Indeed, there is nothing surer than Death and Taxes.

 

Former prime minister Paul Keating says the ballooning cost of aged care should be met by a HECS-style funding model, where every Australian is extended a loan to pay for their care and the costs are recovered from each individual's estate.

The model would reduce the fiscal burden on a generation that will already be carrying the costs of the coronavirus pandemic and allow easier access to home support packages, which currently have long waiting lists. Each person's assets would help to maintain them in later life and it would be more difficult for family members to call on those assets.

"We're not forcing anyone out of their home, we're not obliging aged persons to negatively mortgage their home, you're not asking families to chip in and pay for their relatives in their accommodation or their care, and so I think such a system has a lot of advantages," Mr Keating said.


Former prime minister Paul Keating has proposed a HECS-style scheme for aged care funding.

The scheme, which Mr Keating put to the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Assurance on Monday morning, departs from his previous advocacy for a national insurance model funded by an employer directed levy, similar to the superannuation scheme that he designed as treasurer.

He now believed it would be politically difficult to impose a new levy, given that there was already resistance to an extra half a percentage point going to the superannuation levy.

When superannuation was first conceived in the late 1980s, there were 6.5 people between the ages of 15 and 65 supporting every one person above 65. There are now 3.7 people supporting every person over the age of 65 and the figure is predicted to fall to three by 2040.


As Treasurer, Paul Keating established Australia's superannuation scheme. CREDIT:PETER MORRIS

"As you know, a lot of young people now who actually become that cohort, the tax paying cohort, many of them have low incomes, they're renters, they start life with a HECS debt if they've been to university and of course they pay the GST 10 per cent cold, regardless of income," Mr Keating said.

"So to this cohort we are inviting them to carry the great body of retired aged people and of course now with the debts of the COVID budgetary interventions."

He brushed away the suggestion that it might be viewed as a "death tax".

"If there's not assets there then the Commonwealth pays, but it's a very nice way of working out what the Commonwealth should really pay vis-a-vis the residual assets of an aged person in superannuation or bricks and mortar assets etc."

He conceded that the issue of people trying to divest their assets before they got into the system would need to be addressed in policy.

The Royal Commission is examining the funding, financing and prudential regulation of the sector.

Counsel assisting Peter Gray QC said in his opening remarks there were some "surprising features" in the existing arrangements, including that home-care packages were not required to report what goods and services they were providing with government subsidies, which amount to $2.5 billion per year.

Meanwhile, residential care providers, which receive about $7.5 billion in care subsidies, do not adequately report how that money is used and what profit or loss is made. They are not required to disclose what proportion is spent on management fees or rent or to maintain a particular level of staffing.

www.theage.com.au/national/nsw/hecs-for-aged-care-paul-keating-s-solution-to-fun...



Oh boy!

I bet Albo just loves the thought of having to defend the inevitable election claim that this would be a Death Tax. 

Yeah, thanks Paulie.   

it wont encourage people to accumulate  much in the way of assets  once they reach a ripe old age   if those who do not have any assets......  the Commonwealth will pick up the tab..


why is it   with Labor   they expect those who went without to buy their first home    and forever after pay and pay and pay.....more taxes... called rates land and water...many investing their money in their property  which improved its value....yet are expected to pay out for agedcare... whilst those who didnt bother to invest in a house of their own...found it easier to gamble or smoke......are given a free ride..

because this is what will happen....if you have any assets   it will be hacked at by how many years you happen to spend in agedcare...and Paul says it wont cost the family anything... seriously?......

of course its a death tax.... but only for those who saved and invested wisely...

Broadly, I agree with the sentiments being expressed here. but acknowledge that it's a tough one.

I think many people (most) believe the standard of Aged Care in this country is pretty poor - esp. on the part of the for-profit providers.

So, questions need to be asked about how care is best delivered for our Aged - which includes us in the future.

Then, we've got the Australian economy in the deepest recession since the Great Depression, and racking up debt like it's going out of style (granted, with not much choice).

Fair to say we won't hear too much about "Debt and Deficit Disaster" out of the LNP for a while...we can hope, anyway. 

But I digress...

