Jump to content

General Election - 8th June 2017


Matt

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 minute ago, jimsleftfoot said:

 

£72k cap was proposed as part of the Social Care act and was due to be enacted in 2016, delayed until 2020. It was also part of their 2015 manifesto.

No mention of this or any cap within current manifesto, though the £100k floor was.

They are now saying that there was going to be a cap, not sure what it is.

 

George Osborne has called it a U-Turn.

 

 

 

 

 

The £100k floor should be better than the £72k cap, however, it's more complicated than that :lol:

 

Can we all agree that, at least where residential care is concerned, this is all better than the existing policy that, I think, Labour brought in? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, HarryBosch said:

 

What do they get under the current rules?

 

I'm not saying it isn't maybe a small step do not dress it up as a major plus, it is one year unpaid. Many need care for years, many can't take a year off on only benefits, because of course our benefit system will screw them. It is being missed because it is borderline meaningless, it does not do much if anything really. 

 

1 minute ago, HarryBosch said:

 

The £100k floor should be better than the £72k cap, however, it's more complicated than that :lol:

 

Can we all agree that, at least where residential care is concerned, this is all better than the existing policy that, I think, Labour brought in? 

 

Yes, agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, View Of Golden Gate said:

 

I'm not saying it isn't maybe a small step do not dress it up as a major plus, it is one year unpaid. Many need care for years, many can't take a year off on only benefits, because of course our benefit system will screw them. It is being missed because it is borderline meaningless, it does not do much if anything really. 

 

 

 

It's good that employers are being told to give workers the right to keep a job open for such a person who can somehow do that. 

Odd that it's this party rather than the alleged party of workers rights that's come up with the idea though. 

 

Not so good for small/medium sized businesses though....

 

Still, we're talking about a tiny, tiny number of people - albeit not as few as your £200k euthanasia crew.... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mcfluff1985 said:

So if I needed care under this new proposal I would get an unlimited amount in a residential home and then my kids would still get 100k out of my home/assets?

 

 

 

Yes. I think. 

 

And also, your house wouldn't be sold out from under you/your family until after death whereas it can be currently...

 

Granted, you're in a care home now anyway, but that could still be problematic in various stressful ways...

Edited by HarryBosch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, HarryBosch said:

 

It's good that employers are being told to give workers the right to keep a job open for such a person who can somehow do that. 

Odd that it's this party rather than the alleged party of workers rights that's come up with the idea though. 

 

Not so good for small/medium sized businesses though....

 

Still, we're talking about a tiny, tiny number of people - albeit not as few as your £200k euthanasia crew.... 

 

You mean anyone who owns a home worth more than £100,000 (average home is worth £165,000)? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, HarryBosch said:

 

Yes. I think. 

 

And also, your house wouldn't be sold out from under you/your family until after death whereas it can be currently...

 

Granted, you're in a care home now anyway, but that could still be problematic in various stressful ways...

I don't see the issue with it then. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, HarryBosch said:

 

The £100k floor should be better than the £72k cap, however, it's more complicated than that :lol:

 

Can we all agree that, at least where residential care is concerned, this is all better than the existing policy that, I think, Labour brought in? 

 

It's more progressive as taxes go. But its pretty harsh to those with a bit of wealth, doesn't say a lot about saving Vs spending. Also you get taxed on in home care which will ramp the bills up.

 

For me, depends on whether there is a cap.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I've decided...after reading all the manifestos and listening to the various main players, and considering all the local dimensions down here in Peckham and Camberwell, plus the international situation, Brexit, living standards, pensions, the economy, defence, the IRA, the environment, rural issues, business and so on...I'm gonna vote Labour again.

 

I lie. I was gonna do it anyway and haven't considered even one of those things...except maybe Camberwell and Peckham...which means I can say I'm voting for Harman rather than Seamus fucking Milne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 24hoursfromtulsehill said:

I think I've decided...after reading all the manifestos and listening to the various main players, and considering all the local dimensions down here in Peckham and Camberwell, plus the international situation, Brexit, living standards, pensions, the economy, defence, the IRA, the environment, rural issues, business and so on...I'm gonna vote Labour again.

 

I lie. I was gonna do it anyway and haven't considered even one of those things...except maybe Camberwell and Peckham...which means I can say I'm voting for Harman rather than Seamus fucking Milne.

 

I'll be wasting my time and energy voting for someone other than Labour again in Royton, probably Tory, maybe someone else in the unlikely event I receive and read any info on what they're going to do. 

 

McMahon seems to be doing far more for the town than his predecessor (not hard) and I like him, I think, but I don't like him that much.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, HarryBosch said:

 

I'll be wasting my time and energy voting for someone other than Labour again in Royton, probably Tory, maybe someone else in the unlikely event I receive and read any info on what they're going to do. 

 

McMahon seems to be doing far more for the town than his predecessor (not hard) and I like him, I think, but I don't like him that much.  

 

McMahon is a top bloke, although I liked Meacher as well...with his extremely left wing, well written and superficially attractive economics lectures from the Back Benches, to which no one really listened.

