycle and look after their parents when they retired, This cycle is the basis of many societies that do not have the payment of adequate government retirement benefits.

Jeff

agarnett

uk1 wrote: »

The generational obligations enshrined either in law or in "moral law" only confirms what they have been doing for generations anyway, and the pressure is their only way to ensure that traditional role of what they feel is right.

In many of those societies it normally goes something like this.

You are brought up by your parents in a household - normally your grandparents home - that also houses your grandparents. Grandparents would basically look after you when your parents went to work. When you are old enough to go to work, get married and have your own kids, your kids would be cared for whilst you and your parents were at work by the grandparents. When your parents retired they would then look after your kids. Kids were therefore expected to continue the cycle and look after their parents when they retired, This cycle is the basis of many societies that do not have the payment of adequate government retirement benefits.

Jeff

But one thing that is brand new, Jeff, which they have not been doing for generations at all, is living as long as they now do, or (surprise surprise!!) breeding anywhere near as many children per family as previously - or (even greater surprise!) suffering with inadequate, less than NHS standards of medical services around the world - yes you heard right!

Very recently, I finally saw a fantastic 2014 lecture on world population growth and development by Professor Hans Rosling - on Danish television of all places ... after some UEFA football I had been watching! The football was missable, but Hans Rosling is not.

I can now see that Professor Rosling has been earnestly trying to inform us of what is really happening to our world for years. There are previous lectures by him also worth watching such as this one in 2010.

Our world is changing fast, and our outlook must change equally fast. We can have no hangups about broken promises and entitlement. Instead we should concentrate on mathematics - something the UK voting populace hasn't been good at for a generation or two.

uk1

Haven't Asians tended to live longer?

You could argue that it is a symptom of the breaking down of social responsibility and our failing society that we have needed to resort to introduce all these care homes and benefits in our society when in other societies they wouldn't dream of driving granny to a home and dumping her.

I spend a lot of time in Singapore, and more and more I prefer many of their systems to ours. They do seem more civilised and well ordered



Jeff

bigadaj

uk1 wrote: »

Haven't Asians tended to live longer?

You could argue that it is a symptom of the breaking down of social responsibility and our failing society that we have needed to resort to introduce all these care homes and benefits in our society when in other societies they wouldn't dream of driving granny to a home and dumping her.

I spend a lot of time in Singapore, and more and more I prefer many of their systems to ours. They do seem more civilised and well ordered



Jeff

Aah, benevolent dictatorship, it's got a lot going for it.

uk1

bigadaj wrote: »

Aah, benevolent dictatorship, it's got a lot going for it.

It is a tremendous shock when having always believed that you live in the best and most civilised of societies, that perhaps "freedom" has gone too far. It is extraordinary to see markets where stuff is all left out overnight and never gets stolen, because people would never do so. Where people always pay their fares. Where no one smokes in public. Where if you deal drugs your future is very bad. And if they want to build more metro, they get on with it.

Digress again!

Jeff

agarnett

uk1 wrote: »

Haven't Asians tended to live longer?

Apparently not unless you are talking about Asians in developed societies such as Singapore and Japan. Watch Hans Rosling for country cluster statistics of life expectancy versus average number of children spawned over the past 50 years. China, India and places like Bangladesh in the 60s had very low life expectancy and very high children per family - obviously that changed fast when China introduced the one per family law, but vastly improved medical care is the main driver of transformation in the other Asian countries, and even in parts of Africa.

You could argue that it is a symptom of the breaking down of social responsibility and our failing society that we have needed to resort to introduce all these care homes and benefits in our society when in other societies they wouldn't dream of driving granny to a home and dumping her.

That may be true - even to the extent that I am sure I recently heard about quite serious levels of residential care tourism to places like Thailand where again, they wouldn't dream of dumping anyone's granny, including where we've dumped ours in Thailand.

I spend a lot of time in Singapore, and more and more I prefer many of their systems to ours. They do seem more civilised and well ordered

I roomed with a Singaporean at university - their society has been a watchword for order in my mind for 40 years.

uk1

agarnett wrote: »

Apparently not unless you are talking about Asians in developed societies such as Singapore and Japan.
That may be true - even to the extent that I am sure I recently heard about quite serious levels of residential care tourism to places like Thailand where again, they wouldn't dream of dumping anyone's granny.
I roomed with a Singaporean at university - their society has been a watchword for order in my mind for 40 years.

Bangkok and Singapore are chalk and cheese.

Have you ever visited?

Jeff