Ge 2017

[CheltenhamHacker]

I'm not sure if it was either of them. I have already explained why we saw Troops on the Street and why. If you wish to make some kind of anti Tory point score from it then that's your prerogative, I just don't subscribe to it. Police numbers have fallen and it's all part of the massive deficit created in 2010, painful cuts have been made to do something about it and if Labour are allowed to get into Government then all the hardship we have been through will be wasted as they will just borrow us into the same mess again.

You don't subscribe to the "borrowing may stimulate" the Economy then? I would argue that despite all the austerity from the Tories, we're still in a deficit, and the debt is still getting bigger. Is it still Labour's fault, or is it actually more of an issue about tax coming in? Despite the "austerity", tax rates for business have consistently been falling under the Tories, to a much lower level than lots of places in Europe. It could of course, be argued that this is why the economy has done so well. Or it could be argued it would have done well with slightly higher rates and we would have generated more tax. Hard to know really. I guess my rambling point is that it's a bit simple to point at Labour borrowing last time and say "it's bad". The bad thing was the global crises. Bit harsh to blame them for that isn't it? That would be just as simple as listening to Theresa May and assuming that because she keeps saying "strong and stable", she actually is.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I'm not sure if it was either of them. I have already explained why we saw Troops on the Street and why. If you wish to make some kind of anti Tory point score from it then that's your prerogative, I just don't subscribe to it. Police numbers have fallen and it's all part of the massive deficit created in 2010, painful cuts have been made to do something about it and if Labour are allowed to get into Government then all the hardship we have been through will be wasted as they will just borrow us into the same mess again.

Eh! You asked me a question and I answered, the reasons I stated were the ones from the government, I've also previously stated I'm not claiming Corbyn or Labour would be better, but instead of accepting responsibility as they have been in power since 2010 it's once again deflected back to Labour.
How many years in power is acceptable before whoever it is take responsibility for all decisions during their control?

 

[richy]

I'm not sure if it was either of them. I have already explained why we saw Troops on the Street and why. If you wish to make some kind of anti Tory point score from it then that's your prerogative, I just don't subscribe to it. Police numbers have fallen and it's all part of the massive deficit created in 2010, painful cuts have been made to do something about it and if Labour are allowed to get into Government then all the hardship we have been through will be wasted as they will just borrow us into the same mess again.

Who are you to know the real reason they where on the streets? Are you "in the know?"

The tories have had enough time and have made things worse. Hopefully their time is up. And if you'd actually been through any sort of hardship you certainly wouldn't want to give them another term.

 

[drdel]

Some you might remember a few years back that Labour also supported reducing police numbers.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Wondering how long we have to wait until we can afford to put in the money necessary to move schools and the NHS out of the Red Zone into Amber and Green - because as long as we wait - the worse the situation gets, the NHS and schools continue to fall apart - and the more children and patients the system fails.

Balancing the books and spending within our means is all very well - but a 'make do and mend' approach both stores up major problems or collapse for the future, and fails us today.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I know they do - but only get found out AFTER they get elected. But this is obvious a blatant fib and she stands there insistent that there was always going to be a cap subsequent to a consultative Green Paper. Really? I quote from page 65 of the Conservative Party Manifesto 2017

Under the current system, care costs deplete an individual’s assets, including in some
cases the family home, down to £23,250 or even less. These costs can be catastrophic
for those with modest or medium wealth. One purpose of long-term saving is to cover
needs in old age; those who can should rightly contribute to their care from savings
and accumulated wealth, rather than expecting current and future taxpayers to carry
the cost on their behalf. Moreover, many older people have built considerable property
assets due to rising property prices. Reconciling these competing pressures fairly and in
a sustainable way has challenged many governments of the past. We intend to tackle this
with three connected measures.

First, we will align the future basis for means-testing for domiciliary care with that for
residential care, so that people are looked after in the place that is best for them. This will
mean that the value of the family home will be taken into account along with other assets
and income, whether care is provided at home, or in a residential or nursing care home.

Second, to ensure this is fair, we will introduce a single capital floor, set at £100,000,
more than four times the current means test threshold. This will ensure that, no matter
how large the cost of care turns out to be, people will always retain at least £100,000 of
their savings and assets, including value in the family home.

Third, we will extend the current freedom to defer payments for residential care to those
receiving care at home, so no-one will have to sell their home in their lifetime to pay for care.
We believe this powerful combination maximises protection for pensioner households
with modest assets, often invested in the family home, while remaining affordable
for taxpayers. We consider it more equitable, within and across the generations, than
the proposals following the Dilnot Report, which mostly benefited a small number of
wealthier people.

