On Friday afternoon 7th December there is going to be a debate in the House of Lords about who should be responsible for providing support for the vulnerable in our society.
In one way or another, all of us are affected. How care is funded, its quality, the ability to deliver it and its continuity. But this is going to be a debate with a difference. Less political, more reasoned and concentrating on the issues because those debating are not from Parliament, but from school sixth forms and the University of the Third Age. Both ends of the social care spectrum.
The English Speaking Union and the House of Lords have organised this debate to draw attention to the social, economic and ethical questions arising from the need for social care.
Three options will be considered. Should care be the responsibility of the State through local and national government? Should it be the responsibility of the family looking after each generation or should it be the responsibility of the third sector through religious and voluntary organisations?
A team of speakers will propose each option and the team will consist of a mixture of sixth formers from a particular school and U3A members from the area. I have been helping with students from Westminster City School and U3A members from Ealing and Hillingdon. By helping I mean how they should speak not what they should say. Each speaker has prepared their own line of argument, together with the facts and evidence to support their argument. We mentors help them with the presentation.
Although this is the sixth time that we have had a public debate of this kind in the House of Lords, it is the first time that it has been intergenerational and publically available. You can watch it on www.parliamentlive.tv and there will be excerpts on the social media. Hansard will also report it in its traditional way and you can also see their record on their website.
Social care involves us all – as both givers and receivers. Let’s see if this mixed group of the public can make a better job of debating it than parliamentarians.
If a worker on median wage, had invested their NI in the FTSE, they would have had a fund after 40 years of 550,000 pounds.
Instead you are offering 130,000 pounds.
You’ve ripped off that worker for 420,000 pounds.
That comes from redistribution, charges, and no compound interest.
That’s because rather than running a Welfare system as envisaged by Beveridge, it was turned into a Ponzi. A fraud on a massive scale.
It’s a fraud, because under section 2 of the fraud act, to produce a false set of books to induce people to pay money is a crime.
The state pension isn’t on the books. Part one is proved. Then you are sending out offers to people to pay extra money in. Part two is proved.
Now that debt that’s been hidden off the books comes to 4.7 trillion pounds. About 9 times taxation, ignoring the other debts.
So the state can’t pay that.
That’s why when it come to the question of support for social care, you will carry on the deceit. After all, if the givers (victims of fraud because its taken by force), new the extent of what was being taken from them, they would revolt.
So you won’t mention that at all. You won’t debate it.
The care system in this country is a joke.
If a member of the family or anyone else come to that, is willing to look after an elderly relative or friend, out of their sense of duty or good will, they have to pay for doing so.
And no, this is not a fallacy or wrong thinking.
Take a women say, who decides to care for her grandfather overnight, in his flat, because he is severely disabled and needs constant assistance during that night. If she stays in his rented place, to save herself the difficulty of travel or whatever other inconvenience she has, in order to do so, she will find ‘he loses’ part of his Housing and Council Tax benefit, as a result of her constant not ad hoc care.
Meaning she has to pay for the privilege of assisting an incontinent old man, because after a sleepless night, she goes out to a full time job and gets more than the minimum wage.
Can you wonder that no one wants to take on such a difficult task? If you are in your right mind, you would wonder why on earth you would want a responsibility of that kind. Not only that, to have to go through a gruelling form filling session of means testing to do so.
The dreadful, cruel and ridiculous system we have in place does itself out of money by following such a crude pattern of ‘they are getting something for nothing’ attitude.
So, instead of her helping out, as they both then have a win win situation, the State has to fund a far more expensive form of care for this old man.
Benefits are run by idiots with the mentality of the old Beadles. They have their mind on what is in it for themselves and completely miss what is in it for the public purse when they come up with their idea of saving money. And the humour is, they think they are being clever. It’s the politics of envy, the one that believes it is a lifestyle choice being disabled and sick. Those who feel sickness an advantage.
I forgot to add on this post above, the grandfather has a one bedroom flat and she has to sleep on the sofa in the living room. So, it’s not as as if it is a luxury mansion or some other kind of great situation she is in.
And, it is emotionally painful to both the sick man and the woman in such a situation. He bereft of company and genuine care whilst she is plagued with enormous guilt by not being able to assist without penalty.
This governmnet is a disgrace. You cannot even think for a moment that this can be classed as civilised. It is the attitude of the Borgias. Utter greed with added hatred toward a fellow man.
You still don’t get it.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171766_263808.pdf
Page 4.
4.7 trillion of debt on top of the reported debt. Just for the pensions.
That’s the hidden cost of the welfare state. By taking the money from people and spending it, those people haven’t got the cash to deal with the problems you’re talking about.
It’s gone Greek. It’s too late. It’s going to get much much worse.
No one is lending to the state. All of QE has been used to lend to the state, and the remainder for Brown’s share speculation.
That’s because they took the cash from those people whilst they were working. Rather than invest it, they spent it.
Now those people need to claim under the ‘insurance’, the state finds, oh dear, we’ve spent all the money. You’ll have to b****r off.
So that’s the reason for the games over care.
That’s the reason for the LCP and bumping people off. Same with all socialist systems. They have to bump off people to survive.
Your last line is where I disagree with you Blagger.
It is a Capitalist system that is the cause of this plague. We have no socialist system. Surely you don’t believe Blair and his cronies are socialists do you?
And certainly not those we have now. Ian Duncan Smith is a right wing lunatic who cannot see the forest for the trees. He pretends to be the man of thought, but, he is without any kind of insight or basic intelligence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1SShwIx8dQ
Your last line is where I disagree with you Blagger.
It is a Capitalist system that is the cause of this plague.
================
So lets explore this.
1. Are private companies running the state pension system?
The answer is no. It’s run by the state. They take the NI in exchange for the state pension.
2. What is the value of the investments for those contributions?
Zero. They have no assets because the state spent the money.
3. Is it Socialism?
Yes – it’s Beveridge as implemented. [Not what he designed, which was investment based]
4. What are the debts?
At a minimum, 4.7 trillion, according to the ONS. Personally, I know its higher, because they fail to discount correctly.
So where is the involvement of capitalism in there? There is none.
It’s all run by the state, and it a ‘socialist insurance scheme’. It’s bankrupt, and its screwing people over.
Blagger:
Lets try this.
What exactly do you mean by are private companies running the state pensions system? The answer is, yes, indirectly, it was handed over to private concerns by the Bank of England by our Eton educated Capitalists….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5Ozvk4xKtI
As to the rest of your post claiming it is all socialism, and not Capitalism. I assume you will agree that the USA is a capitalist country, you couldn’t believe otherwise could you? No. Well, how do you account for their pension funds going out of sight the same way ours have? Socialists? ROTFWL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8eOX8TPKuo
Now here is an old boy who was called an idiot. This is just for fun, right.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYBjrOlXhZw
Listen to the c**p of the responder. Now look at what we are paying an old has been. Who, unlike the woman who sleeps on her grandfathers sofa, is fiddling money right left and center to the tune of millions. Is he losing his housing benefit or pension fund. No. Isn’t that a joke on your idea of socialism?
Now for the old has beens mate, who is also an old has been. This is the super socialists you tell us we have here.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2192814/Blairs-400-000-year-taxpayers-Multi-millionaire-ex-PM-enjoys-perks-pension.html
And beware of those socialists we have working for us, cos they are coming as well.
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/4od#3452625
Now, Blagger, this is the last side track by you to me that I will respond to on this thread. I am interested in hearing what others have to say about our criminal care situation and you take my focus off that topic. Which I believe is your intention.
Pensions system is run by
DWP – not the BoE. It’s audited by the NAO (national audit office). The GAD (government actuarial department) are also involved. The money is collected by HMRC.
There is absolutely no involvement by the BoE.
So you’re just making it up. I’ll hazard a guess as to why.
You’re dependent on the state giving you other people’s money. It’s a fair bet that is the case. The socialists have set it up that people are dependent.
Now, the consequences of the state not paying its dependants are dire. I agree with you on this.
So, if you’ve paid in for a state pension, and they default on the 20p in the pound they pay out, you’re getting screwed, twice.
If you’re really disabled, and they can’t pay you, you’re screwed.
If you thought you could have it all, high pay, low working hours, retirement at 60 on an high inflation linked pension as a public sector worker, you’re going to be screwed.
It’s the simple result of a Ponzi fraud.
Be it the capitalist, Maxwell or Maddoff, or the state pension system, people get screwed by Ponzi scams.
Without up-to-date life-experience
and cooperatively participative needs & hows recognition and discussion
any “debate” will be “dead in the water”.