Mum's home, not to give it to equity release or a care home.
Discussion
WinstonWolf said:
SpeckledJim said:
WinstonWolf said:
SpeckledJim said:
WinstonWolf said:
Integroo said:
WinstonWolf said:
And one day you'll have a family and a home that you've paid every penny of tax due on and your opinion will change.
No, it won't. My politics are not based on my own selfish desires. Oh, and no tax is paid on massive increases in wealth caused by house price inflation, which so many of the current senior generation have benefited from.
But calling it a home when they don't live there any more, and never will again, is sophistry.
It's a house, not a home.
It's a very valuable yet completely useless asset at a time when they're burning through an awful lot of somebody's cash.
WinstonWolf said:
Integroo said:
WinstonWolf said:
Ah, so your motivation is keeping your own taxation lower, finally we're getting there. You're not so altruistic after all 
No, it isn't. Stop misrepresenting me, it doesn't make your own arguments more persuasive. I won't deny that I am not fond of my tax being spent on paying for the care of the wealthy in order to protect their children's inheritance. There are many things that are severely underfunded where money could be much better spent.
markcoznottz said:
It's patently obvious he thinks that that piece of equity belongs to the state. Quite why is not clear. People of a left persuasion often speak for other people's money, it eats thier insides away because to them they have already allocated it to a worthy cause of thier choice. Blizzard.
In this case, the 'worthy cause' being your own care?markcoznottz said:
Yep it's just an old fashioned asset grab fuelled by some misguided morality. Property is theft.
It's not an asset grab you imbecile. Your mischaracterisation of the issue is startling, I can't decide if it is because you are thick or because your bias is so entrenched you simply cannot fathom that you are talking nonsense. Explain to me in simple terms how expecting someone who can afford to do so to pay for their own care rather than relying on a State hand out is an asset grab?
Oh, and means testing of benefits is not a 'leftie' / 'commie' / 'marxist' policy by any stretch of the imagination (ps turning politics into a left v right, you v me, us v them is a very binary, American way of looking at things - politics is not so straight cut - my views on some things may be described as left, on other things right, or any shade of grey in between).
markcoznottz said:
It's patently obvious he thinks that that piece of equity belongs to the state. Quite why is not clear.
Nobody is asking anyone to hand their home to the State. Think before you speak. markcoznottz said:
People of a left persuasion often speak for other people's money, it eats thier insides away because to them they have already allocated it to a worthy cause of thier choice. Blizzard.
Except, I want you to spend your money on your own care, you want to spend my money (and other tax payers money) on your own care? Who is it here that is speaking for other's peoples money? anonymous said:
[redacted]
You can pay for whatever you want privately. I don't think the care provided by the state should be luxurious - quite frankly, once you are in the throes of dementia you are unlikely to notice much - but a certain level of dignity and respect should be offered, and I think this should include individual rooms.
markcoznottz said:
It's patently obvious he thinks that that piece of equity belongs to the state. Quite why is not clear. People of a left persuasion often speak for other people's money, it eats thier insides away because to them they have already allocated it to a worthy cause of thier choice. Blizzard.
You honestly don’t understand any of this do you? The State only comes into play if you cannot afford the care costs. All the State is doing is making sure that before it picks up the tab that individual is in genuine need by saying they can’t go and hide their money and screw over other people.
It’s the precise opposite of the leftie drivel you’re going on about. The only leftie in this thread is you and your demand that others pay your way when you have plenty of money to pay your own way. You have the mindset of the Islington champagne socialist. And just as delusional and uneducated.
Why don’t you take a break from frothing and actually think about what you are say you Commie Marxist loon.
Integroo said:
WinstonWolf said:
Where other people's money could be better spent...
So, you do support lower taxation. Yet, you want the State to fund your care. The hypocrisy is baffling. You seem to support forcing other people selling their homes to subsidise *your* tax/NI
WinstonWolf said:
I'm guessing comprehension isn't one of your strong points...
