hibs.net Messageboard

View Poll Results: Will Brexit happen on 31st October?

Voters
93. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    41 44.09%
  • No

    52 55.91%
Page 116 of 116 FirstFirst ... 1666106114115116
Results 3,451 to 3,459 of 3459
  1. #3451
    @hibs.net private member Ozyhibby's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    18,645
    Quote Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The challenge in the care sector is that it is labour-intensive, whether it is delivered in people's own homes or care homes. This is exacerbated year-on-year by people living longer and longer, whilst with basic care needs or long-term health conditions that require some form of support, sometimes several times a day.

    The sector doesn't pay well and it is not difficult to understand why many would rather choose to work in Tesco or B+Q or Dobbie's. Due to the nature of working with vulnerable people there is also a much greater degree of regulation of the workforce. For some, that is off-putting.

    Throw in the addition that significant parts of Scotland (and the UK) are rural and remote and one can see why private sector providers simply don't see a profit in providing services. Local authorities should be the 'provider of last resort' and in some places choose to be an active provider. They, however, face and have faced significant cost pressures over recent years and their own sustainability has to be questioned.

    Comparing the levels of financial reserves held by councils today, as opposed to five -eight years ago would be stark.

    Also, because councils essentially have to prioritise social care and education over everything else, their share of the council budget has had to increase, which is why a lot of other council services have been shrunk or disappeared - the care and education slice of the pie has grown bigger and bigger. But the services that have been shrunk, often in their own ways, were services which helped prevent or delay people needing more formal care.
    Maybe time for compulsory insurance to cover care costs in old age?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


  2. Log in to remove the advert

  3. #3452
    @hibs.net private member Mibbes Aye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    12,989
    Quote Originally Posted by Ozyhibby View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Maybe time for compulsory insurance to cover care costs in old age?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    My longstanding view is that it needs a proper inquiry, along the lines of the Royal Commissions we had in the 1970s, that really got into the heart of matters.

    Your point about compulsory contributions is a fascinating topic that I am not getting into tonight because I am going to bed :-) but I will make one point.

    That sort of proposal, out of both pragmatism and a desire to address inequality, invariably involves a cut-off or tapering whereby those with assets beyond a certain level have to use them. Given this country (and I mean the UK or Scotland) is so wedded to the notion of property and passing it onto their children then I am not sure how it could be sold to the public at large.
    There's only one thing better than a Hibs calendar and that's two Hibs calendars

  4. #3453
    Not sure what thread is best, but has Priti Patel been mentioned? The most hypocritical selfish **** in British politics. Her own ****ing parents wouldn’t be allowed in this country with the new proposed laws but yet she still backs them. She’s a rat.

  5. #3454
    It’s similar to getting into a high end nightclub with a T-shirt and trainers the complaining the person behind you got in wearing the same style.

  6. #3455
    @hibs.net private member Ozyhibby's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    18,645
    Quote Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    My longstanding view is that it needs a proper inquiry, along the lines of the Royal Commissions we had in the 1970s, that really got into the heart of matters.

    Your point about compulsory contributions is a fascinating topic that I am not getting into tonight because I am going to bed :-) but I will make one point.

    That sort of proposal, out of both pragmatism and a desire to address inequality, invariably involves a cut-off or tapering whereby those with assets beyond a certain level have to use them. Given this country (and I mean the UK or Scotland) is so wedded to the notion of property and passing it onto their children then I am not sure how it could be sold to the public at large.
    I can understand why people are attached to their property, because it doesn’t always reflect the size of their income throughout their life but also their choices.
    Back in the mid 80’s when I was an apprentice I worked with a couple of joiners who had worked together for about 15 years. They both made exactly the same money but were in very different situations at about 35 years of age. One was on his fourth house after buying his first house and renovating them selling for bigger every time. He had not been many holidays over the years but wasn’t that bothered and was chuffed with his house. The other lived in his council house and intended to continue doing so. He was always going pretty good holiday (for the mid 80’s) and he also sounded like he had a better social life. Two guys making different decisions and neither right or wrong in my opinion but I can imagine that as they are probably (no idea what they are up to now) hitting retirement I could see why the one who bought the property would be p’ed off if his house had to be sold to pay for his care costs while the other guy got the same care costs for free.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  7. #3456
    Testimonial Due Colr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    London
    Age
    53
    Posts
    3,447
    Quote Originally Posted by HibernianJK View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Not sure what thread is best, but has Priti Patel been mentioned? The most hypocritical selfish **** in British politics. Her own ****ing parents wouldn’t be allowed in this country with the new proposed laws but yet she still backs them. She’s a rat.
    I recommend reading her contribution to ‘Britannia Unchained’ it’ll give you some idea of what level of ****bag this little **** actually is.

