The Theresa May General Election thread (edited)

capo4th

People should pay for their own care if they have money and assets it's called planning for later life.

Too many people have this I have paid my contributions take care of me attitude.

Contributions are peanuts compared to actual real world costs people need to understand that.

The Labour Party sense of entitlement and money trees growing everywhere for everyone! 

As you were ...

Heartfeltdawn

@Budgie the 2015 manifesto had very definite points: this one doesn't. What that indicates is that nobody in power knows for sure what will happen with Brexit and therefore they wish to give themselves as much wriggle room as possible, which means not setting themselves firmly on specific policies. The change from Cameron-era no income tax raises to only guaranteeing not to raise VAT is the big indicator there. 

Now some might respond back about the immigration targets and how these are great to quote and bloody hard to execute. My feeling on this is that it's there to keep the ex-UKIP now-Tory voters happy. Even if they miss the targets, which is likely given historical target missing on this subject, that's something that can be dealt with in the future. For now, it's a vote maintainer with the harder Conservative voters and a vote winner from those who have come away from UKIP. 

I agree that Fallon is vague. However he gives an interview that doesn't throw up instant bloopers like Abbott. Like Theresa May being kept under virtual lock and key during her walkabouts, the hallmark of this Conservative campaign under the watchful hand of Crosby is that bloopers are to be kept to an absolute minimum. Therefore Fallon's interview is crap from an information point of view but perfect for a safe no fuckups interview. 

ThePrettyDamned

capo4th said:

People should pay for their own care if they have money and assets it's called planning for later life.

Too many people have this I have paid my contributions take care of me attitude.

Contributions are peanuts compared to actual real world costs people need to understand that.

The Labour Party sense of entitlement and money trees growing everywhere for everyone! 

As you were ...

Yes, to an extent - but there are far too many people who earn too little in their lifetime to afford their own care. 

I agree that those who can afford it should pay for it - but trade your job for one on £18k per year and do you think in however many years till you retire you'll have enough money to pay for yourself? 

God forbid, truly, but if dementia befalls anyone but the rich (by which I'm defining as probably over a 6 figure salary for a good portion of their life, and living frugally at that) they couldn't afford care for more than a year or two. 

As I said earlier, in the east of England, dementia care home (which is priced roughly as care plus nursing) is approximately £500,000 over ten years. Dementia doesn't pick and choose, it affects people from any and all backgrounds. Few can afford that - can the government, frankly? 

With our standards of living and medical advances, people live for more than ten years with very advanced dementia more and more frequently. The costs are enormous - very few people will be able to prepare for that. 

ThePrettyDamned

I should add, that cost above is for basic nursing needs in a care home - I don't know the costing for 24/7 1-to-1 care would be, which is the necessity for an unfortunate few, the number of which is increasing. 

Garthy

ThePrettyDamned said:

I should add, that cost above is for basic nursing needs in a care home - I don't know the costing for 24/7 1-to-1 care would be, which is the necessity for an unfortunate few, the number of which is increasing. 

Perhaps a live-in carer would be an option?

ThePrettyDamned

Garthy said:

ThePrettyDamned said:

I should add, that cost above is for basic nursing needs in a care home - I don't know the costing for 24/7 1-to-1 care would be, which is the necessity for an unfortunate few, the number of which is increasing. 

Perhaps a live-in carer would be an option?

That's not 1-to-1. 

One to one care typically requires 2 shifts per day, so two members of staff (generally within arms reach, depending on how dangerous the patient is). 

So even a live in carer option would be hugely expensive. Some require very specific staff - some people become aggressively sexist or racist. 

Its a vast, complex spectrum of needs and I feel like the government doesn't acknowledge it. It's only going to get steadily worse as we live longer and longer. 

ThePrettyDamned

Again, that is an extreme scenario - but it does happen, and there are very few people that could afford that level of care in the UK. 

However, I feel there is not enough being done to help people at home - essentially preventing onset of injury and malnourishment before it happens. This is very much at the mild to moderate end of the spectrum that most people reside. I suspect better care at home would massively reduce the strain on hospital resources and thus save money. 

Bucket

Budgie said:

Michael Fallon giving a vague, ambiguous and banal defence of the Tory manifesto. Smoke and mirrors as usual and not a lot of foundations being laid. Why would anyone put an X in a box for this? The Labour Party were clearly setting themselves up for criticism with their overtly detailed statement and costings but at least it gives a clear indication of where the party want to be and the infrastructure investments they wish to make. The Tories on the other hand are giving very little detail...they appear to be asking the electorate to accept the ambiguities on trust. This seems more like a tactic of a dodgy secondhand car dealer than a 'strong and stable' leadership. The only thing I am certain of in this election is that I am definitely not voting Tory.

