Pound Shop Thatcher House Snatcher on the doorstep on ITV News
Oh dear how we laugh at PB Tories who defend Dementia Tax should take a look
"Whats this about charging old people for homecare"
May Explains
Women gives her the you can fook off then look.
Clearly a complete non issue!!
Not many people have said it is a non issue, so your point is irrelevant. It's not going to be exceedingly popular by any measure, it asks people to pay more toward cost of social care so of course it isn't, the question is will it be damaging enough to get significant numbers to switch to Labour (who are promising, again, unfunded massive increases and a promise to merely lay the foundation of a national care service by 2022) to cost them a victory? And will any number of people consider, even if they do not like the policy as it stands, that at least they are trying to address the problem.
That sort of reaction pushes me more toward a Tory vote.
Vote Tory if you wish. Its a free country just prey you do not become disabled or get dementia.
Its a shite policy omly pooling works in terms of fairness
Plenty of Tories on previous thread told me it was a none issue BTW.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
I have also considered abstaining in this election.
The Tories have shifted uncomfortably to the left. May's vision of the UK is a parochial one, she is at best dull and managerial and at worst censorious and meddling.
Labour present a bright, optimistic vision of the future where everyone is happy and everything is paid for by the magic money tree. It is, of course, a complete lie. Plus, Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser who isn't fit to lead his own party let alone a government.
The lib dems stand for nothing any more other than opposition to Brexit. To vote for them would be to vote against democracy, if such a thing is possible.
I'm not a mad Kipper and couldn't give a toss if immigration is 50 or 500,000, so long as we have control over our own borders and make adequate infrastructure provision and help immigrants to integrate into society.
My main concerns are property prices being too high, small to medium sized businesses and higher rate tax payers being squeezed at the expense of large multinationals and the super rich who appear to pay proportionally far less. Generally I'm for lower taxes and less regulation. I'm also socially liberal and can't abide censorship or the government telling people what they can or can't do with their bodies.
Who do I vote for?
There's no socially liberal, economically dry, patriotic-yet-internationalist party out there.
I don't feel as if the Conservatives should be rewarded with my vote. Corbynism terrifies me.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
You could lose even more under the current system. My cousins certainly did.
Clown_Car_HQ is right, nunu.
Under the present system, you COULD lose everything down to 27 k before the State pays.
I have not read a newspaper article that is not supportive of this care policy including the Guardian
Furthermore a tightening of the polls will shake complacency in the conservatives .
I understand there are question time debates with each leader shortly, one of which is Corbyn facing Andrew Neil which should be worth watching
In the last 10 days or so the sun, mail, express, telegraph et al will launch the most horrendous attack on Corbyn and his crew and these are the papers most read by the WWC.
The live one on one's with May and Corbyn and the anti Corbyn media onslaught that is coming should see a good 60-80 majority at the least for May
You say this, but the Telegraph had what I thought was a rather pertinent story about MI5, convicted terrorists etc etc etc. Daily Mail tiny write up, minor thing on Sky, nothing on the BBC.
I have to say given the masses of coverage of Cameron and Bullingdon and former drug use, I would have thought the fact that Jahadi Jez and John the Marxist are terrorist sympthaizers would be rather an important story. Given we have seen the media go for days and days on people for having a single dinner on a yacht with a mildly shady individual, I always thought the bar was set very low for "scandal" news when it comes to potential PMs.
Usually but in my example it's got double meaning with the literal sense as well. Once the policy is established they could lower the threshold to hit more people.
Is there something Machiavellian about the Tory manifesto. Hit pensioners with money tied up in houses mainly in safe seats. Poll leads shRink but people are scared into voting Tory as the postal votes start being sent In.
I don't think so.
The public knows the answer to these questions;
Who do you trust more to run the economy? Who do you trust more to negotiate Brexit? Who do you trust more to deal with terrorism? Who do you trust more to defend the country? Who do you trust more to deal with migration? Who do you trust more to deal with Nicola Sturgeon? Who do you trust more to deal in reality?
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
Just a point - what is Corbyn's policy on care
NHS becomes NH&SCS
Bevan vs Churchill 1948??
"“In its first years, our service will require an additional £3 billion of public funds every year, enough to place a maximum limit on lifetime personal contributions to care costs, raise the asset threshold below which people are entitled to state support, and provide free end of life care. There are different ways the necessary monies can be raised. We will seek consensus on a cross-party basis about how it should be funded, with options including wealth taxes, an employer care contribution or a new social care levy.”
So basically a free National care srvice probably paid for by borrowing. But it's moot they wont get to implement it, I just can't vote for May because of this. She wants to win with nothern working class people who have never voted tory before.....good luck to her.....
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
It's reactions like this that give me the bloody heebie-jeebies.
What arse-wittery has TMay enacted?
The irony is, if Corbyn won, house prices would probably crash.
That is a vast over-reaction. Anyway nothing seems to be able to stop the housig market in London, especially since if he won he would increase mass immigration most of whom would go to London, further pushing up London house prices. I really don't fear a Labour overall majority. No one does.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
It's reactions like this that give me the bloody heebie-jeebies.
What arse-wittery has TMay enacted?
The irony is, if Corbyn won, house prices would probably crash.
There would be a significant possibility of an ongoing wealth tax on properties - ill or not.
I have no idea why the Tories (if they were really scheming) just didn't publish a manifesto of boring shit about bin collection and other stuff that nobody will really change their vote over. There was / is absolutely no need to propose anything radical.
Then when they got the 100+ manifesto push through the OAP reforms in year 1. All the outcry would have been long forgotten come GE 2022.
The odd thing about the polls is I find it difficult to believe either the Conservative or Labour score.
The Conservatives aren't running an impressive campaign so I find it hard to believe they're going to get the highest vote since Heath in 1970 or maybe Wilson in 1966 - a time when the Liberals were very minor and minor parties almost non-existent.
But I find it difficult to believe that Corbyn's Labour can get over 30%.
You're not the only one who finds Labour's vote share astonishing, but we have to accept that we may have under-estimated them - not necessarily because they're any good, but rather because of the extent to which the traditional two party system appears (outside of Scotland) to be re-asserting itself.
It's perfectly plausible to imagine the Conservatives polling in the high 40s. They start with a 38% share from 2015, and that rises to 44% if you simply transfer half of the 2015 Ukip vote into their column. They're on course to double their share in Scotland, which bumps them up to about 45%, after which the remaining gains they need to make in England and Wales to match Heath's 46.4% are rather modest. Certainly, unless the polls have got the Lib Dem score badly wrong, or there's a sudden (and very unlikely) major revival in the Ukip vote, then the only way they're likely to fall short of 45% is if there's a net flow of 2015 voters from Con to Lab, which doesn't seem plausible either. I mean, some people like me who want the Tories to do well fret about a mass sulk by pensioners over having their sweeties taken away, but what proportion of well-to-do over 65s is likely to sit on their hands or vote for Labour under the current management as a result?
