Stabbed in the back Options

[Turin Machine]

What part of care and compassion for the sick, elderly and the vulnerable residents of West Berks does this council not understand ? on the back of last years cuts we now have swinging and damaging cuts in provision in everything from meals on wheels to shopmobility ! I'm sorry "call me Dave" but you really don't understand the damage you are doing and the real resentment that is being generated by the population at large. You will not, cannot be allowed to get away with it anymore, expect heavy losses in the next round of elections when the people that this council and central government have betrayed goes to the poles.

Anyone who is as outraged by these cuts as I am shouls lobby the counil NOW ! and make things change, please, before its too late.


signed

Angry of West Berks

[Turin Machine]

It amazes me that in an age when we are supposed to be caring and compassionate and dare I say it "civilized" and when a government states categorically that the vulnerable will be protected that a council can make cuts that will affect the MOST vulnerable in our society, the old, the sick and the terminally befuddled.

Drastic cuts to meals on wheels, Mencap, Mobility, even for Gods sake when Dave bleats on about the big society and volunteering, the Volunteer office gets a funding cut ! Ironic ? only if you're a politition I guess.

And what response do we get ? bleating about paying a quid to park on a sunday ! I just hope that those among you who will be striking next week in defence of your pensions can tell me how to explain to, lets call her Gladys, who will need to sit on her own in her own filth for eight hours a day because her carer has been withdrawn for "efficiency" reasons how its worth it "c'os you don't matter but my long haul holiday does" ! Please tell me how, if you can.

[user23]

It amazes me that in an age when we are supposed to be caring and compassionate and dare I say it "civilized" and when a government states categorically that the vulnerable will be protected that a council can make cuts that will affect the MOST vulnerable in our society, the old, the sick and the terminally befuddled.

Drastic cuts to meals on wheels, Mencap, Mobility, even for Gods sake when Dave bleats on about the big society and volunteering, the Volunteer office gets a funding cut ! Ironic ? only if you're a politition I guess.

And what response do we get ? bleating about paying a quid to park on a sunday ! I just hope that those among you who will be striking next week in defence of your pensions can tell me how to explain to, lets call her Gladys, who will need to sit on her own in her own filth for eight hours a day because her carer has been withdrawn for "efficiency" reasons how its worth it "c'os you don't matter but my long haul holiday does" ! Please tell me how, if you can.

What happened to Gladys' family in this scenario?

[Squelchy]

What happened to Gladys' family in this scenario?

Many do not have a family. What then?

[user23]

Many do not have a family. What then?

To say many people of this age don't have brothers, sisters, wives, husbands, children, grand children, great grandchildren, cousins or friends they consider family would be untrue.

[Bartholomew]

To say many people of this age don't have brothers, sisters, wives, husbands, children, grand children, great grandchildren, cousins or friends they consider family would be untrue.

I suppose that the use of the word "many" may be your diverting argument but it doesn't alter the fact that there are people in this situation that require support.

[user23]

I suppose that the use of the word "many" may be your diverting argument but it doesn't alter the fact that there are people in this situation that require support.

You're not wrong there certainly are, however there are many who could be looked after by their family.

We have an aging population and if people don't want to pay more tax for someone else to look after their elderly relatives, they're going to have to look after them, themselves.

This way those who really have no one to care for them will be able to receive help whilst those for whom it was convenient to be looked after by the state can be cared for by their relatives.

[Ron]

You're not wrong there certainly are, however there are many who could be looked after by their family.

We have an aging population and if people don't want to pay more tax for someone else to look after their elderly relatives, they're going to have to look after them, themselves.

This way those who really have no one to care for them will be able to receive help whilst those for whom it was convenient to be looked after by the state can be cared for by their relatives.

So what you are saying is that I should look after two lotsof people? My relations, which I done until she died 8 weeks ago, and potentially someone elses?

[user23]

So what you are saying is that I should look after two lotsof people? My relations, which I done until she died 8 weeks ago, and potentially someone elses?

It's an emotive subject and people understandably have strong views on it.

All I'm saying is there's more demand for these services from a growing number of older people and less money coming in to fund them because of relatively lower taxes and other financial constraints, so something has to give.

More people looking after their relatives is one option which to me seems to be the best.

[On the edge]

It's an emotive subject and people understandably have strong views on it.

All I'm saying is there's more demand for these services from a growing number of older people and less money coming in to fund them because of relatively lower taxes and other financial constraints, so something has to give.

More people looking after their relatives is one option which to me seems to be the best.

Ummm, can quite understand why the electorate feel ripped off. The increase in age could have been anticipated and properly planned for. We were all given to understand that under the state insurance scheme (welfare state in total) we'd be looked after from cradle to grave. No wonder the banks followed suit! So after 60 or so years, we are back to every man for himself and never trust anyone from government; they just want you to fight wars and pay taxes.

[user23]

Ummm, can quite understand why the electorate feel ripped off. The increase in age could have been anticipated and properly planned for. We were all given to understand that under the state insurance scheme (welfare state in total) we'd be looked after from cradle to grave. No wonder the banks followed suit! So after 60 or so years, we are back to every man for himself and never trust anyone from government; they just want you to fight wars and pay taxes.

Being looked after by one's family isn't "every man for themselves" is it?

[Cognosco]

Being looked after by one's family isn't "every man for themselves" is it?

Not quite. But it is about authority reneging on a contract? You paid the premuims faithfully all your working life and then when the time comes to make a claim low and behold we have run out of money?

[JeffG]

You paid the premuims faithfully all your working life

NI is not personal insurance - you are not "paying premiums" for your own future benefit. You are paying a tax to fund those that need support and pay their pensions now, and when you in turn draw your pension it will be the current working population that is paying NI to fund it. 'Twas ever thus.

[Cognosco]

NI is not personal insurance - you are not "paying premiums" for your own future benefit. You are paying a tax to fund those that need support and pay their pensions now, and when you in turn draw your pension it will be the current working population that is paying NI to fund it. 'Twas ever thus.

Until now of course according to User there is no money to pay for what Gladys needs now?

[dannyboy]

Until now of course according to User there is no money to pay for what Gladys needs now?

So you are saying NI contributions were not enough?

[Cognosco]

So you are saying NI contributions were not enough?

I'm not. But User is!

[dannyboy]

I'm not. But User is!

So you didn't write - You paid the premuims faithfully all your working life and then when the time comes to make a claim low and behold we have run out of money

[Cognosco]

So you didn't write - You paid the premuims faithfully all your working life and then when the time comes to make a claim low and behold we have run out of money

Just replied with a scenerio to User's argument that the money had run out so families had to look after Gladys.
Obviously Gladys thought her contributions to NI she had paid would do as it said on the tin, look after her from cradle to grave, but lo and behold she has been told a whopper? That's according to User of course.