Just in case our man in Zurich didn't see my post yesterday, canvassed a marginalish ward lastnnight. Mostly pensioners. Tory vote holding strong (indeed several new Con-verts too).
This is beginning to remind me* of the '87 wobble.
Jason, you seem obsessively convinced that the scales are going to fall from everyone's eyes and suddenly everyone will see that Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser and Labour's vote will collapse.
Have you not considered that it's factored in already? That him and his front benchers are a bot iffy on that subject? And that, for one in three voters it isn't a game changer?
That video is damning. Especially the armed forces bit. More so than the IRA parts I think.
And the bit about voting against anti-terror legislation (while actually supporting a terrorist group). If this doesn't bring people to their senses, then nothing will.
Not sure if I've updated all on here with the state of the campaign here in the Labour heartland of East Ham.
We've had Freepost leaflets from both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats and while you can file this under "he would say that, wouldn't he ?" the LD leaflet was far better than the Conservative offering.
Saw a couple of Labour activists in the High Street this morning but they were packing up and moving on to perhaps Beckton or maybe Stratford.
No sign of any door canvassing in my neck of the woods thus far.
How many votes are Labour going to pile up in East Ham this time? 45,000 perhaps.
I'm a Lib Dem member but I think a referendum on A50 is stupid. What's the status quo? We are leaving no matter what and its better to leave it up to experts in the civil service and government than the people on something so important. We can always re-negotiate our relationship at a later date.
As neither of us are happy with party policy, it suggests the policy is flawed.
I voted LEAVE and before the Referendum, I was a strong advocate of the United Kingdom joining (or re-joining) EFTA after a LEAVE vote and re-invigorating that organisation as a free trade but non-political alternative to the EU (more akin to the original notion of a "common" rather than "single" market in which we would pursue as close an economic relationship as possible while maintaining sovereignty over immigration, regulation and other areas).
I'm still there but I fear I'm alone - there doesn't seem to be anyone within any of the main parties supporting this. Perhaps the world has moved on.
Would you therefore take the view that if the A50 Treaty is not something the party can support, we should vote against it in the Commons (if we have any MPs) and the Lords and have a re-negotiation of that Treaty as a manifesto pledge in 2021 or 2022 ?
I voted Remain but would support an EFTA settlement. Problem is that I'm worried I am massively out of line with the mood of the country. I think May is right that immigration is a big worry to many people outside of big metropoliton cities. I don't know how we should solve it.
No one has been a more ferocious critic of Corbyn than me, particularly because of his support for violent Irish Republicanism. But I think he deserves some credit for the pragmatic, flexible position he compelled Labour to adopt on Brexit after the Referendum, when most of his MPs fervently wanted him to uphold the Remain cause. His judgement proved more shrewd than that of pro-EU moderates. He was helped, of course, because he never really believed in Remain. But still, he ensured that Labour was not caught up in an anti-democratic stance like the Liberal Democrats.
Labour's position on Europe is now probably the "most sensible" out of the Lib Dems, Tories and SNP in terms of realism and economic benefits, at least for soft leavers and moderate remainers.
(Personally I see several strong merits in staying in the Single Market, but as I'm a hardline Brexiteer - on "democratic deficit" grounds - and I feel that remaining in the Single Market would in many respects be a betrayal in spirit of what a majority of people voted for in the Brexit referendum, I sway to mildly preferring to leave it. But like I said, I'm a hardline Brexiteer - sufficiently infuriated at what I saw as Labour's excessive Eurounionphilia under previous leadership that I've gone so far as to vote Communist over Labour on the European issue, in an EU election anyway. My views are therefore not at all representative, and this is one issue I feel Corbyn has broadly speaking got "right", Farron has utterly cocked up, the SNP with their "the UK gvt has betrayed Scotland by not seeking an arrangement for Scotland to stay inside the EU" shtick are being utterly disingenuous about, and May has arguably got right from a delivering-on-democratic-mandate perspective but on the other hand unnecessarily closed down some potentially valuable options.)
I'm with you. I want to join the EEA or EFTA, at least for now, to soften the blow. I would accept Freedom of Movement as the price to pay. It angers me that none of the parties are advocating a position that probably commands the support of most of the country: Remainers and Soft Leavers.
I'm long past the point when I believe any political party (including the one of which I'm a member) does any sensible thinking.
I don't see why we have to compromise on FoM. There's a difference between a Common Market and a Single Market. We've rejected the latter - not sure we've rejected the former.
The election has opened a lot of people's eyes to social care facts. I knew nothing - now I've maged to google a little. I understand that the costs of residential care are between 30k and 50k per annum, depending on nursing needs, and that home care is around around 6k per year per hour per day (if that makes sense).
The only thing I don't know is what's the prognosis after the first time care is required. Could I live for twenty years after I first needed home care with dementia. Could I live twenty years after residential care was required? Is it likely? What percentage of people end their days in residential care, and on average how long do they stay there?
After seeing the election hoo-haa, any sensible politician might kick it into the long grass. But some public education would be useful.
This is a US study, but I think our own data is the same ballpark:
For this sort of data Median is probably a better measure than Mean stay, as the latter is skewed by a few outliers, who stay a long time. Paradoxically those who live the shortest are those with the best existing social support (such as a spouse). This is probably due to them entering social care further along the timeline.
Not sure if I've updated all on here with the state of the campaign here in the Labour heartland of East Ham.
We've had Freepost leaflets from both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats and while you can file this under "he would say that, wouldn't he ?" the LD leaflet was far better than the Conservative offering.
Saw a couple of Labour activists in the High Street this morning but they were packing up and moving on to perhaps Beckton or maybe Stratford.
No sign of any door canvassing in my neck of the woods thus far.
How many votes are Labour going to pile up in East Ham this time? 45,000 perhaps.
If I get a chance, I'll post my thoughts on the local outcome next week.
The problem is going to be one of turnout - I suspect there'll be a small swing to the Conservatives (1-2%) but more through Labour abstentions. Stephen Timms may see his majority trimmed to between 25,000 and 30,000.
The election has opened a lot of people's eyes to social care facts. I knew nothing - now I've maged to google a little. I understand that the costs of residential care are between 30k and 50k per annum, depending on nursing needs, and that home care is around around 6k per year per hour per day (if that makes sense).
The only thing I don't know is what's the prognosis after the first time care is required. Could I live for twenty years after I first needed home care with dementia. Could I live twenty years after residential care was required? Is it likely? What percentage of people end their days in residential care, and on average how long do they stay there?
After seeing the election hoo-haa, any sensible politician might kick it into the long grass. But some public education would be useful.
My mother needed residential care for 5 years. Fees were 35k - 40k. You pay yourself unless you have total assets less than about 23k.
There are 300,000 elderly presently in residential care. Now you see the problem -- the bill each year is about 10 billion pounds. (Remember, 1p on income tax raises about 4 or 5 billion).
And we haven’t yet budgeted for the millions of elderly who need in-home care.
Corbyn thinks the National Care Service can be set up for 3 billion a year (number from Labour Manifesto). It really can’t. It needs much more.
It would be interesting to see a believable costing for setting up the National Care Service, and how much we would all pay in income tax.
I voted Remain but would support an EFTA settlement. Problem is that I'm worried I am massively out of line with the mood of the country. I think May is right that immigration is a big worry to many people outside of big metropoliton cities. I don't know how we should solve it.
If it's any consolation, no, you aren't. The Party has failed completely to recognise the concerns many people have about immigration and I see it up close and personal every day here in London.
I became opposed to the Single Market and to the EU because of what I saw happening - the Single Market played to the age-old adage of people moving to the money. It enriched already wealthy areas by drawing in both money and people so London, Bavaria and other areas prospered but the corollary was the depopulation of the peripheries such as Estonia and Lithuania whose younger population migrated en masse in search of a better life.
Nothing wrong with that but it isn't just the able and the willing and the hardworking who have come.
Jason, you seem obsessively convinced that the scales are going to fall from everyone's eyes and suddenly everyone will see that Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser and Labour's vote will collapse.
Have you not considered that it's factored in already? That him and his front benchers are a bot iffy on that subject? And that, for one in three voters it isn't a game changer?
One in three voters - or thereabouts - seem likely to vote Corbyn. But that video is brutally effective - one of the best short political ads I've ever seen - and could scare, say, 1 in 40 active voters, back to the Tories.
That's the difference between the Tories getting 44 and 46 against Labour's 35 or 33. The difference between a massive landslide and a ho-hum win.
The last bit. Poor Corbyn if that was a technical malfunction
Just a warning, Jezza's support for the terrorists speech went down well below the line in the Daily Mail comments. So could be potentially a bounce from that.
Corbyn cleverly conflated isolation, which is definitely a popular idea not least as the main driver for Brexit, with pacifism, which isn't.
There is significant evidence that the Daily Mail BTL comments section has been invaded by Corbynites. There are lots of suspicious very-similar-sounding, similarly-written comments basically making the same point. They use the same punctuation and exhibit the same syntax and rhythm.
File under: hmmm....
I think we all knew that. DM readers, as in genuine readers, would not run to Corbyn's defence over national security. Not in a million years.
It does reinforce what I said earlier about Corbynistas going to extreme measures to try and get him elected.
Does the manipulation of opinion polls now sound so far-fetched?
Just in case our man in Zurich didn't see my post yesterday, canvassed a marginalish ward lastnnight. Mostly pensioners. Tory vote holding strong (indeed several new Con-verts too).
This is beginning to remind me* of the '87 wobble.
Tory maj nailed on. Con gain Bootle?
*I was 4 months old.
Traditionally, when the Conservatives begin an election campaign with a big lead, you can predict four stages.
1. Complacency.
2. The Clusterfuck, usually involving the Manifesto launch (1987, 2010, 2017) or a disastrous debate performance (2010 again).
3. The panic.
4. Gradual recovery, as they slowly get their act together.
Just a warning, Jezza's support for the terrorists speech went down well below the line in the Daily Mail comments. So could be potentially a bounce from that.
Corbyn cleverly conflated isolation, which is definitely a popular idea not least as the main driver for Brexit, with pacifism, which isn't.
There is significant evidence that the Daily Mail BTL comments section has been invaded by Corbynites. There are lots of suspicious very-similar-sounding, similarly-written comments basically making the same point. They use the same punctuation and exhibit the same syntax and rhythm.
File under: hmmm....
Maybe, but Ed Milliband got a lot of support in those quarters for not joining in Syrian airstrikes.
The election has opened a lot of people's eyes to social care facts. I knew nothing - now I've maged to google a little. I understand that the costs of residential care are between 30k and 50k per annum, depending on nursing needs, and that home care is around around 6k per year per hour per day (if that makes sense).
