Tory manifesto: Adult Social Care bill query

Pacifico

I must admit I'm struggling to see why being allowed to keep £100k in savings is more unfair than the current system of being allowed to keep £23k.

As someone who has elderly relatives in care and is in line to inherit whatever they have left after they die, the new system would give us an extra £75k (assuming they died with the minimum legal limit in assets).

Cocksure

In itself this isn't enough for me to switch to labour, i don't like labours planned vat of private education fees either (and no i'm not paying any or have children).

BUT
Take it with all the other policy's and you have a party that thinks this election is so in the bag they can say and do anything, that i dont like and it especially worries me what type of government they will be.

Magie provide in 1983 that the public will put up with hard choices as long as their fair, this policy isn't fair (imho) and the public (rightly imho) knows that to

Pacifico

Why is the taxpayer paying for home care any different to the taxpayer paying for residential care?

Cocksure

Because you don't pay for hospital care, so it all depends on what type of illness you get as to what share of your assets you lose. That's unfair.

Make it so as you have to cover hospital (with terminal or long term illness) costs along with home care and you have a fair system that provides money needed to the whole area. It wouldn't be popular, but it would be fair.

Pacifico

But you are conflating long term Care costs (Home or residential) with the cost of hospital visits. The policy is designed to account for the cost of care in your old age, not to pay for when you get sick.

Cocksure

Home care covers all ages and depends on how you fall ill.

Say you get cancer, vast sums spent on hospital treatment, you are no longer able to work but dont need home care (or at least not much) so little or no cost to you.

Get dementia, little to no hospital costs, but likely high home care cost that you are expected to pay.

One your happy for the public to cover, the other your not.

Either make it so as the public covers both or not at all (directly). I dont like the current setup, but at least your property is currently not included.

IronGiant

It is if you go into residential care isn't it?  So arguably this proposal is "fairer" even though it includes more people.

IronGiant

Make your mind up...  

Pacifico

But it is - if you need residential care your property is sold to fund it.

clemmeroid

"I am not saying the Tories are perfect but they are the best we have right now"

Like Trump vs Clinton, a vote for a punch in the face or a kick in the goolies