But Labour, on the other hand, may well poll well into the 30s. When Harold Wilson was defeated in 1970 he still managed 43%. Now, this was in a scenario where Labour were still the top dogs in Scotland and the old Liberal Party were the only meaningful also-ran party in England. But on the other hand the Liberals in 1970 polled about as well as the Lib Dems are currently predicted to do now, and the principal players in England who weren't around in 1970 - Ukip and the Greens - are both looking pretty marginal now.
If we give 5% of the GB vote to Plaid, the SNP and minor parties, 7% to the Lib Dems, 46% to the Tories and 3% each to Ukip and the Greens, then that leaves 36% for Labour. The votes can't go anywhere else. For Labour to poll worse than Miliband then we would need the Tories, Lib Dems and also-rans to pile on at least another 5%, or about 1.5m voters, between them, directly at Labour's expense. This is certainly possible - it may be that the slew of recent polls showing Labour above 30% are merely the product of incorrect weighting - but it is also realistic to suppose that Labour might actually be doing that well, simply because the votes of the Lib Dems, Ukip and the Green Party are all being depressed, and not all of those lost voters are going to be prepared to back the Tories.
I had a stab at guessing what might happen if the also-ran parties are all significantly depressed, and - consequently - the more Labour friendly polls are in the right ballpark, the other evening. I came up with a range of results between Con 51 - Lab 31 and Con 47 - Lab 35. I'm still of the opinion that the more Labour friendly polls are being too generous to them, but if they did come in a bit above 30% then I would no longer be so surprised.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
It's reactions like this that give me the bloody heebie-jeebies.
What arse-wittery has TMay enacted?
The irony is, if Corbyn won, house prices would probably crash.
Imagine (if you can bear it) what a Corbyn victory, or even a hung parliament, would do to Brexit. Guarantee the most chaotic Brexit imaginable.
Labour's policy is to refuse a bad deal, but they won't accept no deal, either. So the EU would give us the shittiest deal in human history, expecting us to reverse the vote, which we probably would, in the end, as Labour and Tory MPs rebelled against the unfolding nightmare.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
It's reactions like this that give me the bloody heebie-jeebies.
What arse-wittery has TMay enacted?
We can't go on as we are, and the alternatives are something like what is proposed, or higher taxes (which is what "pooled risk" translates to). If the tories propose higher taxes (2p on income tax or NI) no one will vote for them, and if Labour propose higher taxes (all paid for by ending tax dodges and taxing the super-rich) no one will believe them. Impasse.
And another thing: care-giving being low paid and grungy as it is, I am guessing that a large proportion of it is done by furriners, and that Brexit will send the cost of it skywards. The effect of all this may be a heart-warming surge in the number of people deciding to keep care-giving (and inheritances) within the family.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
You could lose even more under the current system. My cousins certainly did.
Clown_Car_HQ is right, nunu.
Under the present system, you COULD lose everything down to 27 k before the State pays.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
Just a point - what is Corbyn's policy on care
NHS becomes NH&SCS
As an ultimate goal, maybe that's a good idea.
IIRC correctly it is the LD manifesto talking of merging systems (Our longer-term objective will be to bring together NHS and social care into one seamless service – pooling budgets in every area by 2020 and developing integrated care organisations) while the Labour one is technically separate but working together so it might as well be one (The National Care Service will be built alongside the NHS, with a shared requirement for single commissioning, partnership arrangements, pooled budgets and joint working arrangements).
But what does that mean for a prospective government now? As only the 'foundation' is to laid in five years (In our first term, Labour will lay the foundations of a National Care Service for England).
And how will it be paid for? (There are different ways the necessary monies can be raised. We will seek consensus on a cross-party basis about how it should be funded, with options including wealth taxes, an employer care contribution or a new social care levy). Different options, but an indication of preference might be nice, given it is such an important and eye catching pledge.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
You could lose even more under the current system. My cousins certainly did.
Clown_Car_HQ is right, nunu.
Under the present system, you COULD lose everything down to 27 k before the State pays.
And if your parents are THAT certain they want you to get their inheritance, they could start transferring it during their lifetime.
Of course, they might want to blow it on hookers and drugs and fast cars and are just stringing you along, because you have this proprietorial attitude towards their assets that leaves them a bit queasy in the pit of their stomach.
I commented a few days ago on those "events" and I think this so-called Dementia Tax is one of them. With just under three weeks to go, it is definitely squeaky bum time for the conservatives and I feel they are losing the momentum, in spite of Labour's problems.
It's hardly scientific I know, but listening to some phone-in programmes, this policy is not going down well, with some callers in tears. We can take the cynical view but most of the caller's are women with elderly relatives with dementia. Having worked in mental health, I know what an absolute curse this disease is for all concerned.
I have no idea why the Tories (if they were really scheming) just didn't publish a manifesto of boring shit about bin collection and other stuff that nobody will really change their vote over. There was / is absolutely no need to propose anything radical.
Then when they got the 100+ manifesto push through the OAP reforms in year 1. All the outcry would have been long forgotten come GE 2022.
Maybe, maybe not. Prioritising preparing people for it now, over a bigger majority and springing on as a surprise which could precipitate an ever larger cost particularly if in the midst of the next economic trouble, is a valid strategy. Particularly if it is a good idea, or at least a start on a serious problem, rather than a vapid slogan.
Mr. Urquhart, again, I agree. The Conservatives have also been weak in attacking Corbyn over this.
Mr. 100, I'd also really like a party with this. If I vote Conservative it'll be because Corbyn's unacceptable, not because I like May. She's a meddling authoritarian and a statist.
I have no idea why the Tories (if they were really scheming) just didn't publish a manifesto of boring shit about bin collection and other stuff that nobody will really change their vote over. There was / is absolutely no need to propose anything radical.
Then when they got the 100+ manifesto push through the OAP reforms in year 1. All the outcry would have been long forgotten come GE 2022.
If it is not in the manifesto the HOL could have caused chaos with it
Why should his strong feelings be a good indication? And if he thinks the first is the most accurate, should be take business for polls during campaign?
When one considers the massive amounts by which the exchequer has benefited on account of income tax and NIC receipts on account of seemingly unending increases in the numbers employed, coupled with lower benefit payments as regards unemployment pay, etc. Add to that the massive amounts of VAT paid as the country continues to spend at higher than expected levels and you really do have to wonder what sort of state the economy might have been in had the UK slipped into recession as had been feared by many, post the Brexit referendum. Yet still, the Tories, at least, are hell bent on raising taxes and/or restricting benefits. It seems as if the good old days when a proper Tory Government would seek to eliminate waste and introduce cost savings which were not unduly penal in their nature to whole sections of the community are now long gone. What it seems we now have to look forward to with Mrs May and the uninspiring Philip Hammond is really a Blair Govt MK2. Small wonder it attracts so many previous Labour and LibDem voters.
Long-time lurker, but sitting here in western Cardiff I thought I'd join the talk about the Cardiff seats.
Here are the results from this month's council elections for the wards in the relevant constituencies (multi-member constituencies include just the votes for each party's top candidate):
Cardiff Central LD 9643 Lab 8682 Con 4072 PC 1573 Oth 2410
Cardiff West Lab 10490 PC 10470 Con 6846 LD 2613 Oth 1130
Cardiff North Con 14999 Lab 12610 PC 3306 LD 3147 Oth 3971
Cardiff South (NOT including Penarth) Lab 8884 Con 3557 PC 3052 LD 1971 Oth 1806
Obviously there are particular circumstances for local elections - e.g. Plaid focused hugely on West to the detriment of their performance elsewhere. So DYOR!
Thank you and welcome.
Interesting to see those figures for central. Having said that Aberystwyth's students are not likely to be especially politically active anyway, is it different in Cardiff? And if so, might the Liberal Democrats benefit from the fact Cardiff University finishes on the 9th June?
SeanT always makes me chuckle when he has one of his wobbles.
But this ia technically an election on leadership. Leaderships ratings point to a tory win
I don't think the point of this GE is a Tory win. For Kim Jong May the idea was a massive win.
For me, it was to see Corbyn squished so the Labour party can get rid of him and his band of Marxists, communists, terrorist supporters, antisemities and holocaust deniers.
At this rate we get a small Tory win, Jezza get a big vote share and stays on.
SeanT always makes me chuckle when he has one of his wobbles.
But this ia technically an election on leadership. Leaderships ratings point to a tory win
I don't think the point of this GE is a Tory win. For Kim Jong May the idea was a massive win.
For me, it was to see Corbyn squished so the Labour party can get rid of him and his band of Marxists, communists, terrorist supporters, antisemities and holocaust deniers.
At this rate we get a small Tory win, Jezza get a big vote share and stays on.
Kim is a surname, so you could call her "May Jong Un" or something!
I really don't fear a Labour overall majority. No one does.
That second sentence is absolutely wrong. I certainly do. If Labour win, given their moronic, uncosted education policies that genuinely appear to be based on ignorance and class spite (ironic from a team led by Corbyn of course) rather than a cold-eyed appraisal of what is needed and how to achieve it, I would be at least one of dead, suffering a nervous breakdown or unemployed within 18 months of Labour getting into power.
SeanT always makes me chuckle when he has one of his wobbles.
But this ia technically an election on leadership. Leaderships ratings point to a tory win
At this rate we get a small Tory win, Jezza get a big vote share and stays on.
Not a great outcome. I'm so disappointed in the LDs, they could have helped a lot of people by limiting the Tory majority somewhat, taking votes from Labour and so helping force Corbyn out, but they've been unable to capitalise.
Touching to see the left with such concern for rich pensioners - quite right that low earners should graft hard so that large estates are passed down intact.
I have no idea why the Tories (if they were really scheming) just didn't publish a manifesto of boring shit about bin collection and other stuff that nobody will really change their vote over. There was / is absolutely no need to propose anything radical.
Then when they got the 100+ manifesto push through the OAP reforms in year 1. All the outcry would have been long forgotten come GE 2022.
If it is not in the manifesto the HOL could have caused chaos with it
They will do anyway...with 100+ majority she can kick between the legs and tell them go f##k themselves as we can just win in HoC with ease.
SeanT always makes me chuckle when he has one of his wobbles.
But this ia technically an election on leadership. Leaderships ratings point to a tory win
I had no idea this site could be so entertaining. Sean T is totally crackers (an act or genuine, I don't think any of us really know), but I can forgive him for it because he expresses his madness (fake or otherwise) so eloquently.
Why should his strong feelings be a good indication?
Because his strong feelings or gut accurately forecast the EURef and as he likes to remind Opinium were the second most accurate pollster at Ge2015*
*Technically the second least inaccurate
People's guts are right sometimes, doesn't mean there's a guarantee their guts will be again - Dan Hodges was right about Ed M, hasn't stopped people dismissing him for most things since.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
I have also considered abstaining in this election.
The Tories have shifted uncomfortably to the left. May's vision of the UK is a parochial one, she is at best dull and managerial and at worst censorious and meddling.
Labour present a bright, optimistic vision of the future where everyone is happy and everything is paid for by the magic money tree. It is, of course, a complete lie. Plus, Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser who isn't fit to lead his own party let alone a government.
The lib dems stand for nothing any more other than opposition to Brexit. To vote for them would be to vote against democracy, if such a thing is possible.
I'm not a mad Kipper and couldn't give a toss if immigration is 50 or 500,000, so long as we have control over our own borders and make adequate infrastructure provision and help immigrants to integrate into society.
My main concerns are property prices being too high, small to medium sized businesses and higher rate tax payers being squeezed at the expense of large multinationals and the super rich who appear to pay proportionally far less. Generally I'm for lower taxes and less regulation. I'm also socially liberal and can't abide censorship or the government telling people what they can or can't do with their bodies.
Who do I vote for?
There's no socially liberal, economically dry, patriotic-yet-internationalist party out there.
I don't feel as if the Conservatives should be rewarded with my vote. Corbynism terrifies me.
Abstention feels like my least worst option.
Kyf,
I feel similar to you, if there was a Libertarian party candidate in my area I would vote for them. but as there are only 4 I think that is unlikely to help you ether. In the end I will probably vote tory and hope she becomes a bit more liberal over time, but I'm not confidant.
Post election, I perhaps the Lib Dems will simultaneously realize that
1) The need a new and better leader. 2) Banging on about EU does not work and will not as most voters have moved on. 3) There is an opening for a free market/free society liberal party and reoccupy it.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
I have also considered abstaining in this election.
The Tories have shifted uncomfortably to the left. May's vision of the UK is a parochial one, she is at best dull and managerial and at worst censorious and meddling.
Labour present a bright, optimistic vision of the future where everyone is happy and everything is paid for by the magic money tree. It is, of course, a complete lie. Plus, Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser who isn't fit to lead his own party let alone a government.
The lib dems stand for nothing any more other than opposition to Brexit. To vote for them would be to vote against democracy, if such a thing is possible.
I'm not a mad Kipper and couldn't give a toss if immigration is 50 or 500,000, so long as we have control over our own borders and make adequate infrastructure provision and help immigrants to integrate into society.
