|
LemonDrizzle posted:The government picks up the tab, afaik. It seems to me that this policy will likely result in more people receiving necessary care that would otherwise not be available to them. That can only be seen as a good thing. But because it came from the mouth of a tory and isn't "full communism now" everyone itt is losing their poo poo over it Has labour said anything to address this issue in their manifesto?
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 05:24 |
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:OK, so what would be a proper inheritance tax that exempts a primary house, and how much do you believe it would raise? 100% on everything, use the money (or the military) to nationalise all houses and give everyone a house and food.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:08
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:OK, so what would be a proper inheritance tax that exempts a primary house, and how much do you believe it would raise? you seem real eager for people whose inheritance is going to be a house and basically nothing else to lose it to pay for care while people with loads of money aren't affected
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:09
|
|
|
fridge corn posted:It seems to me that this policy will likely result in more people receiving necessary care that would otherwise not be available to them. That can only be seen as a good thing. But because it came from the mouth of a tory and isn't "full communism now" everyone itt is losing their poo poo over it Much like paying NI contributions covers things like state pension it should also cover care. Inheritance tax on houses should be a completely separate issue
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:09
|
|
|
fridge corn posted:It seems to me that this policy will likely result in more people receiving necessary care that would otherwise not be available to them. That can only be seen as a good thing. But because it came from the mouth of a tory and isn't "full communism now" everyone itt is losing their poo poo over it Nah, we just think the rich should be paying for that stuff via higher taxes. This is just loving over people who are unlucky enough to get sick when they're old and don't have a vault filled with gold to pay for it outright. The solution is to make care free, and then you can go hog wild on inheritance
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:10
|
|
|
The rich won't be affected by it how hard is that to understand. It'll be the middle class who in the next generation have their assets stripped. How is that good.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:10
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:Oh look, unironic appeals to "Radical Centrism"! This is definitely a winning tactic that will not fall flat on its face!" quote:The radical center transcends left and right but takes important elements of both sides. help im dying.... from American fascism apparently (narrowly beating out British fascism by a boot).
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:11
|
|
|
"Sorry kids you're losing the home you grew up in and wanted to raise your own kids in because your mam's brain is mush and we have to sell it so she can be cared for"
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:12
|
|
|
The problem is that the very olds who have sense have been making living wills. transfer all assets to their boomer children, get given an allowance in return, and then hope they live long enough to get out of paying inheritance tax. Second stage is of course that when they are dead the boomer children get a nice little pension top up renting out their house.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:13
|
|
|
^^They do check a few years back to make sure this wasn't done right before death or specifically to avoid tax so it's not quite that easy.Jose posted:"Sorry kids you're losing the home you grew up in and wanted to raise your own kids in because your mam's brain is mush and we have to sell it so she can be cared for" Then a few elections down the line wait for the bitter dispossessed ex-middle class 'inheritors' to vote in parties which will deny the elderly access to any care unless they are making some contributions because 'it isn't fair that they get it for free but I lost my mums house', completely blind to the fact that they'll probably be caught out by such a rule. Actually ronya that's what you're getting at isn't it?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:17
|
|
|
namesake posted:^^They do check a few years back to make sure this wasn't done right before death or specifically to avoid tax so it's not quite that easy. 7 years, isn't it?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:21
|
|
|
namesake posted:^^They do check a few years back to make sure this wasn't done right before death or specifically to avoid tax so it's not quite that easy. It's about 7 years. Which is why the post specifically states: quote:get given an allowance in return, and then hope they live long enough to get out of paying inheritance tax. e: beat ^^
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:22
|
|
|
Miftan posted:7 years, isn't it? Might be time to have a chat with my mum and Dad.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:22
|
|
|
Bape Culture posted:The rich won't be affected by it how hard is that to understand. Not their assets mate. I thought you were against ppl getting help from their parents?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:24
|
|
|
Jose posted:"Sorry kids you're losing the home you grew up in and wanted to raise your own kids in because your mam's brain is mush and we have to sell it so she can be cared for" The kids in this scenario are 50+
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:25
|
|
|
Breath Ray posted:Not their assets mate. I thought you were against ppl getting help from their parents? A house is the most significant asset of all. I'm not against it, that's why I'm a big fan of you and your rich land lord Dad haha.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:26
|
|
|
Please don't shame people for settling down a bit late
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:27
|
|
|
fridge corn posted:It seems to me that this policy will likely result in more people receiving necessary care that would otherwise not be available to them. Do you even know how the current system works? The only people who will pay less money under the proposed system are those whose cash savings are between £23,500 and £100,000 who also either don't own a house or own a very very very cheap one. People who have less than £23,500 in cash savings and own a home (with the value of their home and their savings combined worth more than £100,000) will pay more. In many cases a lot more. Everyone else pays the same. The second group is a lot bigger than the first one, and includes a lot more people who have never had very much but lucked into getting a house when they were actually affordable. Yes, it's unfair that houses are more expensive now, but that's down to a lot more than just old people owning houses and the solution is not "force owner occupiers to sell to large companies".