This.

ICBM

OK he may well have personal motives too, but even Gideon is putting the boot into it now…

"Former chancellor George Osborne has criticised the Conservative Party’s pledge on immigration.

The former Tory MP and current editor of the Evening Standard wrote in an editorial in today’s paper: “The Conservatives haven’t a clue how they will achieve the commitment to reduce immigration to the tens of thousands.”

He also criticised their refusal to spell out the cost reduced immigration would have on the economy.

“The civil service is entirely capable of modelling the economic impact of a change in the number of migrants coming to this country,” he said.

He suggested that “either ministers know the damage their immigration policy will do, but won’t tell us; or they have deliberately avoided finding out, because they know the answer will be negative”.

Mr Osborne said it left Theresa May’s government “on very weak ground”, called for ministers to be pushed on the details and was highly critical of Defence Secretary Michael Fallon’s response on this issue." - BBC

ToneControl

When did councils start charging houseowners for residential care?

ThePrettyDamned

ToneControl said:

When did councils start charging houseowners for residential care?

It's means tested. If you have £23,500 in capital, you pay (is my basic understanding - I'm sure it's not that simple). 

Wait lists are long. We have been on a respite list for a few months now. 

http://www.ageuk.org.uk/home-and-care/care-homes/paying-for-permanent-residential-care/

capo4th

ToneControl said:

When did councils start charging houseowners for residential care?

If you own a house or have cash assets over £23k you are paying your bills or a substantial portion of them.

Grandparents can become very generous in later life so they don't fall foul of this but ultimately they own a house and it's worth a lot of money. Councils are struggling to pay these care bills people need to plan more effectively for later life. My grandmother has spent the last 10 years in a home paid for by the council as she liquidated her assets long ago.

I wonder what proportion of my £3k council tax goes on care for the elderly? 

holnrew

If I get dementia I want to be put out of my misery

capo4th

PM me your details call any time ;-)

Bucket

I was out with some mates from school tonight, both diehard right-wingers in the past, and even one of them was starting to think Corbyn was a more appealing choice than May.

ToneControl

capo4th said:

ToneControl said:

When did councils start charging houseowners for residential care?

If you own a house or have cash assets over £23k you are paying your bills or a substantial portion of them.

Grandparents can become very generous in later life so they don't fall foul of this but ultimately they own a house and it's worth a lot of money. Councils are struggling to pay these care bills people need to plan more effectively for later life. My grandmother has spent the last 10 years in a home paid for by the council as she liquidated her assets long ago.

I wonder what proportion of my £3k council tax goes on care for the elderly? 

sorry, I meant in which year did this start? I think it was quite a long time ago

capo4th

At least 15 years ago probably longer not sure exactly makes me think I should have opened some care homes in the 90s

Fretwired

ToneControl said:

sorry, I meant in which year did this start? I think it was quite a long time ago

Hasn't it always been that way? I think the state funded some care if you were poor but I can recall relatives being in care homes and they paid the bills. My brother-in-laws mum has been in a care home for 20 years and she's had to pay - no state help.

Nitefly

Fretwired said:

ToneControl said:

sorry, I meant in which year did this start? I think it was quite a long time ago

Hasn't it always been that way? I think the state funded some care if you were poor but I can recall relatives being in care homes and they paid the bills. My brother-in-laws mum has been in a care home for 20 years and she's had to pay - no state help.

In 1987 I was working on an ill-fated system for Social Services, and it was certainly in operation then, albeit at much lower thresholds.

Back then, there were "home helps" and such.

Emp_Fab

capo4th said:

Emp_Fab said:

I'm definitely voting Labour this time.  Whatever you feel about Jeremy Corbyn, he's just one bloke and he won't be there forever.  You can't choose a party based on little more than personal distaste for the current leader, you should choose based on the declared manifestos and which align the closest with your own personal beliefs.  Labour's manifesto appeals to me much more than the others'.

A vote for Labour is really a vote for fantasy island.

More unachievable fantasy politics saying anything to strike a chord and win a vote.

Seriously give your head a shake.

1. I support strengthening the Trade Unions.  They have been weakened for decades.  Having a strong, unionised workforce is the best way to stand up to exploitation of workers.

2. I'm still voting Labour - and - especially because you've taken to posting so much frothy-mouthed Torybot crap lately, I'm going to stick Labour posters in my window - and my car - and write "Sponsored by Capo4th" on the bottom ! :-)

3. A vote for Labour is really a vote for fantasy island ??  Hell Yes !!!  I'm in !!!!