My main concerns are property prices being too high, small to medium sized businesses and higher rate tax payers being squeezed at the expense of large multinationals and the super rich who appear to pay proportionally far less. Generally I'm for lower taxes and less regulation. I'm also socially liberal and can't abide censorship or the government telling people what they can or can't do with their bodies.
Who do I vote for?
There's no socially liberal, economically dry, patriotic-yet-internationalist party out there.
I don't feel as if the Conservatives should be rewarded with my vote. Corbynism terrifies me.
Abstention feels like my least worst option.
If one is terrified of Corbyn but merely uncomfortable with May, then the least worse option is May.
Government is coming for property equity. The various parties are just trying to work out the best way to go about it.
Indeed so but penalising the unlucky one sixth who happen to have someone who needs long term care doesn't seem the way to go about it. Russian roulette anyone? More pooling of risk and a cap are needed.
Would be better to ramp up IHT and use the proceeds to provide more care, I agree. But I can't see the Tories going down that path.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
It's reactions like this that give me the bloody heebie-jeebies.
What arse-wittery has TMay enacted?
We can't go on as we are, and the alternatives are something like what is proposed, or higher taxes (which is what "pooled risk" translates to). If the tories propose higher taxes (2p on income tax or NI) no one will vote for them, and if Labour propose higher taxes (all paid for by ending tax dodges and taxing the super-rich) no one will believe them. Impasse.
And another thing: care-giving being low paid and grungy as it is, I am guessing that a large proportion of it is done by furriners, and that Brexit will send the cost of it skywards. The effect of all this may be a heart-warming surge in the number of people deciding to keep care-giving (and inheritances) within the family.
Which is where Theresa May's guarantee of unpaid carers leave comes in. Those who want to keep the assets have to get their hands dirty. Care homes are around £700 pw, and most stays are less than a year. That is equivalent to around £1000 per week pretax income, so twice median incomes.
There will be a major incentive for families to take a year off (though the mercenary ones are going to want to see the will first!).
On the other hand we are probably going to worsen "bedblocking" * in the NHS.
* I hate the term. Patients are people, worthy of dignity, not a blockage.
Government is coming for property equity. The various parties are just trying to work out the best way to go about it.
Indeed so but penalising the unlucky one sixth who happen to have someone who needs long term care doesn't seem the way to go about it. Russian roulette anyone? More pooling of risk and a cap are needed.
Would be better to ramp up IHT and use the proceeds to provide more care, I agree. But I can't see the Tories going down that path.
IHT is notoriously easy to avoid
Nobody has told Jezza...they are relying on it for a load more dosh....
When one considers the massive amounts by which the exchequer has benefited on account of income tax and NIC receipts on account of seemingly unending increases in the numbers employed, coupled with lower benefit payments as regards unemployment pay, etc. Add to that the massive amounts of VAT paid as the country continues to spend at higher than expected levels and you really do have to wonder what sort of state the economy might have been in had the UK slipped into recession as had been feared by many, post the Brexit referendum. Yet still, the Tories, at least, are hell bent on raising taxes and/or restricting benefits. It seems as if the good old days when a proper Tory Government would seek to eliminate waste and introduce cost savings which were not unduly penal in their nature to whole sections of the community are now long gone. What it seems we now have to look forward to with Mrs May and the uninspiring Philip Hammond is really a Blair Govt MK2. Small wonder it attracts so many previous Labour and LibDem voters.
The economy is unbalanced and has been for many years - too much wealth consumption and not enough wealth creation - so higher than expected economic activity doesn't bring in the taxes it should.
Add in that many of the extra jobs are low paid and/or self-employed with very little income tax and NICs being paid.
If one is terrified of Corbyn but merely uncomfortable with May, then the least worse option is May.
It's the reverse of what Labour MPs are going out and saying to get votes...
I'm so confident that May will win and Corbyn isn't a threat, I feel comfortable not voting Conservative in this election, so as to minimise the size and scale of May's victory, because I'm deeply uncomfortable with her policies.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
I have also considered abstaining in this election.
The Tories have shifted uncomfortably to the left. May's vision of the UK is a parochial one, she is at best dull and managerial and at worst censorious and meddling.
Labour present a bright, optimistic vision of the future where everyone is happy and everything is paid for by the magic money tree. It is, of course, a complete lie. Plus, Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser who isn't fit to lead his own party let alone a government.
The lib dems stand for nothing any more other than opposition to Brexit. To vote for them would be to vote against democracy, if such a thing is possible.
I'm not a mad Kipper and couldn't give a toss if immigration is 50 or 500,000, so long as we have control over our own borders and make adequate infrastructure provision and help immigrants to integrate into society.
My main concerns are property prices being too high, small to medium sized businesses and higher rate tax payers being squeezed at the expense of large multinationals and the super rich who appear to pay proportionally far less. Generally I'm for lower taxes and less regulation. I'm also socially liberal and can't abide censorship or the government telling people what they can or can't do with their bodies.
Who do I vote for?
There's no socially liberal, economically dry, patriotic-yet-internationalist party out there.
I don't feel as if the Conservatives should be rewarded with my vote. Corbynism terrifies me.
Abstention feels like my least worst option.
If one is terrified of Corbyn but merely uncomfortable with May, then the least worse option is May.
The LDs have more to offer you than a position on Brexit, if you look again.
Government is coming for property equity. The various parties are just trying to work out the best way to go about it.
Indeed so but penalising the unlucky one sixth who happen to have someone who needs long term care doesn't seem the way to go about it. Russian roulette anyone? More pooling of risk and a cap are needed.
Would be better to ramp up IHT and use the proceeds to provide more care, I agree. But I can't see the Tories going down that path.
IHT is notoriously easy to avoid
Nobody has told Jezza...they are relying on it for a load more dosh....
I thought he'd already inherited his father's wealth?
Everyone wants to eliminate the deficit but nobody wants to pay. Grim.
Well, no one is really prioritising eliminating it now - the Tories only say by the middle 2020s, and Labour and LDs promising to eliminate the deficit in 'day to day' spending by 2022 and 2020 respectively.
But the fundamental point has always been true, which is why despite their promises to eliminate it a long time ago, the Tories knew they couldn't push it harder and so had to delay over and over again.
Now, despite us pretending to be grown ups, the instant we're asked to pay more, people get really upset and talk about switching to the direct opposite, as though it is the only matter of import, and irrespective of whether the alternative is seen as viable or positive.
PB notes that @SeanT is having his now customary psychotic break.
New PBers should fear not and be mindful that this deficiency of seemliness and appropriate contextualization is but a passing moment and normal @SeanT service will be resumed after June 8th.
