Yep, fucking disgrace.
Especially when you consider that had she been an Albanian asylum-seeker or a one-legged lesbian from Patagonia she'd have been quids in and well taken care of, courtesy of HM government.
- Eric
Titanic survivor's auction keeps roof over her hea
Re: Titanic survivor's auction keeps roof over her
Racist bollocks.
-
andy at handiwork
- Posts: 4113
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Titanic survivor's auction keeps roof over her
Its been a national disgrace for years that elderly people have had to sell their house, never mind possessions, to pay for their late in life care/accomodation. There's no need to bring simplistic xenophobic nostrums into it.
-
JonnyHungwell
- Posts: 1230
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Titanic survivor's auction keeps roof over her hea
It is disgusting, but the fact she was a Titanic survivor has little to do with it being disgusting, apart from the fact it got her publicity and raised some money. Others of the same age won't be so lucky.
Just accept that this country is only here to benefit the upper classes, the rest of us are only statistics. Short of a revolution it will never change, and a revolution is quite unlikely.
In reality everyone knows the situation for certain groups are unacceptable, but nobody really wants to do anything about it, because they'd need to pay more tax. Although most people were happy to borrow to the hilt in the good times for personal gratification.
As a country we're stuck between the want for low taxes and the desire for high standards of public service - the two are incompatible. We either want an American or a European system, but what we have is something in between that satisfies nobody - relatively high taxes that are squandered on the wrong things and next to no accountability for actions of officials, of whom we have too many and they are paid too much.
Just accept that this country is only here to benefit the upper classes, the rest of us are only statistics. Short of a revolution it will never change, and a revolution is quite unlikely.
In reality everyone knows the situation for certain groups are unacceptable, but nobody really wants to do anything about it, because they'd need to pay more tax. Although most people were happy to borrow to the hilt in the good times for personal gratification.
As a country we're stuck between the want for low taxes and the desire for high standards of public service - the two are incompatible. We either want an American or a European system, but what we have is something in between that satisfies nobody - relatively high taxes that are squandered on the wrong things and next to no accountability for actions of officials, of whom we have too many and they are paid too much.
-
JonnyHungwell
- Posts: 1230
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Titanic survivor's auction keeps roof over her
But in reality houses should never have been allowed to rise to the levels they did. A house should have been to live in, not to generate a profit. It was a ridiculous situation when a person's house was gaining more value in a year than they could sell their labour for! So in a way the state does have a right to make them use their house for their keep in old age, because what did they do to earn the value of that house in most cases? Nothing, they just bought lucky.
The purchase of houses should be subject to vat, as in most Euro countries - and home ownership should be for those who can afford it, not something that people think is their right.
I know at the present there isn't a good supply of decent rented accomodation, but rather than let the banks get back to business as usual, we'd be a lot better off investing in public/private housing for rent - and if you want to buy, save up a 30% deposit first.
The purchase of houses should be subject to vat, as in most Euro countries - and home ownership should be for those who can afford it, not something that people think is their right.
I know at the present there isn't a good supply of decent rented accomodation, but rather than let the banks get back to business as usual, we'd be a lot better off investing in public/private housing for rent - and if you want to buy, save up a 30% deposit first.
Re: Titanic survivor's auction keeps roof over her
colonel wrote:
>
Not racist. Not bollocks. Just a fact.
- Eric
>
Not racist. Not bollocks. Just a fact.
- Eric
Re: Titanic survivor's auction keeps roof over her
JonnyHungwell wrote:
>>
Truer words were never spoken.
- Eric
>>
Truer words were never spoken.
- Eric
Re: Titanic survivor's auction keeps roof over her
andy at handiwork wrote:
>>
Nothing xenophobic about it, Andy. I've no axe to grind with either Albanians or Patagonians.
But the fact of the matter is, when you have millions of pensioners and low-income families in the UK struggling to make ends meet and to even pay their fuel bills, something's seriously fucked up when you have a government welcoming virtually any old Tom Dick or Harry from the four corners of the globe and (in many cases) giving them priority over the people who are already here.
Just one example from personal experience: My other half's sister was told there was a 10-year waiting list for council houses in her particular corner of Essex - due in no small part to the fact that immigrants from Afghanistan and elsewhere were being fast-tracked and given priority with minimum waiting times.
By all means be charitable and help those less fortunate - but put your own house in order first BEFORE indulging in such largesse. That's something that this goverment has completely failed to grasp.
- Eric
>>
Nothing xenophobic about it, Andy. I've no axe to grind with either Albanians or Patagonians.
But the fact of the matter is, when you have millions of pensioners and low-income families in the UK struggling to make ends meet and to even pay their fuel bills, something's seriously fucked up when you have a government welcoming virtually any old Tom Dick or Harry from the four corners of the globe and (in many cases) giving them priority over the people who are already here.
Just one example from personal experience: My other half's sister was told there was a 10-year waiting list for council houses in her particular corner of Essex - due in no small part to the fact that immigrants from Afghanistan and elsewhere were being fast-tracked and given priority with minimum waiting times.
By all means be charitable and help those less fortunate - but put your own house in order first BEFORE indulging in such largesse. That's something that this goverment has completely failed to grasp.
- Eric
Re: Titanic survivor's auction keeps roof over her
JonnyHungwell wrote:
>>
I don't have a problem with that, and ordinary people shouldn't be penalised for it - because let's face it, over the course of our working lives, ordinary people (and that probably includes yoem, me and pretty much everyone else here) pays back well over half of their earnings to the state inthe form of taxes - both direct and indirect.
So in my book, the very best health care and decent care in old age should be a fundamental human right. But instead what we have are billions spent on quangos and on armies of administrators, with essential health care services like cleaning being put out to tender to (often shoddy) private companies who are only interested in generating a profit, and patients' TV & telephone servicesbeing placed into the hands of those bedside robbers Patientline.
If governments were to spend the revenue that they take off use more wisely and not fritter it away on their own doctrinal pet projects like 'diversity initiatives', endless tiers of of civil servants & bureaucracy and billions in foreign "aid", the whole question of having to sell your home in later life would be a complete non-issue, because the tax revenue would be there to provide a good standard across the board without any need to force people to sell their homes to pay for something which - let's face it - they're already been paying towards for 40-odd years.
- Eric
>>
I don't have a problem with that, and ordinary people shouldn't be penalised for it - because let's face it, over the course of our working lives, ordinary people (and that probably includes yoem, me and pretty much everyone else here) pays back well over half of their earnings to the state inthe form of taxes - both direct and indirect.
So in my book, the very best health care and decent care in old age should be a fundamental human right. But instead what we have are billions spent on quangos and on armies of administrators, with essential health care services like cleaning being put out to tender to (often shoddy) private companies who are only interested in generating a profit, and patients' TV & telephone servicesbeing placed into the hands of those bedside robbers Patientline.
If governments were to spend the revenue that they take off use more wisely and not fritter it away on their own doctrinal pet projects like 'diversity initiatives', endless tiers of of civil servants & bureaucracy and billions in foreign "aid", the whole question of having to sell your home in later life would be a complete non-issue, because the tax revenue would be there to provide a good standard across the board without any need to force people to sell their homes to pay for something which - let's face it - they're already been paying towards for 40-odd years.
- Eric