 

There's a weird other dimension to politicians from my point of view: you can form a favourable impression or otherwise about MPs based on how easy they are to transcribe. Jim McMahon, for instance, isn't a lot of fun...whereas Meacher was beautiful. Historically, Hansard reporters have had soft spots for charmers such as George Galloway and Enoch Powell, and reciprocal loathing for people with perfectly acceptable views (they're campaigning for the disabled!) but troublesome diction, accents and so on.

Edited by 24hoursfromtulsehill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ChaddySmoker said:

It's not rocket science. This is simply a matter of repeating the words 'death tax' at 100% rates. Fuck fuck fuck-just seen the U turn.

Strong and stable my arse! This is supposedly the woman who will sort out the EU-she cannot even sort out her own party.

She has panicked over the uproar from right wing Tories as she starts to lose the pensioner vote.

Was it better to panic and illustrate weak leadership or to stick by an unpopular (but needed?) policy. Time will tell.

 

 

Was there to be " a dementia tax" before her speech? Is there going to be one after her speech? Where increased NI contributions a target last month? Are NI contributions a target next month?

 

i thought U turns took you in the opposite direction?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ChaddySmoker said:

You will as you get older and your property becomes worth 1/2M.

 

I'm struggling to understand your position. Are you defending the right of David Cameron and the like to inherit the full value of their parents estate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, ChaddySmoker said:

You will as you get older and your property becomes worth 1/2M.

 

To be fair I'm way off (hopefully) being in that position where I need to be put into care. Also if my property was to be worth that much there'd need to be some serious increase in house prices. We paid 160 for ours last year so I think it's a way off as well ha. The stuff needs paying for somehow. It's alright Labour saying we will make this free and this free and not charge for this but someone has to pay.

 

Like the outcry at student loan fees. A student who had about 45k of debt would only pay back about 25 quid a month when they were earning 21k. That's not a lot for the education you've received.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, leeslover said:

I'm struggling to understand your position. Are you defending the right of David Cameron and the like to inherit the full value of their parents estate?

I do not subscribe to the view which I am portraying but unfortunately a lot of the people that I deal with on a day to day basis do.

Just as the biggest tax fiddlers are the ones who earn over £100K pa-they are the greediest ones. Theresa has totally misunderstood the thoughts and fears of a lot of pensioners (+ their families)

If we are arguing about it, how will they be thinking in the Thames estuary? Inheritance Tax is seen as the worst Tax ever-imagine the stupidity of allowing it to be portrayed as being at 100%.

 

Edited by ChaddySmoker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Magister said:

Was there to be " a dementia tax" before her speech? Is there going to be one after her speech? Where increased NI contributions a target last month? Are NI contributions a target next month?

 

i thought U turns took you in the opposite direction?

 

 

You could call it a climbdown rather than a U-turn, perhaps, but it would be a disingenuous act to imply nothing has changed.

 

Even the Murdoch press are pointing this out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Crusoe said:

 

You could call it a climbdown rather than a U-turn, perhaps, but it would be a disingenuous act to imply nothing has changed.

 

Even the Murdoch press are pointing this out.

If I am unsure if this should be classified as a U turn perhaps I should google it

https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/866571831523897344/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.co.uk%2Fentry%2Fdementia-tax_uk_5922a9f6e4b094cdba553945

well maybe not

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mcfluff1985 said:

I don't see the issue with it then. 

 

2 hours ago, ChaddySmoker said:

You will as you get older and your property becomes worth 1/2M.

 

 

He probably won't.

 

He'll probably never need social care.

And - I'm just guessing - but, like most people (the many, not the few if you will :grin: ) he probably leads a multi faceted life that involves lots of far more interesting stuff than hoarding every penny he possibly can for his kids and grand kids inheritance...

 

And he'll soon, once again, be as blissfully unaware of the minutiae of this policy as he was of the current more punitive one it's replacing...

Edited by HarryBosch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mcfluff1985 said:

 

Like the outcry at student loan fees. A student who had about 45k of debt would only pay back about 25 quid a month when they were earning 21k. That's not a lot for the education you've received.

 

 

 

 

Apparently, Labours plans around tuition fees will benefit most the graduates who earn the most and make little difference to most working class students...

 

Is there a theme evolving here?

 

https://election2017.ifs.org.uk/article/labour-s-higher-education-proposals-will-cost-8bn-per-year-although-increase-the-deficit-by-more-graduates-who-earn-most-in-future-would-benefit-most

 

And, it seems they're after sending every man and his dog to University again like last time....

 

If they're not going to do something that a degree will specifically aid I'd rather my kids learn a trade or something....

 

On the other hand, if my lad is honest about it and wants to spend 3 years balls deep in beer & women and worry about life later I'd respect his honesty and support him 100%....

Not his sister though....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, HarryBosch said:

 

Not as much as he is... :grin:

 

 

1 hour ago, ChaddySmoker said:

I do not subscribe to the view which I am portraying but unfortunately a lot of the people that I deal with on a day to day basis do.

Just as the biggest tax fiddlers are the ones who earn over £100K pa-they are the greediest ones. Theresa has totally misunderstood the thoughts and fears of a lot of pensioners (+ their families)

If we are arguing about it, how will they be thinking in the Thames estuary? Inheritance Tax is seen as the worst Tax ever-imagine the stupidity of allowing it to be portrayed as being at 100%.

 

In case you are struggling to keep pace with the discussion! You do have some history here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...