Would you pay more council tax for these people?

[ruby27]

Councils turn backs on care for older people � Nearly 75% of authorities restrict social services � Tens of thousands of the most vulnerable excluded The information, from the Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI), found 73% of local authorities were planning to refuse care to everyone whose needs were not considered to be "substantial". Last month the government gave an increase of less than 1% for social services. Given rises in demand, we will just see more and more cash-strapped councils cutting back." Would you pay more tax to help or should they have saved more? Its in the Guardian (sorry my computer wont let me do links any more)

[ruby27]

I think it is appalling that as a wealthy country we are not prepared to pay enough in the way of tax, nationally and locally to ensure that the elderly are provided with adequate care. It seems we are happy to shell out large sums in charitable donations so that children are recipients of our munificence, but we will not provide it as a right to these people via taxation

[paulos66]

Ruby, here's the link and personally yes:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2007/nov/22/ longtermcare.socialcare

[Theland]

I believe it would be better if taxes went up for everybody, to fund what is necessary, leaving less in our pockets for what is unnecessary.
I think we would be far happier letting the government spend universally on a comprehensive social policy, and take the worry out of becoming ill, growing old, educating our kids and policing the streets etc. not to mention providing decently for our armed forces.
So we each would have less to spend, so would not prices come down as a result, particularly housing? And if there was a social housing programme, what could be better?

[paulos66]

Unfortunately I tend to find the people who complain about our public serices the most are also those who complain about being taxed too much and will bleat on about the money being spent effficiently - of course it should but I don't think that's the issue

[Reverandfunk]

Shouldn't we be looking at the way our tax is spent?

What qualifications do the majority of local councillors have when it comes to making decisions?

O levels in woodwork

[redcrx]

I think the council could pay for a lot more of these vital services if, take ours for instance, they didnt spend money on sculptures and shoddy work thats completely unecessary!

If they stopped wasting money and still couldnt make ends meet to fund social resourses then I would mind an increase.

Ive seen too many examples of wasted money to trust them with more

[redcrx]

sorry 'wouldNT mind and increase'

[Theland]

There's nowt wrong wiv a o level in wudwerk!

[redcrx]

my dad was a councillor for 8 years, town not district, and the way that the old school councillors ran things was often astounding. theyd happily allow the district to pass back to them amenities such as toilet blocks and lighting. Theyd then increase the town part of the CT but not ask for the district to lower their bit.
They also said when questioned about the spending and whether it was in best interests of towns people that they were elected to make the deicisons on what was best, it wasnt for the towns people to say what they wanted once theyd voted for a councillor. To my dad that was all wrong.

[New Judge]

Difficulties arise in this otherwise straightforward argument when you consider who is paying in and who is drawing out.

Only about one fifth of local council spending is funded from Council Tax. The remainder comes from central taxation. More than a quarter of all the taxation raised is via Income Tax (i.e. from people who are working). This is completely eaten up (and indeed exceeded) by payments in Social Security (i.e. from people who are not working).

This is the fundamental problem that needs to be adressed. This should not be by increasing Income Tax but by getting the �career unemployed� into work instead of shipping in foreigners to do the work that they will not do.

Nobody would then need to pay more taxes and there would be more funds available for the people who really need it. This country will never prosper (and its people will never be properly provided for in the matters that the State controls) whilst it pays people to spend their time in pubs and betting shops.

[sp1814]

Why should it be down to the councils in the first place?

Why are the elderly taken in by their families?

Why should the state pick up this responsibility?

[sp1814]

Guh!

That should read;

Why are't the elderly taken in by their families?

Don't get me wrong...I'll be sticking my mum in an old people's home the split second she forgets my name or cannot complete The Guardian crossword.

I'm asking this in general.

[naomi24]

Some elderly people don't have anyone to go to, so for them that isn't an option. There is plenty of money in the pot to care for our elderly people properly, as they should be, but too much of it is wasted. For them, after a lifetime working and paying into the system, to end up neglected, is shameful, but even if we paid more tax, I doubt it would go to them. Some bright spark would deem it better spent in other areas. The whole social services system needs completely overhauling - and by someone with a bit of common sense - but where we're going to find someone with a bit of common sense to do it is another matter.

[Loosehead]

No because increasing tax does not help. The problem with the public sector generally is that it i vastly overmanned with all the people who could not get a job in the private sector. Local authorities are the worst. Take my own Bournemouth, 59 councillors, snout in trough, total laviathan bureaucracy. If it where a prvate company it would have gone down the kazi years ago. The town halls are full of busy bodies doing unnecessary jobs being paid by public money. Just look at the jobs pages in the Guardian. So no I would not pay extra because the council would spend it on a load of diversity coordinators and 5 a day specialists!

[naomi24]

Ruby, a question. If someone is paying income tax at 40%, and, say, �2500 a year in council tax, and taking very little out of the system, how much more do you think it would be fair for them to pay? (Ooo ... I'm excited. We could start disagreeing again on this one!).

[New Judge]

Exactly, Naomi. People who have worked and paid taxes all their lives are the very people the taxes they have paid should be used to help. But they are the very people who are deemed �too well off� to need the State�s help.

Unfortunately successive administrations have led people to believe that they do not need to get out of bed in the morning and the State will provide for their every need from cradle to grave. (Indeed, it now seems they are to be provided for before the cradle as a current plan involves giving pregnant women �190 to buy fruit and veg).

Unfortunately most of these services are provided on the basis of need and take no account of contributions. It follows that those most in need are those who have made no contribution.

It will never change and this country will never be able to adequately provide services for those who need them and who have paid in under the delusion that they will receive them if necessary.

[libertie]

Maybe the answer lies in the government giving more help to groups like Help the Aged & Age Concern who are able to be more specific in what help our elderly population require! I'm sure that with more support many old folk would be able to stay in their own homes!

[naomi24]

libertie, No. Charities waste far too much money too.