You seem to support forcing other people selling their homes to subsidise *your* tax/NI
The mental gymnastics is astounding. I am selfishly wanting to 'subsidise' my tax (what does that even mean?) by supporting people paying for their own care if they can afford it. Baffling logic. You seem to support forcing other people selling their homes to subsidise *your* tax/NI
WinstonWolf said:
Integroo said:
WinstonWolf said:
Where other people's money could be better spent...
So, you do support lower taxation. Yet, you want the State to fund your care. The hypocrisy is baffling. You seem to support forcing other people selling their homes to subsidise *your* tax/NI
From an impassionate point of view asset price inflation is driven by need. It's worth what someone wants to pay. The rush into bricks was in part caused by browns destruction of the best private pension in Europe, btl became fashionable because people assumed quite rightly that it was a good investment. It always 'looks' easy from the outside, bare in mind the 2007 and on crash caused investors a lot of grief, but the groo can't be arsed with real world specifics. You used phrases like unearned, undeserved, and dropped into thier lap, to describe an investment. Silly little Marxist students saying that boomers haven't 'earnt' on thier investment is a nonsense quite frankly. If anyone had said in the late 70's that those houses would be worth a million you would have been laughed out the room, especially considering the state of the country. But those people prioritised paying the mortgage above all else, and probably had a very hard time '89 when ir rates went skywards. Investment is a gamble, a game of chance, they 'earnt' the money by deferring enjoyment of selling when times were hard in a gamble that prices would go up. Socialists think that they 'deserve' some of that.
One of my customers had a 996 gt2, which he bought for low £40ks about ten years ago. He didn't sell during 2009-10 when traders were offering him £45 trade. He had balls of steel and kept faith that they would pick up, sold 18 months ago for £125k. Is that £80 profit 'undeserved' 'unearned' or did it 'fall in his lap'integroo? I would have lost faith and got out. I think people of a left persuasion are just bitter that someone in life has been 'lucky' either through intuition or dogged determination.
markcoznottz said:
He understands very well. The whole care thing is a red herring, the actual difference between means testing and a blanket funded system like in Scotland is negligible. And despite what anyone says we can afford it. How many times have we been told the NHS is about to collapse, to the extent we no longer believe it. Means testing usually is a waste of time because it usually breaks even or costs money. Logistical nightmare as well.
From an impassionate point of view asset price inflation is driven by need. It's worth what someone wants to pay. The rush into bricks was in part caused by browns destruction of the best private pension in Europe, btl became fashionable because people assumed quite rightly that it was a good investment. It always 'looks' easy from the outside, bare in mind the 2007 and on crash caused investors a lot of grief, but the groo can't be arsed with real world specifics. You used phrases like unearned, undeserved, and dropped into thier lap, to describe an investment. Silly little Marxist students saying that boomers haven't 'earnt' on thier investment is a nonsense quite frankly. If anyone had said in the late 70's that those houses would be worth a million you would have been laughed out the room, especially considering the state of the country. But those people prioritised paying the mortgage above all else, and probably had a very hard time '89 when ir rates went skywards. Investment is a gamble, a game of chance, they 'earnt' the money by deferring enjoyment of selling when times were hard in a gamble that prices would go up. Socialists think that they 'deserve' some of that.
One of my customers had a 996 gt2, which he bought for low £40ks about ten years ago. He didn't sell during 2009-10 when traders were offering him £45 trade. He had balls of steel and kept faith that they would pick up, sold 18 months ago for £125k. Is that £80 profit 'undeserved' 'unearned' or did it 'fall in his lap'integroo? I would have lost faith and got out. I think people of a left persuasion are just bitter that someone in life has been 'lucky' either through intuition or dogged determination.
