Author: The Dark Horse

Tory manifesto: Adult Social Care bill query

[Copy link]

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 03:24:42 Mobile | Show all posts
Pity it wasn't given that consideration before it was chucked in the manifesto
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 03:24:42 Mobile | Show all posts
Oh to be a fly on the wall in tory head quarters from what I heard on the radio today, this was a last minute bolt on (would never have guessed!)

I would imagine that the cap will be incredibley complex as it will need to take into account assets, savings and value of your property.

To make it fair to the poor but not overly against the rich a sliding scale would be needed say 500k dropping to 50k.

Percentage wise the poor will lose a larger chunk, but then the rich will lose vastly more money.

Naturally neither side we be happy.

What will make or break this policy now is if may is forced to give a figure on the cap. It will be a very long few weeks for her now

Edit
Then again the poor might be better off with this cap if your house isn't worth much. In that case they will keep a larger percentage.

Like so much in life, it will come down to where you live
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 03:24:42 Mobile | Show all posts
They've come up with a policy so complicated that nobody in the world will be able to figure out how it affects them.
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 03:24:42 Mobile | Show all posts
A cap instead of the previous Tory proposal is very unfair to the poor.

It disproportionately benefits those with assets above the cap. While the poor see no benefit from a cap whatsoever.
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 03:24:42 Mobile | Show all posts
No wonder so many seem to like May, disagree with her enough and she'll u-turn on anything. Weak and malleable.
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 03:24:42 Mobile | Show all posts
Neither makes any difference to the poor. The poor don't have assets to lose.

It's those with some assets, such as a house, that are affected by the changes.
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 03:24:42 Mobile | Show all posts
Only if you think the poor have zero assets.

My parents own a council house up north. Last time I checked it was worth less than £100k.

A cap of say £100k does nothing for them. (Or rather me I should say [emoji41])
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

 Author| 26-11-2019 03:24:43 Mobile | Show all posts
Which does effect the poor, plenty of poor oap's in London say that bought a house in a "bad" area 20 to 30 plus years back that is now very sought after
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 03:24:43 Mobile | Show all posts
I never thought that, never said it.

My comment was specifically in response to this:

A cap isn't unfair to the poor, because they'll never reach the cap. Therefore it makes no difference to them.

In the same way that a 200 MPH speed limit is not unfair to cyclists
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 03:24:43 Mobile | Show all posts
Something definitely needs to be done to address our ageing population. People are living longer and the population is only going to get bigger over time, the state can't pay unless taxes go through the roof which isn't a sustainable policy. They really need to be clearer how this will work though as once implemented (assuming it isn't dropped) it can't really be scrapped in the future as people would have gone through the process and had homes sold and money lost. It's a bold policy but unfortunately what other options are there that will address a problem that's only going to get worse over the years?
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

You have to log in before you can reply Login | register

Points Rules

返回顶部