Jump to content

8 June

Nigello

By Nigello
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

????

????

Posted
Posted

jaywalker Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The clip of May's interview on news.sky.com has

> really made my afternoon. Well done to the press

> for not letting her off the hook.



I thought they were all Tory Lapdog/Murdoch MSM etc?


So, from my point of view, from thinking we had just one incompetent at the head of a major political party I see it's now 2!


Oh happy days

JohnL

JohnL

Posted
Posted

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> jaywalker Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > The clip of May's interview on news.sky.com has

> > really made my afternoon. Well done to the

> press

> > for not letting her off the hook.

>

>

> I thought they were all Tory Lapdog/Murdoch MSM

> etc?

>

> So, from my point of view, from thinking we had

> just one incompetent at the head of a major

> political party I see it's now 2!

>

> Oh happy days


and Tim Farron (still banging on/being banged on about faith) and Paul Nuttall (who scored hat trick for Spurs at the weekend)

????

????

Posted
Posted

May's U-Turn is the issue really.


In terms of the Manifestos


- endless free stuff, however regressive (and free school meals and no tuition fees FOR ALL are blatantly upper middle-class subsidies thus regressive), paid for by other people is very popular


And an actually more progressive policy (the Dementia tax) is unpopular


So people want a free lunch........but there is no such thing


Not that the Tory manifesto was very inspiring and May's political judgement looks terrible with the u-turn

Earl Aelfheah

Earl Aelfheah

Posted
Posted
The 'dementia tax' isn't progressive nor a tax. It's a deferred charge for a service..effectively a deferred privatisation of social care. It's the removal of publically funded social care provision for those unlucky enough to develop a slow degenerative illness in old age.
Lordship 516

Lordship 516

Posted
Posted

NOT a U-turn ...a clarification..!


Stable Policy [not!] - ?100,000.00 protected


Wobble policy clarification


?100,000.00 protected

Cap on contribution to dementia care

All of this will favour the richest house owners


Example


1] House worth ?175,000 [say in North East]

a) ?100,000 protected

b) Cap of ?75,000

c) Residual value left in property - ?100,000.00

d) Percentage of property taken - 42%


2] House worth ?350,000 [say in Kent]

a) ?100,000 protected

b) Cap of ?75,000

c) Residual value left in property - ?275,000.00

d) Percentage of property taken - 21%


3] House worth ?700,000 [say in Dulwich]

a) ?100,000 protected

b) Cap of ?75,000

c) Residual value left in property - ?625,000.00

d) Percentage of property taken - 10.5%


This proposal helps the richest in society - again..!

She is really recovering to help her own constituency of conservative well off people.


If the cap was worked so the first ?100,000 was totally protected for everyone ... then cap the contribution at (say) 50% of the balance. [amounts to be adjusted annually in line with inflation or average wage rise.] This would be a more fair arrangement.


No provision has been proposed for a relative who has been acting as a carer for many years in the house that is also their home. A total ideological policy convenience so the Mayniacs can divvy up reduced taxes to their well off friends.


Neither has she explained how the charge on the property would be applied - would it be a charge by the government or would it be a loan from a bank or insurance company guaranteed by the government..? This matters a lot also because a loan from a bank/insurance company or even the local authority would be exposed to interest accruing annually affecting the security of the residual value.

Earl Aelfheah

Earl Aelfheah

Posted
Posted

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> you forgot ...those that own a home



Yep, that's true. Anyone who owns a house or has an estate of more than ?100k will have it taken after their death, (only) if they are unlucky enough to die of a drawn out, degenerative illness. So a form of deferred privatisation. The other way to provide social care would be through a system of progressive taxation during people's lives, which pays for public health provision.

titch juicy

titch juicy

Posted
Posted

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ???? Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > jaywalker Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > The clip of May's interview on news.sky.com

> has

> > > really made my afternoon. Well done to the

> > press

> > > for not letting her off the hook.

> >

> >

> > I thought they were all Tory Lapdog/Murdoch

> MSM

> > etc?

> >

> > So, from my point of view, from thinking we had

> > just one incompetent at the head of a major

> > political party I see it's now 2!

