How many stocks do you hold in you portfolio?

[Harvey Specter]

the poor beggar on a minimum wage pays tax

the poor buggar on minimum wage probably doesn't pay tax, especially if they have a kid. But other than that, I agree. While I can accept super not being means tested, rest home subsidies should be including full look through of trusts.

[Bjauck]

Of course. Why should people in their last years be able to preserve money to leave to family or whoever, and expect taxpayers to cover their expenses? Imagine some wealthy person's kids being left a pile of dough when the poor beggar on a minimum wage pays tax to support the rest home resident. That would be grossly unfair. We should all pay for our own living costs as long as able. For all that, use whatever is legally available, but never complain about assets being depleted by being spent on the asset's owner!

Fair point -except it is the more modestly wealthy who usually end up unsubsidised, whilst the more seriously rich with long-established trusts are still able to claim the subsidy.

Some elderly folk are able to remain independent in their own homes, whilst others become more feeble in old age, necessitating rest home level care. So I think there is a medical element for the need for both rest home care and nursing home care and the full cost for both should be borne by the Health Boards without means testing, as with general hospital care. Any extra tax needed to cover the extra expense would be largely borne by the wealthy (including trusts!) anyway.

There is no insurance available in NZ to cover someone if they end up requiring long-term rest home level care - unlike the private medical insurance available for shorter-term general hospital fees.

[macduffy]

I get a Yogi Berra "deja vu all over again" feeling reading this thread. Havn't we been here before, somewhere?

Meanwhile, the "how many stocks....." subject seems to have slipped the net!

[Bjauck]

I get a Yogi Berra "deja vu all over again" feeling reading this thread. Havn't we been here before, somewhere?

Meanwhile, the "how many stocks....." subject seems to have slipped the net!

True. As ever, one thing leads to another and I guess you sometimes cannot discuss one topic in isolation from other topics.

Whilst the objective of a portfolio, being to finance long-term rest home care in this case, is relevant to the optimal number (or perhaps type if that is still on topic?) of stocks to hold in the portfolio.

Whether it is just or consistent for society to expect such an objective is important but not directly relevant. Bear in mind that someone is assessed as needing rest home level care, when they are physically and/or mentally unable to live independently.