Quite frankly I don't much care whether wealth is earned or unearned. If it exists, you can pay for your own care. The fact that many of the current older generation are wealthy through no fault of their own, certainly not because of their hard work, is neither here nor there. (Oh, and it doesn't take balls of steel not to sell an appreciating asset, don't make me laugh). From an impassionate point of view asset price inflation is driven by need. It's worth what someone wants to pay. The rush into bricks was in part caused by browns destruction of the best private pension in Europe, btl became fashionable because people assumed quite rightly that it was a good investment. It always 'looks' easy from the outside, bare in mind the 2007 and on crash caused investors a lot of grief, but the groo can't be arsed with real world specifics. You used phrases like unearned, undeserved, and dropped into thier lap, to describe an investment. Silly little Marxist students saying that boomers haven't 'earnt' on thier investment is a nonsense quite frankly. If anyone had said in the late 70's that those houses would be worth a million you would have been laughed out the room, especially considering the state of the country. But those people prioritised paying the mortgage above all else, and probably had a very hard time '89 when ir rates went skywards. Investment is a gamble, a game of chance, they 'earnt' the money by deferring enjoyment of selling when times were hard in a gamble that prices would go up. Socialists think that they 'deserve' some of that.
One of my customers had a 996 gt2, which he bought for low £40ks about ten years ago. He didn't sell during 2009-10 when traders were offering him £45 trade. He had balls of steel and kept faith that they would pick up, sold 18 months ago for £125k. Is that £80 profit 'undeserved' 'unearned' or did it 'fall in his lap'integroo? I would have lost faith and got out. I think people of a left persuasion are just bitter that someone in life has been 'lucky' either through intuition or dogged determination.
You seem to consider yourself 'right wing' - if so, why are you in favour of the State paying for your (and everybody elses) care? That seems like a very 'left wing' policy to me. Surely you would be in favour of everyone having to pay for their own care?
Oh, and the argument that means testing is a waste of time and saves no money, that's nonsense quite frankly, especially given the costs of care. If that is your view, I guess you are in favour of Universal Credit? Widening disability benefits? Things like that? Somehow I doubt it.
Your apparent hatred of 'lefties', 'commies', 'marxists', 'socialists' is bizarre considering you appear to hold left wing views. I am not convinced you have the first clue what any of those words mean. You certainly don't have clear and principled political views.
Your mental gymnastics to try and justify your selfish views mark you out to be a massive hypocrite (or a bit thick).
markcoznottz said:
He understands very well. The whole care thing is a red herring, the actual difference between means testing and a blanket funded system like in Scotland is negligible. And despite what anyone says we can afford it. How many times have we been told the NHS is about to collapse, to the extent we no longer believe it. Means testing usually is a waste of time because it usually breaks even or costs money. Logistical nightmare as well.
From an impassionate point of view asset price inflation is driven by need. It's worth what someone wants to pay. The rush into bricks was in part caused by browns destruction of the best private pension in Europe, btl became fashionable because people assumed quite rightly that it was a good investment. It always 'looks' easy from the outside, bare in mind the 2007 and on crash caused investors a lot of grief, but the groo can't be arsed with real world specifics. You used phrases like unearned, undeserved, and dropped into thier lap, to describe an investment. Silly little Marxist students saying that boomers haven't 'earnt' on thier investment is a nonsense quite frankly. If anyone had said in the late 70's that those houses would be worth a million you would have been laughed out the room, especially considering the state of the country. But those people prioritised paying the mortgage above all else, and probably had a very hard time '89 when ir rates went skywards. Investment is a gamble, a game of chance, they 'earnt' the money by deferring enjoyment of selling when times were hard in a gamble that prices would go up. Socialists think that they 'deserve' some of that.
One of my customers had a 996 gt2, which he bought for low £40ks about ten years ago. He didn't sell during 2009-10 when traders were offering him £45 trade. He had balls of steel and kept faith that they would pick up, sold 18 months ago for £125k. Is that £80 profit 'undeserved' 'unearned' or did it 'fall in his lap'integroo? I would have lost faith and got out. I think people of a left persuasion are just bitter that someone in life has been 'lucky' either through intuition or dogged determination.
Total Rubbish. From an impassionate point of view asset price inflation is driven by need. It's worth what someone wants to pay. The rush into bricks was in part caused by browns destruction of the best private pension in Europe, btl became fashionable because people assumed quite rightly that it was a good investment. It always 'looks' easy from the outside, bare in mind the 2007 and on crash caused investors a lot of grief, but the groo can't be arsed with real world specifics. You used phrases like unearned, undeserved, and dropped into thier lap, to describe an investment. Silly little Marxist students saying that boomers haven't 'earnt' on thier investment is a nonsense quite frankly. If anyone had said in the late 70's that those houses would be worth a million you would have been laughed out the room, especially considering the state of the country. But those people prioritised paying the mortgage above all else, and probably had a very hard time '89 when ir rates went skywards. Investment is a gamble, a game of chance, they 'earnt' the money by deferring enjoyment of selling when times were hard in a gamble that prices would go up. Socialists think that they 'deserve' some of that.
One of my customers had a 996 gt2, which he bought for low £40ks about ten years ago. He didn't sell during 2009-10 when traders were offering him £45 trade. He had balls of steel and kept faith that they would pick up, sold 18 months ago for £125k. Is that £80 profit 'undeserved' 'unearned' or did it 'fall in his lap'integroo? I would have lost faith and got out. I think people of a left persuasion are just bitter that someone in life has been 'lucky' either through intuition or dogged determination.
Asset inflation is a result of increased money supply. In the case of UK property and classic cars this has been firstly as a result of the deregulation of lending in the 90s to deliberately create the property asset rise and then at the end of 2009 the exercise of QE.
Champagne socialists never comprehend the basics of economics. They just think money grows on trees and that others should pay their bills.
Integroo said:
markcoznottz said:
He understands very well. The whole care thing is a red herring, the actual difference between means testing and a blanket funded system like in Scotland is negligible. And despite what anyone says we can afford it. How many times have we been told the NHS is about to collapse, to the extent we no longer believe it. Means testing usually is a waste of time because it usually breaks even or costs money. Logistical nightmare as well.
From an impassionate point of view asset price inflation is driven by need. It's worth what someone wants to pay. The rush into bricks was in part caused by browns destruction of the best private pension in Europe, btl became fashionable because people assumed quite rightly that it was a good investment. It always 'looks' easy from the outside, bare in mind the 2007 and on crash caused investors a lot of grief, but the groo can't be arsed with real world specifics. You used phrases like unearned, undeserved, and dropped into thier lap, to describe an investment. Silly little Marxist students saying that boomers haven't 'earnt' on thier investment is a nonsense quite frankly. If anyone had said in the late 70's that those houses would be worth a million you would have been laughed out the room, especially considering the state of the country. But those people prioritised paying the mortgage above all else, and probably had a very hard time '89 when ir rates went skywards. Investment is a gamble, a game of chance, they 'earnt' the money by deferring enjoyment of selling when times were hard in a gamble that prices would go up. Socialists think that they 'deserve' some of that.
One of my customers had a 996 gt2, which he bought for low £40ks about ten years ago. He didn't sell during 2009-10 when traders were offering him £45 trade. He had balls of steel and kept faith that they would pick up, sold 18 months ago for £125k. Is that £80 profit 'undeserved' 'unearned' or did it 'fall in his lap'integroo? I would have lost faith and got out. I think people of a left persuasion are just bitter that someone in life has been 'lucky' either through intuition or dogged determination.
Quite frankly I don't much care whether wealth is earned or unearned. If it exists, you can pay for your own care. The fact that many of the current older generation are wealthy through no fault of their own, certainly not because of their hard work, is neither here nor there. (Oh, and it doesn't take balls of steel not to sell an appreciating asset, don't make me laugh). From an impassionate point of view asset price inflation is driven by need. It's worth what someone wants to pay. The rush into bricks was in part caused by browns destruction of the best private pension in Europe, btl became fashionable because people assumed quite rightly that it was a good investment. It always 'looks' easy from the outside, bare in mind the 2007 and on crash caused investors a lot of grief, but the groo can't be arsed with real world specifics. You used phrases like unearned, undeserved, and dropped into thier lap, to describe an investment. Silly little Marxist students saying that boomers haven't 'earnt' on thier investment is a nonsense quite frankly. If anyone had said in the late 70's that those houses would be worth a million you would have been laughed out the room, especially considering the state of the country. But those people prioritised paying the mortgage above all else, and probably had a very hard time '89 when ir rates went skywards. Investment is a gamble, a game of chance, they 'earnt' the money by deferring enjoyment of selling when times were hard in a gamble that prices would go up. Socialists think that they 'deserve' some of that.
One of my customers had a 996 gt2, which he bought for low £40ks about ten years ago. He didn't sell during 2009-10 when traders were offering him £45 trade. He had balls of steel and kept faith that they would pick up, sold 18 months ago for £125k. Is that £80 profit 'undeserved' 'unearned' or did it 'fall in his lap'integroo? I would have lost faith and got out. I think people of a left persuasion are just bitter that someone in life has been 'lucky' either through intuition or dogged determination.
You seem to consider yourself 'right wing' - if so, why are you in favour of the State paying for your (and everybody elses) care? That seems like a very 'left wing' policy to me. Surely you would be in favour of everyone having to pay for their own care?
Oh, and the argument that means testing is a waste of time and saves no money, that's nonsense quite frankly, especially given the costs of care. If that is your view, I guess you are in favour of Universal Credit? Widening disability benefits? Things like that? Somehow I doubt it.
Your apparent hatred of 'lefties', 'commies', 'marxists', 'socialists' is bizarre considering you appear to hold left wing views. I am not convinced you have the first clue what any of those words mean. You certainly don't have clear and principled political views.
Your mental gymnastics to try and justify your selfish views mark you out to be a massive hypocrite (or a bit thick).
markcoznottz said:
I really don't think you understand how the world works. You earn from an investment when you buy not sell. I used the car analogy because it's easy to follow, just not for you. In 2009 with zirp, the used car market collapsed, hence the lowball trade offers. If you remember the scrappage scheme etc it was tough times. This is what you actually said - 'Oh, and it doesn't take balls of steel not to sell an appreciating asset, don't make me laugh). Where did I say the asset was appreciating in 09-10? He could have got out at the bottom but didn't - do you actually understand? It was a hedge. You don't care between earned or unearned wealth. It's all earned, maybe not in the fashion that suits you, but money will always find its way into assets . You're bringing sentiment into the bare facts of life. Just because you don't like certain types of asset inflation does not mean it's morallly wrong. I'm not left or right, this country is a command economy, I think we should have funded care, and I'm willing to pay more tax and I'm sure I will pay more tax till I drop off.
Lots of words, none of them relevant or interesting. DonkeyApple said:
markcoznottz said:
He understands very well. The whole care thing is a red herring, the actual difference between means testing and a blanket funded system like in Scotland is negligible. And despite what anyone says we can afford it. How many times have we been told the NHS is about to collapse, to the extent we no longer believe it. Means testing usually is a waste of time because it usually breaks even or costs money. Logistical nightmare as well.
From an impassionate point of view asset price inflation is driven by need. It's worth what someone wants to pay. The rush into bricks was in part caused by browns destruction of the best private pension in Europe, btl became fashionable because people assumed quite rightly that it was a good investment. It always 'looks' easy from the outside, bare in mind the 2007 and on crash caused investors a lot of grief, but the groo can't be arsed with real world specifics. You used phrases like unearned, undeserved, and dropped into thier lap, to describe an investment. Silly little Marxist students saying that boomers haven't 'earnt' on thier investment is a nonsense quite frankly. If anyone had said in the late 70's that those houses would be worth a million you would have been laughed out the room, especially considering the state of the country. But those people prioritised paying the mortgage above all else, and probably had a very hard time '89 when ir rates went skywards. Investment is a gamble, a game of chance, they 'earnt' the money by deferring enjoyment of selling when times were hard in a gamble that prices would go up. Socialists think that they 'deserve' some of that.