Touching to see the left with such concern for rich pensioners - quite right that low earners should graft hard so that large estates are passed down intact.
This isn't the left attacking the policy (beyond the obvious opportunism of Labour / Lib Dem leadership, fair enough in election season) - it is the right. I support the policy and am on the left. This policy targets inheritees not the pensioners themselves - something has to give if we are to manage social care properly in this country.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
It's reactions like this that give me the bloody heebie-jeebies.
What arse-wittery has TMay enacted?
We can't go on as we are, and the alternatives are something like what is proposed, or higher taxes (which is what "pooled risk" translates to). If the tories propose higher taxes (2p on income tax or NI) no one will vote for them, and if Labour propose higher taxes (all paid for by ending tax dodges and taxing the super-rich) no one will believe them. Impasse.
And another thing: care-giving being low paid and grungy as it is, I am guessing that a large proportion of it is done by furriners, and that Brexit will send the cost of it skywards. The effect of all this may be a heart-warming surge in the number of people deciding to keep care-giving (and inheritances) within the family.
Which is where Theresa May's guarantee of unpaid carers leave comes in. Those who want to keep the assets have to get their hands dirty. Care homes are around £700 pw, and most stays are less than a year. That is equivalent to around £1000 per week pretax income, so twice median incomes.
There will be a major incentive for families to take a year off (though the mercenary ones are going to want to see the will first!).
On the other hand we are probably going to worsen "bedblocking" * in the NHS.
* I hate the term. Patients are people, worthy of dignity, not a blockage.
Patients are people So why should it be You and I should get along so awfully
If the DM comments have turned on her then perhaps it really is bad.
Online newspaper comments sections - the worst.
A lot of 'how dare you attack pensioners' comments I see, not considering whether pensioners (or some pensioners) deserve so many of the things they had, and whether it can be afforded, and if other priorities mean perhaps they need to pay more in these areas.
I have no idea why the Tories (if they were really scheming) just didn't publish a manifesto of boring shit about bin collection and other stuff that nobody will really change their vote over. There was / is absolutely no need to propose anything radical.
Then when they got the 100+ manifesto push through the OAP reforms in year 1. All the outcry would have been long forgotten come GE 2022.
If it is not in the manifesto the HOL could have caused chaos with it
One line in the manifesto would have solved that problem: We will reform the House of Lords.
FFS it needs reform anyway.
Ironically, that's one line that's been dropped.
But yes, the commitment should be in there and the reform should be done, not least for political reasons: if the Tories complete the reform on their terms, it's far harder for Labour to change things again. By contrast, if the Tories leave things be then Labour gets to model it according to their own fashion.
If the DM comments have turned on her then perhaps it really is bad.
The Daily Mail rant threads are probably no more representative of the thinking of the average Tory voter than The Guardian rant threads are representative of the thinking of the average Labour voter.
Most voters do not spend their time venting their spleens on newspaper websites.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
I have also considered abstaining in this election.
The Tories have shifted uncomfortably to the left. May's vision of the UK is a parochial one, she is at best dull and managerial and at worst censorious and meddling.
Labour present a bright, optimistic vision of the future where everyone is happy and everything is paid for by the magic money tree. It is, of course, a complete lie. Plus, Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser who isn't fit to lead his own party let alone a government.
The lib dems stand for nothing any more other than opposition to Brexit. To vote for them would be to vote against democracy, if such a thing is possible.
I'm not a mad Kipper and couldn't give a toss if immigration is 50 or 500,000, so long as we have control over our own borders and make adequate infrastructure provision and help immigrants to integrate into society.
My main concerns are property prices being too high, small to medium sized businesses and higher rate tax payers being squeezed at the expense of large multinationals and the super rich who appear to pay proportionally far less. Generally I'm for lower taxes and less regulation. I'm also socially liberal and can't abide censorship or the government telling people what they can or can't do with their bodies.
Who do I vote for?
There's no socially liberal, economically dry, patriotic-yet-internationalist party out there.
I don't feel as if the Conservatives should be rewarded with my vote. Corbynism terrifies me.
Abstention feels like my least worst option.
If one is terrified of Corbyn but merely uncomfortable with May, then the least worse option is May.
But thats just it we're not terrified of Corbyn. Because we know he wont win. So a protest through abstention is very easy to justify.
RIght. I've decided, I'm not voting for the Conservatives if this mad Dementia Tax stays as is.
I(and my siblings) COULD lose hundrends of thousands of pounds of our inheritance. Yes, this decision is based on pure greed, but greed is good. Even if Corbyn by some miracle won and reduced the IHT threshold we would still be better off then what May is planning. I think I'll abstain then voten for this.
I have also considered abstaining in this election.
The Tories have shifted uncomfortably to the left. May's vision of the UK is a parochial one, she is at best dull and managerial and at worst censorious and meddling.
Labour present a bright, optimistic vision of the future where everyone is happy and everything is paid for by the magic money tree. It is, of course, a complete lie. Plus, Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser who isn't fit to lead his own party let alone a government.
The lib dems stand for nothing any more other than opposition to Brexit. To vote for them would be to vote against democracy, if such a thing is possible.
I'm not a mad Kipper and couldn't give a toss if immigration is 50 or 500,000, so long as we have control over our own borders and make adequate infrastructure provision and help immigrants to integrate into society.
My main concerns are property prices being too high, small to medium sized businesses and higher rate tax payers being squeezed at the expense of large multinationals and the super rich who appear to pay proportionally far less. Generally I'm for lower taxes and less regulation. I'm also socially liberal and can't abide censorship or the government telling people what they can or can't do with their bodies.
Who do I vote for?
There's no socially liberal, economically dry, patriotic-yet-internationalist party out there.
I don't feel as if the Conservatives should be rewarded with my vote. Corbynism terrifies me.
Abstention feels like my least worst option.
If one is terrified of Corbyn but merely uncomfortable with May, then the least worse option is May.
The LDs have more to offer you than a position on Brexit, if you look again.
Perhaps. But how many people are going to bother to look at what the Liberal Democrats have to say about anything?
(EDIT: and regardless, one of only two parties has any chance of being in power after this election, and the Yellows ain't one of them.)
I have no idea why the Tories (if they were really scheming) just didn't publish a manifesto of boring shit about bin collection and other stuff that nobody will really change their vote over. There was / is absolutely no need to propose anything radical.
Then when they got the 100+ manifesto push through the OAP reforms in year 1. All the outcry would have been long forgotten come GE 2022.
If it is not in the manifesto the HOL could have caused chaos with it
One line in the manifesto would have solved that problem: We will reform the House of Lords.
FFS it needs reform anyway.
They do say they will reform it - it is cautious though.
