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)

[Miss Zippy]

An other respondents have already alluded to, there is plenty of money in the pot already to cover the cost of caring for the elderly. The problem is how the money in that pot is distributed. Increased taxation will inevitably end up in the pockets of the undeserving. By 'undeserving', I don't just mean the "career unemployed" (to borrow New Judge's phrase), but also the public sector to a degree. Most of us know people who work in the public sector and hear stories of how public money is squandered left, right and centre. (Eg, how council departments are, effectively, encouraged to spend their entire annual budget otherwise they risk receiving a lower budget the following year. In other words, there is no incentive for councils to use their funds more efficiently, thereby, saving public money which could be put to use elsewhere.) In reality though, I think the inherent culture of inefficiency and wasting of resources in the public sector is just too gargantuan a task for any government to ever tackle.

[New Judge]

A relative of mine has an office job with a local council. He rarely, if ever, needs to leave the office in connection with his work.

At the end of the last financial year the council provided each member of its office staff with an overcoat and waterproof boots. The year before that it provided two pullovers and two shirts to each of them. The reason? Their budget for protective clothing (presumably for their outdoor workers) was underspent on each occasion and the administration was concerned that if it was not all spent they would be allocated less the following year. It had not occurred to them, of course, they could obviously manage on a smaller budget, such is the entrenched attitude among these organisations. In addition to this he receives quarterly shopping vouchers (totalling about �750pa, about �15 per week) if he turns up for work every day.

No private concern (answerable to either shareholders or a proprietor) would get away with such behaviour and that is one very good reason why I would be most unhappy to pay extra taxes whilst this sort of waste goes on. As has been mentioned, it will simply disappear into the trough.

[naomi24]

Absolutely right, Judge.

[Miss Zippy]

Hear, hear New Judge. That's precisely the kind of unnecessary expenditure that I've heard about. How many billions of pounds must be wasted each year like that? Money that could be spent on providing proper care for our elderly or allocated to the NHS etc.

[LoftyLottie]

I can't even reply on this ruby27 because, having an elderly parent in a care home, I am so involved. My answer would be 'yes'. I am appalled by Social Services so called 'care' in my area and have battled long and hard.

As soon as 'care in the community' (ha, ha!) came into existence things have gone from bad to worse. There is no care in the community and very shortly there will be no care in care homes. The council are not even recommending elderly people go into care homes now because they have to pay for those who can't fund themselves and are recommending care in the home instead - 1/2 an hr per day on average from untrained contracted care workers who barely earn a living wage.
There is very little help for vulnerable and elderly people any more and soon there won't be any.

Can't go on. I'm just so angry and upsset.

[LoftyLottie]

I should have said that yes I would pay more council tax if it went to the right people, (but it wouldn't) New Judge is spot on.

[naomi24]

It's time we got our priorities in order, because it's a sad fact that the lowest on the list do seem to be the elderly -and they have paid more into the system than anyone else. And you're so right, LoftyLottie - it did begin with Care in the Community, which was really nothing to do with caring at all - it was, quite simply, a huge cost-cutting exercise - and the standard of care has deteriorated progressively further ever since. Throwing money at the problem is not the answer because it will be squandered elsewhere. This situation needs to be addressed honestly once and for all. It's a complete disgrace - and it makes me angry too.

[ruby27]

Thank you very much for all of your answers.

I am afraid that I am probably to biased to provide an impartial answer. I have spent the last 25+ years working in the public sector. So I am one of those who spends their day looking for ways to waste money, personally I can not think of a better way to use my own tax contribution.

LA's are bureaucratic organisations, having studied those who study organisations such as Handy, it does seem inevitable - sort of part of the human condition - damn those humans who just won't do it the way I see it should be done.

I don't work with the elderly, haven't done since I was 16, but I am aware that the needs of this population in this country is growing at an unprecedented pace, unlike our preparedness to pay tax.
I do some voluntary work and I am disappointed to say that this is an area that doesn't always attract.

[fagidill]

Pity We Do'nt Take A Leaf Out Of The Spanish & Italian's Book. There Are , Old People's Home's In Those Two Countries. But Quess Who The Resident's Are !! Yeh Brit's. I Know As Fact, It Was Brit's Who Opened Up The First Old Folk's Homes In Spain. Even Today In Spain The Elderly Are Looked After By Their Children, Not Shoved Into A Residential Home, And Elderly People With No Children Are Taken Care Of By The Catholic Church. What A Way To Thank Your Parent's For For Bringing You Up !!!

