May calls General Election on 8 June

[Guest Pistonbroke]

I see Michal Gove fucked up akin to Diane Abbott during an LBC interview. I shall await the media ripping him apart. 

 

http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/michael-gove-numbers-hopelessly-wrong/?utm_source=m.facebook.com&utm_medium=referral

 

In this interview with Nick Ferrari, Conservative Michael Gove hopelessly messes up his numbers, not once, but twice.

The LBC Breakfast Presenter quizzed the former Secretary of State for Education about some numbers from the Tory manifesto.

Nick asked: "How much if I wish, if I seek to employ someone who is not born in the UK, how much is it going to cost me?"

Mr Gove replied: "I think that at the moment the current figure is going to be double, I'm just looking at my notes here, I don't have the exact figure of what it costs at the moment."

Nick said: "Mr Gove, you're lecturing me about the benefits of increasing the charge, and you don't know what the charge is?"

 

The prospective MP for Surrey Heath responded: "I think it's £2,000 a year."

Nick asked: "It's £2,000 currently is it?"

Mr Gove said: "Yes I think that's right."

Nick said: "So it will go to £4,000?"

Mr Gove said: "Yes I think that's right." 

Nick added: "What will the impact be on the NHS?

"I think that the NHS benefits from having more people who are trained in this country, who can provide the care and support people need. 

"It's already the case that the NHS benefits from people from outside the UK who've come here in the past, and of course we want to make sure we have the very, very best care.

"But it's also important that we ensure that the NHS is supported and enhanced by having people who have been trained in this country. More doctors, and more nurses, who are UK born and who can contribute to ensuring that the NHS remains a source of pride for all."

Watch the clip to see Nick hold Mr Gove to account about his numbers. 

[Naz17]

Which part of the Social Care Policy?

If you are talking about having a year off without pay,then that's a load of bollocks.

Using your home to pay for Care?-  What happens when the equity in the home has run out, or when house prices don't rise (or if they fall) for future generations.And rich people will hire the best accountants to avoid it anyway.

Sorry,but I can't see any decent proposals in it 

 

If you own a property then you have assets which can fund your care. The problem has also been the liquidity nature of the asset (ie you have to sell your house to receive care) but this resolves it.

[Pureblood]

If you own a property then you have assets which can fund your care.

 

Woo-hoo!  I can see why, in that case, we're a nation obsessed with owning a house. You get to live it in and care for it all your life, then when it's time to die you can cash in this wonderful asset for somebody else's benefit.  What. A. Plan.  

[Naz17]

Woo-hoo!  I can see why, in that case, we're a nation obsessed with owning a house. You get to live it in and care for it all your life, then when it's time to die you can cash in this wonderful asset for somebody else's benefit.  What. A. Plan.  

 

It's for your own benefit - you are paying for your care. I thought people here were socialists? It's wealth, not income, which drives inequality. If you don't want to sell your house then you don't have to, pay for it another way. The taxpayer shouldn't have to underwrite the inheritance expectations of a section of the middle classes.

[setreal]

No, clearly the taxpayer should only underwrite the inheritance expectations of the rich.

[Pureblood]

It's for your own benefit - you are paying for your care. I thought people here were socialists? It's wealth, not income, which drives inequality. If you don't want to sell your house then you don't have to, pay for it another way. The taxpayer shouldn't have to underwrite the inheritance expectations of a section of the middle classes.

 

For some people their home is their only asset.  I think it's a cunt's plan, but each to their own.  

[Naz17]

No, clearly the taxpayer should only underwrite the inheritance expectations of the rich.

 

If the rich can pay for their social care then good for them.

[Vincent Vega]

When Gordon Brown was proposing something similar to fund social care, but with it capped at a far more reasonable £20,000, the Tories and the right wing press went ape shit and called it a death tax.

[Naz17]

When Gordon Brown was proposing something similar to fund social care, but with it capped at a far more reasonable £20,000, the Tories and the right wing press went ape shit and called it a death tax.

 

They're still calling it a death tax now. Tories aren't happy with this policy. 

[Jenson]

It's for your own benefit - you are paying for your care. I thought people here were socialists? It's wealth, not income, which drives inequality. If you don't want to sell your house then you don't have to, pay for it another way. The taxpayer shouldn't have to underwrite the inheritance expectations of a section of the middle classes.

 

I thought National Insurance, which we pay all our working lives, was supposed to pay for our care? Wealth does drive inequality, which is why the wealthiest should be taxed more to pay for care for all, not just themselves, and leave everyone else in the gutter. Telling pensioners who have worked all their lives, payed their taxes and NI, saved into a pension and paid their mortgage that they then have to fund what they've already paid for, instead of raising income tax on the highest earners in this country, closing tax avoidance loopholes on £billion multinationals, raising corporation tax etc is a cunt's trick.

[dickie mint]

I thought National Insurance, which we pay all our working lives, was supposed to pay for our care? Wealth does drive inequality, which is why the wealthiest should be taxed more to pay for care for all, not just themselves, and leave everyone else in the gutter. Telling pensioners who have worked all their lives, payed their taxes and NI, saved into a pension and paid their mortgage that they then have to fund what they've already paid for, instead of raising income tax on the highest earners in this country, closing tax avoidance loopholes on £billion multinationals, raising corporation tax etc is a cunt's trick.

 

Spot on.

[Denny Crane]

From the cradle to the grave was the social contract.

 

But not if you have a stroke, get disabled, Parkinson's dementia or any other illness which makes you a burden on society.

 

This isn't about care homes this is a way of profiting from those who fall ill and receive care in their own home.

 

Means testing is shit.

 

As for winter payments, they exist because energy prices are one of the biggest expenditures for the elderly. If we had lower energy prices there would be less of a need.

Edited May 18, 2017 by Denny Crane

[Strontium]

I thought National Insurance, which we pay all our working lives, was supposed to pay for our care?

A common misconception. NI goes into the same general taxation pot as everything else. Pensions, benefits etc are paid for by the current crop of taxpayers.

[Naz17]

I thought National Insurance, which we pay all our working lives, was supposed to pay for our care? Wealth does drive inequality, which is why the wealthiest should be taxed more to pay for care for all, not just themselves, and leave everyone else in the gutter. Telling pensioners who have worked all their lives, payed their taxes and NI, saved into a pension and paid their mortgage that they then have to fund what they've already paid for, instead of raising income tax on the highest earners in this country, closing tax avoidance loopholes on £billion multinationals, raising corporation tax etc is a cunt's trick.

 

You thought wrong. NICs don't contribute to social care.

[Jenson]

You thought wrong. NICs don't contribute to social care.

 

I'll stand corrected on NI, but how about the rest of what I posted?

[Denny Crane]

Latest polls.

 

YouGov/Times:

 

CON 45 (-4)

LAB 32 (+1)

LD 8 (-1)

UKIP 6 (+3)

 

16th-17th May

 

Ipsos MORI/Evening Standard:

 

CON 49 (=)

LAB 34 (+8)

LD 7 (-6)

UKIP 2 (-2)

[Carvalho Diablo]

Just listened to May launching the Tory manifesto on 5 Live and could not stop shaking my head and laughing with incredulity at the sheer preposterousness of it.

 

Also,  the way she delivered it; she doesn't speak to you or talk to people,  she simply  demonstrates that she can read! I know all politicians use prompts and autocues but fucking hell,  it really is no wonder why she flatly refused to engage Corbyn in debate. May is truly fucking awful.

 

Strong and stable?  Like a Tussaud's waxwork. 

[Section_31]

the idea of taxing the rich is often deliberately misrepresented as taking a rich person's 'hard earned' and giving it to some make believe lazy bastard, it's not, it's saying 'instead of letting Tesco drill tendrils into a town, syphon off all the money and hide it under the bed in Switzerland, why not give a fair crack to some individual business owners so they can hire people, pay good wages so they themselves will be able to afford cars, and fridges and houses, which will in turn be sold'. 

 

There's nothing inherently evil about capitalism, but this is not capitalism and hasn't been for quite some time. 

[Naz17]

I'll stand corrected on NI, but how about the rest of what I posted?

 

It's also wrong because it is built on your misinterpretation that NICs pay for social care.

[Jairzinho]

https://www.facebook.com/1615787525378016/videos/1761311710825596/

[Jenson]

It's also wrong because it is built on your misinterpretation that NICs pay for social care.

 

It's built on my interpretation that robbing pensioners of their winter fuel payments and means testing them to pay for care as they get older, rather than taxing the wealthiest in order to level the playing field, is an absolute cunt's trick. It's ideologically driven and has nothing to do with providing for the 'neediest', and everything to do with hoarding wealth for wealthy.

[Denny Crane]

Good to see the people of Halifax give May a warm reception.

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/GuardianAnushka/status/865140287013871616/video/1

 

 

[Guest Pistonbroke]

[Fowlers God]

Jeremy vine giving Corbyn some tough questions and he came out very well. My whole office is conservative and they thought he spoke well. Problem is their voting history won't change. They're not actually listening to Mays policies

[Jenson]

"Conservatives vow to halve rough sleeping over the course of the next Parliament and eliminate it by 2027"

 

They're just trolling people now

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jan/25/number-of-rough-sleepers-in-england-rises-for-sixth-successive-year