Today's discussion about the news
Comments
-
Action is needed. At the very least we should signal some virtues.
It may go the way of elderly care, and the govt will try to put in place prices they think they should pay and
1. All homes will charge the maximum
2. Some homes wont take local authority contracts at all, such that
3. Some people needing care williss out entirely or get the wrong kind of care.
0 -
Is this not just repeating yourself but with bullet points.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
No it's pointing out the potential unintended consequences.
What's the solution, in your view?
0 -
Those are obvious. The 'market' for care provision is already a hostage to fortune as the major customers - local authorities - are obliged to buy. So there is zero incentive to provide a better than bare minimum service. Standards enforcement is, like every other sector, underfunded to the point of being almost non-existent, so of course that gap is exploited. It would be weird if it wasn't.
A lot of this does also boil down to local authorities being broke, though. Fixing that means higher Council tax and Business rates or reducing the scope of what they are responsible for.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Local authorities pay less than the market rate for care. That's the first issue.
With LAs paying less than the market rate, it means that self funders have to pay more than the market rate to compensate.
Things would improve a little if the LAs paid the market rate, or provided the care themselves.
0 -
I know it's not a solution, but isn't the fact that it costs £250,000 *per child* for 12 months the scandal? It feels like LAs are being held hostage by the industry that's been virtually monopolised by PE, and I don't think it's unreasonable to ask how it can cost £800 a day, every day, to look after each one. If the answer to the crisis is just for already-bankrupt LAs to 'pay the market rate', then aren't we simply rewarding the rigging of the market?
0 -
Social services funding is lacking, and that is a false economy because the cost of children or anyone else who ends up in care vastly outweighs the cost of the social services needed to prevent a proportion of it from being necessary.
The rest of the comments on here amount to shutting the gates after the horse has bolted. PE shouldn't be anywhere near care services in the first place, but that would have needed legislation a long time ago. Now that they are such a widespread contaminant the 12% annualised return or whatever they need to generate has to be paid for.
0 -
What's the staff child ratio?
0 -
I think the number I heard this week was a profit margin if about 30%. What definition of profit that is, I don't know, but it sounds (a) about right to pique the interests of PE and (b) too high
0 -
Dunno, but widespread 20%+ profit margins suggest a market that's not working as a market should.
@First.Aspect point taken about horses having bolted, and obviously it's not a market you can let crash and rebuild... but just forking out whatever this dysfunctional over-a-barrel market demands doesn't offer a long term solution, and probably makes it worse.
As I say, I realise I'm just sniping and not offering solutions of any sort.
0 -
The problem started when local authority and health service accountants started to question the cost of running units. It cost the same to run a unit with 15 kids in it as it did with 2 staffing wise. So they decided to close the units down to save money buy sending the 2 kids out of area to a private run facility. But then suddenly there was 15 kids needing care and the private units realised as everyone had shut their local units, they could charge what they like.
Or something like this. It’s the same with care homes for the elderly.
0 -
One has to admire private enterprise/equity for exploiting screw-ups by government (see water privatisation, etc.) to the max.
0 -
Finding it somewhat ironic that on the one hand we can argue that a private school is a crucial part of the local community that should be given tax breaks but on the other that people running care homes shouldn't be allowed to make a profit.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
That's an EBITDA margin which doesn't consider any capex, tax or interest. I'm not investing.
0 -
I'm sure you'd be more than happy if you could make a 20% profit from guaranteed government work that's bankrupting councils.
As I say, I know I'm not offering solutions, and it's like giving directions to someone "Ah, now if you want to go there, I'd not be starting from here", but equally I'm not saying they shouldn't make a profit from them. But, that said, even with their financing structures (I suspect with high debt servicing costs), the profit margins are suggestive of a market that is acting like a monopoly. I suspect architectural practices haven't got the same power over a captive market, so your profit margin is somewhat more modest.
0 -
I think the question is how much profit someone is making out of a child welfare issue. It's a moral rehensibility test.
And the consensus with private schools was not what you say, but rather that vat on school fees is an odd hill for Labour to die on.
I can, for example, consider it a pointless policy while at the same time generally thinking that the societal division that private schools embed is not a good thing.
Not that I suggest it can be abolished in favour of all state schools being above average, or anything idealistic like that.
0 -
It's not bankrupting the local authorities because of the profit margin. That's down to slashing of central grants and freezing Council Tax.
Like TBB says, 20-30% before tax, capex and interest is nothing spectacular.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
You aren't wrong. But on top of that, spending on social services is unpopular, so if you increased local govt funding, public toilets, libraries, swimming pools and potholes would all come before spending more on social care to save more.
0 -
I didn't suggest there was a consensus. I don't think there is one, thank goodness.
So how far are we going to extend this? Is private medical care prohibited? Should all veterinary medicine be provided at cost? What about the building contractors who build the care homes or the catering companies that provide the food?Are they allowed to make a profit?
There's nothing immoral about profit.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Dunno about that last part, as far as a general rule goes .
0 -
The converse is that all this stuff is run as a charity. And they can definitely be relied upon to spend money responsibly with absolutely no impropriety whatsoever.🤨
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
It's a lesser of two evils thing. But horse has already bolted, so its a moot point.
0 -
I don't think it is at all. There are multiple examples of unsavoury behaviour and wasting of donated money in the charity sector. And making a profit is not evil.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
-
Those prone to Chasian extrapolations to turn arguments people haven't made against them.
1 -
Unless I misunderstood, you suggested that providing care at cost rather than for profit was the lesser of two evils. You also suggested profiting from care provision was somehow immoral or at least morally questionable. I think that's incorrect and that sort of thinking is partly how care workers end up being poorly paid. And in turn don't take the care in their job that perhaps they should.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
If you're going to take well-known idioms literally, there could be quite a few misunderstandings in life. And I suspect you know the difference between making a profit and profiteering.
0 -
-
Sorry, the farming discussion was in the Labour govt thread.
0 -
Sure, but you see my point about a resistance to the idea that any kind of care work should also be profitable. If not actually wrong there's an idea that it's somehow unseemly.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0
