To wonder why young people are outraged over the dementia tax on the news

[brexitstolemyfuture]

Seems a bit strange for me the young people on the news calling the Tory's dementia tax greedy and outrageous. But who do they think will pay for it?

I guess my aibu to think some people think there is a magic money tree. Or you can just tax Google and Starbucks and pay for everything for everyone.

Their generation even!

IMO and this my opinion and know it won't be shared by everyone, but I honestly am not even thinking about how much care will cost me because if I was to get something as truly awful as dementia is I do not personally want to live the rest of my days being cared for, not knowing my own mind. Same with a terminal illness where I will be in pain or be made to be as comfortable as possible. No thanks its not how I want my life to end, I would rather die when I choose to than go through such awful days.

Why should people who've worked hard for a property portfolio have to sell it, whilst people who've been loose with money, frittered it on smoking etc, not have to? There's two sides to every debate.
The dementia tax (Socialist spin) would have been better for most than the current system

Spectre8 I think anyone that has seen a relative go through dimentia will have the same pov. Although only a tiny amount of adults get it.

I know I will refuse treatment when I get to that age, I'd rather die at home than drag it out for another 5 or so years of many hospital visit and a low quality of life.

Erm, perhaps because they care about other people other than themselves?

Young people are capable of doing that you know.

It's not just older people who need care at home.

Not everyone who doesn't own a house frittered away their money!

My 94 year old aunt died a couple of years ago. Paid rent for over seventy years, far more than she would ever had paid for a mortgage. No kids, just paid taxes her whole life until she died.

She spent the last six months of her life only requiring care, so the state made money from her life. They can use it to pay for the care of others. If she had had assets, the state would have been spared paying six months of care, but the residue of her estate would have gone to us instead of being used to help anyone else.

Social care needs to be paid for through tax, there is no other fair way to do it since we cannot know if a person will require care, or how long for if they do.
If taxes were higher on higher incomes yes it would slightly reduce the number of assets people were able to acquire, but the alternative was they were taking the gamble of handing ALL but 100k of those assets back if they need care? I think the certainly of some taxes versus the prospect of no capital to pass on would be preferable for most people.

Won't go through now anyhow, there will be too much dissent for it to get through parliament.

every cloud .......

brexitstolemyfuture Sat 10-Jun-17 15:34:12

"I know I will refuse treatment when I get to that age, I'd rather die at home than drag it out for another 5 or so years of many hospital visit and a low quality of life."

Sadly the truth is that you have no idea how you will react when you actually do get to that age. It's not as if there was a definite cut-off age when quality of life ceases equally for all people. My 85yo parents are still having a great time travelling the world and hosting their grandchildren: there is no way they intend to kill themselves just because my MIL at the same age was in a home paralysed. (Particularly as they are now needed to support their youngest son through a serious illness). Nor can they possibly know if they will ever suffer from dementia.

My MIL always did say she wanted to die before she became incapacitated. But then did nothing about it when incapacity did happen. And yes, she could have. But she didn't.

But she did not suffer from dementia. People I knew who gradually descended into dementia did not recognise the clues until it was too late to take a measured decision and organise their own deaths.

The problem is, a painless death isn't something that just happens if you stay at home and refuse treatment. By the time MIL really wanted to die, death simply refused to come. The treatment given was simply to ease the horrendous pain; refusing it to her would not have let her die.

I'm actually not that sure that the dementia tax was such a bad idea. But can absolutely see why young people engage in questions like this. They have parents, they have grandparents, they do not exist in a vacuum. My teens sat by their grandmother's bedside while she was slowly and painfully dying. Probably seems a lot more real to them than tuition fees (ds at least not planning to go to uni).

Well, young people have the right to care about all social issues.

But I don't understand why this is thought of as so bad for the old person - the house can only be sold when they are dead. So really it's about inheritance, and I'm not sure that everyone should pay tax to protect other peoples' inheritance.

There are concerns I have about it being a principle that could be extrapolated to non-social care, however.

