Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2021 19:30:01 GMT
And of course wealth management and planning for inheritance is also quite a large employer.
I suspect though if my ideas came to fruition the whole way people live would be completely different and people would have a worry free old age for reasons other than having enough money because it would be so much less important.
Back to the caves I say!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2021 20:49:12 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2021 21:03:34 GMT
I probably could, but since it is such a well-constructed narrative which intertwines history, politics, war, art, philosophy, religion and economics so incredibly elegantly that any attempt on my part to do so would likely be a travesty of unimaginable proportions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2021 21:05:52 GMT
I probably could, but since it is such a well-constructed narrative which intertwines history, politics, war, art, philosophy, religion and economics so incredibly elegantly that any attempt on my part to do so would likely be a travesty of unimaginable proportions. If you prefer to liken it to a film, that could work? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2021 21:24:00 GMT
I'm not aware of any film you may be familiar with which would be sufficient to draw any such comparison (apart from the aforementioned televised series called, co-incidentally enough, 'The Ascent of Money'). Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
Post by Trina on Sept 10, 2021 21:26:26 GMT
In a nutshell Phil
The night before last I happened to see something on the box ...... didn't watch much was too disgusted and switched off. Talking to my sister yesterday she had watched the whole thing and she said she had been shouting at the television (not something she is prone to)
A couple were nearly in tears because their Mothers house was going to have to be sold to fund her care in a home because she had developed dementia.
This meant they were being robbed of their inheritance !!! WTF !!!
Where the hell does this belief that you are entitled to inherit wealth that someone else worked for ?
The wealth a person accumulates during their lifetime should rightly be spent on maintaining them when they can no longer manage on their own !!! It should be considered a form of insurance.
Why the hell should everybody else pay for their parents care just so greedy buggers can get a nice fat inheritance ........ sod off !!! stand on your own two feet !!!
I sort of agree with what you're saying. The problem that appears to have always been there is this: You can have two people admitted to the same care home- One has worked all their life, saved for their retirement. Worked to buy their own house and provide for their family. The other hasn't saved a penny, spent everything they earn (if they earn at all). The first enters the retirement home and has to give up everything to pay for their care. The second enters with nothing and has all their care paid for. This, I would suggest, is what really needs to be addressed. Or maybe I, like many others, have got it all wrong and would be better blowing it all now. To add to this-dad was Polish & here in a Polish squadron during the war where he met my WAAF mum.They worked & saved hard to buy their own house-never owed a penny to anyone.Fast forward to the 70s when I made a good friend at teacher training college.Fast forward again,first dad died & mum then died 10 weeks later-a very expensive time.My friend however,did not have the same expense as her parents lived in council property & had no savings.If you asked her,she'd tell you that there were no savings as her dad was at the bookies every day & when he wasn't there-he was in the pub.She got an awful lot of help with funeral costs which we did not.I felt like my parents got punished for being prudent. Before anyone says it,it was a hard time for me as first dad died,mum died 10 weeks later & my only brother 6 months later. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2021 22:08:14 GMT
If it's too much you may prefer this (which at least has the virtue of a few gags). It's got fuck-all to do with the book I mentioned though. |
|
|
|
Post by patty on Sept 11, 2021 6:18:02 GMT
I sort of agree with what you're saying. The problem that appears to have always been there is this: You can have two people admitted to the same care home- One has worked all their life, saved for their retirement. Worked to buy their own house and provide for their family. The other hasn't saved a penny, spent everything they earn (if they earn at all). The first enters the retirement home and has to give up everything to pay for their care. The second enters with nothing and has all their care paid for. This, I would suggest, is what really needs to be addressed. Or maybe I, like many others, have got it all wrong and would be better blowing it all now. To add to this-dad was Polish & here in a Polish squadron during the war where he met my WAAF mum.They worked & saved hard to buy their own house-never owed a penny to anyone.Fast forward to the 70s when I made a good friend at teacher training college.Fast forward again,first dad died & mum then died 10 weeks later-a very expensive time.My friend however,did not have the same expense as her parents lived in council property & had no savings.If you asked her,she'd tell you that there were no savings as her dad was at the bookies every day & when he wasn't there-he was in the pub.She got an awful lot of help with funeral costs which we did not.I felt like my parents got punished for being prudent. Before anyone says it,it was a hard time for me as first dad died,mum died 10 weeks later & my only brother 6 months later. Seemed wrong to 'like' this. Very sad losing both parents and brother within a year. It does seem that the state supports those who gamble and booze their money. Both my parents worked really hard and managed to accumulate savings. Dad brought a field and after many years sold it for a ridiculous amount for housing estate. However he then hoarded his moneys used cheapest stuff and always said he couldn't afford this n that. I used to buy stuff and take him for meals.... post his death we find out that he'd lived in this way but had the means to have a more extravagant life style. The tax man did very well out of dads estate. I don't have a lot of savings and I have set up so Mr Taxman won't benefit. I have not yet protected the house though from any nursing home scenario. |
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Sept 11, 2021 6:30:42 GMT
People are generally confused.
Many (most?) people will state, often quite passionately, that they support a society that protects people, cares for people who don't have the means to look after themselves. Socialism, I suppose.
Then:
The same people sometimes set up schemes to avoid proper contribution to the costs associated with having this caring, sharing society. Putting an estate into trust is the obvious example, but there are others. And then, if increases to the tax these people pay is suggested, they are often far from pleased.
The problem we have here is a clash between the natural instinct of wishing to protect family and those closest to us versus what we might describe as the taught instinct of the desire to share more widely. I say taught instinct, it's not really an instinct but such is its prominence in our society that it likely behaves as one.
So there we have it: The people are conflicted, they don't know what they want.
|
|
|
|
Post by ianali on Sept 11, 2021 7:13:49 GMT
People are generally confused. Many (most?) people will state, often quite passionately, that they support a society that protects people, cares for people who don't have the means to look after themselves. Socialism, I suppose. Then: The same people sometimes set up schemes to avoid proper contribution to the costs associated with having this caring, sharing society. Putting an estate into trust is the obvious example, but there are others. And then, if increases to the tax these people pay is suggested, they are often far from pleased. The problem we have here is a clash between the natural instinct of wishing to protect family and those closest to us versus what we might describe as the taught instinct of the desire to share more widely. I say taught instinct, it's not really an instinct but such is its prominence in our society that it likely behaves as one. So there we have it: The people are conflicted, they don't know what they want. I don’t believe many people want to share there wealth at all. I do believe many say they do though. |
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Sept 11, 2021 8:22:48 GMT
People are generally confused. Many (most?) people will state, often quite passionately, that they support a society that protects people, cares for people who don't have the means to look after themselves. Socialism, I suppose. Then: The same people sometimes set up schemes to avoid proper contribution to the costs associated with having this caring, sharing society. Putting an estate into trust is the obvious example, but there are others. And then, if increases to the tax these people pay is suggested, they are often far from pleased. The problem we have here is a clash between the natural instinct of wishing to protect family and those closest to us versus what we might describe as the taught instinct of the desire to share more widely. I say taught instinct, it's not really an instinct but such is its prominence in our society that it likely behaves as one. So there we have it: The people are conflicted, they don't know what they want. I don’t believe many people want to share there wealth at all. I do believe many say they do though. I agree with you. However, the whole system has been set up based on the words of those who say they want to share. These words are powerful. So much so that, in certain settings, anyone speaking up against the (false) words risks social ridicule. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2021 8:36:31 GMT
In reality all that happens is that the system takes money from the ordinary working people and puts it into a fund which provides security for the rich by giving the feckless enough cash to not need to think too much about breaking down the doors of the rich people.
Clever bit of crowdfunded security which the beneficiaries do not pay for.
|
|
