Take on the elderly at your peril
A local lady, age 87, complained to a nationally well-known department store that an expensive mattress purchased less than six years before was uncomfortable. An 'inspector' was sent out and she subsequently received a fairly dismissive letter stating it was 'fair wear and tear'. Not content the lady sent another letter containing the following:
"My age is relevant only in so far that I am, and have been, the only user of the double mattress in question, which makes it more surprising given it has become uncomfortable so quickly in the absence of the the more energetic use it could have expected to receive from a young couple."
It remains to be seen what reply she gets to this letter, but it does reveal a truth that David Cameron and his government - not all elderly people are senile, passive, or prepared to be ripped off by taxes on all the elderly to provide care for those who need it as suggested in Andrew Dilnot's report.
Let's be clear about one thing, this 87 year old lady like many other pensioners endured tremendous hardships as young people during World World II. Either in the armed forces, or working the number of hours outlawed now by the EU in most occupations. They grew up rapidly, faced regular bombings from the enemy, but learnt to fight, and to endure, whatever was thrown at them.
After the war they were subject to food rationing, had difficulty finding housing, and received a token amount of child allowance for one child only. But they dug in and perservered until better times appeared in the late 1950s for them and their children.
Like today, the Coalition Government faced extreme difficulties. After the war, Winston Churchill, the successful wartime prime minister, was voted out of office. The incoming Labour Government, under Clement Attlee, in response to the nation's aspirations, embarked on radical social reform to set up the NHS and provide a welfare benefits safety net to temporarily help those people in real need and to ensure there was going to be no return to the social conditions of the 1920s with semi-starved barefeet children.
This week the Dilnot report suggests pensioners should pay additional taxes to fund their care in old age. This is estimated by Grant Thornton Accountants as adding 2p in the pound, applicable to pensioners only.
Those pensioners with their own homes who need care will still have to pay for their personal care, capped at £35,000, but this will not include "bed and board" costs of residential care estimated at an additional £7,000 to £10,000 per annum.
So effectively the elderly - but only those who worked; were frugal; and paid mortgages - but not those who, in some cases, have received benefits best part or all their lives who will, surprise, surprise, carry on receiving state benefits to cover all costs.
Just to add insult to injury, councils pay an average of £520 a week, while self-funders pay £631 for identical, or worse, care. The difference works out at £5,700 a year, or £17,100 over 5 years - and guess who is really paying for another stealth tax, this time created by local councils to reduce their overheads? Get the picture?
Now by the time these "reforms" are implemented the cap of £35,000 will almost certainly have increased, along with "bed and board" costs, and note no one is talking about minimum standards for care homes. The elderly will have to pay considerable more to upgrade their accommodation.
So the 87 year old and her ilk, if they are one of the 90% who do not need residential care, will have their current standard of living reduced still further by a tax only applied to pensioners - in addition, of course, to all the income tax they are probably paying now! So, Mr Cameron, what happened to "We are all in this together"!
Before anyone bleats, notably from the generation who received generous child benefits, working family tax credits, housing benefits, and a myriad of other benefits not available to those of the older generation, you will also get old and it comes round quicker than you think. Could it be paid for without trying to increase the queues for Dignitas? Yes, it could.
This week the papers carried the story of a foreign national, who had self medicated fertility pills at twice the recommended dose. She boarded a plane, just in time to give birth in London to quintuplets. This cost the NHS £200,000 and is probably irrecoverable as she claimed to be penniless. No doubt once she has seen one of Human Rights lawyers, who will make inroads into legal aid, she may well demand "The right to family life" in the UK. What other country, or government, would allow such an abuse of what was set up as a welfare safety net, but which should be advertised now as something quite different?
Another tear-jerker was the anguish expressed by the Labour Party on behalf of the 40,000 families who may be made homeless, because they will not be able to manage on housing benefits of £26,000 per year. But no one has mentioned the child benefits etc they will carry on receiving. The following is perhaps indicative as to why there is no money left to pay for care for the elderly.
A family of asylum seekers, consisting of the parents and seven children, were costing taxpayers £8,000 per month in housing benefit staying in a £2.1 million luxury Kensington townhouse. They are all dependent on benefits, but no information is available as to whether their lifestyle is one of choice, or because none speaks English.
Then there are all the other payments and taxes, some totalling billions, this Coalition Government chooses to spend money on instead, such as the annual EU contributions; bailouts from the UK to the EU and IMF used to support Greece, Ireland, and Portugal; the plethora of so-called 'green' stealth taxes which have added £200 to your home fuel bill; petrol receipts which are pushing the poorer motorists off the road; International Aid, ringfenced and engorged, including to India and Pakistan; the £ billions spent on Afghanistan and Libya, but not on the sub-standard housing provided to ordinary soldiers, yet the accommodation for senior officers - not in any personal danger - continues to be as opulent as ever; and for the Royal Family where the Coalition Government rushed through FOI legislation to ensure the public were kept in the dark on the content of discussions between the Crown and Ministers, and rushed through changes so the impoverished House of Windsor would, in future, take a percentage of Crown Estates revenue, including leases for windfarms on the seabed.
Democracy only works when politicians listen to the electorate. Today, democracy is simply not working in England and other parts of the UK. When a politician says they are listening, it translates now as "No, we are not."