"If" we want a better standard of care, then a couple of things need to be realised:

1) We need to change the way the sector operates. Removing the profit motive would be a good start.

2) We also need to properly fund the thing, so that the money is spent where needed (not banked as profits or dividends - or both).

Number 2 costs money, so the question is "How do we fund it, coming out of this recession?"

So, yes. there will be all sorts of suggestions.

For those of us who own our houses, one particularly galling idea I keep seeing pushed, is the idea of introducing a broad-based Land Tax, which angers me on a number of fronts:

1) We already pay a "Land Tax". It's called "Rates".

2) Some already pay a second discreet land tax, depending on property use/value.

3) There is no mention of grand fathering, meaning that those of us (almost everyone) who paid a fair chunk of Stamp Duty on the purchase of the home, will then be asked to pay again. I for one will be staunchly opposed to that.

Again, just another example of the kinds of "tax reform" the "economists" will throw out there, knowing that Governments across the country will be desperate to recover lost revenue post-pandemic, regardless of the Political cost.

Expect to see more such proposals being bandied around...

The bastards running aged care homes will still
spend only $6 per day on food per person
and pocket the rest for themselves.

Sir lastnail wrote on Sep 15^th, 2020 at 12:29pm:



Baked beans and mashed spud for Xmas dinner.
Could you put up with that kind of cuisine?

Thank you, Brother Keating the well-heeled in retirement courtesy of the dumb public who have no say (The Silenced Majority) - we always knew you and your mates could offer us yet another way sneaky to remove from retirees their well-earned and ensure that only your kind would be able to have a legacy to YOUR future generations, thus dividing society into its natural situation of massively rich masters and absolutely poor serfs...

Free Tertiary Education for REAL subjects!

No HEX on retirement homes!

Plebiscites To The People NOW!

Bobby. wrote on Sep 15^th, 2020 at 12:30pm:


Went to pick up the disabled ex in 'rehab' for a hip operation... 600 km each way - and lunch had a choice of a chintzy sandwich or a pie..... first thing we did was head for the local Chinese with an order list from all the inmates...... only one or two die-hards said NO to a Chinese run.... and the staff were appalled - what if they are poisoned on our 'watch' .....

Don't ever mention Florence Nightingale to me in the context of hospital care again..... 

Valkie wrote on Sep 16^th, 2020 at 7:24am:


Invest in a cardboard box then....Who do you think is going to pay for your aged care mate....You do realise you must pay for it yourself and this proposal gives people a means to fund their own aged care without burdening the taxpayer....The other alternatives are to take out private insurance, self fund through your own assets and income or live in a cardboard box???

Valkie wrote on Sep 16^th, 2020 at 7:24am:



Force all former politicians to stay in a very cheap aged care home
when they need aged care help.

Let them have baked beans and mashed spud for Xmas dinner.

Income and assets tests for aged care need to be simplified, former federal treasurer Peter Costello tells royal commission
Quote:

(Click link for full article)

And here it is.

The elderly lady up the road from me has sever Parkinson's and other medical conditions.

He friend of many, many years lives with her in a small comfortable house.

But the Parkinson's and other conditions have reached a point where she can no longer be looked after by her long time friend (who herself is not well and in her 80s)

So, its off to a home.
Now, both these ladies worked all their lives, they saved and lived comfortably.
They both have small nest eggs (there was no super for most of their working lives)
But the grubberment DEMANDS and enormous sum of money to put her in a home.
They want the house sold and used to pay for her care in a nursing home.
They also take the majority of her pension while there.

The friend still lives in the house, and the grubberment want her out.
She has nowhere else to live, and her small nest egg will not meet the cost of a house or even a flat.
Neither gets a full pension, but their savings are less than the grubberment DEMANDS to put this elderly lady up.

So the grubberment wants to discuss a DEAL
$200,000.00 will give her 5 years living in the home.........Non-refundable.
Basically everything she has.
If she sells off the house ($450,000.00 - $500,000.00) and hands that over, she will be housed until she passes.
But she gets only 60% approx back for her family.

On top of all that cash handed over, the lions share of the pension she gets goes straight to the home.
Meals (as have been well documented) amount to about $6.00 and day per person.