One of my customers had a 996 gt2, which he bought for low £40ks about ten years ago. He didn't sell during 2009-10 when traders were offering him £45 trade. He had balls of steel and kept faith that they would pick up, sold 18 months ago for £125k. Is that £80 profit 'undeserved' 'unearned' or did it 'fall in his lap'integroo? I would have lost faith and got out. I think people of a left persuasion are just bitter that someone in life has been 'lucky' either through intuition or dogged determination.
Total Rubbish. From an impassionate point of view asset price inflation is driven by need. It's worth what someone wants to pay. The rush into bricks was in part caused by browns destruction of the best private pension in Europe, btl became fashionable because people assumed quite rightly that it was a good investment. It always 'looks' easy from the outside, bare in mind the 2007 and on crash caused investors a lot of grief, but the groo can't be arsed with real world specifics. You used phrases like unearned, undeserved, and dropped into thier lap, to describe an investment. Silly little Marxist students saying that boomers haven't 'earnt' on thier investment is a nonsense quite frankly. If anyone had said in the late 70's that those houses would be worth a million you would have been laughed out the room, especially considering the state of the country. But those people prioritised paying the mortgage above all else, and probably had a very hard time '89 when ir rates went skywards. Investment is a gamble, a game of chance, they 'earnt' the money by deferring enjoyment of selling when times were hard in a gamble that prices would go up. Socialists think that they 'deserve' some of that.
One of my customers had a 996 gt2, which he bought for low £40ks about ten years ago. He didn't sell during 2009-10 when traders were offering him £45 trade. He had balls of steel and kept faith that they would pick up, sold 18 months ago for £125k. Is that £80 profit 'undeserved' 'unearned' or did it 'fall in his lap'integroo? I would have lost faith and got out. I think people of a left persuasion are just bitter that someone in life has been 'lucky' either through intuition or dogged determination.
Asset inflation is a result of increased money supply. In the case of UK property and classic cars this has been firstly as a result of the deregulation of lending in the 90s to deliberately create the property asset rise and then at the end of 2009 the exercise of QE.
Champagne socialists never comprehend the basics of economics. They just think money grows on trees and that others should pay their bills.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1068/a2606...
Effects of QE are as yet undetermined according to the BOE.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/...
But you still haven't explained why you think the state should pay for you to live in a care home?
Surely you must see that people not paying their own care is 'leftie'. You cant just switch completely from 'I'm earning, it's my money' to, 'I'm paying out, someone else needs to pay for me'. It would be your care, that you need! not mine or anyone elses!
Surely you must see that people not paying their own care is 'leftie'. You cant just switch completely from 'I'm earning, it's my money' to, 'I'm paying out, someone else needs to pay for me'. It would be your care, that you need! not mine or anyone elses!
covmutley said:
But you still haven't explained why you think the state should pay for you to live in a care home?
Surely you must see that people not paying their own care is 'leftie'. You cant just switch completely from 'I'm earning, it's my money' to, 'I'm paying out, someone else needs to pay for me'. It would be your care, that you need! not mine or anyone elses!
Should be free at the point of use like the NHS. No other component is means tested i.e. operations. Yes I know certain benefits are means tested re savings, which again is wrong. If others get it for free and you are a taxpayer then the system should be there. Like I say the only reason the issue is raised is because tSurely you must see that people not paying their own care is 'leftie'. You cant just switch completely from 'I'm earning, it's my money' to, 'I'm paying out, someone else needs to pay for me'. It would be your care, that you need! not mine or anyone elses!
ts like integroo can see an asset to be raided. To ask people to pay for something others get for free is the issue, nothing to do with leftie. Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff