politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Your regular reminder that you should always look at the full

Black_Rook said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I have no problem paying it to be honest, it will be a lot cheaper than paying for care

I would doubt that you'd have to. Whacking pensioners is pretty much taboo. The middle aged, not so much.

Maybe but fairness would require everyone over 40 to contribute plus the insurance pot more than probably requires it

Big_G_NorthWales said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Mexicanpete said:

ydoethur said:

NickPalmer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

That social care policy genuinely sounds pretty good

It is shocking, I already pay enough tax as forty something.

This really isn't a Conservative government, this is socialism.

There's nothing fiscally un-conservative about doing something and raising taxes to pay for it, though? One can debate if it's wise, but it's not in principle fiscally reckless.

Any government that wants to be fiscally prudent will have to raise taxes sooner rather than later.

The question is whether they will admit it in advance.

Corbyn did to a limited extent, although his sums (contrary to his claims) didn’t even begin to add up. Johnson probably won’t. If he is still PM at the next election, therefore, Starmer will have an awkward problem explaining to people that yes, we can have all these nice things but we have to pay for them through higher taxes.

See that is Boris' brilliant USP. Free stuff and loads of it, and never having to pay for it on his watch.

By comparison Starmer really is has a hard sell. No free stuff, but you still have to pay for it anyway!

Maybe Johnson is the answer after all?

Johnson found the magic money tree

If it an insurance scheme it should be self sufficient and no money tree needed to be fair

It'll take a while to build up the pot, or shall we borrow some more in the meantime?

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

They should definitely make it 50 or 55. Our generation seems to have become the most put upon, unable to buy property because our parents' generation pulled the ladder up behind them, huge childcare costs and longer living parents resulting in huge care costs.

We definitely have become the very definition of the "squeezed middle" politicians love talking about. I'm lucky to have a career that has affordede a fairly comfortable life and the chance to own my own home but loads of my friends are t so fortunate.

TheScreamingEagles said:

My favourite chant of the season was from Sheffield United fans (to Liverpool fans)

'Champions of League 1, you'll never sing that.'

Leicester sang a similar song to Cardiff last season. Champions of England, you'll never sing that...

Black_Rook said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I'll be angry if they don't.

The real question you ought to be asking is, will the new charge be banked in some way to cover the care costs of those paying it, or will it be just like every other tax and thus deployed to lower care costs for current pensioners (or increase the threshold amount that they're allowed to leave intact in their estates if compelled to sell their homes)?

My guess is the latter. The stick bangers will be cock-a-hoop.

Not a chance it will be banked.

logical_song said:

Mexicanpete said:

ydoethur said:

NickPalmer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

That social care policy genuinely sounds pretty good

It is shocking, I already pay enough tax as forty something.

This really isn't a Conservative government, this is socialism.

There's nothing fiscally un-conservative about doing something and raising taxes to pay for it, though? One can debate if it's wise, but it's not in principle fiscally reckless.

Any government that wants to be fiscally prudent will have to raise taxes sooner rather than later.

The question is whether they will admit it in advance.

Corbyn did to a limited extent, although his sums (contrary to his claims) didn’t even begin to add up. Johnson probably won’t. If he is still PM at the next election, therefore, Starmer will have an awkward problem explaining to people that yes, we can have all these nice things but we have to pay for them through higher taxes.

See that is Boris' brilliant USP. Free stuff and loads of it, and never having to pay for it on his watch.

By comparison Starmer really is has a hard sell. No free stuff, but you still have to pay for it anyway!

Maybe Johnson is the answer after all?

Didn't corbyn offer loads of free stuff - he just wasn't believed.

He offered loads of stuff other people would pay for. Which is slightly different.

But as I said, the problem was his sums didn’t add up.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Philip_Thompson said:

OllyT said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Oh and OllyT, here's some records Liverpool have broken this season.

Earliest title win

By claiming the title with seven matches to spare Liverpool beat the mark set of becoming champions with five matches remaining, set by Manchester United in 2000/01, and Man City in 2017/18.

Fastest to 30 wins

The 3-1 victory at Brighton & Hove Albion on 8 July was the Reds' 30th this season, and they achieved that mark in a Premier League record of 34 matches.

Best start ever

When Liverpool reached 61 points from their opening 21 matches, it was the most a team had ever accumulated at that stage in any of Europe's top five leagues.

But all worth nothing because you've got a better goal difference.

I didn't say it was worth nothing I said it was not the all- time record breaking season Liverpool fans were telling us what going to happen a few months back.

Creditable though the things you mention are you aren't going to see them in any of the record books. The records that count come from what you do over 38 games, not the first 21. Still nice to see the barrels being scraped.

Earliest ever title victory (and latest ever) is a very clear record.

Having wrapped up the title with 7 an unprecedented games to spare is it any surprise the pressure was off during the longest ever victory lap recorded?

Liverpool join Blackburn and Leicester in we have won the premiership once hall of fame

19 times. Football didn't start in 92.

Black_Rook said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I'll be angry if they don't.

The real question you ought to be asking is, will the new charge be banked in some way to cover the care costs of those paying it, or will it be just like every other tax and thus deployed to lower care costs for current pensioners (or increase the threshold amount that they're allowed to leave intact in their estates if compelled to sell their homes)?

My guess is the latter. The stick bangers will be cock-a-hoop.

I would assume it would be administered by an insurance company to keep it away from HMG hands

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I have no problem paying it to be honest, it will be a lot cheaper than paying for care

You say that with no knowledge of how much it will be though, at 5£ a month from age 40 that guarantees to meet all your care needs might be very good value, 500£ a month may not be especially bearing in mind the great majority of people will never actually need it

TheScreamingEagles said:

OllyT said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

OllyT said:

kle4 said:

kinabalu said:

Liverpool 1 point short of the magic 100. And City end with a MUCH better goal difference.

Still a good season for them but perhaps a bit of the gloss has come off.

You keep pushing this line, it is absolutely absurd. 18 points ahead of second but the gloss is off because the goal difference is worse? In what universe would that be rational;?

The gloss is off because Liverpool looked like they were going to break lots of PL records and ended up breaking none. The only record they broke was their own 30 year duck in the PL.

Bless, your bitterness is wonderful.

Bless, Liverpool fans who bragged about how they were going to go unbeaten, break the 100 points record, win every home game, win the PL by a record margin now pretending it never mattered! As a City fan I have absolutely nothing to feel bitter about as far as Liverpool are concerned. Listening to their fans you' wouldn't think anyone had ever won the PL before.

We only wanted one thing, one thing alone, the title, anything else was a bonus.

I can understand the desperation to finally win the PL, let's face it it was becoming an embarrassment but you really ought to have a bit more ambition. City did it last year and both domestic cups in the same season.

Philip_Thompson said:

OllyT said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Oh and OllyT, here's some records Liverpool have broken this season.

Earliest title win

By claiming the title with seven matches to spare Liverpool beat the mark set of becoming champions with five matches remaining, set by Manchester United in 2000/01, and Man City in 2017/18.

Fastest to 30 wins

The 3-1 victory at Brighton & Hove Albion on 8 July was the Reds' 30th this season, and they achieved that mark in a Premier League record of 34 matches.

Best start ever

When Liverpool reached 61 points from their opening 21 matches, it was the most a team had ever accumulated at that stage in any of Europe's top five leagues.

But all worth nothing because you've got a better goal difference.

I didn't say it was worth nothing I said it was not the all- time record breaking season Liverpool fans were telling us what going to happen a few months back.

Creditable though the things you mention are you aren't going to see them in any of the record books. The records that count come from what you do over 38 games, not the first 21. Still nice to see the barrels being scraped.

Earliest ever title victory (and latest ever) is a very clear record.

Having wrapped up the title with 7 an unprecedented games to spare is it any surprise the pressure was off during the longest ever victory lap recorded?

I was a bit surprised. I thought those records were going to go and as a neutral I was rooting for that. Ah well. The trophy is adequate compensation, I suppose.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Philip_Thompson said:

OllyT said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Oh and OllyT, here's some records Liverpool have broken this season.

Earliest title win

By claiming the title with seven matches to spare Liverpool beat the mark set of becoming champions with five matches remaining, set by Manchester United in 2000/01, and Man City in 2017/18.

Fastest to 30 wins

The 3-1 victory at Brighton & Hove Albion on 8 July was the Reds' 30th this season, and they achieved that mark in a Premier League record of 34 matches.

Best start ever

When Liverpool reached 61 points from their opening 21 matches, it was the most a team had ever accumulated at that stage in any of Europe's top five leagues.

But all worth nothing because you've got a better goal difference.

I didn't say it was worth nothing I said it was not the all- time record breaking season Liverpool fans were telling us what going to happen a few months back.

Creditable though the things you mention are you aren't going to see them in any of the record books. The records that count come from what you do over 38 games, not the first 21. Still nice to see the barrels being scraped.

Earliest ever title victory (and latest ever) is a very clear record.

Having wrapped up the title with 7 an unprecedented games to spare is it any surprise the pressure was off during the longest ever victory lap recorded?

Liverpool join Blackburn and Leicester in we have won the premiership once hall of fame

19 times. Football didn't start in 92.

For Liverpool it stopped in 1992

Not any more...

Deserved winners and without breaking the Fair Play rules.

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Philip_Thompson said:

OllyT said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Oh and OllyT, here's some records Liverpool have broken this season.

Earliest title win

By claiming the title with seven matches to spare Liverpool beat the mark set of becoming champions with five matches remaining, set by Manchester United in 2000/01, and Man City in 2017/18.

Fastest to 30 wins

The 3-1 victory at Brighton & Hove Albion on 8 July was the Reds' 30th this season, and they achieved that mark in a Premier League record of 34 matches.

Best start ever

When Liverpool reached 61 points from their opening 21 matches, it was the most a team had ever accumulated at that stage in any of Europe's top five leagues.

But all worth nothing because you've got a better goal difference.

I didn't say it was worth nothing I said it was not the all- time record breaking season Liverpool fans were telling us what going to happen a few months back.

Creditable though the things you mention are you aren't going to see them in any of the record books. The records that count come from what you do over 38 games, not the first 21. Still nice to see the barrels being scraped.

Earliest ever title victory (and latest ever) is a very clear record.

Having wrapped up the title with 7 an unprecedented games to spare is it any surprise the pressure was off during the longest ever victory lap recorded?

Liverpool join Blackburn and Leicester in we have won the premiership once hall of fame

19 times. Football didn't start in 92.

It really was a different era before PL and CL. You don't support Corinthian Casuals as well by any chance?

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Black_Rook said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I'll be angry if they don't.

The real question you ought to be asking is, will the new charge be banked in some way to cover the care costs of those paying it, or will it be just like every other tax and thus deployed to lower care costs for current pensioners (or increase the threshold amount that they're allowed to leave intact in their estates if compelled to sell their homes)?

My guess is the latter. The stick bangers will be cock-a-hoop.

I would assume it would be administered by an insurance company to keep it away from HMG hands

You also are not thinking this through in regards to the ramifications

Currently if my father needed care I would agree with my work working from home and go live with him and work from there. Rather than spend the amount care homes cost.

If he has insurance then why wouldn't I just shove him in a home (I still wouldn't because I think it should be my job) but I have no doubt many will go oh sod upending my life and downrating my quality of life the old bugger has paid in for it so now he should get the benefit.

If this gets bought in I forsee a rise in oldies being crammed into care homes

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Black_Rook said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I'll be angry if they don't.

The real question you ought to be asking is, will the new charge be banked in some way to cover the care costs of those paying it, or will it be just like every other tax and thus deployed to lower care costs for current pensioners (or increase the threshold amount that they're allowed to leave intact in their estates if compelled to sell their homes)?

My guess is the latter. The stick bangers will be cock-a-hoop.

I would assume it would be administered by an insurance company to keep it away from HMG hands

You also are not thinking this through in regards to the ramifications

Currently if my father needed care I would agree with my work working from home and go live with him and work from there. Rather than spend the amount care homes cost.

If he has insurance then why wouldn't I just shove him in a home (I still wouldn't because I think it should be my job) but I have no doubt many will go oh sod upending my life and downrating my quality of life the old bugger has paid in for it so now he should get the benefit.

If this gets bought in I forsee a rise in oldies being crammed into care homes

You may be in that position but most are not and of course you are not able to forecast your father's care needs.

My son in law's father needs are beyond anything he could provide even though he is working from home

Philip_Thompson said:

Black_Rook said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I'll be angry if they don't.

The real question you ought to be asking is, will the new charge be banked in some way to cover the care costs of those paying it, or will it be just like every other tax and thus deployed to lower care costs for current pensioners (or increase the threshold amount that they're allowed to leave intact in their estates if compelled to sell their homes)?

My guess is the latter. The stick bangers will be cock-a-hoop.

Not a chance it will be banked.

I see it now, this care proposal is so demonically clever. Make the middle-aged pay a modest surcharge - it's insurance against their needing their bums wiped when they get infirm. It will solve the social care funding gap! Who could possibly object to this?

Then, once the money is collected, you pass it on as a massive bung to today's retired homeowners, in the form of higher protected allowances if they're forced to sell up. They become even more likely to vote Tory in gratitude, and there's more money for heirs. Effectively, it's a redistributive policy that transfers wealth from general taxation upwards to the families of the well-to-do, cloaked in the garb of equity. It's really good politics - and it can only yield higher dividends over time, as the median age of the population continues to increase. And the stickbanger charities are already voicing their approval: the Graun report has the Age UK woman effectively describing the plan as reparations for all the Covid deaths in care homes. Quite brilliant.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Another run today and 30 miles every week for the last 8 completed.

Going to attempt the 5K in under 25 mins next week!

Impressive but increase it carefully

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Black_Rook said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I'll be angry if they don't.

The real question you ought to be asking is, will the new charge be banked in some way to cover the care costs of those paying it, or will it be just like every other tax and thus deployed to lower care costs for current pensioners (or increase the threshold amount that they're allowed to leave intact in their estates if compelled to sell their homes)?

My guess is the latter. The stick bangers will be cock-a-hoop.

I would assume it would be administered by an insurance company to keep it away from HMG hands

You also are not thinking this through in regards to the ramifications

Currently if my father needed care I would agree with my work working from home and go live with him and work from there. Rather than spend the amount care homes cost.

If he has insurance then why wouldn't I just shove him in a home (I still wouldn't because I think it should be my job) but I have no doubt many will go oh sod upending my life and downrating my quality of life the old bugger has paid in for it so now he should get the benefit.

If this gets bought in I forsee a rise in oldies being crammed into care homes

You may be in that position but most are not and of course you are not able to forecast your father's care needs.

My son in law's father needs are beyond anything he could provide even thought he is working from home

Obviously it is dependent on it being care I can give being adequate that I assumed didn't need to be caveated.

The point I am trying to make is so far all we have is a vague statement and already we have people saying its good or bad despite the fact we know none of the details and as I have shown you already I think your 10£ a month estimate is at least an order of magnitude out

MaxPB said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Black_Rook said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I have no problem paying it to be honest, it will be a lot cheaper than paying for care

I would doubt that you'd have to. Whacking pensioners is pretty much taboo. The middle aged, not so much.

Maybe but fairness would require everyone over 40 to contribute plus the insurance pot more than probably requires it

No, it's time for pensioners to pay for the cost of care. Honestly it's this kind of stuff that makes me want to move back to Zurich and take up my option of Swiss citizenship (by marriage). Our pensioners have got to be the most selfish generation ever (though not you personally) nowhere near the self sacrifice of their parents who fought for our freedom, bought all the property and rinse the generations below them for rent and resent any moves to raise taxes on them for care and healthcare costs which they benefit from the most. It's the kind of thing that could make someone vote Labour.

There does however seem to be a perception among many young people that the older generation all went to university for free, all waltzed into purchasing cheap property in their early twenties and generally have lived a life on easy street for most of their adult lives.

When the reality is that university was free because most didn't go to university. Mortgage costs were often far more in excess of what they were today (if you can get a deposit) and life was genuinely hard for a lot of people.

And house prices aren't stupid everywhere, even today.

So there is arguably a ring of truth about today's pensioners representing the "selfish" generation, but so is there a ring of truth about today's youngsters being the "entitled" generation.

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Black_Rook said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I'll be angry if they don't.

The real question you ought to be asking is, will the new charge be banked in some way to cover the care costs of those paying it, or will it be just like every other tax and thus deployed to lower care costs for current pensioners (or increase the threshold amount that they're allowed to leave intact in their estates if compelled to sell their homes)?

My guess is the latter. The stick bangers will be cock-a-hoop.

I would assume it would be administered by an insurance company to keep it away from HMG hands

You also are not thinking this through in regards to the ramifications

Currently if my father needed care I would agree with my work working from home and go live with him and work from there. Rather than spend the amount care homes cost.

If he has insurance then why wouldn't I just shove him in a home (I still wouldn't because I think it should be my job) but I have no doubt many will go oh sod upending my life and downrating my quality of life the old bugger has paid in for it so now he should get the benefit.

If this gets bought in I forsee a rise in oldies being crammed into care homes

You may be in that position but most are not and of course you are not able to forecast your father's care needs.

My son in law's father needs are beyond anything he could provide even thought he is working from home

Obviously it is dependent on it being care I can give being adequate that I assumed didn't need to be caveated.

The point I am trying to make is so far all we have is a vague statement and already we have people saying its good or bad despite the fact we know none of the details and as I have shown you already I think your 10£ a month estimate is at least an order of magnitude out

For clarification that was not an estimate, it was an example of the return on £10 per month per year

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I have no problem paying it to be honest, it will be a lot cheaper than paying for care

You say that with no knowledge of how much it will be though, at 5£ a month from age 40 that guarantees to meet all your care needs might be very good value, 500£ a month may not be especially bearing in mind the great majority of people will never actually need it

Example - £10 per month x 30million equals £3.6 billion a year

Any tax would need to be around 5-7x that amount by my best guess, at least if the intention is to fund care costs and take the burden off the NHS. Not sure how well people will react to between £200 and £2000 per year in additional taxation depending on income and implementation.

Philip_Thompson said:

OllyT said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

OllyT said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

OllyT said:

kle4 said:

kinabalu said:

Liverpool 1 point short of the magic 100. And City end with a MUCH better goal difference.

Still a good season for them but perhaps a bit of the gloss has come off.

You keep pushing this line, it is absolutely absurd. 18 points ahead of second but the gloss is off because the goal difference is worse? In what universe would that be rational;?

The gloss is off because Liverpool looked like they were going to break lots of PL records and ended up breaking none. The only record they broke was their own 30 year duck in the PL.

Bless, your bitterness is wonderful.

Bless, Liverpool fans who bragged about how they were going to go unbeaten, break the 100 points record, win every home game, win the PL by a record margin now pretending it never mattered! As a City fan I have absolutely nothing to feel bitter about as far as Liverpool are concerned. Listening to their fans you' wouldn't think anyone had ever won the PL before.

We only wanted one thing, one thing alone, the title, anything else was a bonus.

I can understand the desperation to finally win the PL, let's face it it was becoming an embarrassment but you really ought to have a bit more ambition. City did it last year and both domestic cups in the same season.

A bit more ambition? Like being crowned the World's Best Club this season as well?

Current trophy cabinet:
Champions of England 🏆✔
Champions of Europe 🏆✔
Champions of the World 🏆✔

I suppose we'll have to settle for only winning European and World cups instead of domestic ones we sent our youth squad out for while fighting for the World trophy.

Has any other English club achieved all those

RobD said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I have no problem paying it to be honest, it will be a lot cheaper than paying for care

You say that with no knowledge of how much it will be though, at 5£ a month from age 40 that guarantees to meet all your care needs might be very good value, 500£ a month may not be especially bearing in mind the great majority of people will never actually need it

Example - £10 per month x 30million equals £3.6 billion a year

How much does the government spend on adult social care currently?

According to this https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/audio-video/key-facts-figures-adult-social-care

22.2 billion and we are continually told this isn't enough even at the current level its going to be 80£ a month so a fair chunk out of a state pension. Presumably also per person so your two minimum wage workers raising a family now have to suddenly find another 160£ a month.

Presumably if this comes in its to fund social care properly probably 100£ a month +

Is the proposal that the funding supplements existing funding or replaces it?

Who knows?

As I said in another post so far its a detail free sound bite and we have people welcoming it or complaining about it without knowing anything such as

Who will pay
How much will it be
What will it cover
Will it replace current funding
Will it be general taxation or an insurance scheme

At the moment the only thing that can be send is they have an idea about adult social care and it may be good or bad

Pagan2 said:

RobD said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I have no problem paying it to be honest, it will be a lot cheaper than paying for care

You say that with no knowledge of how much it will be though, at 5£ a month from age 40 that guarantees to meet all your care needs might be very good value, 500£ a month may not be especially bearing in mind the great majority of people will never actually need it

Example - £10 per month x 30million equals £3.6 billion a year

How much does the government spend on adult social care currently?

According to this https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/audio-video/key-facts-figures-adult-social-care

22.2 billion and we are continually told this isn't enough even at the current level its going to be 80£ a month so a fair chunk out of a state pension. Presumably also per person so your two minimum wage workers raising a family now have to suddenly find another 160£ a month.

Presumably if this comes in its to fund social care properly probably 100£ a month +

Is the proposal that the funding supplements existing funding or replaces it?

Who knows?

As I said in another post so far its a detail free sound bite and we have people welcoming it or complaining about it without knowing anything such as

Who will pay
How much will it be
What will it cover
Will it replace current funding
Will it be general taxation or an insurance scheme

At the moment the only thing that can be send is they have an idea about adult social care and it may be good or bad

Ah okay. Numbers on both sides are complete guesswork at the moment.

Philip_Thompson said:

OllyT said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Philip_Thompson said:

OllyT said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Oh and OllyT, here's some records Liverpool have broken this season.

Earliest title win

By claiming the title with seven matches to spare Liverpool beat the mark set of becoming champions with five matches remaining, set by Manchester United in 2000/01, and Man City in 2017/18.

Fastest to 30 wins

The 3-1 victory at Brighton & Hove Albion on 8 July was the Reds' 30th this season, and they achieved that mark in a Premier League record of 34 matches.

Best start ever

When Liverpool reached 61 points from their opening 21 matches, it was the most a team had ever accumulated at that stage in any of Europe's top five leagues.

But all worth nothing because you've got a better goal difference.

I didn't say it was worth nothing I said it was not the all- time record breaking season Liverpool fans were telling us what going to happen a few months back.

Creditable though the things you mention are you aren't going to see them in any of the record books. The records that count come from what you do over 38 games, not the first 21. Still nice to see the barrels being scraped.

Earliest ever title victory (and latest ever) is a very clear record.

Having wrapped up the title with 7 an unprecedented games to spare is it any surprise the pressure was off during the longest ever victory lap recorded?

Liverpool join Blackburn and Leicester in we have won the premiership once hall of fame

19 times. Football didn't start in 92.

It really was a different era before PL and CL. You don't support Corinthian Casuals as well by any chance?

No, Tranmere Rovers as well.

If by different era you mean much more buying in players with TV money much more now then yes I agree, but I'm not sure why that's especially relevant.

Liverpool only bang on about their history (ie pre CL/PL) because of their lack of success since. For a club in their position Liverpool have spectacularly underachieved in the modern era. Money is at the centre of everything these days, sad but no use hankering for the "jumpers for goalposts" era.

OnlyLivingBoy said:

MaxPB said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Black_Rook said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I have no problem paying it to be honest, it will be a lot cheaper than paying for care

I would doubt that you'd have to. Whacking pensioners is pretty much taboo. The middle aged, not so much.

Maybe but fairness would require everyone over 40 to contribute plus the insurance pot more than probably requires it

No, it's time for pensioners to pay for the cost of care. Honestly it's this kind of stuff that makes me want to move back to Zurich and take up my option of Swiss citizenship (by marriage). Our pensioners have got to be the most selfish generation ever (though not you personally) nowhere near the self sacrifice of their parents who fought for our freedom, bought all the property and rinse the generations below them for rent and resent any moves to raise taxes on them for care and healthcare costs which they benefit from the most. It's the kind of thing that could make someone vote Labour.

Yeah they really are the absolute worst. Although I reckon Millennials will turn into a bunch of vile selfish reactionaries when they get old too. Meanwhile us unassuming Gen-Xers just get on with our lives, paying our taxes, raising our kids and keeping our heads down, wishing the Boomers hadn't saddled us with Boris Johnson and Brexit and wondering what kind of nonsense the Millennials will start spouting next.

As a Millennial child of Boomer parents, I think Gen-Xers are the luckiest generation of all. They had free university education and have had the luxury of ultra-low interest rates after they got on the property ladder.

OllyT said:

Philip_Thompson said:

OllyT said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

OllyT said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

OllyT said:

kle4 said:

kinabalu said:

Liverpool 1 point short of the magic 100. And City end with a MUCH better goal difference.

Still a good season for them but perhaps a bit of the gloss has come off.

You keep pushing this line, it is absolutely absurd. 18 points ahead of second but the gloss is off because the goal difference is worse? In what universe would that be rational;?

The gloss is off because Liverpool looked like they were going to break lots of PL records and ended up breaking none. The only record they broke was their own 30 year duck in the PL.

Bless, your bitterness is wonderful.

Bless, Liverpool fans who bragged about how they were going to go unbeaten, break the 100 points record, win every home game, win the PL by a record margin now pretending it never mattered! As a City fan I have absolutely nothing to feel bitter about as far as Liverpool are concerned. Listening to their fans you' wouldn't think anyone had ever won the PL before.

We only wanted one thing, one thing alone, the title, anything else was a bonus.

I can understand the desperation to finally win the PL, let's face it it was becoming an embarrassment but you really ought to have a bit more ambition. City did it last year and both domestic cups in the same season.

A bit more ambition? Like being crowned the World's Best Club this season as well?

Current trophy cabinet:
Champions of England 🏆✔
Champions of Europe 🏆✔
Champions of the World 🏆✔

I suppose we'll have to settle for only winning European and World cups instead of domestic ones we sent our youth squad out for while fighting for the World trophy.

Champions of the World is a joke frankly, it ranks along with the Charity Shield as a bit of money-making fluff and I believe your reign as Champions of Europe is about to end.

Don't be silly. A knockout competition of the world's best clubs, each Champions of their own Continent is nothing like the Charity Shield ... Or the Milk/Carling/whatever Cup.

I'd rather be World Champions than League Cup winners and fully understand forfeiting the domestic cup to win the more important one. Just like United did when they went for the global cup.

Black_Rook said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Black_Rook said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I'll be angry if they don't.

The real question you ought to be asking is, will the new charge be banked in some way to cover the care costs of those paying it, or will it be just like every other tax and thus deployed to lower care costs for current pensioners (or increase the threshold amount that they're allowed to leave intact in their estates if compelled to sell their homes)?

My guess is the latter. The stick bangers will be cock-a-hoop.

Not a chance it will be banked.

I see it now, this care proposal is so demonically clever. Make the middle-aged pay a modest surcharge - it's insurance against their needing their bums wiped when they get infirm. It will solve the social care funding gap! Who could possibly object to this?

Then, once the money is collected, you pass it on as a massive bung to today's retired homeowners, in the form of higher protected allowances if they're forced to sell up. They become even more likely to vote Tory in gratitude, and there's more money for heirs. Effectively, it's a redistributive policy that transfers wealth from general taxation upwards to the families of the well-to-do, cloaked in the garb of equity. It's really good politics - and it can only yield higher dividends over time, as the median age of the population continues to increase. And the stickbanger charities are already voicing their approval: the Graun report has the Age UK woman effectively describing the plan as reparations for all the Covid deaths in care homes. Quite brilliant.

So as forecasted - reprehensible.

