Health Care

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Margaret Goodwin on July 16, 2009 at 2:14pm

Sounds scandalous!! Where did you see the quote Arthur? I have trawled the BBC website and can't find anything about it......tell us more. Was it Ben Bradshawe who said it? Let's start a petition!!

Best
Marg

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Arthur Harrison on July 17, 2009 at 12:33pm

Hi Margaret
Yes this is just a proposal at the moment but these things soon turn into fact.
http://news.stv.tv/uk/109189-government-weighs-20000-pounds-charge-...
This above link will give the full story.
Arthur H

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by John E Pallister on July 17, 2009 at 3:10pm

Hi Arthur,
I wonder, with a general election on the horizon, and the fact that the majority of voters are the 'older generation' if they think they would get away with this idea?

Cheers

John

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Margaret Goodwin on July 18, 2009 at 8:50am

Thanks for the link Arthur - I see from the article below the quote that it is not actually a proposal to take £20,000 from old people across the board.....phew! Thank goodness for that! The suggestion is to get everyone who would not qualify for benefits to pay for an insurance product that would ultimately cost them £20 - 30k. According to the article the average Brit pays 30k for care in old age, 20% pay over 50k and those with serious conditions such as Alzheimers pay up to200k (+ state help).......I don't know about you but those figures sound like lottery wins to me.
So what it comes down to, is that people who have previously had to sell their homes to pay for care, would now have to buy an insurance policy, instead, to cover those costs.....or have I got it wrong? The state has always paid for the (comparatively) less well off - like me - so I do not have an axe to grind. I think if I owned a house and did not want to be forced to sell it in a poor market I would welcome the idea of buying an insurance policy instead.
Am I missing the point? I'm beginning to think it sounds like a good idea. The only thing that niggles slightly in the back of my mind is that it is a continuation of the creeping privatisation of the state......and we have to keep an eye on that. I have nothing against the public/private partnership idea in principle it's just when it starts running away with itself that I get nervous.

Thanks for this thought-provoking topic Arthur, it had completely escaped me (and I love current affairs) but I have been more busy than usual with a sick friend over the last couple of weeks.

What do you think about it, John, have I completely misinterpreted the article?

Best

Marg

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Arthur Harrison on July 18, 2009 at 11:22am

Hi Margaret
I think you have it as I see the scheme. In itself it is not a great threat, BUT, government ideas are rolled out to test the water then before you know it things are on the move to law.
Like you say, Where do they get these cost figures from?
I have a life insurance out for £4000 that I took in 1990, seemed a lot at the time now because of the "economic climate" I am asked to up my premium from £16 to £22 (almost 30%) so what would the likes of the lowest above estimate (20K) cost.
I think most people would need a second mortgage to pay.

Arthur H

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Arthur Harrison on July 18, 2009 at 11:25am

Hi John
I think that is a valid point and considering the fact that a greater percentage of "older people" do most of the voteing such a scheme would not be pushed untill the start of a new term.

Arthur H

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by John E Pallister on July 18, 2009 at 11:39am

Hi Margaret,
Like Arthur said, it looks like someone is dipping thier toes in the water to see if the topic is too hot. Perhaps if it is more widely publiced, we might get a more responsive reaction.

Cheers

John

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Margaret Goodwin on July 19, 2009 at 1:01pm

You are so right......even when I was reading it I thought the figures sounded extremely low. What I think they have done, to achieve those rates, is to lump in all the people who pay for care at home (even if it's only a meels on wheels helper) which then brings the average 'cost' down across the board.

Very sneaky!

Well we're watching them!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Margaret Goodwin on July 19, 2009 at 1:04pm

I do agree John but they're trying to con the wrong ones, quite frankly. Old folks know the true cost of care only too well and trying to make those figures stand up won't work. As you say, they are in the run up to the election......so treat everything with suspicion!!!

Best

Marg

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by John E Pallister on July 19, 2009 at 9:48pm

Hi Magaret,
Hidden agenda comes to mind here.

Cheers

John

▶ Reply to This

▶ Reply to This