Although comprehensive reform is not a priority we will ensure that the House of Lords continues to fulfl its constitutional role as a revising and scrutinising chamber which respects the primacy of the House of Commons. We have already undertaken reform to allow the retirement of peers and the expulsion of members for poor conduct and will continue to ensure the work of the House of Lords remains relevant and effective by addressing issues such as its size
But 'issues such as its size' leaves the door open to more reform, if they feel they need to, as does the bit on enduring it 'fulfills its constitutional role'.
A classic document says, only when we do our tasks are we prepared, when we are prepared, there is no trouble.
Zhuge Liang, about 2,000 years ago.
Shoving something in last minute is damned foolishness. Hubris, complacency, arrogance, take your pick. No examination of an idea means no preparation. It's bloody stupid.
" Of the 15% who intend to be tactical with their vote, 46% said they were trying to stop the SNP and 39% said they were trying to lock the Tories out. "
I feel similar to you, if there was a Libertarian party candidate in my area I would vote for them. but as there are only 4 I think that is unlikely to help you ether. In the end I will probably vote tory and hope she becomes a bit more liberal over time, but I'm not confidant.
Post election, I perhaps the Lib Dems will simultaneously realize that
1) The need a new and better leader. 2) Banging on about EU does not work and will not as most voters have moved on. 3) There is an opening for a free market/free society liberal party and reoccupy it.
Libertarianism seems doomed in the UK for the time being. The overton window has shifted. And the trouble with the lib dems is that the membership is often as much Labour on holiday as UKIP are Tories on holiday. They'll always be a social democratic rather than libertarian party.
A George-Osborne-led British version of En Marche, anyone? Not impossible if Theresa May's hard brexit goes tits up...
A classic document says, only when we do our tasks are we prepared, when we are prepared, there is no trouble.
Zhuge Liang, about 2,000 years ago.
Shoving something in last minute is damned foolishness. Hubris, complacency, arrogance, take your pick. No examination of an idea means no preparation. It's bloody stupid.
Why would May include an item without adequate preparation? Even defenders would not say this is a great vote winner, so why would she act so strangely? It seems much more likely they did think about it, and decided it was a hit that needed taking.
" Of the 15% who intend to be tactical with their vote, 46% said they were trying to stop the SNP and 39% said they were trying to lock the Tories out. "
Comments from the Mail, Twitter....come on. Seriously. You could get hundreds - possibly thousands - of highly organised Corbynistas in a heartbeat to hi-jack any phone-in or any newspaper message board, and especially Twitter. You can read some of those comments and see that most of them are so obviously non-Tories.
God, three weeks from election day and this level of panic with a comfortable double digit polling lead.
One thing's for sure, Dementia Tax (note how the name has already stuck) is the mother of all stealth taxes. For God's sake, the last thing we need are yet more stealth taxes. If needs be increase the rate of income tax, incl the higher rate as was always the case before governments introduced all these smoke and mirror dishonest schemes which we're not supposed to notice, until we move house, die, etc, etc. Enough!
Hang on: right wing, small state Tories think that the state should pay for their care if they get Dementia and not themselves or their family?
What sort of topsy turvy world is this?
I don't think that's true though. Right wing, small state Tories didn't see this coming. Personally I think it makes complete sense. Your life is a cycle where you build up debt in some expectation, then build up savings, and finally spend those savings. What's left after that cycle is yours to pass on.
Mostly it's Labour types saying that Tories will hate this because it's an increase in tax. Simpletons to a man.
If the DM comments have turned on her then perhaps it really is bad.
That's another mark in the manifestos favour then.
Honestly, from what I've read so far of the Tory manifesto I'm generally relatively impressed - there are certainly specific policies I disagree with, some very important (Brexit), others less so (fox hunting), but overall better than I was expecting.
I really don't fear a Labour overall majority. No one does.
That second sentence is absolutely wrong. I certainly do. If Labour win, given their moronic, uncosted education policies that genuinely appear to be based on ignorance and class spite (ironic from a team led by Corbyn of course) rather than a cold-eyed appraisal of what is needed and how to achieve it, I would be at least one of dead, suffering a nervous breakdown or unemployed within 18 months of Labour getting into power.
And I am not joking.
What I mean is I don't fear it, because hell would freeze over before Labour win the election, especially with no recovery in Scotland.
If the DM comments have turned on her then perhaps it really is bad.
Online newspaper comments sections - the worst.
A lot of 'how dare you attack pensioners' comments I see, not considering whether pensioners (or some pensioners) deserve so many of the things they had, and whether it can be afforded, and if other priorities mean perhaps they need to pay more in these areas.
It doesn't matter. It's the perception. People hate this. You can sense it. They could have announced a big commission and then done this six months later, in a better way, but instead they decided to pour manure over the voters, BEFORE the election.
Of course I might easily be wrong, but what if I am right? And this is electorally toxic?
What do they do? How do the Tories row back? It's in the bloody manifesto: there in black and white. Hmm. Grr. Harrumph.
Gin.
They're stuck with it and so need to explain it, and hammer home that at least they have come up with a real solution, not a pie in the sky one. Will that mollify a whole bunch of pensioners and others? Some, probably not most, but that's the only thing they can do.
If the voting public are more sophisticated than children (or political wonks like us), then they should be able to step back, consider this policy in context of the overall offer, and then decide if it is so bad that they must act against it, not merely react to it as being bad.
If this means a 50 seat majority rather than a 100 seat majority, that's fine by me, better governance with a smaller majority. The only danger would be Corbyn surviving, but that might have happened anyway.
One thing's for sure, Dementia Tax (note how the name has already stuck) is the mother of all stealth taxes. For God's sake, the last thing we need are yet more stealth taxes. If needs be increase the rate of income tax, incl the higher rate as was always the case before governments introduced all these smoke and mirror dishonest schemes which we're not supposed to notice, until we move house, die, etc, etc. Enough!
We should not be increasing income taxes so that some people can inherit more.
Since when is paying for most of your care a tax? It is actually ending a subsidy, Osborne slashed inheritance tax last year to leave each estate able to pass up to £1 million tax free. Plus if you are in residential care your subsidy has actually increased so you get to keep £100k rather than £23k
Pound Shop Thatcher House Snatcher on the doorstep on ITV News
Oh dear how we laugh at PB Tories who defend Dementia Tax should take a look
"Whats this about charging old people for homecare"
May Explains
Women gives her the you can fook off then look.
Clearly a complete non issue!!
Not many people have said it is a non issue, so your point is irrelevant. It's not going to be exceedingly popular by any measure, it asks people to pay more toward cost of social care so of course it isn't, the question is will it be damaging enough to get significant numbers to switch to Labour (who are promising, again, unfunded massive increases and a promise to merely lay the foundation of a national care service by 2022) to cost them a victory? And will any number of people consider, even if they do not like the policy as it stands, that at least they are trying to address the problem.