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:28
|
|
|
I can understand the arguement that it's a bit of a half measure but im surprised about the backlash against this policy. Given the current state of things it stands to both improve care and lessen the burden on the NHS. As it stands we are most likely looking at another tory government after this election, so im pleased that they've come out with this especially considering they didn't really have to address the issue
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:28
|
|
|
that's why they call them grand kids
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:28
|
|
|
Breath Ray posted:The kids in this scenario are 50+ My father's getting in-home care (and is paying for it, as he has sufficient savings) and I'm 33.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:29
|
|
|
My grandfather needed a full time carer as well, and my parents had just turned 40 when it happened.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:32
|
|
|
Bape Culture posted:A house is the most significant asset of all. Sorry I should have emphasised that I meant the house is not THEIR (the heirs') asset, but the heirs' parents'. I mean we could dispose of ppl in passage graves in accordance with their wishes to never give up their home in this life or the next but seems better to use the sale of the house.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:34
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:Do you even know how the current system works? There is nothing to suggest there will be a forced sale to large companies, and the measure only meaningfully affects dead people who have significantly more property wealth than most: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1475-5890.2016.12083/full 
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:35
|
|
|
Breath Ray posted:The kids in this scenario are 50+ I'm 29, my mam is 63 and her family have a history of dementia and alzheimers
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:35
|
|
|
Breath Ray posted:Houses are a good place to levy inheritance tax because you can't take them offshore. Are you sure about that?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:38
|
|
|
Jose posted:I'm 29, my mam is 63 and her family have a history of dementia and alzheimers But you've already got a house of your own!
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:40
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:There is nothing to suggest there will be a forced sale to large companies, and the measure only meaningfully affects dead people who have significantly more property wealth than most: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1475-5890.2016.12083/full It'll affect people who have around the median level of wealth, it will not affect* people who are very well off. *The correlation between cash wealth and property wealth is important but is not addressed in that paper; I'm assuming it's large and positive which seems fairly safe.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:41
|
|
|
Bape Culture posted:The rich won't be affected by it how hard is that to understand. Because there is no middle class.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:42
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:Because there is no middle class. Alright. The top end of the "working class".
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:51
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Might be time to have a chat with my mum and Dad. If you're going to avoid inheritance tax you might as well do it properly and have the assets transferred to the grandkids.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:51
|
|
|
One of the problems of the scheme is that regardless of the merits of the actual policy itself, it's still a sop to the idea that social care is a commodity to be paid for and not a guaranteed right that should be available to everyone, since no amount of personal responsibility can stop you getting dementia. Like, have inheritance tax by all means, but it should apply universally and be used to pay for social care, rather than directly punishing people who both happen to have money and are hit with dementia with no fault of their own.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:52
|
|
|
Have money (but not that much)
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 11:55
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:Like, have inheritance tax by all means, but it should apply universally and be used to pay for social care, rather than directly punishing people who both happen to have money and are hit with dementia with no fault of their own. Does the policy itself focus on dementia and mental health care?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 12:01
|
|
|
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...d=facebook-post I hope everybody is getting to know the renren.com layout!
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 12:06
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:It'll affect people who have around the median level of wealth
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 12:08
|
|
|
"What Will Happen To Me, Mrs May?": Heart-Wrenching Call From Carer
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 12:09
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:the inheritor would have to take out a tiny mortgage of a few grand to secure the house. Since the cost of servicing that mortgage would be vastly lower than any rent they might realistically be paying pre-inheritance, they're still coming out miles ahead. If they've been living with their parents as carers they've probably not been paying any rent, and not everyone can get a mortgage you smug fucker.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 12:16
|
|
|
Miftan posted:http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...d=facebook-post these threads will finally be put out of everyones misery
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 12:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 05:24 |
|
|
Bape Culture posted:Alright. The top end of the "working class". Stop trying to divide the working class, that's only in the interest of capital.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2017 12:17
|
|