I thinks it's different to cancer because on average it's longer and the person will definitely die from it. I can see the logic of the 'why just dementia' argument, but personally I'm think ok with drawing the line there.

Tories really are shaken aren't they? All the attacks on Corbyn and Labour voters - when their pathetic Prime Minister has managed to fuck us all. Again.

It was completely different from the present system in a way that most people haven't grasped at all & that is that it includes home care for the first time. That difference is significant. Add this to Mrs Woodentop saying it was a floor not a cap, then it was a cap & finally it was a cap & a floor.

Young people absolutely should engage in the debate. Everyone should.

The problem of this election is that it is a snap one, plus the two horrible terrorists attacks, plus the complete failure of TM in communicating her ideas, a lot of issues didn't get a proper debate on.

To look at the funding of social care we need more in depth information of the current system and the proposed system, and the voices of the most immediate stakeholders to be heard. But everything has been hijacked for political points.

Some people say this propsed system is better than the current one, is it true? With a cap and a bottom will this policy work? How much does the care cost for a elderly person with dementia per year? How much is the projected deficit if we just carry on and change nothing? What about people who need care from younger age?

TM was wrong in putting it as her main policy. People need time to properly digest and research information to make up their mind. There wasn't enough time.

On behalf of all us young people...

Do fuck off

HTH.

By the way, my man has advanced dementia and is cared for at home by a team of carers and predominantly, my under 30 year old sister. Should she not care either?

*nan

Dementia is an illness, that's what the NHS is for.

there is a magic money tree
thats what quantitive easing is. I guess it doesnt sound as good, possibly 'magic money tree' didnt sound appropriately adult. plus of course its used to pay of the debts of the richest not the poorest.

back to the dementia tax, young people are not selfish dicks perhaps?

I don't agree with the dementia tax however its interesting to see labour being up in arms against what is essentially an inheritance tax on the wealthy.

when I get to that age, I'd rather die at home than drag it out for another 5 or so years of many hospital visit and a low quality of life.

Yeah, we should just euthanise them all upon diagnosis. That's much cheaper. In fact, choosing to live is selfish so it would be best to just take them all round the back of the GP's and shoot them.

By the way, my nan has had dementia for 12 years, needed care for the last 10, lost all awareness in the last 18 months. She's also fit as a flea, is never ill and will probably outlive us all. She's 91. My grandad was her full time career until he passed away 2 years ago, at which point my sister took a break from work to look after her in her home.

To say you'd 'choose' to die at home is insensitive and bloody ridiculous. You realise dementia isn't a terminal illness right? If you choose to top yourself if you get dementia, go for it but don't inflict your warped opinion on other sufferers and imply they are somehow selfish. I actually support the right to die, but your comment is exactly the reason it's still illegal here.

So again, piss off.

Seems a bit strange for me the young people on the news calling the Tory's dementia tax greedy and outrageous. But who do they think will pay for it?

Sorry OP. Are you saying that it's strange for them to care about an issue that doesn't affect them?

Because it does.

It affected us as family when my Grandad died, pneumonia killed him off before his dementia finally got him. He was in a care home for a decade.

Then there's my Gran. In her 80s. Mostly independent. Starting to get a bit forgetful. Had a few falls and is needing a bit more help from family than before. She worked all her life before a late retirement.

What do you mean who will pay for it? Can we not afford to look after our elderly and vulnerable now? I mean I know May promised to plough billions into housing recently but surely the tories have some money left over to help look after some of the most vulnerable in our society.

It's not just older people who need care at home

Indeed. My Uncle in his 50s was temporarily placed in one to give his wife some reprieve towards the end of his days before going into a hospice. (Terminal Lung Cancer).

People who have been though this with elderly rellies KNOW how unfair the present system is. Young people naively think the state pays for it all.
I've been told that locally 15 mins twice a day is the most you get on the state .

Young people naively think the state pays for it all.

I really don't. I have been through it and KNOW too. I'm also young too. Just not naive.