That sort of reaction pushes me more toward a Tory vote.
Vote Tory if you wish. Its a free country just prey you do not become disabled or get dementia.
Its a shite policy omly pooling works in terms of fairness
Plenty of Tories on previous thread told me it was a none issue BTW.
Pooling wouldn't be fair if based on a flat-rate sum regardless of the size of the estate. Perhaps a charge based on a percentage of the total estate value might work with no charge at all if this was below a threshold (e.g. £100k). What is good about the proposed policy is that a house need not be sold until the surviving partner has died. As Southam has remarked, at least the subject is out in the open for debate.
" Of the 15% who intend to be tactical with their vote, 46% said they were trying to stop the SNP and 39% said they were trying to lock the Tories out. "
T.May’s manifesto SCRAPS BAN on elephant ivory sales bowing to millionaire antique lobbyists
Fake news. Surely. Screams of Fakery.
There is no mention of ivory in the manifesto. Assuming they would be coded than to refer to it, I'm not sure what section that would be under - free trade? Cannot see a reference that might be an ivory sales bit.
Comments from the Mail, Twitter....come on. Seriously. You could get hundreds - possibly thousands - of highly organised Corbynistas in a heartbeat to hi-jack any phone-in or any newspaper message board, and especially Twitter. You can read some of those comments and see that most of them are so obviously non-Tories.
God, three weeks from election day and this level of panic with a comfortable double digit polling lead.
Unreal.
I was mostly playing Devil's Advocate / injecting more panic with the Mail tweet - of course it's unrepresentative, would be like citing The Canary to say Labour are on course for a landslide. I don't think this will change much at the end of the day but we may see a small polling dip - to those that don't look in enough detail, Dementia Tax is a powerful negative branding.
T.May’s manifesto SCRAPS BAN on elephant ivory sales bowing to millionaire antique lobbyists
Fake news. Surely. Screams of Fakery.
There is no mention of ivory in the manifesto. Assuming they would be coded than to refer to it, I'm not sure what section that would be under - free trade? Cannot see a reference that might be an ivory sales bit.
That on top of hunting simply not credible, surely.
Comments
Its a shite policy omly pooling works in terms of fairness
Plenty of Tories on previous thread told me it was a none issue BTW.
The Tories have shifted uncomfortably to the left. May's vision of the UK is a parochial one, she is at best dull and managerial and at worst censorious and meddling.
Labour present a bright, optimistic vision of the future where everyone is happy and everything is paid for by the magic money tree. It is, of course, a complete lie. Plus, Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser who isn't fit to lead his own party let alone a government.
The lib dems stand for nothing any more other than opposition to Brexit. To vote for them would be to vote against democracy, if such a thing is possible.
I'm not a mad Kipper and couldn't give a toss if immigration is 50 or 500,000, so long as we have control over our own borders and make adequate infrastructure provision and help immigrants to integrate into society.
My main concerns are property prices being too high, small to medium sized businesses and higher rate tax payers being squeezed at the expense of large multinationals and the super rich who appear to pay proportionally far less. Generally I'm for lower taxes and less regulation. I'm also socially liberal and can't abide censorship or the government telling people what they can or can't do with their bodies.
Who do I vote for?
There's no socially liberal, economically dry, patriotic-yet-internationalist party out there.
I don't feel as if the Conservatives should be rewarded with my vote. Corbynism terrifies me.
Abstention feels like my least worst option.
Bring on the hung parliament that we need to unite the country!
Under the present system, you COULD lose everything down to 27 k before the State pays.
The public knows the answer to these questions;
Who do you trust more to run the economy?
Who do you trust more to negotiate Brexit?
Who do you trust more to deal with terrorism?
Who do you trust more to defend the country?
Who do you trust more to deal with migration?
Who do you trust more to deal with Nicola Sturgeon?
Who do you trust more to deal in reality?
TM or Jezza?
So basically a free National care srvice probably paid for by borrowing. But it's moot they wont get to implement it, I just can't vote for May because of this. She wants to win with nothern working class people who have never voted tory before.....good luck to her.....
Then when they got the 100+ manifesto push through the OAP reforms in year 1. All the outcry would have been long forgotten come GE 2022.
It's perfectly plausible to imagine the Conservatives polling in the high 40s. They start with a 38% share from 2015, and that rises to 44% if you simply transfer half of the 2015 Ukip vote into their column. They're on course to double their share in Scotland, which bumps them up to about 45%, after which the remaining gains they need to make in England and Wales to match Heath's 46.4% are rather modest. Certainly, unless the polls have got the Lib Dem score badly wrong, or there's a sudden (and very unlikely) major revival in the Ukip vote, then the only way they're likely to fall short of 45% is if there's a net flow of 2015 voters from Con to Lab, which doesn't seem plausible either. I mean, some people like me who want the Tories to do well fret about a mass sulk by pensioners over having their sweeties taken away, but what proportion of well-to-do over 65s is likely to sit on their hands or vote for Labour under the current management as a result?
(TBC)
But Labour, on the other hand, may well poll well into the 30s. When Harold Wilson was defeated in 1970 he still managed 43%. Now, this was in a scenario where Labour were still the top dogs in Scotland and the old Liberal Party were the only meaningful also-ran party in England. But on the other hand the Liberals in 1970 polled about as well as the Lib Dems are currently predicted to do now, and the principal players in England who weren't around in 1970 - Ukip and the Greens - are both looking pretty marginal now.
If we give 5% of the GB vote to Plaid, the SNP and minor parties, 7% to the Lib Dems, 46% to the Tories and 3% each to Ukip and the Greens, then that leaves 36% for Labour. The votes can't go anywhere else. For Labour to poll worse than Miliband then we would need the Tories, Lib Dems and also-rans to pile on at least another 5%, or about 1.5m voters, between them, directly at Labour's expense. This is certainly possible - it may be that the slew of recent polls showing Labour above 30% are merely the product of incorrect weighting - but it is also realistic to suppose that Labour might actually be doing that well, simply because the votes of the Lib Dems, Ukip and the Green Party are all being depressed, and not all of those lost voters are going to be prepared to back the Tories.
I had a stab at guessing what might happen if the also-ran parties are all significantly depressed, and - consequently - the more Labour friendly polls are in the right ballpark, the other evening. I came up with a range of results between Con 51 - Lab 31 and Con 47 - Lab 35. I'm still of the opinion that the more Labour friendly polls are being too generous to them, but if they did come in a bit above 30% then I would no longer be so surprised.
And another thing: care-giving being low paid and grungy as it is, I am guessing that a large proportion of it is done by furriners, and that Brexit will send the cost of it skywards. The effect of all this may be a heart-warming surge in the number of people deciding to keep care-giving (and inheritances) within the family.