    Dominic Raab contributed to it as well but he’s just not very bright.

  8. #3457
    Coaching Staff Smartie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Age
    42
    Posts
    11,885
    Quote Originally Posted by Ozyhibby View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I can understand why people are attached to their property, because it doesn’t always reflect the size of their income throughout their life but also their choices.
    Back in the mid 80’s when I was an apprentice I worked with a couple of joiners who had worked together for about 15 years. They both made exactly the same money but were in very different situations at about 35 years of age. One was on his fourth house after buying his first house and renovating them selling for bigger every time. He had not been many holidays over the years but wasn’t that bothered and was chuffed with his house. The other lived in his council house and intended to continue doing so. He was always going pretty good holiday (for the mid 80’s) and he also sounded like he had a better social life. Two guys making different decisions and neither right or wrong in my opinion but I can imagine that as they are probably (no idea what they are up to now) hitting retirement I could see why the one who bought the property would be p’ed off if his house had to be sold to pay for his care costs while the other guy got the same care costs for free.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    For the reasons you mention, this is going to be a very tough problem to fix and it's not that I don't have sympathy for the guy who "did the right thing".

    Say for example the guy who lived the high life and lived in the council house reaches 65 and drops dead having never spent a day in hospital in his life or taken any medication. Over a lifetime, he's probably paid more than enough in tax to cover what he has received. Then imagine the other guy having several operations throughout his 50s, being on medication every day from 60, reaching about 85 where he has to go into a home but as his dementia develops his heart and lungs are strong so he hangs on needing significantly expensive resident care for more than a decade.

    The nation needs to have a serious conversation about how we pay for the increasing numbers of people who are falling into the latter category. This care has to be paid for by someone and it is a significant cost (especially now we've got our country back delivering fairer wages for British workers to have British hands to wipe British *****).

    I don't have the answer and I accept that in your example it appears totally unfair on those who have been responsible. You have to accept the consequences of your actions though, and you have to accept that occasionally you are only a quirk of government away from your hard work and good decisions being wiped out.

    The politicians alone cannot be trusted to fix this, and MA's idea is an excellent one. I'm convinced there is plenty to go round in this country (and throughout the world) but we're struggling to make it happen right now and we're being forced to think that constitutional change, or reducing immigration, or taxing the rich etc etc is the answer to all of our questions. We need to think about it at a higher level and people can then plan accordingly.
    Last edited by Smartie; Today at 09:32 AM.

  9. #3458
    Quote Originally Posted by Colr View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I recommend reading her contribution to ‘Britannia Unchained’ it’ll give you some idea of what level of ****bag this little **** actually is.

    Dominic Raab contributed to it as well but he’s just not very bright.
    And Liz Truss and Kwasi Karteng. I suspect we'll look back in 20 years at the wasteland these idiots create in the same way people in the 40s and 50s revisited Mein Kampf* and realised all that stuff about lebensraum wasn't just idle nonsense after all.



    * yeah, yeah, Godwin's law, yadda yadda.

  10. #3459
    Testimonial Due Colr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    London
    Age
    53
    Posts
    3,447
    Quote Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    And Liz Truss and Kwasi Karteng. I suspect we'll look back in 20 years at the wasteland these idiots create in the same way people in the 40s and 50s revisited Mein Kampf* and realised all that stuff about lebensraum wasn't just idle nonsense after all.



    * yeah, yeah, Godwin's law, yadda yadda.
    These books are well worth a look when they come out. The LibDems orange book showed the thinking that led them to the coalition whereas Labour’s Purple Book was a lacklustre as their post-Blair preformance.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
hibs.net ©2012 All Rights Reserved