The only thing I don't know is what's the prognosis after the first time care is required. Could I live for twenty years after I first needed home care with dementia. Could I live twenty years after residential care was required? Is it likely? What percentage of people end their days in residential care, and on average how long do they stay there?
After seeing the election hoo-haa, any sensible politician might kick it into the long grass. But some public education would be useful.
My mother needed residential care for 5 years. Fees were 35k - 40k. You pay yourself unless you have total assets less than about 23k.
There are 300,000 elderly presently in residential care. Now you see the problem -- the bill each year is about 10 billion pounds. (Remember, 1p on income tax raises about 4 or 5 billion).
And we haven’t yet budgeted for the millions of elderly who need in-home care.
Corbyn thinks the National Care Service can be set up for 3 billion a year (number from Labour Manifesto). It really can’t. It needs much more.
It would be interesting to see a believable costing for setting up the National Care Service, and how much we would all pay in income tax.
Your sums sounds about right, but we also need to factor in the change in demographics. The number of very elderly (>85) mushrooms over the next decade. You should probably double your figure to allow for this.
As well as the cost, there is a human factor as there are major staffing implications, whether care is from families or paid staff. Social care is very time consuming.
I'm a Lib Dem member but I think a referendum on A50 is stupid. What's the status quo? We are leaving no matter what and its better to leave it up to experts in the civil service and government than the people on something so important. We can always re-negotiate our relationship at a later date.
As neither of us are happy with party policy, it suggests the policy is flawed.
I voted LEAVE and before the Referendum, I was a strong advocate of the United Kingdom joining (or re-joining) EFTA after a LEAVE vote and re-invigorating that organisation as a free trade but non-political alternative to the EU (more akin to the original notion of a "common" rather than "single" market in which we would pursue as close an economic relationship as possible while maintaining sovereignty over immigration, regulation and other areas).
I'm still there but I fear I'm alone - there doesn't seem to be anyone within any of the main parties supporting this. Perhaps the world has moved on.
Would you therefore take the view that if the A50 Treaty is not something the party can support, we should vote against it in the Commons (if we have any MPs) and the Lords and have a re-negotiation of that Treaty as a manifesto pledge in 2021 or 2022 ?
I voted Remain but would support an EFTA settlement. Problem is that I'm worried I am massively out of line with the mood of the country. I think May is right that immigration is a big worry to many people outside of big metropoliton cities. I don't know how we should solve it.
This is a very honest and realistic post. There has been a huge change in small towns, almost incomprehensible. I used to work in Wisbech just as the Lithuanian/Polish influx came in - there were already Portuguese and Turkish communities, and so on, but the East European accession was utterly transformative. I was in Boston a couple of weeks ago, and if people don't understand why it was the Brexiest place in the UK then frankly they just need to go and take a walk around the town.
Immigration doesn't "bother" me, but then I'm not competing at the low end of the labour pile. When these people voted for Brexit, free movement of people was something they hoped and believed would stop.
In some sense I believe that both May and Corbyn have got this issue "right", albeit from contrasting points of view. The Farronite position that, should a Farrongasm take him to unexpected victory, then we would allow a Lib Dem government to somehow negotiate a fair Brexit deal with Brussels that it will then come home to campaign against, is nonsense on an elongated pogo stick.
The election has opened a lot of people's eyes to social care facts. I knew nothing - now I've maged to google a little. I understand that the costs of residential care are between 30k and 50k per annum, depending on nursing needs, and that home care is around around 6k per year per hour per day (if that makes sense).
The only thing I don't know is what's the prognosis after the first time care is required. Could I live for twenty years after I first needed home care with dementia. Could I live twenty years after residential care was required? Is it likely? What percentage of people end their days in residential care, and on average how long do they stay there?
After seeing the election hoo-haa, any sensible politician might kick it into the long grass. But some public education would be useful.
My mother needed residential care for 5 years. Fees were 35k - 40k. You pay yourself unless you have total assets less than about 23k.
There are 300,000 elderly presently in residential care. Now you see the problem -- the bill each year is about 10 billion pounds. (Remember, 1p on income tax raises about 4 or 5 billion).
And we haven’t yet budgeted for the millions of elderly who need in-home care.
Corbyn thinks the National Care Service can be set up for 3 billion a year (number from Labour Manifesto). It really can’t. It needs much more.
It would be interesting to see a believable costing for setting up the National Care Service, and how much we would all pay in income tax.
So what is the solution? More tax? Pay for it youur self or ski from 60, smoke drink and enjoy life?
The election has opened a lot of people's eyes to social care facts. I knew nothing - now I've maged to google a little. I understand that the costs of residential care are between 30k and 50k per annum, depending on nursing needs, and that home care is around around 6k per year per hour per day (if that makes sense).
The only thing I don't know is what's the prognosis after the first time care is required. Could I live for twenty years after I first needed home care with dementia. Could I live twenty years after residential care was required? Is it likely? What percentage of people end their days in residential care, and on average how long do they stay there?
After seeing the election hoo-haa, any sensible politician might kick it into the long grass. But some public education would be useful.
My mother needed residential care for 5 years. Fees were 35k - 40k. You pay yourself unless you have total assets less than about 23k.
There are 300,000 elderly presently in residential care. Now you see the problem -- the bill each year is about 10 billion pounds. (Remember, 1p on income tax raises about 4 or 5 billion).
And we haven’t yet budgeted for the millions of elderly who need in-home care.
Corbyn thinks the National Care Service can be set up for 3 billion a year (number from Labour Manifesto). It really can’t. It needs much more.
It would be interesting to see a believable costing for setting up the National Care Service, and how much we would all pay in income tax.
It's not the only thing they are under-costed, neither party have covered themselves in glory in terms of actually telling the public how much their manifestos will actually cost in the real world.
Jason, you seem obsessively convinced that the scales are going to fall from everyone's eyes and suddenly everyone will see that Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser and Labour's vote will collapse.
Have you not considered that it's factored in already? That him and his front benchers are a bot iffy on that subject? And that, for one in three voters it isn't a game changer?
Actually, I never said that. I understand a lot of people agree with his anti-British views, and his terrorist sympathising (see the growing list of apologists on this very site) - but 38%? That is why that ad is so powerful - it will cut through to many people who wavered or considered Corbyn.
I'm a Lib Dem member but I think a referendum on A50 is stupid. What's the status quo? We are leaving no matter what and its better to leave it up to experts in the civil service and government than the people on something so important. We can always re-negotiate our relationship at a later date.
As neither of us are happy with party policy, it suggests the policy is flawed.
I voted LEAVE and before the Referendum, I was a strong advocate of the United Kingdom joining (or re-joining) EFTA after a LEAVE vote and re-invigorating that organisation as a free trade but non-political alternative to the EU (more akin to the original notion of a "common" rather than "single" market in which we would pursue as close an economic relationship as possible while maintaining sovereignty over immigration, regulation and other areas).
I'm still there but I fear I'm alone - there doesn't seem to be anyone within any of the main parties supporting this. Perhaps the world has moved on.
Would you therefore take the view that if the A50 Treaty is not something the party can support, we should vote against it in the Commons (if we have any MPs) and the Lords and have a re-negotiation of that Treaty as a manifesto pledge in 2021 or 2022 ?
I voted Remain but would support an EFTA settlement. Problem is that I'm worried I am massively out of line with the mood of the country. I think May is right that immigration is a big worry to many people outside of big metropoliton cities. I don't know how we should solve it.
The way we solve it is by stopping all Muslim and Roma immigration. Period.
That's the immigration which REALLY agitates people. Sorry to be brutal, but there it is.
No one is fussed by French bankers, Spanish baristas, American dance instructors. Few, to be honest, are bothered by Polish plumbers or Chinese cockle pickers.
.
Which "people" are you referring to? Because the Muslim/Roma immigration (I would suggest) is not seen as a major contributor to undercutting working class wages. Maybe there is some grievance from supposed "jumping Council housing waiting lists", but that is a different issue.
Thank you ever so much for the link, FoxinSox, I have appreciated for a long time (much longer than I have been posting) your input into matters medical on this site.
--- The study authors used data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) to describe the lengths of stay of older adults who resided in nursing homes at the end of life. What they found was that out of the 8,433 study participants who died between 1992 and 2006, 27.3% of resided in a nursing home prior to their death. Most of these patients (70%) actually died in the nursing home without being transferred to another setting like a hospital.
The length of stay data were striking:
the median length of stay in a nursing home before death was 5 months the average length of stay was longer at 14 months due to a small number of study participants who had very long lengths of stay 65% died within 1 year of nursing home admission 53% died within 6 months of nursing home admission
--- If we assume that USA is similar to UK in terms of prognosis, what this tells me is that the chance of my spending, say 5 or more years in end-of-life residential care (costing about 150k to 250k) is absolutely miniscule.
The typical cost (based on a median stay of 5 months) is the monthly cost (typically £3,000) x 5 which is £15,000).
The average cost (based on average stay of 14 months) is the monthly cost (say £3,000) x 14 which is £42,000).
The study shows that 27% of people enter residential care before death.
----- This has reassured me that the tory proposals are nothing to fear, but also that a National care Service need not be unaffordable.
I'm a Lib Dem member but I think a referendum on A50 is stupid. What's the status quo? We are leaving no matter what and its better to leave it up to experts in the civil service and government than the people on something so important. We can always re-negotiate our relationship at a later date.
As neither of us are happy with party policy, it suggests the policy is flawed.
I voted LEAVE and before the Referendum, I was a strong advocate of the United Kingdom joining (or re-joining) EFTA after a LEAVE vote and re-invigorating that organisation as a free trade but non-political alternative to the EU (more akin to the original notion of a "common" rather than "single" market in which we would pursue as close an economic relationship as possible while maintaining sovereignty over immigration, regulation and other areas).
I'm still there but I fear I'm alone - there doesn't seem to be anyone within any of the main parties supporting this. Perhaps the world has moved on.
Would you therefore take the view that if the A50 Treaty is not something the party can support, we should vote against it in the Commons (if we have any MPs) and the Lords and have a re-negotiation of that Treaty as a manifesto pledge in 2021 or 2022 ?
I voted Remain but would support an EFTA settlement. Problem is that I'm worried I am massively out of line with the mood of the country. I think May is right that immigration is a big worry to many people outside of big metropoliton cities. I don't know how we should solve it.
The way we solve it is by stopping all Muslim and Roma immigration. Period.
That's the immigration which REALLY agitates people. Sorry to be brutal, but there it is.