TimT said:

@ DixieDean

I think I'm going to have to try the radishes in garlic anchovy butter:

https://cooking.nytimes.com/68861692-nyt-cooking/1064796-surprising-ways-to-cook-with-radishes

Enjoy. Thanks for the link. I have exhausted my radishes till Thursday's veg box.
Radishes and Buffy the Vampire Slayer. 2 things lockdown has turned me onto!!

MaxPB said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I have no problem paying it to be honest, it will be a lot cheaper than paying for care

You say that with no knowledge of how much it will be though, at 5£ a month from age 40 that guarantees to meet all your care needs might be very good value, 500£ a month may not be especially bearing in mind the great majority of people will never actually need it

Example - £10 per month x 30million equals £3.6 billion a year

Any tax would need to be around 5-7x that amount by my best guess, at least if the intention is to fund care costs and take the burden off the NHS. Not sure how well people will react to between £200 and £2000 per year in additional taxation depending on income and implementation.

We'd need about £350 million each week.

Where on earth could we lay our hands on that kind of money?

MaxPB said:

tlg86 said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

MaxPB said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Black_Rook said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I have no problem paying it to be honest, it will be a lot cheaper than paying for care

I would doubt that you'd have to. Whacking pensioners is pretty much taboo. The middle aged, not so much.

Maybe but fairness would require everyone over 40 to contribute plus the insurance pot more than probably requires it

No, it's time for pensioners to pay for the cost of care. Honestly it's this kind of stuff that makes me want to move back to Zurich and take up my option of Swiss citizenship (by marriage). Our pensioners have got to be the most selfish generation ever (though not you personally) nowhere near the self sacrifice of their parents who fought for our freedom, bought all the property and rinse the generations below them for rent and resent any moves to raise taxes on them for care and healthcare costs which they benefit from the most. It's the kind of thing that could make someone vote Labour.

Yeah they really are the absolute worst. Although I reckon Millennials will turn into a bunch of vile selfish reactionaries when they get old too. Meanwhile us unassuming Gen-Xers just get on with our lives, paying our taxes, raising our kids and keeping our heads down, wishing the Boomers hadn't saddled us with Boris Johnson and Brexit and wondering what kind of nonsense the Millennials will start spouting next.

As a Millennial child of Boomer parents, I think Gen-Xers are the luckiest generation of all. They had free university education and have had the luxury of ultra-low interest rates after they got the property ladder.

In almost the same boat as an older millennial. I just about got the benefits of almost free university (£1k fees and I worked part time) but also suffered from having to spend well over the odds on housing for 7 years renting until we were able to buy a flat.

I was in the last year of 1.2k a year, which I am grateful for. No one talks about monetary policy any more.

Just imagine the benefit of being able to slash interest rates from 4% to 0.1% if we'd been steadily increasing rates over the last eight years or so. Instead, we have no where to go and a property bubble that cannot be allowed to burst.

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Black_Rook said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I'll be angry if they don't.

The real question you ought to be asking is, will the new charge be banked in some way to cover the care costs of those paying it, or will it be just like every other tax and thus deployed to lower care costs for current pensioners (or increase the threshold amount that they're allowed to leave intact in their estates if compelled to sell their homes)?

My guess is the latter. The stick bangers will be cock-a-hoop.

I would assume it would be administered by an insurance company to keep it away from HMG hands

You also are not thinking this through in regards to the ramifications

Currently if my father needed care I would agree with my work working from home and go live with him and work from there. Rather than spend the amount care homes cost.

If he has insurance then why wouldn't I just shove him in a home (I still wouldn't because I think it should be my job) but I have no doubt many will go oh sod upending my life and downrating my quality of life the old bugger has paid in for it so now he should get the benefit.

If this gets bought in I forsee a rise in oldies being crammed into care homes

You may be in that position but most are not and of course you are not able to forecast your father's care needs.

My son in law's father needs are beyond anything he could provide even thought he is working from home

Obviously it is dependent on it being care I can give being adequate that I assumed didn't need to be caveated.

The point I am trying to make is so far all we have is a vague statement and already we have people saying its good or bad despite the fact we know none of the details and as I have shown you already I think your 10£ a month estimate is at least an order of magnitude out

For clarification that was not an estimate, it was an example of the return on £10 per month per year

Which is totally useless as whether its a good idea or bad idea depends on how much people had to pay.

Would you support this if the end result was the extra tax pushed an extra million children into the living in absolute poverty bracket because of the money removed from their parents pocket for being over 40 for example?

There is no reason why those in poverty can be allowed for in the scheme

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Black_Rook said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I'll be angry if they don't.

The real question you ought to be asking is, will the new charge be banked in some way to cover the care costs of those paying it, or will it be just like every other tax and thus deployed to lower care costs for current pensioners (or increase the threshold amount that they're allowed to leave intact in their estates if compelled to sell their homes)?

My guess is the latter. The stick bangers will be cock-a-hoop.

I would assume it would be administered by an insurance company to keep it away from HMG hands

You also are not thinking this through in regards to the ramifications

Currently if my father needed care I would agree with my work working from home and go live with him and work from there. Rather than spend the amount care homes cost.

If he has insurance then why wouldn't I just shove him in a home (I still wouldn't because I think it should be my job) but I have no doubt many will go oh sod upending my life and downrating my quality of life the old bugger has paid in for it so now he should get the benefit.

If this gets bought in I forsee a rise in oldies being crammed into care homes

You may be in that position but most are not and of course you are not able to forecast your father's care needs.

My son in law's father needs are beyond anything he could provide even thought he is working from home

Obviously it is dependent on it being care I can give being adequate that I assumed didn't need to be caveated.

The point I am trying to make is so far all we have is a vague statement and already we have people saying its good or bad despite the fact we know none of the details and as I have shown you already I think your 10£ a month estimate is at least an order of magnitude out

For clarification that was not an estimate, it was an example of the return on £10 per month per year

Which is totally useless as whether its a good idea or bad idea depends on how much people had to pay.

