Avoiding care home fees.

BML

I don't do cynicism.

spadoosh

onwards&upwards wrote: »

Really easy to tell you’ve had no real contact with or experience of poverty.

Youre probably right.

All i know is i meet my needs and am happy with that. I think a lot of the population are similar. In that they dont aspire to financial wealth just a level of comfort that is suitable for them.

If the government meet that level of comfort. i struggle to see why i at least (and a good chunk of others) would want to work harder/at all when it wasnt necessary. If they offer to meet my basic needs, i can guarantee that i will work less.

Gavin83

BML wrote: »

I seek a political solution which we will never get from the Tories who resent taxation but a political solution has to be sought because the whole Care Industry is a mess at the moment.

The Tories tried to reform the care home charging policies and cap any potential costs and there was uproar and they had to scrap it. I'm still not sure to this day why people had an issue with it but none the less no Government (regardless of party) will want to touch this now.

And as I've already said I think most people like the idea of free care. However when they see other services reduce or taxes go up to pay for it they suddenly won't be as keen.

I honestly don't think there's the public desire to change it and despite what you say a Government won't just implement this without public backing.

I can see some argument for providing everyone with a basic level of care but I certainly don't think it should be any better than the basic homes now. If people want a better quality of service they'll need to pay for it.

spadoosh wrote: »

If the government meet that level of comfort. i struggle to see why i at least (and a good chunk of others) would want to work harder/at all when it wasnt necessary. If they offer to meet my basic needs, i can guarantee that i will work less.

It's a fair point. There comes a point where all the extra work just isn't worth it. After all, the vast majority of people work for the money.

I guess the most extreme example of this is communism. Why work hard (or at all) if it makes your quality of life worse?

The more the Government provide the less incentive there is to work. We've already got people in this country that are happy to drift through life, having not worked a day in their lives knowing the Government will support them. Lets not make that worse.

getmore4less

A lot of people used to keep their hard earned and be in a position to pass it on because those that were to inherit looked after their family.

One issue with extending care and the point that spadoosh raises is you end up with a catch 22 no one needs to work so there is no one to work the homes.

Perhaps nationalise care and deploy those that can't get jobs to impove the standards doing a few hours to earn their benefits.
(one of the primary issues is staffing levels).

spadoosh

Gavin83 wrote: »

It's a fair point. There comes a point where all the extra work just isn't worth it. After all, the vast majority of people work for the money.

I guess the most extreme example of this is communism. Why work hard (or at all) if it makes your quality of life worse?

The more the Government provide the less incentive there is to work. We've already got people in this country that are happy to drift through life, having not worked a day in their lives knowing the Government will support them. Lets not make that worse.

Its certainly communist thinking.

Im of the thought process that you teach a man to fish to feed him for a life as opposed to giving him one and seeing him again tomorrow. I think this can and does play out through generations.

Were heading towards the demolition man society.... greeting and salutations good citizen! My problem is im Edgar Friendly.....

You got that right. See, according to Cocteau's plan, I'm the enemy. Cause I like to think, I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech and freedom of choice. I'm the kind of guy who wants to sit in a greasy spoon and think, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecued ribs with the side order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol. I want to eat bacon, butter and buckets of cheese, okay? I want to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in a non-smoking section. I wanna run through the streets naked with green Jello all over my body reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly might feel the need to. Okay, pal? I've seen the future, you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sittin' around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake singing "I'm an Oscar-Meyer Wiener". You wanna live on top, you gotta live Cocteau's way. What he wants, when he wants, how he wants. Your other choice: come down here, maybe starve to death.

Demolition man seems to be a foretelling. Except we still dont have autonomous cars, awesome crash foam and the 3 sea shells.

Dymphna60

Can’t quote from phone- sorry
But regarding making people work in care homes for benefits is just a non starter.
You can ‘ make ‘ people paint a fence but you can’t make them care . Bad enough to be washed and fed by someone who does it well by an angry and resentful job seeker - no thanks .
Maybe a solution will come along with the lack of new antibiotics being developed and once again “the old mans friend “ will take us when acceptable life is over

spadoosh

getmore4less wrote: »

A lot of people used to keep their hard earned and be in a position to pass it on because those that were to inherit looked after their family.

One issue with extending care and the point that spadoosh raises is you end up with a catch 22 no one needs to work so there is no one to work the homes.

Perhaps nationalise care and deploy those that can't get jobs to impove the standards doing a few hours to earn their benefits.
(one of the primary issues is staffing levels).

Its high turnover because its usually a min wage job. Its not an easy job (physically or emotionally) and the financial remuneration is rubbish. Problem is with making people work as carers is that right now ill be surprised if there isnt an area in the country that isnt advertising for care workers (theres always care jobs available due to the high turnover) and if they cant get those jobs ive got little hope they are able to do the job.

We need to invent a baymax.

BML

Care homes are a growth industry and many in the South of England charge in excess of £1,000.00 a week, pay minimum wage and employ second rate managers yet at the same time claim they are being pauperized. Maybe the industry should be handed back to Local Authorities.

onwards&upwards

spadoosh wrote: »

Youre probably right.

All i know is i meet my needs and am happy with that. I think a lot of the population are similar. In that they dont aspire to financial wealth just a level of comfort that is suitable for them.

If the government meet that level of comfort. i struggle to see why i at least (and a good chunk of others) would want to work harder/at all when it wasnt necessary. If they offer to meet my basic needs, i can guarantee that i will work less.

They don’t Though.

jackieblack

getmore4less wrote: »

Perhaps nationalise care and deploy those that can't get jobs to impove the standards doing a few hours to earn their benefits.
(one of the primary issues is staffing levels).

Is that really who you want to be looking after your elderly/vulnerable family members?
People who can’t get any other job and who don’t want to work? Doing the bare minimum they can get away with, with no care or enthusiasm at all?
:eek:

I certainly wouldn’t!