BigJoe#1
Well-Known Member
Can you be a bit more specific and say what it is you disagree with?
General Election June 8th
- Thread starter Ric
- Start date
- Status
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
It's utterly frightening. Politics in this country is completely fucked.
BigJoe#1
Well-Known Member
She's miles better than call me Dave!
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
People saying May is the worst kind of Tory are the same kind of people who say Bravo is the worst ever City keeper, in spite of witnessing Martin Margetson at first hand.
Len Rum
Well-Known Member
Where are the costings in the Tory party manifesto?
There aren't any from the party of ( supposed) economic competence.
Fcuk off.
There aren't any from the party of ( supposed) economic competence.
Fcuk off.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
My view on jeremy Corbyns association with Irish Republicans is that as a North Londoner and an MP in the area that in the 1970's there would have been a large Irish community with which he was associating with. Similarly he has associated with groups from the Middle East - the thing is you consider association is automatically guilty sympathy with those causes. My view is that - as happened with the UK Government and Republicans following on leading to the Good Friday Agreement, as has happened with US Presidents speaking to unsavoury characters from the Middle East as Trump is offering to speak to North Korea even now the fact is you don't negotiate peace with adversaries without opening up initial talks and as such I am prepared to accept the claim that Jeremy Corbyn was not supporting and not in sympathy and in out and out support of those causes'
I fear your interpretation of somebody associating with people whom you would rather they shun mark out Eberhard Spieckler and Brendan Duddy as terror supporters not facilitators of peace.
I would much rather have someone at the helm who - like Jermy Corbyn when asked repeatedly says he would seek a political solution to conflict than someone who would not do so.
Blue Maverick
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 25,330
Ok so if we've all got to pay for social care I think the NHS should stop funding IVF, tit jobs etc etc if you want that pay for it yourself. No fucking way I'm letting them take my daughters inheritance I've worked hard for that and paid into the system and will continue paying as my pension will be taxed. £100k might not be a lot to some but in the future it will be hell of a difference for my girl. First sign of going under I'll downsize and give her the cash for a deposit, these wankers get worse by the minute.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
Its funny coz the TV yesterday was full of Tory supporters lambasting Labour for not fully costing theirs - same people are now on saying trust the Tory smoke and mirrors they are the competent ones......the ones who said austerity would be done by 2012 and have just pushed back the date to 2025 ha ha ha
BigJoe#1
Well-Known Member
Although it may appear harsh and heartless I agree about IVF treatment and plastic surgery in the name of vanity.
Trouble is we are all living a lot longer and have some responsibility to fund or part fund services we want or need. But fine, if you want to downsize and provide more for your daughter then, thankfully that is your choice to so do.
Blue Maverick
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 25,330
But we are paying for it, they are just wasting billions on shit we really don't need or giving it away to countries that don't need it, council tax is going up to help fund it as well. I'd gladly pay another 2p in income tax if the money went where it's supposed to.
The blue phantom
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2015
- Messages
- 9,606
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-39969306
May delights her fans in the press
So it turns out that a prime minister's word isn't always sacrosanct - because, after all, he or she won't be in No 10 forever.
Victims of press abuse in Britain believe they were given a cast-iron guarantee that the second stage of the Leveson Inquiry, which would look at corporate governance at Rupert Murdoch's News International as well as the relationship between Britain's press and the police, would definitely go ahead.
The Tory manifesto says that, if they are elected, it will not.
Moreover, Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013, which if enacted would have forced newspapers to pay the costs of legal action taken against them - unless they belonged to an approved regulator - has also been dropped.
Tory bastard.
To think people are going to vote for this ****.
hilts
Well-Known Member
You have to be careful with gifting mate their not that daft, I think its anything under seven years they will have you.
Check this out
https://www.saga.co.uk/magazine/mon...-about-signing-property-over-to-your-children
Blue Maverick
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 25,330
Ye I know about the 7 year rule but I'd fucking hang in believe me lol
BigJoe#1
Well-Known Member
I agree with the point shouldn't be paying for such procedures whilst recognising we currently do.
Another really important point to note here. This change only affects where people choose to live in their own home and have home visits. You pat until your assets are down to 100k.
However what seems to have been lost here is that if you go into a dare home today you get no assistance until you're down to your last 14k (I think). Under the change proposed, you will be able to keep 100k as opposed to 14k at which point the state pays.
Think about that it's much better for working class people in my opinion.
The social care thing is a problem only because of low taxation. It seems the opponents of high taxation are OK that those who've been able to buy a big house should lose it if they are unlucky enough to need social care, and that the rich (relatively) should bear that burden. If you think inherited wealth is a bit suspect anyway (my kids have benefited from the bank of mum and dad but that's to the disadvantage of kids who haven't got parents who could afford to help out) that may not matter, but this care cost issue isn't decent social policy, it's just gambling that you don't get ill. Sorry this is simplistic, but it's just another instance of Bill Bryson's observation that the country is far wealthier than when he first came here and wrote Notes from a Small Island, but now we can't afford flowers on roundabouts.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
Current proposals that will be changed again if todays manifesto is applies are from 2020 you will have a maximum cap of £72,000 you will be asked to pay towards care costs - presumably lifetime figure - but that doesn't include "bed and board" costs which you also have to pay for and are capped at £12k pa. So thats the current Govt proposal - £72k and a further up to £12k pa till you die.
At the moment the first £14,250 capital and savings is disregarded and is yours to keep - that fig up to £23,250 and you get some local authority assistance with costs. Above that and you are on your own until you are down to the £14250 in assets and savings.
The 2020 savings will see the lower limit raised to £17,000 and the upper to £118,000.
So these latest changes will mean that you can retain £100k in assets and cash but the £72k cap is gone and the £12k pa remains - you keep more than you do now not as much as proposed in 2020 and the payoff is that the £72k overall cap is removed.
M
M
mat
Guest
Beat me too it.
Tomorrows papers set her up as president of the country. But they would now she's going to ignore Levenson.
I couldn't agree more. It's why Labour's manifesto, although it will personally harm me more than any of the others, is the most attractive option for the country.
- Status