IIRC correctly it is the LD manifesto talking of merging systems (Our longer-term objective will be to bring together NHS and social care into one seamless service – pooling budgets in every area by 2020 and developing integrated care organisations) while the Labour one is technically separate but working together so it might as well be one (The National Care Service will be built alongside the NHS, with a shared requirement for single commissioning, partnership arrangements, pooled budgets and joint working arrangements).
But what does that mean for a prospective government now? As only the 'foundation' is to laid in five years (In our first term, Labour will lay the foundations of a National Care Service for England).
And how will it be paid for? (There are different ways the necessary monies can be raised. We will seek consensus on a cross-party basis about how it should be funded, with options including wealth taxes, an employer care contribution or a new social care levy). Different options, but an indication of preference might be nice, given it is such an important and eye catching pledge.
Of course, they might want to blow it on hookers and drugs and fast cars and are just stringing you along, because you have this proprietorial attitude towards their assets that leaves them a bit queasy in the pit of their stomach.
It's hardly scientific I know, but listening to some phone-in programmes, this policy is not going down well, with some callers in tears. We can take the cynical view but most of the caller's are women with elderly relatives with dementia. Having worked in mental health, I know what an absolute curse this disease is for all concerned.
But this ia technically an election on leadership. Leaderships ratings point to a tory win
This is what Opinium's Head of Political Polling has tweeted following their poll showing the Tories 13% ahead tonight.
https://twitter.com/AGKD123/status/865976449748041728
That poll had the Tories 19% ahead.
What sort of topsy turvy world is this?
Mr. 100, I'd also really like a party with this. If I vote Conservative it'll be because Corbyn's unacceptable, not because I like May. She's a meddling authoritarian and a statist.
Yet still, the Tories, at least, are hell bent on raising taxes and/or restricting benefits. It seems as if the good old days when a proper Tory Government would seek to eliminate waste and introduce cost savings which were not unduly penal in their nature to whole sections of the community are now long gone. What it seems we now have to look forward to with Mrs May and the uninspiring Philip Hammond is really a Blair Govt MK2. Small wonder it attracts so many previous Labour and LibDem voters.
Interesting to see those figures for central. Having said that Aberystwyth's students are not likely to be especially politically active anyway, is it different in Cardiff? And if so, might the Liberal Democrats benefit from the fact Cardiff University finishes on the 9th June?
For me, it was to see Corbyn squished so the Labour party can get rid of him and his band of Marxists, communists, terrorist supporters, antisemities and holocaust deniers.
At this rate we get a small Tory win, Jezza get a big vote share and stays on.
*Technically the second least inaccurate
And I am not joking.
Twitter isn't representative of the voters.
I feel similar to you, if there was a Libertarian party candidate in my area I would vote for them. but as there are only 4 I think that is unlikely to help you ether. In the end I will probably vote tory and hope she becomes a bit more liberal over time, but I'm not confidant.
Post election, I perhaps the Lib Dems will simultaneously realize that
1) The need a new and better leader.
2) Banging on about EU does not work and will not as most voters have moved on.
3) There is an opening for a free market/free society liberal party and reoccupy it.
There will be a major incentive for families to take a year off (though the mercenary ones are going to want to see the will first!).
On the other hand we are probably going to worsen "bedblocking" * in the NHS.
* I hate the term. Patients are people, worthy of dignity, not a blockage.
I've taken the last fortnight of this campaign off from work to go canvassing for Aaron, sciatica flare ups permitting.
Add in that many of the extra jobs are low paid and/or self-employed with very little income tax and NICs being paid.
I'm so confident that May will win and Corbyn isn't a threat, I feel comfortable not voting Conservative in this election, so as to minimise the size and scale of May's victory, because I'm deeply uncomfortable with her policies.
"Too many Tweets make a tw@t!" - Dave
https://twitter.com/DMReporter/status/865876515430576128
If the DM comments have turned on her then perhaps it really is bad.
But the fundamental point has always been true, which is why despite their promises to eliminate it a long time ago, the Tories knew they couldn't push it harder and so had to delay over and over again.
Now, despite us pretending to be grown ups, the instant we're asked to pay more, people get really upset and talk about switching to the direct opposite, as though it is the only matter of import, and irrespective of whether the alternative is seen as viable or positive.
PB notes that @SeanT is having his now customary psychotic break.
New PBers should fear not and be mindful that this deficiency of seemliness and appropriate contextualization is but a passing moment and normal @SeanT service will be resumed after June 8th.
**** END OF BROADCAST ****
So why should it be
You and I should get along so awfully
But yes, the commitment should be in there and the reform should be done, not least for political reasons: if the Tories complete the reform on their terms, it's far harder for Labour to change things again. By contrast, if the Tories leave things be then Labour gets to model it according to their own fashion.
Most voters do not spend their time venting their spleens on newspaper websites.
(EDIT: and regardless, one of only two parties has any chance of being in power after this election, and the Yellows ain't one of them.)
Regardless, I actually support the policy but I'm worried if it puts Corbyn anywhere near Downing Street.
Although comprehensive reform is not a priority we will ensure that the House of Lords
continues to fulfl its constitutional role as a revising and scrutinising chamber which
respects the primacy of the House of Commons. We have already undertaken reform to
allow the retirement of peers and the expulsion of members for poor conduct and will
continue to ensure the work of the House of Lords remains relevant and effective by
addressing issues such as its size
But 'issues such as its size' leaves the door open to more reform, if they feel they need to, as does the bit on enduring it 'fulfills its constitutional role'.
A classic document says, only when we do our tasks are we prepared, when we are prepared, there is no trouble.
Zhuge Liang, about 2,000 years ago.
Shoving something in last minute is damned foolishness. Hubris, complacency, arrogance, take your pick. No examination of an idea means no preparation. It's bloody stupid.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/poll-15-of-scottish-voters-plan-to-vote-tactically-1-4451912
A George-Osborne-led British version of En Marche, anyone? Not impossible if Theresa May's hard brexit goes tits up...
God, three weeks from election day and this level of panic with a comfortable double digit polling lead.
Unreal.
Mostly it's Labour types saying that Tories will hate this because it's an increase in tax. Simpletons to a man.
T.May’s manifesto SCRAPS BAN on elephant ivory sales bowing to millionaire antique lobbyists
If the voting public are more sophisticated than children (or political wonks like us), then they should be able to step back, consider this policy in context of the overall offer, and then decide if it is so bad that they must act against it, not merely react to it as being bad.
If this means a 50 seat majority rather than a 100 seat majority, that's fine by me, better governance with a smaller majority. The only danger would be Corbyn surviving, but that might have happened anyway.