No one is fussed by French bankers, Spanish baristas, American dance instructors. Few, to be honest, are bothered by Polish plumbers or Chinese cockle pickers.
.
Which "people" are you referring to? Because the Muslim/Roma immigration (I would suggest) is not seen as a major contributor to undercutting working class wages. Maybe there is some grievance from supposed "jumping Council housing waiting lists", but that is a different issue.
It's his usual racist rubbish. If he got out more he would know that many people are concerned about EU migrants; the Lincs situation is already evidenced downthread. And the growth in our Asian population is already hard-wired into future demographics because of that community's higher birth rate, and has very little to do with immigration.
The election has opened a lot of people's eyes to social care facts. I knew nothing - now I've maged to google a little. I understand that the costs of residential care are between 30k and 50k per annum, depending on nursing needs, and that home care is around around 6k per year per hour per day (if that makes sense).
The only thing I don't know is what's the prognosis after the first time care is required. Could I live for twenty years after I first needed home care with dementia. Could I live twenty years after residential care was required? Is it likely? What percentage of people end their days in residential care, and on average how long do they stay there?
After seeing the election hoo-haa, any sensible politician might kick it into the long grass. But some public education would be useful.
My mother needed residential care for 5 years. Fees were 35k - 40k. You pay yourself unless you have total assets less than about 23k.
There are 300,000 elderly presently in residential care. Now you see the problem -- the bill each year is about 10 billion pounds. (Remember, 1p on income tax raises about 4 or 5 billion).
And we haven’t yet budgeted for the millions of elderly who need in-home care.
Corbyn thinks the National Care Service can be set up for 3 billion a year (number from Labour Manifesto). It really can’t. It needs much more.
It would be interesting to see a believable costing for setting up the National Care Service, and how much we would all pay in income tax.
It's not the only thing they are under-costed, neither party have covered themselves in glory in terms of actually telling the public how much their manifestos will actually cost in the real world.
Tories aren't actually proposing anything new to cost though are they? So their "uncosted" manifesto is uncosted in the same way as their last budget was. Put down to "savings to be identified".
As an aside, the Chilterns are fucking beautiful. I've walked them before, but, today, Wow.
It has the perfect combination of hills and hidden valleys and red kites and exquisite little villages and it's just 45 minutes from Marylebone (the most charming and usable of London termini). Incredible rural beauty less than an hour from the heart of the world's greatest city?
We are a lucky country.
Remember that the next time the developer lobby leans on the government of the day and argues for building in the green belt.
Just a warning, Jezza's support for the terrorists speech went down well below the line in the Daily Mail comments. So could be potentially a bounce from that.
Corbyn cleverly conflated isolation, which is definitely a popular idea not least as the main driver for Brexit, with pacifism, which isn't.
There is significant evidence that the Daily Mail BTL comments section has been invaded by Corbynites. There are lots of suspicious very-similar-sounding, similarly-written comments basically making the same point. They use the same punctuation and exhibit the same syntax and rhythm.
File under: hmmm....
Maybe, but Ed Milliband got a lot of support in those quarters for not joining in Syrian airstrikes.
I'm a Lib Dem member but I think a referendum on A50 is stupid. What's the status quo? We are leaving no matter what and its better to leave it up to experts in the civil service and government than the people on something so important. We can always re-negotiate our relationship at a later date.
As neither of us are happy with party policy, it suggests the policy is flawed.
I voted LEAVE and before the Referendum, I was a strong advocate of the United Kingdom joining (or re-joining) EFTA after a LEAVE vote and re-invigorating that organisation as a free trade but non-political alternative to the EU (more akin to the original notion of a "common" rather than "single" market in which we would pursue as close an economic relationship as possible while maintaining sovereignty over immigration, regulation and other areas).
I'm still there but I fear I'm alone - there doesn't seem to be anyone within any of the main parties supporting this. Perhaps the world has moved on.
Would you therefore take the view that if the A50 Treaty is not something the party can support, we should vote against it in the Commons (if we have any MPs) and the Lords and have a re-negotiation of that Treaty as a manifesto pledge in 2021 or 2022 ?
I voted Remain but would support an EFTA settlement. Problem is that I'm worried I am massively out of line with the mood of the country. I think May is right that immigration is a big worry to many people outside of big metropoliton cities. I don't know how we should solve it.
The way we solve it is by stopping all Muslim and Roma immigration. Period.
That's the immigration which REALLY agitates people. Sorry to be brutal, but there it is.
No one is fussed by French bankers, Spanish baristas, American dance instructors. Few, to be honest, are bothered by Polish plumbers or Chinese cockle pickers.
.
Which "people" are you referring to? Because the Muslim/Roma immigration (I would suggest) is not seen as a major contributor to undercutting working class wages. Maybe there is some grievance from supposed "jumping Council housing waiting lists", but that is a different issue.
That there is a body of opinion opposing Muslim immigration doesn't mean that Muslim immigration is the only thing people are concerned about. Which is what I was disputing. Especially in the working class communities who are perceived to have suffered most through globalisation.
Jason, you seem obsessively convinced that the scales are going to fall from everyone's eyes and suddenly everyone will see that Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser and Labour's vote will collapse.
Have you not considered that it's factored in already? That him and his front benchers are a bot iffy on that subject? And that, for one in three voters it isn't a game changer?
Actually, I never said that. I understand a lot of people agree with his anti-British views, and his terrorist sympathising (see the growing list of apologists on this very site) - but 38%? That is why that ad is so powerful - it will cut through to many people who wavered or considered Corbyn.
It could be worth 1 or 2%. That's massive.
Fair enough. 1 or 2% is important. I think that the IRA stuff is genuinely old hat for younger voters. Probably toxic for the older ones. I just feel it is factored in for older ones.
Unless Labour come up with a late election policy wheeze - say a free Daesh commemorative china cup for every voter, fully funded by a tax on communion wine. But Nick Timothy is working for the other side.
I'm a Lib Dem member but I think a referendum on A50 is stupid. What's the status quo? We are leaving no matter what and its better to leave it up to experts in the civil service and government than the people on something so important. We can always re-negotiate our relationship at a later date.
As neither of us are happy with party policy, it suggests the policy is flawed.
I voted LEAVE and before the Referendum, I was a strong advocate of the United Kingdom joining (or re-joining) EFTA after a LEAVE vote and re-invigorating that organisation as a free trade but non-political alternative to the EU (more akin to the original notion of a "common" rather than "single" market in which we would pursue as close an economic relationship as possible while maintaining sovereignty over immigration, regulation and other areas).
I'm still there but I fear I'm alone - there doesn't seem to be anyone within any of the main parties supporting this. Perhaps the world has moved on.
Would you therefore take the view that if the A50 Treaty is not something the party can support, we should vote against it in the Commons (if we have any MPs) and the Lords and have a re-negotiation of that Treaty as a manifesto pledge in 2021 or 2022 ?
I voted Remain but would support an EFTA settlement. Problem is that I'm worried I am massively out of line with the mood of the country. I think May is right that immigration is a big worry to many people outside of big metropoliton cities. I don't know how we should solve it.
The way we solve it is by stopping all Muslim and Roma immigration. Period.
That's the immigration which REALLY agitates people. Sorry to be brutal, but there it is.
No one is fussed by French bankers, Spanish baristas, American dance instructors. Few, to be honest, are bothered by Polish plumbers or Chinese cockle pickers.
.
Which "people" are you referring to? Because the Muslim/Roma immigration (I would suggest) is not seen as a major contributor to undercutting working class wages. Maybe there is some grievance from supposed "jumping Council housing waiting lists", but that is a different issue.
Please explain the causal relationship between the religion of immigrants and working class wage levels.
I have mixed feelings about these attacks on Corbyn's IRA support.
They're mixed for one reason only. We could just about forgive a man who was misguided in such ways back then. He perhaps did think he would do good.
What's clear is that now, right now, he is suggesting that he should become our PM and that he would implement a set of policies which are so far from reality I can't think of a metaphor. People believe this crap too - free education, unlimited healthcare, a world-leading economy, in the EU for the good bits - but we get to choose, modern railways that run like clockwork, as much power as you want with bills that you won't notice, major companies appointing the underpriviledged to direct their operations in a meaningful way, tea with the Comrade Queen whenever you're in the area....
The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn. That doesn't change at all. If you're ok now you'll probably be less ok under Corbyn, and if you're rich now you'll be living elsewhere.
Thank you ever so much for the link, FoxinSox, I have appreciated for a long time (much longer than I have been posting) your input into matters medical on this site.
--- The study authors used data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) to describe the lengths of stay of older adults who resided in nursing homes at the end of life. What they found was that out of the 8,433 study participants who died between 1992 and 2006, 27.3% of resided in a nursing home prior to their death. Most of these patients (70%) actually died in the nursing home without being transferred to another setting like a hospital.
The length of stay data were striking:
the median length of stay in a nursing home before death was 5 months the average length of stay was longer at 14 months due to a small number of study participants who had very long lengths of stay 65% died within 1 year of nursing home admission 53% died within 6 months of nursing home admission
--- If we assume that USA is similar to UK in terms of prognosis, what this tells me is that the chance of my spending, say 5 or more years in end-of-life residential care (costing about 150k to 250k) is absolutely miniscule.
The typical cost (based on a median stay of 5 months) is the monthly cost (typically £3,000) x 5 which is £15,000).
The average cost (based on average stay of 14 months) is the monthly cost (say £3,000) x 14 which is £42,000).
The study shows that 27% of people enter residential care before death.
----- This has reassured me that the tory proposals are nothing to fear, but also that a National care Service need not be unaffordable.
Last post for the night, dementia is not solely an old age condition it can strike through a number of causes, TBI, stroke, heart failure leading to hypoxia, etc it's not even physically progressive just a life sentence for them and their families. I don't expect anybody to pay for my problems but the care system has got to be more encompassing
Thank you ever so much for the link, FoxinSox, I have appreciated for a long time (much longer than I have been posting) your input into matters medical on this site.
--- The study authors used data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) to describe the lengths of stay of older adults who resided in nursing homes at the end of life. What they found was that out of the 8,433 study participants who died between 1992 and 2006, 27.3% of resided in a nursing home prior to their death. Most of these patients (70%) actually died in the nursing home without being transferred to another setting like a hospital.
The length of stay data were striking:
the median length of stay in a nursing home before death was 5 months the average length of stay was longer at 14 months due to a small number of study participants who had very long lengths of stay 65% died within 1 year of nursing home admission 53% died within 6 months of nursing home admission
--- If we assume that USA is similar to UK in terms of prognosis, what this tells me is that the chance of my spending, say 5 or more years in end-of-life residential care (costing about 150k to 250k) is absolutely miniscule.
The typical cost (based on a median stay of 5 months) is the monthly cost (typically £3,000) x 5 which is £15,000).
The average cost (based on average stay of 14 months) is the monthly cost (say £3,000) x 14 which is £42,000).
The study shows that 27% of people enter residential care before death.
----- This has reassured me that the tory proposals are nothing to fear, but also that a National care Service need not be unaffordable.
No problem! my interest is in medical statistics, hence my interest in probability and polling.
I think your figures are in the right ball park, though may underestimate the cost of care in ones own home. In practice this is strongly preferable as most people want to remain in a familiar environment as long as possible. Also people with dementia cope better in their own homes. They may forget what day it is, but if in a place that they have lived for years, they will not forget where the fridge and TV are.
As an aside, the Chilterns are fucking beautiful. I've walked them before, but, today, Wow.
It has the perfect combination of hills and hidden valleys and red kites and exquisite little villages and it's just 45 minutes from Marylebone (the most charming and usable of London termini). Incredible rural beauty less than an hour from the heart of the world's greatest city?
We are a lucky country.
Remember that the next time the developer lobby leans on the government of the day and argues for building in the green belt.
I'm with you, bruv.
I love rural English beauty. It's a unique and precious thing. And it is another reason I am in favour of Brexit.
There is simply no way you can import 300,000 people every single year - most of whom want to live in England, and SE England at that - and pretend that, in the end, this won't impact the countryside we have left.
This is what Remainers won't face. Net migration of 330,000 a year was simply unsustainable. We don't have room for a population of 80m, 90m, 120m. An economy built on the sugar rush of immigration is an economy headed for socio-economic diabetes.
We need to find a new way to grow. Not by numbers alone.
Utter bollocks, from start to finish. 2.27% of the UK's land is built on.
Thank you ever so much for the link, FoxinSox, I have appreciated for a long time (much longer than I have been posting) your input into matters medical on this site.
--- The study authors used data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) to describe the lengths of stay of older adults who resided in nursing homes at the end of life. What they found was that out of the 8,433 study participants who died between 1992 and 2006, 27.3% of resided in a nursing home prior to their death. Most of these patients (70%) actually died in the nursing home without being transferred to another setting like a hospital.
The length of stay data were striking:
the median length of stay in a nursing home before death was 5 months the average length of stay was longer at 14 months due to a small number of study participants who had very long lengths of stay 65% died within 1 year of nursing home admission 53% died within 6 months of nursing home admission
--- If we assume that USA is similar to UK in terms of prognosis, what this tells me is that the chance of my spending, say 5 or more years in end-of-life residential care (costing about 150k to 250k) is absolutely miniscule.
The typical cost (based on a median stay of 5 months) is the monthly cost (typically £3,000) x 5 which is £15,000).
The average cost (based on average stay of 14 months) is the monthly cost (say £3,000) x 14 which is £42,000).
The study shows that 27% of people enter residential care before death.
----- This has reassured me that the tory proposals are nothing to fear, but also that a National care Service need not be unaffordable.
I think foxinsox’s link is to end-of-life care, not solely dementia care.
End-of-life care is already funded by the NHS. Dementia care in general isn’t.
It is the money for dementia care that has to be found from either the patients or the National Care Service.
I have mixed feelings about these attacks on Corbyn's IRA support.
They're mixed for one reason only. We could just about forgive a man who was misguided in such ways back then. He perhaps did think he would do good.
What's clear is that now, right now, he is suggesting that he should become our PM and that he would implement a set of policies which are so far from reality I can't think of a metaphor. People believe this crap too - free education, unlimited healthcare, a world-leading economy, in the EU for the good bits - but we get to choose, modern railways that run like clockwork, as much power as you want with bills that you won't notice, major companies appointing the underpriviledged to direct their operations in a meaningful way, tea with the Comrade Queen whenever you're in the area....
The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn. That doesn't change at all. If you're ok now you'll probably be less ok under Corbyn, and if you're rich now you'll be living elsewhere.
Wanting peace/trying to understand the other side's arguments is not an ignoble position to have.
But Corbyn's position wasn't that, he wanted the UK to lose.
Just imagine if some members of the EDL had tried to kill Jeremy Corbyn, and a few days later a Tory MP had invited other members of the EDL to the Commons.....
I have mixed feelings about these attacks on Corbyn's IRA support.
They're mixed for one reason only. We could just about forgive a man who was misguided in such ways back then. He perhaps did think he would do good.
What's clear is that now, right now, he is suggesting that he should become our PM and that he would implement a set of policies which are so far from reality I can't think of a metaphor. People believe this crap too - free education, unlimited healthcare, a world-leading economy, in the EU for the good bits - but we get to choose, modern railways that run like clockwork, as much power as you want with bills that you won't notice, major companies appointing the underpriviledged to direct their operations in a meaningful way, tea with the Comrade Queen whenever you're in the area....
The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn. That doesn't change at all. If you're ok now you'll probably be less ok under Corbyn, and if you're rich now you'll be living elsewhere.
Well said. The richest will leave, everybody remaining will be worse off, the poorest will be MUCH worse off. Many won't have jobs.
As neither of us are happy with party policy, it suggests the policy is flawed.
I voted LEAVE and before the Referendum, I was a strong advocate of the United Kingdom joining (or re-joining) EFTA after a LEAVE vote and re-invigorating that organisation as a free trade but non-political alternative to the EU (more akin to the original notion of a "common" rather than "single" market in which we would pursue as close an economic relationship as possible while maintaining sovereignty over immigration, regulation and other areas).
I'm still there but I fear I'm alone - there doesn't seem to be anyone within any of the main parties supporting this. Perhaps the world has moved on.
Would you therefore take the view that if the A50 Treaty is not something the party can support, we should vote against it in the Commons (if we have any MPs) and the Lords and have a re-negotiation of that Treaty as a manifesto pledge in 2021 or 2022 ?
I voted Remain but would support an EFTA settlement. Problem is that I'm worried I am massively out of line with the mood of the country. I think May is right that immigration is a big worry to many people outside of big metropoliton cities. I don't know how we should solve it.
The way we solve it is by stopping all Muslim and Roma immigration. Period.
That's the immigration which REALLY agitates people. Sorry to be brutal, but there it is.
No one is fussed by French bankers, Spanish baristas, American dance instructors. Few, to be honest, are bothered by Polish plumbers or Chinese cockle pickers.
.
Which "people" are you referring to? Because the Muslim/Roma immigration (I would suggest) is not seen as a major contributor to undercutting working class wages. Maybe there is some grievance from supposed "jumping Council housing waiting lists", but that is a different issue.
Please explain the causal relationship between the religion of immigrants and working class wage levels.
I would hypothesis, and I could be completely wrong, that the sort of jobs that Muslim immigrants tend to gravitate towards, often found within areas of high existing Muslim population, are less likely to be seen as in areas in competition to where traditional working class might seek employment. That's ignoring the belief that a large proportion of muslim immigration is often extended families etc not actually seeking work.
As an aside, the Chilterns are fucking beautiful. I've walked them before, but, today, Wow.
It has the perfect combination of hills and hidden valleys and red kites and exquisite little villages and it's just 45 minutes from Marylebone (the most charming and usable of London termini). Incredible rural beauty less than an hour from the heart of the world's greatest city?
We are a lucky country.
Remember that the next time the developer lobby leans on the government of the day and argues for building in the green belt.
I'm with you, bruv.
I love rural English beauty. It's a unique and precious thing. And it is another reason I am in favour of Brexit.
There is simply no way you can import 300,000 people every single year - most of whom want to live in England, and SE England at that - and pretend that, in the end, this won't impact the countryside we have left.
This is what Remainers won't face. Net migration of 330,000 a year was simply unsustainable. We don't have room for a population of 80m, 90m, 120m. An economy built on the sugar rush of immigration is an economy headed for socio-economic diabetes.
We need to find a new way to grow. Not by numbers alone.
Utter bollocks, from start to finish. 2.27% of the UK's land is built on.
As an aside, the Chilterns are fucking beautiful. I've walked them before, but, today, Wow.
It has the perfect combination of hills and hidden valleys and red kites and exquisite little villages and it's just 45 minutes from Marylebone (the most charming and usable of London termini). Incredible rural beauty less than an hour from the heart of the world's greatest city?
We are a lucky country.
Remember that the next time the developer lobby leans on the government of the day and argues for building in the green belt.
If what you want to protect is the Chilterns you arguably want stronger protection for AONBs regardless of whether they are green belt or not, and the trade-off might be less protection for the neighbouring green belt areas outside the AONB.
The way we solve it is by stopping all Muslim and Roma immigration. Period.
That's the immigration which REALLY agitates people. Sorry to be brutal, but there it is.
No one is fussed by French bankers, Spanish baristas, American dance instructors. Few, to be honest, are bothered by Polish plumbers or Chinese cockle pickers.
Political correctness has prevented us having a sane discussion about migration. There are migrants we like and want, and migrants we don't like and we don't want. And we all know who they are.
Political correctness might be preventing *us* from having a sane discussion about migration, but what's preventing *you* from having a sane discussion about migration?
You seem to think that everyone is racist, but that's not true. Most people are content to have emigration from anywhere, as long as there's a feeling of control. There isn't a feeling of control of immigration from Pakistan - the impression we get, right or wrong, is that any Pakistani in Britain can import an arranged bride or groom, no questions asked. Let's get ourselves better informed and change policies as and when necessary, without blanket bans.
Stopping Roma immigration would also be ridiculously racist. In my experience, although Roma emigrants have great difficulties, they aren't hopeless cases. The fact that the vast majority of them adapt to a respectable lifestyle proves that the way that most of them live in their home countries is a product of generations of stereotyping. Of course far little is still being done, even though their home countries are now in the EU, to ensure sensible, better treatment which would cause fewer of them to want to leave. Interestingly, a key figure in this is Soros, who's put a lot of money into improving things for the Roma in Hungary, Slovakia, etc. and that work should be supported.
Finally, the idea that very few people care about white immigration from Europe is a nonsense. The rise of Ukip on the East Coast has been about little else. And in these parts the more familiar racist political expression has been replaced by "If you want a foreigner for a neighbour, vote Labour." Even Germans, French, Swedish etc. are now often asked when they're "going home".
Corbyn - where's the remorse? He doesn't think he's put a foot wrong in his life. Self-denial, perhaps. That's what makes him unfit.
This is a discussion I've had at work regularly, not specifically about Corbyn, but what's the difference between being a stubborn bastard and being a very principled person?
I have mixed feelings about these attacks on Corbyn's IRA support.
They're mixed for one reason only. We could just about forgive a man who was misguided in such ways back then. He perhaps did think he would do good.
What's clear is that now, right now, he is suggesting that he should become our PM and that he would implement a set of policies which are so far from reality I can't think of a metaphor. People believe this crap too - free education, unlimited healthcare, a world-leading economy, in the EU for the good bits - but we get to choose, modern railways that run like clockwork, as much power as you want with bills that you won't notice, major companies appointing the underpriviledged to direct their operations in a meaningful way, tea with the Comrade Queen whenever you're in the area....
The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn. That doesn't change at all. If you're ok now you'll probably be less ok under Corbyn, and if you're rich now you'll be living elsewhere.
"The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn."
No. If you're poor now, you'll be even worse off under Corbyn.
Corbyn is offering a fantasy that will become a nightmare. Anyone who has looked at these kind of policies throughout the world knows how they end up.
The way we solve it is by stopping all Muslim and Roma immigration. Period.
That's the immigration which REALLY agitates people. Sorry to be brutal, but there it is.
No one is fussed by French bankers, Spanish baristas, American dance instructors. Few, to be honest, are bothered by Polish plumbers or Chinese cockle pickers.
Political correctness has prevented us having a sane discussion about migration. There are migrants we like and want, and migrants we don't like and we don't want. And we all know who they are.
Continued....
The remedy to all this is something that Labour has been traditionally good at, and which the racist minority (see above) knows and hates: Solidarity and internationalism. Ordinary working-class people should (and often still do) show solidarity with each other. Our neighbours, whoever they are, should be respected for the (often hard) decisions they've made, and if there are problems, our criticism should be directed to the people who caused the problems. So, the Blair government did miscalculate badly; the numbers themselves weren't the worst of it: the worst thing was the failure to plan adequately to deal with the influx. There'd be much less resentment if the necessary infrastructure investment has been made and systems were adequate to ensure that such huge numbers could be dealt with according to the (really quite adequate) EU rules rather than some half-baked "British way of doing things" that came back to bite us on the bum.
As an aside, the Chilterns are fucking beautiful. I've walked them before, but, today, Wow.
It has the perfect combination of hills and hidden valleys and red kites and exquisite little villages and it's just 45 minutes from Marylebone (the most charming and usable of London termini). Incredible rural beauty less than an hour from the heart of the world's greatest city?
We are a lucky country.
Remember that the next time the developer lobby leans on the government of the day and argues for building in the green belt.
I'm with you, bruv.
I love rural English beauty. It's a unique and precious thing. And it is another reason I am in favour of Brexit.
There is simply no way you can import 300,000 people every single year - most of whom want to live in England, and SE England at that - and pretend that, in the end, this won't impact the countryside we have left.
This is what Remainers won't face. Net migration of 330,000 a year was simply unsustainable. We don't have room for a population of 80m, 90m, 120m. An economy built on the sugar rush of immigration is an economy headed for socio-economic diabetes.
We need to find a new way to grow. Not by numbers alone.
Utter bollocks, from start to finish. 2.27% of the UK's land is built on.
In the same article you can find the figure that 10.6% of England is urban. Sure, not all of an urban area is built on, because of parks and gardens, but 10.6% is a much larger proportion of the country than 2.27%.
As neither of us are happy with party policy, it suggests the policy is flawed.
I voted LEAVE and before the Referendum, I was a strong advocate of the United Kingdom joining (or re-joining) EFTA after a LEAVE vote and re-invigorating that organisation as a free trade but non-political alternative to the EU (more akin to the original notion of a "common" rather than "single" market in which we would pursue as close an economic relationship as possible while maintaining sovereignty over immigration, regulation and other areas).
I'm still there but I fear I'm alone - there doesn't seem to be anyone within any of the main parties supporting this. Perhaps the world has moved on.
Would you therefore take the view that if the A50 Treaty is not something the party can support, we should vote against it in the Commons (if we have any MPs) and the Lords and have a re-negotiation of that Treaty as a manifesto pledge in 2021 or 2022 ?
I voted Remain but would support an EFTA settlement. Problem is that I'm worried I am massively out of line with the mood of the country. I think May is right that immigration is a big worry to many people outside of big metropoliton cities. I don't know how we should solve it.
The way we solve it is by stopping all Muslim and Roma immigration. Period.
That's the immigration which REALLY agitates people. Sorry to be brutal, but there it is.
No one is fussed by French bankers, Spanish baristas, American dance instructors. Few, to be honest, are bothered by Polish plumbers or Chinese cockle pickers.
.
Which "people" are you referring to? Because the Muslim/Roma immigration (I would suggest) is not seen as a major contributor to undercutting working class wages. Maybe there is some grievance from supposed "jumping Council housing waiting lists", but that is a different issue.
Please explain the causal relationship between the religion of immigrants and working class wage levels.
I would hypothesis, and I could be completely wrong, that the sort of jobs that Muslim immigrants tend to gravitate towards, often found within areas of high existing Muslim population, are less likely to be seen as in areas in competition to where traditional working class might seek employment. That's ignoring the belief that a large proportion of muslim immigration is often extended families etc not actually seeking work.
I would hypothesise, and I could be completely wrong, that you are inventing a theory that happily suits your own prejudices.
Corbyn - where's the remorse? He doesn't think he's put a foot wrong in his life. Self-denial, perhaps. That's what makes him unfit.
This is a discussion I've had at work regularly, not specifically about Corbyn, but what's the difference between being a stubborn bastard and being a very principled person?
Whether you agree or not, I guess.
What I really mean is Corbyn could have said that was then, and this is now, but he doesn't. He's re-running 1983 over and over again. (Which would make for an interesting Life on Mars spinoff.)
As an aside, the Chilterns are fucking beautiful. I've walked them before, but, today, Wow.
It has the perfect combination of hills and hidden valleys and red kites and exquisite little villages and it's just 45 minutes from Marylebone (the most charming and usable of London termini). Incredible rural beauty less than an hour from the heart of the world's greatest city?
We are a lucky country.
Remember that the next time the developer lobby leans on the government of the day and argues for building in the green belt.
I'm with you, bruv.
I love rural English beauty. It's a unique and precious thing. And it is another reason I am in favour of Brexit.
There is simply no way you can import 300,000 people every single year - most of whom want to live in England, and SE England at that - and pretend that, in the end, this won't impact the countryside we have left.
This is what Remainers won't face. Net migration of 330,000 a year was simply unsustainable. We don't have room for a population of 80m, 90m, 120m. An economy built on the sugar rush of immigration is an economy headed for socio-economic diabetes.
We need to find a new way to grow. Not by numbers alone.
"An economy built on the sugar rush of immigration is an economy headed for socio-economic diabetes." - Nice line
Corbyn - where's the remorse? He doesn't think he's put a foot wrong in his life. Self-denial, perhaps. That's what makes him unfit.
This is a discussion I've had at work regularly, not specifically about Corbyn, but what's the difference between being a stubborn bastard and being a very principled person?
A very principled person does things for others or the greater good, even against onslaught of others, but they will consider that they might be wrong.
A stubborn bastard does things because they believe they are right and their ego is supreme. No matter how much evidence they are presented with, they will never consider they are wrong.
Thank you ever so much for the link, FoxinSox, I have appreciated for a long time (much longer than I have been posting) your input into matters medical on this site.
--- The study authors used data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) to describe the lengths of stay of older adults who resided in nursing homes at the end of life. What they found was that out of the 8,433 study participants who died between 1992 and 2006, 27.3% of resided in a nursing home prior to their death. Most of these patients (70%) actually died in the nursing home without being transferred to another setting like a hospital.
The length of stay data were striking:
the median length of stay in a nursing home before death was 5 months the average length of stay was longer at 14 months due to a small number of study participants who had very long lengths of stay 65% died within 1 year of nursing home admission 53% died within 6 months of nursing home admission
--- If we assume that USA is similar to UK in terms of prognosis, what this tells me is that the chance of my spending, say 5 or more years in end-of-life residential care (costing about 150k to 250k) is absolutely miniscule.
The typical cost (based on a median stay of 5 months) is the monthly cost (typically £3,000) x 5 which is £15,000).
The average cost (based on average stay of 14 months) is the monthly cost (say £3,000) x 14 which is £42,000).
The study shows that 27% of people enter residential care before death.
----- This has reassured me that the tory proposals are nothing to fear, but also that a National care Service need not be unaffordable.
Last post for the night, dementia is not solely an old age condition it can strike through a number of causes, TBI, stroke, heart failure leading to hypoxia, etc it's not even physically progressive just a life sentence for them and their families. I don't expect anybody to pay for my problems but the care system has got to be more encompassing
Yes. My friend in longterm care has been there years following his stroke.
He seems surprisingly happy with his lot, but that may in itself be because of some brain damage in the frontal lobe. Merciful if so.
This is an astonishing book in many ways, but the author was another person who enjoyed life despite a catastrophic neurological event:
Corbyn - where's the remorse? He doesn't think he's put a foot wrong in his life. Self-denial, perhaps. That's what makes him unfit.
This is a discussion I've had at work regularly, not specifically about Corbyn, but what's the difference between being a stubborn bastard and being a very principled person?
Whether you agree or not, I guess.
What I really mean is Corbyn could have said that was then, and this is now, but he doesn't. He's re-running 1983 over and over again. (Which would make for an interesting Life on Mars spinoff.)
That's true.
I still giggle when Labour in 2010 tried to portray David Cameron as Gene Hunt thinking that was a negative.
I have mixed feelings about these attacks on Corbyn's IRA support.
They're mixed for one reason only. We could just about forgive a man who was misguided in such ways back then. He perhaps did think he would do good.
What's clear is that now, right now, he is suggesting that he should become our PM and that he would implement a set of policies which are so far from reality I can't think of a metaphor. People believe this crap too - free education, unlimited healthcare, a world-leading economy, in the EU for the good bits - but we get to choose, modern railways that run like clockwork, as much power as you want with bills that you won't notice, major companies appointing the underpriviledged to direct their operations in a meaningful way, tea with the Comrade Queen whenever you're in the area....
The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn. That doesn't change at all. If you're ok now you'll probably be less ok under Corbyn, and if you're rich now you'll be living elsewhere.
I have mixed feelings about those attacks too, but for more than one reason.
You're right, it's ancient history to most voters and older voters could forgive misguidedness in certain circumstances.
But Mr Corbyn shows no sign of ever having changed his mind on anything. What he believed as a young man, he believes still. He may be prepared to make concessions to the democratic votes within the Labour party, but he still has the same guiding principles lying behind all his actions as he did then.
When push comes to shove, in the unforeseen circumstances of the future, I really, really don't want a man with his guiding principles deciding on the best course of action. He simply isn't interested in what's best for this country or its people.
And I'm sorry, I have every sympathy with other countries and have no desire to make life any worse for any of them, but every country needs a government that's prepared to go into bat for it.
That there is a body of opinion opposing Muslim immigration doesn't mean that Muslim immigration is the only thing people are concerned about. Which is what I was disputing. Especially in the working class communities who are perceived to have suffered most through globalisation.
Tell you what. Go to Rotherham and ask around. Or indeed Manchester.
I'm not disputing there is hostility to Muslim immigration. Some of it racist, some of it not. (obviously we know the issues in Rotherham). What I am questioning is whether it is Muslim immigration that is driving the specific belief that immigration is contributing to permanent and long term depression of working class wages. Belief that Muslim immigration makes it harder to get on the Council Housing ladder? Perhaps. Belief that Muslim immigration undermines community cohesion and endangers security? Yes. But belief that Muslim immigration (specifically or at all) is driving down wages? I'm not so sure.
Corbyn - where's the remorse? He doesn't think he's put a foot wrong in his life. Self-denial, perhaps. That's what makes him unfit.
This is a discussion I've had at work regularly, not specifically about Corbyn, but what's the difference between being a stubborn bastard and being a very principled person?
As an aside, the Chilterns are fucking beautiful. I've walked them before, but, today, Wow.
It has the perfect combination of hills and hidden valleys and red kites and exquisite little villages and it's just 45 minutes from Marylebone (the most charming and usable of London termini). Incredible rural beauty less than an hour from the heart of the world's greatest city?
We are a lucky country.
Remember that the next time the developer lobby leans on the government of the day and argues for building in the green belt.
I'm with you, bruv.
I love rural English beauty. It's a unique and precious thing. And it is another reason I am in favour of Brexit.
There is simply no way you can import 300,000 people every single year - most of whom want to live in England, and SE England at that - and pretend that, in the end, this won't impact the countryside we have left.
This is what Remainers won't face. Net migration of 330,000 a year was simply unsustainable. We don't have room for a population of 80m, 90m, 120m. An economy built on the sugar rush of immigration is an economy headed for socio-economic diabetes.
We need to find a new way to grow. Not by numbers alone.
Utter bollocks, from start to finish. 2.27% of the UK's land is built on.
As an aside, the Chilterns are fucking beautiful. I've walked them before, but, today, Wow.
It has the perfect combination of hills and hidden valleys and red kites and exquisite little villages and it's just 45 minutes from Marylebone (the most charming and usable of London termini). Incredible rural beauty less than an hour from the heart of the world's greatest city?
We are a lucky country.
Remember that the next time the developer lobby leans on the government of the day and argues for building in the green belt.
I'm with you, bruv.
I love rural English beauty. It's a unique and precious thing. And it is another reason I am in favour of Brexit.
There is simply no way you can import 300,000 people every single year - most of whom want to live in England, and SE England at that - and pretend that, in the end, this won't impact the countryside we have left.
This is what Remainers won't face. Net migration of 330,000 a year was simply unsustainable. We don't have room for a population of 80m, 90m, 120m. An economy built on the sugar rush of immigration is an economy headed for socio-economic diabetes.
We need to find a new way to grow. Not by numbers alone.
Utter bollocks, from start to finish. 2.27% of the UK's land is built on.
I have mixed feelings about these attacks on Corbyn's IRA support.
They're mixed for one reason only. We could just about forgive a man who was misguided in such ways back then. He perhaps did think he would do good.
What's clear is that now, right now, he is suggesting that he should become our PM and that he would implement a set of policies which are so far from reality I can't think of a metaphor. People believe this crap too - free education, unlimited healthcare, a world-leading economy, in the EU for the good bits - but we get to choose, modern railways that run like clockwork, as much power as you want with bills that you won't notice, major companies appointing the underpriviledged to direct their operations in a meaningful way, tea with the Comrade Queen whenever you're in the area....
The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn. That doesn't change at all. If you're ok now you'll probably be less ok under Corbyn, and if you're rich now you'll be living elsewhere.
"The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn."
No. If you're poor now, you'll be even worse off under Corbyn.
Corbyn is offering a fantasy that will become a nightmare. Anyone who has looked at these kind of policies throughout the world knows how they end up.
Delete "Corbyn" throughout, replace with "Brexit". Still works.
Still didn't stop many of the poor voting for Brexit.
At what point will Britain have a minute's silence for the LibDems?
They tried a minute's silence in the bird cage in Kendal on Thursday - Farron and his crew. Unfortunately a Tory councillor was there before them and planted himself next to Farron. cue much LD annoyance. Other Tories were physically barred from attended the photo-shoot. The minute's silence was by all accounts 5 mins as LDs tried to angle up shots avoiding the errant Tory.
Corbyn - where's the remorse? He doesn't think he's put a foot wrong in his life. Self-denial, perhaps. That's what makes him unfit.
This is a discussion I've had at work regularly, not specifically about Corbyn, but what's the difference between being a stubborn bastard and being a very principled person?
Um, a very principled person is genuinely prepared to consider other views and make a change of mind. A simply stubborn person knows s/he's right because right is who s/he is.
Corbyn - where's the remorse? He doesn't think he's put a foot wrong in his life. Self-denial, perhaps. That's what makes him unfit.
This is a discussion I've had at work regularly, not specifically about Corbyn, but what's the difference between being a stubborn bastard and being a very principled person?
If you're a principled person you clearly state what you think, why you think it, what you've done in light of those thoughts. Stubborn bastards would probably not bother with the why, and Corbyn likes to gloss over all of these things, and especially the last.
As an aside, the Chilterns are fucking beautiful. I've walked them before, but, today, Wow.
It has the perfect combination of hills and hidden valleys and red kites and exquisite little villages and it's just 45 minutes from Marylebone (the most charming and usable of London termini). Incredible rural beauty less than an hour from the heart of the world's greatest city?
We are a lucky country.
Remember that the next time the developer lobby leans on the government of the day and argues for building in the green belt.
I'm with you, bruv.
I love rural English beauty. It's a unique and precious thing. And it is another reason I am in favour of Brexit.
There is simply no way you can import 300,000 people every single year - most of whom want to live in England, and SE England at that - and pretend that, in the end, this won't impact the countryside we have left.
This is what Remainers won't face. Net migration of 330,000 a year was simply unsustainable. We don't have room for a population of 80m, 90m, 120m. An economy built on the sugar rush of immigration is an economy headed for socio-economic diabetes.
We need to find a new way to grow. Not by numbers alone.
Utter bollocks, from start to finish. 2.27% of the UK's land is built on.
I have mixed feelings about these attacks on Corbyn's IRA support.
They're mixed for one reason only. We could just about forgive a man who was misguided in such ways back then. He perhaps did think he would do good.
What's clear is that now, right now, he is suggesting that he should become our PM and that he would implement a set of policies which are so far from reality I can't think of a metaphor. People believe this crap too - free education, unlimited healthcare, a world-leading economy, in the EU for the good bits - but we get to choose, modern railways that run like clockwork, as much power as you want with bills that you won't notice, major companies appointing the underpriviledged to direct their operations in a meaningful way, tea with the Comrade Queen whenever you're in the area....
The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn. That doesn't change at all. If you're ok now you'll probably be less ok under Corbyn, and if you're rich now you'll be living elsewhere.
"The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn."
No. If you're poor now, you'll be even worse off under Corbyn.
Corbyn is offering a fantasy that will become a nightmare. Anyone who has looked at these kind of policies throughout the world knows how they end up.
Delete "Corbyn" throughout, replace with "Brexit". Still works.
Still didn't stop many of the poor voting for Brexit.
Brexit offers freedom (and with freedom comes risks, of course).
As an aside, the Chilterns are fucking beautiful. I've walked them before, but, today, Wow.
It has the perfect combination of hills and hidden valleys and red kites and exquisite little villages and it's just 45 minutes from Marylebone (the most charming and usable of London termini). Incredible rural beauty less than an hour from the heart of the world's greatest city?
We are a lucky country.
Remember that the next time the developer lobby leans on the government of the day and argues for building in the green belt.
I'm with you, bruv.
I love rural English beauty. It's a unique and precious thing. And it is another reason I am in favour of Brexit.
There is simply no way you can import 300,000 people every single year - most of whom want to live in England, and SE England at that - and pretend that, in the end, this won't impact the countryside we have left.
This is what Remainers won't face. Net migration of 330,000 a year was simply unsustainable. We don't have room for a population of 80m, 90m, 120m. An economy built on the sugar rush of immigration is an economy headed for socio-economic diabetes.
We need to find a new way to grow. Not by numbers alone.
Utter bollocks, from start to finish. 2.27% of the UK's land is built on.
Please explain the causal relationship between the religion of immigrants and working class wage levels.
I would hypothesis, and I could be completely wrong, that the sort of jobs that Muslim immigrants tend to gravitate towards, often found within areas of high existing Muslim population, are less likely to be seen as in areas in competition to where traditional working class might seek employment. That's ignoring the belief that a large proportion of muslim immigration is often extended families etc not actually seeking work.
I would hypothesise, and I could be completely wrong, that you are inventing a theory that happily suits your own prejudices.
I think you are misunderstanding the argument I am making (obviously badly) if you are seeing a prejudice within it. I am simply saying that a driver of anti-immigrant feeling is a belief that it is leading to a depression of wages for the traditional working class. And suggesting that Muslim immigrants are not seen (uniquely or at all) as the reason for this.
I have mixed feelings about these attacks on Corbyn's IRA support.
They're mixed for one reason only. We could just about forgive a man who was misguided in such ways back then. He perhaps did think he would do good.
What's clear is that now, right now, he is suggesting that he should become our PM and that he would implement a set of policies which are so far from reality I can't think of a metaphor. People believe this crap too - free education, unlimited healthcare, a world-leading economy, in the EU for the good bits - but we get to choose, modern railways that run like clockwork, as much power as you want with bills that you won't notice, major companies appointing the underpriviledged to direct their operations in a meaningful way, tea with the Comrade Queen whenever you're in the area....
The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn. That doesn't change at all. If you're ok now you'll probably be less ok under Corbyn, and if you're rich now you'll be living elsewhere.
"The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn."
No. If you're poor now, you'll be even worse off under Corbyn.
Corbyn is offering a fantasy that will become a nightmare. Anyone who has looked at these kind of policies throughout the world knows how they end up.
Delete "Corbyn" throughout, replace with "Brexit". Still works.
Still didn't stop many of the poor voting for Brexit.
Brexit offers freedom (and with freedom comes risks, of course).
Corbyn offers the chains of communism.
What you mean like the government getting involved in energy prices?
At what point will Britain have a minute's silence for the LibDems?
They tried a minute's silence in the bird cage in Kendal on Thursday - Farron and his crew. Unfortunately a Tory councillor was there before them and planted himself next to Farron. cue much LD annoyance. Other Tories were physically barred from attended the photo-shoot. The minute's silence was by all accounts 5 mins as LDs tried to angle up shots avoiding the errant Tory.
I'm not sure anyone could have saved the LDs, Farron or not.
They went for the 48% strategy, and ended up with the 4-8% one.
It didn't work. "Brexit is Brexit" as someone once said.
I have mixed feelings about these attacks on Corbyn's IRA support.
They're mixed for one reason only. We could just about forgive a man who was misguided in such ways back then. He perhaps did think he would do good.
What's clear is that now, right now, he is suggesting that he should become our PM and that he would implement a set of policies which are so far from reality I can't think of a metaphor. People believe this crap too - free education, unlimited healthcare, a world-leading economy, in the EU for the good bits - but we get to choose, modern railways that run like clockwork, as much power as you want with bills that you won't notice, major companies appointing the underpriviledged to direct their operations in a meaningful way, tea with the Comrade Queen whenever you're in the area....
The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn. That doesn't change at all. If you're ok now you'll probably be less ok under Corbyn, and if you're rich now you'll be living elsewhere.
"The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn."
No. If you're poor now, you'll be even worse off under Corbyn.
Corbyn is offering a fantasy that will become a nightmare. Anyone who has looked at these kind of policies throughout the world knows how they end up.
Delete "Corbyn" throughout, replace with "Brexit". Still works.
Still didn't stop many of the poor voting for Brexit.
That may be true - Brexit is a one-off thing though. I know the raveling and unraveling might go on for many years, but the effect is basically a cliff-edge - scaling, or leaping off as you choose.
Corbynism is (potentially) a spiraling down into the abyss. Oddly I imagine that you're going to agree
As an aside, the Chilterns are fucking beautiful. I've walked them before, but, today, Wow.
It has the perfect combination of hills and hidden valleys and red kites and exquisite little villages and it's just 45 minutes from Marylebone (the most charming and usable of London termini). Incredible rural beauty less than an hour from the heart of the world's greatest city?
We are a lucky country.
Remember that the next time the developer lobby leans on the government of the day and argues for building in the green belt.
I'm with you, bruv.
I love rural English beauty. It's a unique and precious thing. And it is another reason I am in favour of Brexit.
There is simply no way you can import 300,000 people every single year - most of whom want to live in England, and SE England at that - and pretend that, in the end, this won't impact the countryside we have left.
This is what Remainers won't face. Net migration of 330,000 a year was simply unsustainable. We don't have room for a population of 80m, 90m, 120m. An economy built on the sugar rush of immigration is an economy headed for socio-economic diabetes.
We need to find a new way to grow. Not by numbers alone.
Utter bollocks, from start to finish. 2.27% of the UK's land is built on.
Like other forms of grief, having a loved one deteriorate is often more tough on those close to them than the sufferer themselves.
Dr Sox, highly recommend Mihaliy Csikszentmihalyi's "Flow". I talks about how people who suffer traumatic injuries can actually end up happier than before because they find in the accident, or in the recovery from it, some purpose in life, some doable challenge, that was lacking beforehand.
Jeremy Corbyn is closer to winning the election than at any time during the campaign thanks to a surge in support from women, a poll for the Sunday Telegraph indicates.
Labour is now just 6 points behind the Tories with less than a fortnight to go – the smallest gap recorded by pollsters ORB International since the vote was called.
The Tories are on 44 per cent of the vote with Labour on 38. The Liberal Democrats are on 7 while Ukip has collapsed to just 4.
It marks a dramatic tightening of the election race, with the Tories enjoying a 15-point lead over Labour at the beginning of the month.
Driving Labour’s comeback appears to be women voters, who have grown increasingly positive about Mr Corbyn’s party in recent weeks.
Just 31 per cent of women planned to vote Labour in mid-May but that figure has jumped to 40 per cent this week – just a single point behind the Tories.
The polling, carried out after the Manchester terror attack on Wednesday and Thursday, indicates Labour has not been impacted by security becoming a more prominent election issue.
Is this some odd attempt by you to cozy up with lemmings? Just because they're getting pally with the meerkats in the US doesn't mean you have to copy you know.
I have mixed feelings about these attacks on Corbyn's IRA support.
They're mixed for one reason only. We could just about forgive a man who was misguided in such ways back then. He perhaps did think he would do good.
What's clear is that now, right now, he is suggesting that he should become our PM and that he would implement a set of policies which are so far from reality I can't think of a metaphor. People believe this crap too - free education, unlimited healthcare, a world-leading economy, in the EU for the good bits - but we get to choose, modern railways that run like clockwork, as much power as you want with bills that you won't notice, major companies appointing the underpriviledged to direct their operations in a meaningful way, tea with the Comrade Queen whenever you're in the area....
The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn. That doesn't change at all. If you're ok now you'll probably be less ok under Corbyn, and if you're rich now you'll be living elsewhere.
"The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn."
No. If you're poor now, you'll be even worse off under Corbyn.
Corbyn is offering a fantasy that will become a nightmare. Anyone who has looked at these kind of policies throughout the world knows how they end up.
Delete "Corbyn" throughout, replace with "Brexit". Still works.
Still didn't stop many of the poor voting for Brexit.
That may be true - Brexit is a one-off thing though. I know the raveling and unraveling might go on for many years, but the effect is basically a cliff-edge - scaling, or leaping off as you choose.
Corbynism is (potentially) a spiraling down into the abyss. Oddly I imagine that you're going to agree
The two are interlinked. Fantasies for fantasists.
As an aside, the Chilterns are fucking beautiful. I've walked them before, but, today, Wow.
It has the perfect combination of hills and hidden valleys and red kites and exquisite little villages and it's just 45 minutes from Marylebone (the most charming and usable of London termini). Incredible rural beauty less than an hour from the heart of the world's greatest city?
We are a lucky country.
Remember that the next time the developer lobby leans on the government of the day and argues for building in the green belt.
I'm with you, bruv.
I love rural English beauty. It's a unique and precious thing. And it is another reason I am in favour of Brexit.
There is simply no way you can import 300,000 people every single year - most of whom want to live in England, and SE England at that - and pretend that, in the end, this won't impact the countryside we have left.
This is what Remainers won't face. Net migration of 330,000 a year was simply unsustainable. We don't have room for a population of 80m, 90m, 120m. An economy built on the sugar rush of immigration is an economy headed for socio-economic diabetes.
We need to find a new way to grow. Not by numbers alone.
It's fair to say that if EU25 hadn't happened, immigration to the UK would've been much lower in the period since 2004. But economically that immigration has proved to be a massive boost to the UK economy. Unemployment rates have stayed relatively low and government tax receipts have stayed relatively high.
Is Brexit a red herring regarding immigration? British business, and ordinary people who use the services they provide, will find it difficult to get by without the large immigrant workforce, and the economy is likely to contract. Theresa May kept issuing pointless figures about reducing immigration knowing full well that it wasn't going to happen and the government didn't really want it to happen, and she continues to do the same thing. Can a Conservative government really resist the call of industry and agriculture for a continued supply of reliable, hard-working, non-bolshie and, yes, relatively cheap labour? The simple answer is no.
Racists were relatively happy that EU migration meant that most immigrants were now white. There will now be a rebalancing so that more immigrants will be black and Asian. This might be a positive outcome of Brexit, but not for racists.
1. The one that makes Labour think they are closing the gap. 2. The one that makes Tories breathe a sigh of relief. 3. The one that makes everyone say MOE.
As an aside, the Chilterns are fucking beautiful. I've walked them before, but, today, Wow.
It has the perfect combination of hills and hidden valleys and red kites and exquisite little villages and it's just 45 minutes from Marylebone (the most charming and usable of London termini). Incredible rural beauty less than an hour from the heart of the world's greatest city?
We are a lucky country.
Yes was walking in Buckinghamshire myself today and beautiful day for it
Comments
Have you not considered that it's factored in already? That him and his front benchers are a bot iffy on that subject? And that, for one in three voters it isn't a game changer?
(Personally I see several strong merits in staying in the Single Market, but as I'm a hardline Brexiteer - on "democratic deficit" grounds - and I feel that remaining in the Single Market would in many respects be a betrayal in spirit of what a majority of people voted for in the Brexit referendum, I sway to mildly preferring to leave it. But like I said, I'm a hardline Brexiteer - sufficiently infuriated at what I saw as Labour's excessive Eurounionphilia under previous leadership that I've gone so far as to vote Communist over Labour on the European issue, in an EU election anyway. My views are therefore not at all representative, and this is one issue I feel Corbyn has broadly speaking got "right", Farron has utterly cocked up, the SNP with their "the UK gvt has betrayed Scotland by not seeking an arrangement for Scotland to stay inside the EU" shtick are being utterly disingenuous about, and May has arguably got right from a delivering-on-democratic-mandate perspective but on the other hand unnecessarily closed down some potentially valuable options.)
I don't see why we have to compromise on FoM. There's a difference between a Common Market and a Single Market. We've rejected the latter - not sure we've rejected the former.
http://www.geripal.org/2010/08/length-of-stay-in-nursing-homes-at-end.html?m=1
For this sort of data Median is probably a better measure than Mean stay, as the latter is skewed by a few outliers, who stay a long time. Paradoxically those who live the shortest are those with the best existing social support (such as a spouse). This is probably due to them entering social care further along the timeline.
The problem is going to be one of turnout - I suspect there'll be a small swing to the Conservatives (1-2%) but more through Labour abstentions. Stephen Timms may see his majority trimmed to between 25,000 and 30,000.
/reply
I believe so. You remind me, and that explains a lot. His qualifications for the role don't leap from the page.
There are 300,000 elderly presently in residential care. Now you see the problem -- the bill each year is about 10 billion pounds. (Remember, 1p on income tax raises about 4 or 5 billion).
And we haven’t yet budgeted for the millions of elderly who need in-home care.
Corbyn thinks the National Care Service can be set up for 3 billion a year (number from Labour Manifesto). It really can’t. It needs much more.
It would be interesting to see a believable costing for setting up the National Care Service, and how much we would all pay in income tax.
I became opposed to the Single Market and to the EU because of what I saw happening - the Single Market played to the age-old adage of people moving to the money. It enriched already wealthy areas by drawing in both money and people so London, Bavaria and other areas prospered but the corollary was the depopulation of the peripheries such as Estonia and Lithuania whose younger population migrated en masse in search of a better life.
Nothing wrong with that but it isn't just the able and the willing and the hardworking who have come.
It does reinforce what I said earlier about Corbynistas going to extreme measures to try and get him elected.
Does the manipulation of opinion polls now sound so far-fetched?
1. Complacency.
2. The Clusterfuck, usually involving the Manifesto launch (1987, 2010, 2017) or a disastrous debate performance (2010 again).
3. The panic.
4. Gradual recovery, as they slowly get their act together.
As well as the cost, there is a human factor as there are major staffing implications, whether care is from families or paid staff. Social care is very time consuming.
Immigration doesn't "bother" me, but then I'm not competing at the low end of the labour pile. When these people voted for Brexit, free movement of people was something they hoped and believed would stop.
In some sense I believe that both May and Corbyn have got this issue "right", albeit from contrasting points of view. The Farronite position that, should a Farrongasm take him to unexpected victory, then we would allow a Lib Dem government to somehow negotiate a fair Brexit deal with Brussels that it will then come home to campaign against, is nonsense on an elongated pogo stick.
It could be worth 1 or 2%. That's massive.
---
The study authors used data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) to describe the lengths of stay of older adults who resided in nursing homes at the end of life. What they found was that out of the 8,433 study participants who died between 1992 and 2006, 27.3% of resided in a nursing home prior to their death. Most of these patients (70%) actually died in the nursing home without being transferred to another setting like a hospital.
The length of stay data were striking:
the median length of stay in a nursing home before death was 5 months
the average length of stay was longer at 14 months due to a small number of study participants who had very long lengths of stay
65% died within 1 year of nursing home admission
53% died within 6 months of nursing home admission
---
If we assume that USA is similar to UK in terms of prognosis, what this tells me is that the chance of my spending, say 5 or more years in end-of-life residential care (costing about 150k to 250k) is absolutely miniscule.
The typical cost (based on a median stay of 5 months) is the monthly cost (typically £3,000) x 5 which is £15,000).
The average cost (based on average stay of 14 months) is the monthly cost (say £3,000) x 14 which is £42,000).
The study shows that 27% of people enter residential care before death.
-----
This has reassured me that the tory proposals are nothing to fear, but also that a National care Service need not be unaffordable.
https://twitter.com/blairmcdougall/status/868550221629992960
Unless Labour come up with a late election policy wheeze - say a free Daesh commemorative china cup for every voter, fully funded by a tax on communion wine. But Nick Timothy is working for the other side.
They're mixed for one reason only. We could just about forgive a man who was misguided in such ways back then. He perhaps did think he would do good.
What's clear is that now, right now, he is suggesting that he should become our PM and that he would implement a set of policies which are so far from reality I can't think of a metaphor. People believe this crap too - free education, unlimited healthcare, a world-leading economy, in the EU for the good bits - but we get to choose, modern railways that run like clockwork, as much power as you want with bills that you won't notice, major companies appointing the underpriviledged to direct their operations in a meaningful way, tea with the Comrade Queen whenever you're in the area....
The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn. That doesn't change at all. If you're ok now you'll probably be less ok under Corbyn, and if you're rich now you'll be living elsewhere.
What? We have UPS at home and at work
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/868551488028774403
Oh and if Peter from Putney is around......
I think your figures are in the right ball park, though may underestimate the cost of care in ones own home. In practice this is strongly preferable as most people want to remain in a familiar environment as long as possible. Also people with dementia cope better in their own homes. They may forget what day it is, but if in a place that they have lived for years, they will not forget where the fridge and TV are.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18623096
Stick to fiction.
End-of-life care is already funded by the NHS. Dementia care in general isn’t.
It is the money for dementia care that has to be found from either the patients or the National Care Service.
But Corbyn's position wasn't that, he wanted the UK to lose.
Just imagine if some members of the EDL had tried to kill Jeremy Corbyn, and a few days later a Tory MP had invited other members of the EDL to the Commons.....
You seem to think that everyone is racist, but that's not true. Most people are content to have emigration from anywhere, as long as there's a feeling of control. There isn't a feeling of control of immigration from Pakistan - the impression we get, right or wrong, is that any Pakistani in Britain can import an arranged bride or groom, no questions asked. Let's get ourselves better informed and change policies as and when necessary, without blanket bans.
Stopping Roma immigration would also be ridiculously racist. In my experience, although Roma emigrants have great difficulties, they aren't hopeless cases. The fact that the vast majority of them adapt to a respectable lifestyle proves that the way that most of them live in their home countries is a product of generations of stereotyping. Of course far little is still being done, even though their home countries are now in the EU, to ensure sensible, better treatment which would cause fewer of them to want to leave. Interestingly, a key figure in this is Soros, who's put a lot of money into improving things for the Roma in Hungary, Slovakia, etc. and that work should be supported.
Finally, the idea that very few people care about white immigration from Europe is a nonsense. The rise of Ukip on the East Coast has been about little else. And in these parts the more familiar racist political expression has been replaced by "If you want a foreigner for a neighbour, vote Labour." Even Germans, French, Swedish etc. are now often asked when they're "going home".
"The truth is that if you're poor now you'll be poor under Corbyn."
No. If you're poor now, you'll be even worse off under Corbyn.
Corbyn is offering a fantasy that will become a nightmare. Anyone who has looked at these kind of policies throughout the world knows how they end up.
The remedy to all this is something that Labour has been traditionally good at, and which the racist minority (see above) knows and hates: Solidarity and internationalism. Ordinary working-class people should (and often still do) show solidarity with each other. Our neighbours, whoever they are, should be respected for the (often hard) decisions they've made, and if there are problems, our criticism should be directed to the people who caused the problems. So, the Blair government did miscalculate badly; the numbers themselves weren't the worst of it: the worst thing was the failure to plan adequately to deal with the influx. There'd be much less resentment if the necessary infrastructure investment has been made and systems were adequate to ensure that such huge numbers could be dealt with according to the (really quite adequate) EU rules rather than some half-baked "British way of doing things" that came back to bite us on the bum.
What I really mean is Corbyn could have said that was then, and this is now, but he doesn't. He's re-running 1983 over and over again. (Which would make for an interesting Life on Mars spinoff.)
A very principled person does things for others or the greater good, even against onslaught of others, but they will consider that they might be wrong.
A stubborn bastard does things because they believe they are right and their ego is supreme. No matter how much evidence they are presented with, they will never consider they are wrong.
He seems surprisingly happy with his lot, but that may in itself be because of some brain damage in the frontal lobe. Merciful if so.
This is an astonishing book in many ways, but the author was another person who enjoyed life despite a catastrophic neurological event:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Diving-Bell-Butterfly-Jean-Dominique-Bauby/dp/0007139845
Like other forms of grief, having a loved one deteriorate is often more tough on those close to them than the sufferer themselves.
I still giggle when Labour in 2010 tried to portray David Cameron as Gene Hunt thinking that was a negative.
You're right, it's ancient history to most voters and older voters could forgive misguidedness in certain circumstances.
But Mr Corbyn shows no sign of ever having changed his mind on anything. What he believed as a young man, he believes still. He may be prepared to make concessions to the democratic votes within the Labour party, but he still has the same guiding principles lying behind all his actions as he did then.
When push comes to shove, in the unforeseen circumstances of the future, I really, really don't want a man with his guiding principles deciding on the best course of action. He simply isn't interested in what's best for this country or its people.
And I'm sorry, I have every sympathy with other countries and have no desire to make life any worse for any of them, but every country needs a government that's prepared to go into bat for it.
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/868536625105686530
Tell you what. Go to Rotherham and ask around. Or indeed Manchester. I'm not disputing there is hostility to Muslim immigration. Some of it racist, some of it not. (obviously we know the issues in Rotherham). What I am questioning is whether it is Muslim immigration that is driving the specific belief that immigration is contributing to permanent and long term depression of working class wages. Belief that Muslim immigration makes it harder to get on the Council Housing ladder? Perhaps. Belief that Muslim immigration undermines community cohesion and endangers security? Yes. But belief that Muslim immigration (specifically or at all) is driving down wages? I'm not so sure.
Still didn't stop many of the poor voting for Brexit.
https://twitter.com/leaveeuofficial/status/868546234310680580
(What were Enzensberger's first thoughts like!!?)
Brexit offers freedom (and with freedom comes risks, of course).
Corbyn offers the chains of communism.
England 421/sq. km (1089/sq. mile)
I'm not sure anyone could have saved the LDs, Farron or not.
They went for the 48% strategy, and ended up with the 4-8% one.
It didn't work. "Brexit is Brexit" as someone once said.
Corbynism is (potentially) a spiraling down into the abyss. Oddly I imagine that you're going to agree
https://twitter.com/Patrick_E_Scott/status/868559397005520896
Labour is now just 6 points behind the Tories with less than a fortnight to go – the smallest gap recorded by pollsters ORB International since the vote was called.
The Tories are on 44 per cent of the vote with Labour on 38. The Liberal Democrats are on 7 while Ukip has collapsed to just 4.
It marks a dramatic tightening of the election race, with the Tories enjoying a 15-point lead over Labour at the beginning of the month.
Driving Labour’s comeback appears to be women voters, who have grown increasingly positive about Mr Corbyn’s party in recent weeks.
Just 31 per cent of women planned to vote Labour in mid-May but that figure has jumped to 40 per cent this week – just a single point behind the Tories.
The polling, carried out after the Manchester terror attack on Wednesday and Thursday, indicates Labour has not been impacted by security becoming a more prominent election issue.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/27/exclusive-telegraph-orb-poll-labour-narrows-gap-six-points-women/
Is Brexit a red herring regarding immigration? British business, and ordinary people who use the services they provide, will find it difficult to get by without the large immigrant workforce, and the economy is likely to contract. Theresa May kept issuing pointless figures about reducing immigration knowing full well that it wasn't going to happen and the government didn't really want it to happen, and she continues to do the same thing. Can a Conservative government really resist the call of industry and agriculture for a continued supply of reliable, hard-working, non-bolshie and, yes, relatively cheap labour? The simple answer is no.
Racists were relatively happy that EU migration meant that most immigrants were now white. There will now be a rebalancing so that more immigrants will be black and Asian. This might be a positive outcome of Brexit, but not for racists.
..but do any of the polls seem to have a consistent view on whats causing the lab increase? Some say its 18-24s, others non voters, ORB is women..
2. The one that makes Tories breathe a sigh of relief.
3. The one that makes everyone say MOE.