Time to revolt, stand up for pensioners and fix bayonets. To the barricades!
"My age is relevant only in so far that I am, and have been, the only user of the double mattress in question, which makes it more surprising given it has become uncomfortable so quickly in the absence of the the more energetic use it could have expected to receive from a young couple."
It remains to be seen what reply she gets to this letter, but it does reveal a truth that David Cameron and his government - not all elderly people are senile, passive, or prepared to be ripped off by taxes on all the elderly to provide care for those who need it as suggested in Andrew Dilnot's report.
Let's be clear about one thing, this 87 year old lady like many other pensioners endured tremendous hardships as young people during World World II. Either in the armed forces, or working the number of hours outlawed now by the EU in most occupations. They grew up rapidly, faced regular bombings from the enemy, but learnt to fight, and to endure, whatever was thrown at them.
After the war they were subject to food rationing, had difficulty finding housing, and received a token amount of child allowance for one child only. But they dug in and perservered until better times appeared in the late 1950s for them and their children.
Like today, the Coalition Government faced extreme difficulties. After the war, Winston Churchill, the successful wartime prime minister, was voted out of office. The incoming Labour Government, under Clement Attlee, in response to the nation's aspirations, embarked on radical social reform to set up the NHS and provide a welfare benefits safety net to temporarily help those people in real need and to ensure there was going to be no return to the social conditions of the 1920s with semi-starved barefeet children.
This week the Dilnot report suggests pensioners should pay additional taxes to fund their care in old age. This is estimated by Grant Thornton Accountants as adding 2p in the pound, applicable to pensioners only.
Those pensioners with their own homes who need care will still have to pay for their personal care, capped at £35,000, but this will not include "bed and board" costs of residential care estimated at an additional £7,000 to £10,000 per annum.
So effectively the elderly - but only those who worked; were frugal; and paid mortgages - but not those who, in some cases, have received benefits best part or all their lives who will, surprise, surprise, carry on receiving state benefits to cover all costs.
Just to add insult to injury, councils pay an average of £520 a week, while self-funders pay £631 for identical, or worse, care. The difference works out at £5,700 a year, or £17,100 over 5 years - and guess who is really paying for another stealth tax, this time created by local councils to reduce their overheads? Get the picture?
Now by the time these "reforms" are implemented the cap of £35,000 will almost certainly have increased, along with "bed and board" costs, and note no one is talking about minimum standards for care homes. The elderly will have to pay considerable more to upgrade their accommodation.
So the 87 year old and her ilk, if they are one of the 90% who do not need residential care, will have their current standard of living reduced still further by a tax only applied to pensioners - in addition, of course, to all the income tax they are probably paying now! So, Mr Cameron, what happened to "We are all in this together"!
Before anyone bleats, notably from the generation who received generous child benefits, working family tax credits, housing benefits, and a myriad of other benefits not available to those of the older generation, you will also get old and it comes round quicker than you think. Could it be paid for without trying to increase the queues for Dignitas? Yes, it could.
This week the papers carried the story of a foreign national, who had self medicated fertility pills at twice the recommended dose. She boarded a plane, just in time to give birth in London to quintuplets. This cost the NHS £200,000 and is probably irrecoverable as she claimed to be penniless. No doubt once she has seen one of Human Rights lawyers, who will make inroads into legal aid, she may well demand "The right to family life" in the UK. What other country, or government, would allow such an abuse of what was set up as a welfare safety net, but which should be advertised now as something quite different?
Another tear-jerker was the anguish expressed by the Labour Party on behalf of the 40,000 families who may be made homeless, because they will not be able to manage on housing benefits of £26,000 per year. But no one has mentioned the child benefits etc they will carry on receiving. The following is perhaps indicative as to why there is no money left to pay for care for the elderly.
A family of asylum seekers, consisting of the parents and seven children, were costing taxpayers £8,000 per month in housing benefit staying in a £2.1 million luxury Kensington townhouse. They are all dependent on benefits, but no information is available as to whether their lifestyle is one of choice, or because none speaks English.
Then there are all the other payments and taxes, some totalling billions, this Coalition Government chooses to spend money on instead, such as the annual EU contributions; bailouts from the UK to the EU and IMF used to support Greece, Ireland, and Portugal; the plethora of so-called 'green' stealth taxes which have added £200 to your home fuel bill; petrol receipts which are pushing the poorer motorists off the road; International Aid, ringfenced and engorged, including to India and Pakistan; the £ billions spent on Afghanistan and Libya, but not on the sub-standard housing provided to ordinary soldiers, yet the accommodation for senior officers - not in any personal danger - continues to be as opulent as ever; and for the Royal Family where the Coalition Government rushed through FOI legislation to ensure the public were kept in the dark on the content of discussions between the Crown and Ministers, and rushed through changes so the impoverished House of Windsor would, in future, take a percentage of Crown Estates revenue, including leases for windfarms on the seabed.
Democracy only works when politicians listen to the electorate. Today, democracy is simply not working in England and other parts of the UK. When a politician says they are listening, it translates now as "No, we are not."
Time to revolt, stand up for pensioners and fix bayonets. To the barricades!
posted by Cobblers | 7:26 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home