Would you support this if the end result was the extra tax pushed an extra million children into the living in absolute poverty bracket because of the money removed from their parents pocket for being over 40 for example?

There is no reason why those in poverty can be allowed for in the scheme

By which you mean wouldn't pay it

So thats probably all the adults in the 15.6 million odd households that recieve some sort of benefits out, pensioners out , adults under 40 out so how many are paying this again

https://twitter.com/chriscurtis94/status/1287391527677890560?s=21

OllyT said:

Philip_Thompson said:

OllyT said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Philip_Thompson said:

OllyT said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Oh and OllyT, here's some records Liverpool have broken this season.

Earliest title win

By claiming the title with seven matches to spare Liverpool beat the mark set of becoming champions with five matches remaining, set by Manchester United in 2000/01, and Man City in 2017/18.

Fastest to 30 wins

The 3-1 victory at Brighton & Hove Albion on 8 July was the Reds' 30th this season, and they achieved that mark in a Premier League record of 34 matches.

Best start ever

When Liverpool reached 61 points from their opening 21 matches, it was the most a team had ever accumulated at that stage in any of Europe's top five leagues.

But all worth nothing because you've got a better goal difference.

I didn't say it was worth nothing I said it was not the all- time record breaking season Liverpool fans were telling us what going to happen a few months back.

Creditable though the things you mention are you aren't going to see them in any of the record books. The records that count come from what you do over 38 games, not the first 21. Still nice to see the barrels being scraped.

Earliest ever title victory (and latest ever) is a very clear record.

Having wrapped up the title with 7 an unprecedented games to spare is it any surprise the pressure was off during the longest ever victory lap recorded?

Liverpool join Blackburn and Leicester in we have won the premiership once hall of fame

19 times. Football didn't start in 92.

It really was a different era before PL and CL. You don't support Corinthian Casuals as well by any chance?

No, Tranmere Rovers as well.

If by different era you mean much more buying in players with TV money much more now then yes I agree, but I'm not sure why that's especially relevant.

Liverpool only bang on about their history (ie pre CL/PL) because of their lack of success since. For a club in their position Liverpool have spectacularly underachieved in the modern era. Money is at the centre of everything these days, sad but no use hankering for the "jumpers for goalposts" era.

This is just sad. Liverpool haven't just won the League this season, or the Club World Cup this season - they've also just won the European Cup last season for the second time in the modern era.

That's without considering the minor cups won through the years like the FA, Carling, Charity or the UEFA Super Cup which Liverpool also won this season.

How many World Cups or European Cups have Manchester City won in the modern era?

Great goal by Swansea

tlg86 said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

MaxPB said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Black_Rook said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I have no problem paying it to be honest, it will be a lot cheaper than paying for care

I would doubt that you'd have to. Whacking pensioners is pretty much taboo. The middle aged, not so much.

Maybe but fairness would require everyone over 40 to contribute plus the insurance pot more than probably requires it

No, it's time for pensioners to pay for the cost of care. Honestly it's this kind of stuff that makes me want to move back to Zurich and take up my option of Swiss citizenship (by marriage). Our pensioners have got to be the most selfish generation ever (though not you personally) nowhere near the self sacrifice of their parents who fought for our freedom, bought all the property and rinse the generations below them for rent and resent any moves to raise taxes on them for care and healthcare costs which they benefit from the most. It's the kind of thing that could make someone vote Labour.

Yeah they really are the absolute worst. Although I reckon Millennials will turn into a bunch of vile selfish reactionaries when they get old too. Meanwhile us unassuming Gen-Xers just get on with our lives, paying our taxes, raising our kids and keeping our heads down, wishing the Boomers hadn't saddled us with Boris Johnson and Brexit and wondering what kind of nonsense the Millennials will start spouting next.

As a Millennial child of Boomer parents, I think Gen-Xers are the luckiest generation of all. They had free university education and have had the luxury of ultra-low interest rates after they got on the property ladder.

I think you ned to actually go and learn some history. You have very conveniently forgotten the high interest rates and negative equity of the late 80s when many Gen-Xrs were trying to get on the property ladder. I was lucky and could just about scrape together enough for a deposit but that was only because I was doing a job no other bugger would want to do. Certainly not any of the poor, scared, self absorbed Millennials of today.

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/chriscurtis94/status/1287391527677890560?s=21

No party in British history has ever got 60% of the vote in a general election. Baldwin came closest with 56% in 1931 (although the parties forming the a National Government got 67% overall).

But I think I’m right in saying Labour did have scores of over 60% in opinion polls in late 1997.

That seem's unlikely to me and after a slight look-see on the internet I'm inclined to think you're wrong. 1832 for example?

Richard_Tyndall said:

tlg86 said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

MaxPB said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Black_Rook said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UK ministers looking at plans to raise taxes for over-40s to pay for social care

Exclusive: Matt Hancock advocate of plan to raise tax as solution to social care crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/26/uk-ministers-looking-at-plans-to-raise-taxes-for-over-40s-to-pay-for-social-care

I bet this will be introduced in a couple of years just as I turn 40 too. Student grants were abolished and tuition fees introduced just as I started university so I had to pay fees while students who'd started previously didn't. I know full well pensions by the time we retire are going to be crap too. Now this . . . I can see it happening!

The interesting one will be will current pensioners have to pay this?

I have no problem paying it to be honest, it will be a lot cheaper than paying for care

I would doubt that you'd have to. Whacking pensioners is pretty much taboo. The middle aged, not so much.