[naomi24]

Ruby, it's not a case of reluctance to pay tax, hence my question asking how much more you think a person who takes very little out of the system, but nevertheless pays 40% income tax, and �2500 Council Tax, should pay? You still haven't responded to that, and since your original question suggested that people pay more tax, I should very much like an answer.

I also have considerable experience in several areas, including civil service departments, social services and major charities - and I know where the money goes because I've seen the appalling waste. In fact I resigned from one post because of it. I cannot condone it, I cannot shut my eyes to it, and I certainly cannot work alongside it and ignore it.

I believe you're a very committed lady, and I believe you do your best to do a good job, but being biased is not good, since that doesn't bode well for clear judgement. There are very clearly problems with the sytem, and there are very clearly enormous flaws in the system - and you need to take a good, hard, and, most of all, a completely honest look at what's really going on before you ask people who already pay an enormous amount of their income in taxes, and see their money being poured straight down the drain, to pay more.

[New Judge]

This really needs to be expanded, Naomi.

I know Ruby�s original question asked whether readers would be prepared to pay more tax but her subsequent post (which referred to � ..our preparedness to pay tax�) seemed to suggest that she thinks we all should.

Let�s look at a �well off� single person earning �30k pa. They lose about �7,500 (in Income Tax and NI) without seeing it. If they are �fortunate� enough to own or rent a property they will pay 75% of the normal council tax, let�s say �750. So that�s the compulsory payments.

If they are �lucky� enough to own a small car (and many have to just to get to work) they will pay �150 just to keep it parked outside their door (Road Fund Licence and Insurance Premium Tax). If they drive a modest 10,000 miles pa they will pay in excess of �1200 in tax on their fuel. We�re approaching �10k in total tax now - �200 per week.

Of course it does not end there. If they insure their property, they pay tax on the premium. If they fall ill, they pay �6.80 for a prescription (unlike those on benefits). If they value their teeth they pay �21-odd for a check up at the dentist (if they can find one that does NHS work). Those on benefits get free treatment. And so it goes on.

Of course, they have not yet paid their rent or mortgage, or eaten or drunk anything. If they are �lucky� enough to have a few pounds left over afterwards almost everything else they spend will be subject to some special tax (and I find insurance premium tax the most iniquitous) or VAT, or possibly both.

Somebody in the circumstances I describe (and �30k, whilst a nice salary, is by no means mega) will almost certainly see 50% or more of their income being routed to the Exchequer by some means or other. That is quite enough in my humble opinion and the country needs to find ways of funding essentials by cutting funding elsewhere.

[naomi24]

I couldn't agree more. Enough is enough. And people wonder why others won't go to work.

Still waiting for your answer, Ruby.

[ruby27]

naomi24
the reason you have had to wait for an answer is that I can not post between the hours of 08.45 and 19.00 hr., because I am at work wasting tax payers money. In fact I am so addicted to this, I work a 45 hour week when I am only paid for 37 hours.
So as I am not at work today I can answer before 18.00

I don't properly understand the points you raise becauses I dont fully understand numbers. I pay some tax at 40%, I have a large house in a expensive part of the country so I guess I pay a reasonable amount of council tax, I do not have any dependants so my tax is spent on others not me. Could I pay more tax - yes, would I yes, should I, yes.

[naomi24]

Ruby, you really do have blinkers on. Your bias is such, that don't even understand what people are saying.

[ruby27]

naomi24
I thought I did understand what other posters were saying, but I bow to your superior knowledge.

[naomi24]

Ruby, no, you don't need to bow to my superior knowledge, if indeed it is superior. You just have to read these posts - get rid of your pre-conceived notions of political correctness and think clearly and honestly for yourself. If you can do that, there's no doubt you will do a better job for society. The truth is there are problems within social services, the civil service, and the health service, with funds being terribly wasted. Denying that and closing your eyes to the problem doesn't cure it. All decent people want the elderly to be properly cared for, but hardworking taxpayers look at the waste of money spent on people who will not work, on those who claim bogus disability, on hooligans being constantly excused and cossetted, or the millions spent on bogus asylum seekers, or on financing legal aid to fight the cases of hate-spreading imams, who do this country and race relations no good whatsover, - and, naturally, they quite rightly, question where their money is really going and whether or not it is being spent wisely. When you really look at what is happening, can you blame them? Do yourself - and everyone else a favour - think about it - and think about it seriously..