At least trying to use the trillions* billions millions of pounds locked up in property to help pay for carers to look after the elderly and redistribute wealth around the country based on need not privilege is surly a good first step in the process.
I really am shocked that JC and so many people are so against this.*
Me too JamieX
But it would appear that a lot of the self-professed 'left-leaning' MNers are more concerned about their children's inheritance.
The much vaunted 'social care insurance policy' option is not something I would bother with, I'd rather take the gamble that I won't need care tbh.
And when there are many of the working poor already not paying for home contents insurance because they'd rather take the gamble that they won't need it, why on earth are posters so sure that these people would bother with social-care insurance?
Wrt the cries of 'a limit would have been better' - well, how much of a limit?
When Jezza Corbyn misunderstood the Tory proposal, he thought they'd suggested a £100k cap.
His response to this?
'Not Enough! The Tories are daft if they think £100k is enough to pay for their care!'
So - £100k is not enough according to commie Corbyn - so how much is enough?
The Tory proposal is by far the best solution I've seen so far.
The more your assets are worth, the more you need to pay yourself.
You will not be left with nothing - you will have £100k to leave to your beneficiaries.
If you don't want to do that, then unlock the tied up wealth that you have earlier - give it to your kids, go on cruises, whatever.
At least it's benefiting the economy if it's being spent.