It's not there is it? Neither the cap nor the green Paper. And it would be pretty darned critical to state that there would be a cap if the intention was to have one. The omission was not a mistake.

Still wondering where in the manifesto pledge above I find mention of the cap on individual contributions to social care and the consultations about the cap.

Anyone? - from the black squiggly bits rather than the white spaces in between please?

Then tell me how how the PM can claim with a straight and earnest face that it was there all the time - just that we the dear readers - just didn't understand...

 

[Hobbit]

Still wondering where in the manifesto pledge above I find mention of the cap on individual contributions to social care and the consultations about the cap.

Anyone? - from the black squiggly bits rather than the white spaces in between please?

Then tell me how how the PM can claim with a straight and earnest face that it was there all the time - just that we the dear readers - just didn't understand...

If you read the Labour manifesto you will find similar gaps, e.g. The dubbed garden tax. But if you do a bit of digging, no pun intended, you will find that the Land Value Tax was announced at the 2016 LABOUR Conference.

Labour are sniping at the Tories for scaremongering about the garden tax but it's all out there if you look. The intention is to add 3% of the value of the land your house is built on to your council tax by 2020.

For you in leafy Surrey Hugh, that's about £200 a month. Personally, I don't think it will ever reach the 3% but there will be a rise - page 86 of the Labour manifesto.

Are the Tories being disingenuous about the cap? Yes they are. Are Labour being disingenuous about the garden tax? Yes they are.

 

[SocketRocket]

If you listened or read the Government announcement then you would of heard or read that yes it was that simplistic, they put Troops on the streets in high profile areas to release police back to policeing, ie, they didn't have enough Police to provide adequate security to said places and carry on with other duties, therefore we either don't have enough Police or they are being mismanaged, which one do you think it was?

]Eh! You asked me a question[/B] and I answered, the reasons I stated were the ones from the government, I've also previously stated I'm not claiming Corbyn or Labour would be better, but instead of accepting responsibility as they have been in power since 2010 it's once again deflected back to Labour.
How many years in power is acceptable before whoever it is take responsibility for all decisions during their control?

What do you mean by EH! You asked me a question!

 

[Imurg]

Anyone who doesn't get the result they want on Thursday, don't forget to blame the weather

 

[Deleted member 16999]

What do you mean by EH! You asked me a question!

I answered why troops were on the streets and you went on about political point scoring without answering what I'd put, once again nice deflection!

 

[User62651]

Anyone who doesn't get the result they want on Thursday, don't forget to blame the weather

Predicitons for overall turnout % Thursday
I'll start us off with a middling 64%.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Anyone who doesn't get the result they want on Thursday, don't forget to blame the weather

Raining all day Thursday up here. Who wins when that happens, do we know or is it just "the other side"?

Add to the last post, I'll go 57%. I think people are bored with politics.

 

[Old Skier]

Predicitons for overall turnout % Thursday
I'll start us off with a middling 64%.

Hopefully higher going by all those on social media that pretend to care.

 

[drdel]

Hopefully higher going by all those on social media that pretend to care.

That would mean getting off their backsides and doing something in the real world _ never happen!

 

[spongebob59]

Originally posted in wrong thread

Another car crash from Abbott :

http://news.sky.com/video/diane-abbo...eview-10905600

 

[ger147]

Originally posted in wrong thread

Another car crash from Abbott :

http://news.sky.com/video/diane-abbo...eview-10905600

Serious question - does she have learning difficulties? Or does she just completely freeze and forget anything and everything as soon as someone points a camera at her?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Tories praying for bad weather so that the under 25s and feckless can't be bothered getting themselves to the Polling Station?

70%

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Raining all day Thursday up here. Who wins when that happens, do we know or is it just "the other side"?

Add to the last post, I'll go 57%. I think people are bored with politics.

Can I call these people stupid if they are 'bored' (can't be ar**d more like - bored just an excuse) given how important this election is, notwithstanding fact that Tories will walk it,.

 

[MegaSteve]

Can I call these people stupid if they are 'bored' (can't be ar**d more like - bored just an excuse) given how important this election is, notwithstanding fact that Tories will walk it,.

It's very easy to not be ar**d... I've read up everything I can find on the folk that'll be on my ballot paper and not one of them is worthy of my vote or anyone else's for that matter... And, no way do I vote purely on the colour of a candidates rosette...

 

[User62651]

It's very easy to not be ar**d... I've read up everything I can find on the folk that'll be on my ballot paper and not one of them is worthy of my vote or anyone else's for that matter... And, no way do I vote purely on the colour of a candidates rosette...

Spoil a paper, good to keep voting whatever, it's a right many have died for.