> >

> > Oh happy days

>

> and Tim Farron (still banging on/being banged on

> about faith) and Paul Nuttall (who scored hat

> trick for Spurs at the weekend)




Is Tim Farron still banging on about faith? From what i've seen he's been doing a pretty decent job in recent weeks, and to my eyes their manifesto is the best of the bunch.

JohnL

JohnL

Posted
Posted

titch juicy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> JohnL Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > ???? Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > jaywalker Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > The clip of May's interview on news.sky.com

> > has

> > > > really made my afternoon. Well done to the

> > > press

> > > > for not letting her off the hook.

> > >

> > >

> > > I thought they were all Tory Lapdog/Murdoch

> > MSM

> > > etc?

> > >

> > > So, from my point of view, from thinking we

> had

> > > just one incompetent at the head of a major

> > > political party I see it's now 2!

> > >

> > > Oh happy days

> >

> > and Tim Farron (still banging on/being banged

> on

> > about faith) and Paul Nuttall (who scored hat

> > trick for Spurs at the weekend)

>

>

>

> Is Tim Farron still banging on about faith? From

> what i've seen he's been doing a pretty decent job

> in recent weeks, and to my eyes their manifesto is

> the best of the bunch.


Abortion when I last heard - The interviewers start it

but maybe he should ignore it.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/lib-dem-leader-tim-farron-christian-faith-refuses-say-abortion-wrong-sky-sophy-ridge-a7747226.html


Edit: to be honest "Mr Farron, who has made no secret of

his Christian faith, replied" is a bit suspect in tone.

Jeremy

Jeremy

Posted
Posted

It doesn't come across at all well when he says he's pro-choice, but refuses to say "no, it's not wrong".


It's a strange sort of dichotomy... as a liberal he believes in individual liberty, but at the same time has private views grounded in religion which he's unwilling to share.


I'll probably be voting LD, but I think he's the wrong man to lead the party, and a poor choice as a figurehead for British liberalism. A missed opportunity in the current political landscape.

Dogkennelhillbilly

Dogkennelhillbilly

Posted
Posted

Angelina Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> interesting to read some 'readers' letters'

> agreeing with the stealth tax if there is enough

> money in the estate and why people should expect

> to hand down their property to their children.

>

> Is this based on envy?


It could be based on the perfectly reasonable belief that - the care has to be paid for, the money has to come from somewhere, and big wodges of unearned inheritances are a good enough place to start.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

    • Sue
      Dulwich Hill SNT - "Cuppa with a Coppa"

      By Sue · Posted

      PCSOs may not need specific qualifications, but they go through a reasonably rigorous recruitment process. Or at least they used to. It may have changed.
    • Penguin68
      Dulwich Hill SNT - "Cuppa with a Coppa"

      By Penguin68 · Posted

      The ones I've dropped into may be organised by PCSOs in the SNT but regular PCs have attended. They have actually been a cuppa with a copper, but not necessarily loads of them. 
    • vladi
      Dulwich Hill SNT - "Cuppa with a Coppa"

      By vladi · Posted

      @Pereira Neves "Cuppa with a Coppa" is a misrepresentation as PCSOs are not real police.   They have no more powers of arrest that any public citizen. They may have the "authority" to advise the regular police of a crime - just like Joe Public. One exception is that they can issue fixed penalty notices to people who cycle on a footpath. We see people cycling on the footpath every day but have never seen a PCSO issue a fixed penalty notice to anybody. No  qualifications are needed to become a PCSO.  At best, all they do is reassure and advise the public with platitudes.      
    • Sephiroth
      Is Rachel Reeves becoming the new Liz Truss?

      By Sephiroth · Posted

      Right.  Already too many people saying “labour pushed for longer and more stringent lockdowns” which if nothing else, does seem to give credence the notion that yes people can be brainwashed    Nothing ...  Nothing Labour pushed for was about longer lockdowns.  Explicitly, and very clearly they said “lock down early OR we will be locking down for longer “   ie they were trying to prevent the longer lockdowns we had   But “positive thinking” and “nothing to see here” from Johnson led to bigger problems    as for the hand-wavery about the economic inheritance and markets being spooked by labour budget - look - things did get really really and under last government and they tried to hide it.  So when someone tries to address it, no one is going to be happy.  But pretending all was tickety boo is a child’s response 

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...