Now here is the crux.
She may live a few months.
She may even live a year.
But all the doctors say she probably wont see next year out.
So its win -win for the thieving criminal grubberment.

These ladies have worked all their lives
Paid taxes all their lives.
Volunteered in many charities up until they could no longer
They have given and given, but now are treated like shite.

Compare this scenario to another lady who was put in the same home just days ago.
My wife and I helped her get settled.
This lady was neither frugal or a worker.
Spent all the money her husband made, lived in Housing commission houses.
When he died, she went on the dole and has nothing to show for her life.
She walked up to the home and was give a room without any cost.

There is nor fairness in this or any grubberment.
There are no rewards for being a good citizen.
In fact, you are punished for doing the right thing.

Dont believe me?
Then why is it that if you own your own home, you get less than a budging parasite who never bothered to buy one?

We seriously need a revolution.
We need a grubberment who reward hard work and contribution.
At the moment, the worse you are, the less you contribute, the bigger the bludger and parasite you are, the more you get.

There should be a standard dole for everyone, one level for all.
This pension should be without asset test, everyone should be eligible, no matter how much you have or own.
this would make people more willing to save and enjoy life.

But as it is, I have to divest myself of a considerable sum before I even get a look in at a pension or part pension.
So I quit work 5 years earlier than the grubberment wants me to.
Ill live off my super and spend up, so that I will be eligible for a part pension which I will top up with my super enough to live comfortable.

Had the system been less unfair, I would have worked to 67 and continued to pay taxes.
I would have spent my money on things I wanted without a care, as I would have known I was covered.
but now, Its all very careful.
I spend much less.
pay no tax
and look for any freebies I can lay my hand on.

The moment such things go up - so do the costs to match.... you all know by now that every time there is any rise in unemployment benefits, the costs of living go up... every time there is a rise in the home owner's scheme etc, the costs go up... every time there is a wage increase, the costs go up ... and that's not even taking into account the added costs of 'privatised' once public enterprises.

Without clearly limiting costs, no advance will ever be made.

Ergo - if you want a nation to get ahead and get some real economic activity going that actually helps the majority - you control costs first - then you start to wind back the extra costs added by privatisation.  When you add shareholders and massively overpaid 'ceos' and such to the mix, you cannot avoid cost increases...

But not you, I guess, Paul? You had the initiative to implement superannuation. But I doubt that you will see your estate given up to pay for your care.

A raise in Medicare Levy would go into 'consolidated revenue' - you saw clearly how that works with all the money donated to help 'bushfire victims' that instead went into the coffers of the organisations who had control over the funds and disappeared for 'other services'.

Remember the poor old 7.5% out of your wage to fund your eventual pension??  A hidden tax that remains to this day while 'governments' try to argue that pensions are a handout.... though theirs never are.

Boot the bloody lot and start again.

I will never go into an aged care home. If Im too feeble to care for myself then thats it. No way am i relying on anyone to wipe my bum and eat baby food. Lots of people living longer in our society but not living better. People shouldnt linger, its against the natural order.

Mix_Master wrote on Sep 26^th, 2020 at 8:37am:


Joys of being an old bastard with a long memory....

"We simply do not have the resources to support the large amount of self entitled wilfully stupid people in this world."

Politicians?  Their mates?  They're a pretty self-entitled lot... unless you subscribe to the ideas of St Tony Of The Repository of Wisdom, who meant that the Age of Entitlement™ being over was for the peasants who already had no entitlements........ well - he was right there...... it was over before it started for them..... now for getting rid of the genuinely (self) Entitled™ lots...

Frank wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2020 at 10:48am:


Well - that's what happens when you demand 'equality' by your standards... for every such woman there will be a man in the same situation, and the need is to focus on why this is the case for all... forty years of affirmative action not enough to make a difference other than to impoverish others?
It's all well and good to apply for jobs - but when the jobs simply don't exist due to bad management of the nation for the same forty years.....

They could all pick fruit according to some...... maybe we need a Moskva solution, with the babushkas sweeping the snow off the streets for their state pension or an Asian solution wherein the old women walk daily for miles collecting firewood for the family home ....