Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
CHF

Use housing gold mine to pay for long term care

Recommended Posts

You can see the government/rich's plan.

Pass the burden of care onto the young via housing, in effect 100% taxation.

Leaving more for them...leaving everything for them really.

It's cirminal...Genius...but criminal.

What for the next generation you ask.

Since it's a pyramid scam, we'll need another 200Million immigrants in the country.  

Do tyuo want to like in a UK with 300Million people in it ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This contains far to much common sense and hard truth to get a wider airing but it should be all over Sky,  BBC news and in all the grown up papers.

This section really nails it...

 

But that is just the start. Allowing for RPI inflation, the price of £9,350 in 1975 is equivalent to around £75,000 now. Where did the other £250,000 of its current value come from?

It was created by the way society works. By a shortage of housing. By that Miras subsidy. By a growing population. By those who buy more than one home. So there is an argument that society has a right to its share of that windfall gain.

..and tidily refutes those who oppose inheritance tax because  '..the money has already been taxed'.    For most estates,  the bulk of the value is the house,  the value of which has been given a massive,  tax free boost courtesy of state housing policy.  This free money should be taxed more heavily that peoples' labour. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You either look after yourself or your house will look after you......your kids care for you otherwise your house will not be caring for them. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Simon Taylor said:

..and tidily refutes those who oppose inheritance tax because  '..the money has already been taxed'.    For most estates,  the bulk of the value is the house,  the value of which has been given a massive,  tax free boost courtesy of state housing policy.  This free money should be taxed more heavily that peoples' labour. 

That's where they got it wrong.

 

The free money shouldnt exist.  Housing costs should be driven down to let the young live and the economy recover.


The old, well, they're no longer of use to society.  If the young dont get a better deal this pyramid scam will collapse regardless.

We all live, we all die, to think the old should be keep going in favour of the young/productive is obscene.

Oddly it's the old people driving the ponzi. :lol::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People who build a life time partnership often having children are treated as a couple in law when it suits.....the inheritance law is highly prejudential and unjust.....having to go through a legal marriage in name just to benefit financially, what a farce.....what about single parents through no fault of their own who have children they can't get a double whammy...their kids suffer, then they suffer again. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, TheCountOfNowhere said:

That's where they got it wrong.

 

The free money shouldnt exist.  Housing costs should be driven down to let the young live and the economy recover.


The old, well, they're no longer of use to society.  If the young dont get a better deal this pyramid scam will collapse regardless.

We all live, we all die, to think the old should be keep going in favour of the young/productive is obscene.

Oddly it's the old people driving the ponzi:lol::lol:

And driving expensive, high end, automatic German cars. Badly. Normally in hedges. houses, kids, other OAPs ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, spyguy said:

And driving expensive, high end, automatic German cars. Badly. Normally in hedges. houses, kids, other OAPs ...

And who votes for the same shiesters that allow them to line their own pockets via the ponzi ?

And who allows the banks to lend to the young to keep prices up ?

And who benefit ?

 

THE BANKERS AND THE 1000 YEAR OLD FAMILIES THAT LEECH OFF OUR BACKS.

 

Q.E.D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheCountOfNowhere said:

Pass the burden of care onto the young via housing, in effect 100% taxation.

That's only going to work for those who are on state care or who have some kind of private financial coverage... or a caring family who will spoon feed you and clean your sh1tty ar$e three times a day.

The vast majority of Britain will be forking out in the region of £20-£50k per year for care... and that price will escalate significantly with unwinding of cost controls on medicines, the eventual breakdown of the NHS, and a huge increase in care age demographics.

"your home is your pension".... do the maths...

You don't all of a sudden turn 65 and dementia sets in, then you keel over 6 months later. These costs can run into the decades, increasing at every significant downturn in your health.

This IS the REAL crisis facing Britain, the USA, Canada, and most westernised nations.

9726779b4001277d1a2ef3495cf3de49.jpg

UK housing is nothing more than an untapped piggy bank for the UK state. Anybody not figured that out yet?

It is in fact the only thing that will fund the boomers great die off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would remove any ring fencing of assets for any means testing purpose, I see no reason why a person with 300k equity in a house should be treated differently to someone with 300k savings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the people I've known over the age of 50 who've died didn't end up in care homes. They died of heart attacks, pneumonia, cancer etc. in their 50s-80s. The ones that became infirm lived in low cost sheltered housing with the rent paid from their pensions. 

This observation is backed up by the ONS http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/ageing/articles/changesintheolderresidentcarehomepopulationbetween2001and2011/2014-08-01

I do know someone who work in the care home field though - their parents signed over their home to them when they were relatively young (late 50s) specifically to avoid having to pay care home fees should they need care when they were 68+ (I think there's an 8 year waiting time limit). I suppose that approach does need a trusting family though, not one full of seething resentful gen-x/millennials wishing that all 'boomers' would hurry up and die.  

Personally, if I get diagnosed with untreatable dementia, my plan is to check out while I'm still capable of making the decision myself, rather than the pointless zombie hell of advanced dementia, and the kids not getting any inheritance...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Simon Taylor said:

But that is just the start. Allowing for RPI inflation, the price of £9,350 in 1975 is equivalent to around £75,000 now. Where did the other £250,000 of its current value come from?

it comes from the future...the young need to be given a good education and training...they have a lot of work to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, goldbug9999 said:

I would remove any ring fencing of assets for any means testing purpose, I see no reason why a person with 300k equity in a house should be treated differently to someone with 300k savings.

come on...you should know by now that owners of land and property are special...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, newbonic said:

Personally, if I get diagnosed with untreatable dementia, my plan is to check out while I'm still capable of making the decision myself, rather than the pointless zombie hell of advanced dementia, and the kids not getting any inheritance...

I prefer Bill Hicks idea:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, newbonic said:

 

Personally, if I get diagnosed with untreatable dementia, my plan is to check out while I'm still capable of making the decision myself, rather than the pointless zombie hell of advanced dementia, and the kids not getting any inheritance...

All depends, there are over 100 types of dementia....some are living with the fairies, no worries, no cares, everything done for them, all provided for.... could live for many years, strong in body, weak in mind.....others die because become weak in body but still strong I mind.....;)

Edited by winkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, goldbug9999 said:

I would remove any ring fencing of assets for any means testing purpose, I see no reason why a person with 300k equity in a house should be treated differently to someone with 300k savings.

+ 300K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, winkie said:

You either look after yourself or your house will look after you......your kids care for you otherwise your house will not be caring for them. ;)

Exactly what we did with my mother in Law and am doing with my Mum. The care homes bit is also a bit of a fear story there are a total apparently of about 300,000 people in care homes not really a massive amount when you consider the population 65+ is estimated at around 9 million

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

3 hours ago, Wayward said:

come on...you should know by now that owners of land and property are special...

Or just people who saved and worked hard - so why would someone with no assets and lived on benefit all their life get better treatment than someone who has paid taxes and sought to save ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Greg Bowman said:

The care homes bit is also a bit of a fear story there are a total apparently of about 300,000 people in care homes not really a massive amount when you consider the population 65+ is estimated at around 9 million

Depends on how you are rationalising your argument.

This here graph says to me at that we are 'sleepwalking' into a massive financial crisis, starting about 2025.

united-kingdom-population-pyramid-2016.g

Same applies to USA, Canada, Australia, Europe.

And many of the 50-ish generation are very unhealthy now. Obesity & it's related ill-side effects being the biggest one. Apt on the graph shape too, innit? Big fat bulge in the 50 somethings.

united-states-population-pyramid-2016.gi

canada-population-pyramid-2014.gif

australia-population-pyramid-2014.gif

european-union-population-pyramid-2014.g

Further, from a paper a while ago:

Quote

The future course of pensions policy in the UK remains to be seen, but doing nothing is not an option. As this article has shown, there are only three ways to support an ageing population: consume less during working life (save more or tax more), consume less during retirement, or work for longer. If we make no active choices about which margins to adjust, a choice will be made for us, and it may well be a choice we do not like.

Boomers haven't by in large been saving, rather spending.

Medical care costs for fatties is vastly greater than skinnies.

And locked in pensions... well, they will be retiring, en masse...plus nobody is going to hire 60 somethings versus teenagers.

Spells crisis to me.

Edited by cashinmattress

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Greg Bowman said:

 

 

Or just people who saved and worked hard - so why would someone with no assets and lived on benefit all their life get better treatment than someone who has paid taxes and sought to save ?

dont disagree, point I am making if owners of property are given privileges over owners of other asset classes, ie productive asset classes. I am sure this is cultural and manifestation of a fixation on land and property as principle evidence of status arising from feudalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Next General Election   90 members have voted

    1. 1. When do you predict the next general election will be held?


      • 2019
      • 2020
      • 2021
      • 2022

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.