Maybe but fairness would require everyone over 40 to contribute plus the insurance pot more than probably requires it

No, it's time for pensioners to pay for the cost of care. Honestly it's this kind of stuff that makes me want to move back to Zurich and take up my option of Swiss citizenship (by marriage). Our pensioners have got to be the most selfish generation ever (though not you personally) nowhere near the self sacrifice of their parents who fought for our freedom, bought all the property and rinse the generations below them for rent and resent any moves to raise taxes on them for care and healthcare costs which they benefit from the most. It's the kind of thing that could make someone vote Labour.

Yeah they really are the absolute worst. Although I reckon Millennials will turn into a bunch of vile selfish reactionaries when they get old too. Meanwhile us unassuming Gen-Xers just get on with our lives, paying our taxes, raising our kids and keeping our heads down, wishing the Boomers hadn't saddled us with Boris Johnson and Brexit and wondering what kind of nonsense the Millennials will start spouting next.

As a Millennial child of Boomer parents, I think Gen-Xers are the luckiest generation of all. They had free university education and have had the luxury of ultra-low interest rates after they got on the property ladder.

I think you ned to actually go and learn some history. You have very conveniently forgotten the high interest rates and negative equity of the late 80s when many Gen-Xrs were trying to get on the property ladder. I was lucky and could just about scrape together enough for a deposit but that was only because I was doing a job no other bugger would want to do. Certainly not any of the poor, scared, self absorbed Millennials of today.

I can sympathise. I bought my first house in 1987 in a fairly economical town and realised at the time I was lucky to have got a house in a rising university quarter just in time to avoid the negative equity trough. But I remember the interest rates!!

RobD said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/chriscurtis94/status/1287391527677890560?s=21

Will it? They don't have FPTP after all.

A majority of any kind on your own under PR is a landslide.
Jacinda Ardern is proving to be a remarkably able political operator.

OllyT said:

Philip_Thompson said:

OllyT said:

Philip_Thompson said:

OllyT said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

OllyT said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

OllyT said:

kle4 said:

kinabalu said:

Liverpool 1 point short of the magic 100. And City end with a MUCH better goal difference.

Still a good season for them but perhaps a bit of the gloss has come off.

You keep pushing this line, it is absolutely absurd. 18 points ahead of second but the gloss is off because the goal difference is worse? In what universe would that be rational;?

The gloss is off because Liverpool looked like they were going to break lots of PL records and ended up breaking none. The only record they broke was their own 30 year duck in the PL.

Bless, your bitterness is wonderful.

Bless, Liverpool fans who bragged about how they were going to go unbeaten, break the 100 points record, win every home game, win the PL by a record margin now pretending it never mattered! As a City fan I have absolutely nothing to feel bitter about as far as Liverpool are concerned. Listening to their fans you' wouldn't think anyone had ever won the PL before.

We only wanted one thing, one thing alone, the title, anything else was a bonus.

I can understand the desperation to finally win the PL, let's face it it was becoming an embarrassment but you really ought to have a bit more ambition. City did it last year and both domestic cups in the same season.

A bit more ambition? Like being crowned the World's Best Club this season as well?

Current trophy cabinet:
Champions of England 🏆✔
Champions of Europe 🏆✔
Champions of the World 🏆✔

I suppose we'll have to settle for only winning European and World cups instead of domestic ones we sent our youth squad out for while fighting for the World trophy.

Champions of the World is a joke frankly, it ranks along with the Charity Shield as a bit of money-making fluff and I believe your reign as Champions of Europe is about to end.

Don't be silly. A knockout competition of the world's best clubs, each Champions of their own Continent is nothing like the Charity Shield ... Or the Milk/Carling/whatever Cup.

I'd rather be World Champions than League Cup winners and fully understand forfeiting the domestic cup to win the more important one. Just like United did when they went for the global cup.

It only started in 2000 and it was then not held from 2001 to 2004 due largely to the collapse of FIFA's marketing partner which gives a pretty good indication of what it's all about. It's a promotional but of fluff to line FIFAs coffers. It's about on a par with the pre-season club tournaments.

According to Wikipedia "it struggles to attract interest in most of Europe".

Whereas the League Cup attracts so much interest in most of Europe? You're kidding, right?

It struggles to attract interest in most of Europe as there's only one European club ever competing in it, so most years it isn't even on the radar for anyone English (or any other country for that matter). Any time the club competing has been English they have always prioritised it over the domestic clubs because its clearly more valuable than the Worthington Cup.

dixiedean said:

RobD said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/chriscurtis94/status/1287391527677890560?s=21

Will it? They don't have FPTP after all.

A majority of any kind on your own under PR is a landslide.
Jacinda Ardern is proving to be a remarkably able political operator.

Not killing off the electorate is proving to be popular.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Andy_JS said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Another run today and 30 miles every week for the last 8 completed.

Going to attempt the 5K in under 25 mins next week!

Impressive. I do cycling and long-distance walking, but not running.

Find what works for you is my motto, I've never been much into cycling but a lot of my friends are.

It is a good motto. I am just the opposite. I love cycling, but I find running tedious, even though I imagine it’s probably better exercise.

But - each to their own. Would be a dull old world if we were all alike (and the cycleways would be clogged beyond endurance)!

Omnium said:

ydoethur said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/chriscurtis94/status/1287391527677890560?s=21

No party in British history has ever got 60% of the vote in a general election. Baldwin came closest with 56% in 1931 (although the parties forming the a National Government got 67% overall).

But I think I’m right in saying Labour did have scores of over 60% in opinion polls in late 1997.

That seem's unlikely to me and after a slight look-see on the internet I'm inclined to think you're wrong. 1832 for example?

Yes, the Whigs got 67% in 1832 and the Tories 29% in the worst Tory result in British history in terms of the national popular vote

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1832_United_Kingdom_general_election