Ponty
pfm Member
Absolutely not. Apologies if it came across that way, I was just trying to set out the scale of some of the numbers involved in the context of how we pay for it.
Who should pay for social care ?
- Thread starter hifinutt
- Start date
Absolutely not. Apologies if it came across that way, I was just trying to set out the scale of some of the numbers involved in the context of how we pay for it.
Spraggons Den
pfm Member
Hang on what about all the VAT I pay when I buy stuff and come to think of it how about car tax, the tax on insurance, the tax on petrol and when I had my own company Corporation Tax.
Ponty
pfm Member
There are countless other public services which need paying for, not just care. Per the above, I was just trying to set out the scale of some of the numbers involved in the context of how we pay for it.
Spraggons Den
pfm Member
Firstly at least the Johnson government has put in a plan to deal with the cost of social care issue, something previous administrations of different colours had declined to do.
The cost of these places are frightening and with the baby boom generation about to start developing Alzheimer's/Vascular Dementia in large numbers and needing care for god knows how long- this is indeed a nettle that needs grasping.
I believe the original plans were based on care costs from the average length of time a person spends in care (about nine months) and each of us would have to build a ring fenced pot equal to that amount during our working lives. The pot would be taken by the State if, for example you drop dead of a heart attack after England win the Ashes down under, without drawing on it. Conversely, if you live in a care home for ten years after going ga ga then the State will cover the extra costs long after your own pot was exhausted.
This has advantages and disadvantages over what has been introduced.
The cost of these places are frightening and with the baby boom generation about to start developing Alzheimer's/Vascular Dementia in large numbers and needing care for god knows how long- this is indeed a nettle that needs grasping.
I believe the original plans were based on care costs from the average length of time a person spends in care (about nine months) and each of us would have to build a ring fenced pot equal to that amount during our working lives. The pot would be taken by the State if, for example you drop dead of a heart attack after England win the Ashes down under, without drawing on it. Conversely, if you live in a care home for ten years after going ga ga then the State will cover the extra costs long after your own pot was exhausted.
This has advantages and disadvantages over what has been introduced.
ks.234
Half way to Infinity
Why is it only public services that cause the ‘how do we pay for it’ concern. Why are there not similar sharp intake of breath concerns when it comes to starting a war, paying for a vanity project like HS2, paying for the monarchy, or throwing millions of Covid money at Tory supporters in a VIP lane?
The problem is not finding the money, the problem is finding the political will
ks.234
Half way to Infinity
But Johnson has not put in place a plan to deal with the cost of social care.
The money he has allocated will go to the NHS in the first place, only if there is any surplus will it go to Care.
Neither does he propose to pay for care for nursing or dementia’s Care. Those with savings under £120k can apply to their local authority for means tested funding, but where are local authorities to get the money from?
The £86k ceiling is meaningless as it only applies to ‘personal care’, it does not apply to the ‘hotel fees’ element of the cost of staying in a care home, which is the majority of the total fees.
As an example, I am in the process of have looking at a Care Home for my father. The Care home costs will be £1250 per week for residential, which rises to £1350 to £1400 for nursing care and £1400 to £1500 for dementia care. Johnson’s promise that no one will have to lose their house is a nonsense because the vast majority of the cost of staying in a care home is not ‘personal care’ but residential costs. My father for example, will still have to fund the vast majority of his overall cost of staying in a care home.
Bob McC
Living the life of Riley
If you think the govts plan is for the state to pick up a bill of £1700 a week once the £86K threshold has been met you are living in cloud cuckoo land.
Also don’t forget that the govt will not cover board and lodge costs element of a care home stay. These can approach £1000 a week.
In fact all the govt have done is tinker with a few thresholds.
Most people will still have to sell their homes because they won’t have a spare £86K hanging around.
Le Baron
Unbiased advice at reasonable rates
Entirely the wrong question. Even in the currency-limited private sector no solvent entity poses that question. Government isn't currency constrained (unless it chooses to cap itself for no reason). Ergo the question is incoherent.
Spraggons Den
pfm Member
I had gathered that already from the name of the tax - the Health and Social Care Levy.
Spraggons Den
pfm Member
From the document presented to Parliament: We will invest £5.4 billion over the next three years to deliver the ...commitments set out in this document.
Spraggons Den
pfm Member
These are already covered by the NHS-funded Nursing Care Allowance which is paid at a flat rate of £187.60 a week directly to the home. I recognise that this may not always be sufficient depending on the level of support needed for the individual.
Bob McC
Living the life of Riley
So not covered at all then.
What a fatuous post.
How much do you think the nursing needs of an incontinent 82 year old with dementia actually cost?
Spraggons Den
pfm Member
Surely board and lodge is exactly what Residential Care costs are intended to cover.
From the Carehome.co.uk website:
A residential care home provides accommodation and 24 hour personal care:
meals throughout the day
getting in/out of bed
help with toileting, bathing and dressing
medication
There is also an example in the governments own document which is based on a poor chap who moves into a residential home in order to show the difference the proposed changes will make.
Is that surplus after the 40 hospitals that BJ promised at election time ? Remember those ? Because BJ doesn't. I don't believe anything anymore.
Spraggons Den
pfm Member
It depends what you mean by Hotel Fees but the basics of accommodation, food, medication and ablutions are covered by social care in a residential home. If on the other hand it refers to free use of the gym/spa facilities and the nine hole golf course- then no that would be outside the scope.
Spraggons Den
pfm Member
Well if we use KSs example of his Dad from a few posts further up, they would appear to be in the region of £150-250 a week which is not a million miles from the £187 a week figure on the NHS website.
Le Baron
Unbiased advice at reasonable rates
The only surplus they are willing to expend is their vast surplus of lies.
ks.234
Half way to Infinity
Sorry if I didn’t make it clear but I am recognising that ‘personal care’ is what Johnson is on about, not residential care. And yes, I am of course aware of the Care allowance already available.
But my point was that if a person goes into a care home there is still the bulk of the care home fees that fall outside ‘personal care’ to pay for.
So yes, there is already the NHS Care Allowance, and Johnson’s proposals might add a bit to that, but he has made it clear that the ‘hotel fees’, which are by far the largest proportion of the overall week charge, will still have to be paid.
ks.234
Half way to Infinity
At present Care home fees are only covered if you have no other means of paying them. At present anyone with assets such as a house are expected to sell their house and pay up.
Last edited: