Wednesday, 31 March 2010

Another of Labour's headline grabbing announcements that usually come to nothing.

Where does Burnham get the idea that care at any stage is free? More Labour politics, trying to convince the voters that it costs nothing if you're spending other people's money.
Firstly, why should the current working generation - who in all likelihood will be working longer and dying earlier - have to pay yet more to keep the Baby-Boomer generation in the style to which they are accustomed? Secondly, if you wait to tax estates after death, the chances are that it is the families of the ones who die early and don't need care, or who have been prudent and saved for their retirement, who end up paying for those who have either made no provision or lived so long that they have used up their savings: Either way it's a disincentive to save and/or to plan for your old age. Thirdly, this heralds a massive expansion of the social care sector, with the risk of the cost ever increasing in the years to come, and with it the bill.
I have got this suggestion for Labour introduce a pro-smoking campaign. Get people smoking, which contributes to the Exchequer and would kill off a load of people earlier, thus reducing the burden on the State of people living to be a lot older - then there would be enough to pay for those who do survive through old age and into infirmity, as well as reducing the pensions deficit.
Thatcher, love or loathe her, had one thing right that Labour will never learn - the government hasn't got any money. It all comes from the private sector taxpayers, no-one else.

1 comment: