Zand- it makes sense to most people when it is explained clearly without the spin for political gain. We get it constantly and yet I have only seen one article that explains it clearly and accurately. Ruth Davidson has tried to explain it but she gets shouted down for supporting the "abhorrent rape clause". What I don't get is what is abhorrent about allowing Benefit to be claimed for a child conceived in exceptional circumstances?@maglil55 I didn't know that about the 'rape clause'. It makes sense to only have the number of children you can afford to support, this seems like a sensible policy to me. In fact it's one I have been saying should be brought in world wide since we have too many people on this small planet of ours. I know that anyone can hit hard times and need state help and I wouldn't want to stop them getting it, but it's so wrong when people have more children knowing that they can't afford to support them.
I believe that is true; but we should also remember that Labour has carried out some NHS privitisation too - and I absolutely disagree with the policy.As a pensioner and someone who will probably increasingly rely on our NHS I couldn't, and never have voted Conservative.
I have voted for Labour (usually), LibDems and Greens in the past, but will be voting Labour on Thursday as they are the only ones who will be able to defend the NHS and pensions from the Tories' attacks.
To be fair, they are all terrible.After Thatcher, I'll never vote Conservative, EVER.
My husband has been waiting almost a year for an appointment with an orthopaedic consultant, so I certainly won't be voting SNP who seem to concentrate on getting independence, rather than running Scotland properly.
As for who I will vote for, your guess is as good as mine!
I feel compelled to vote for my current MP, even though I disagree with him on most things.I'll be voting for my MP she is a superb help to my family. (Labour lady).
Actions speak louder than words!
I agree. The money has to come from somewhere. Alternatives are wealth taxes or for pensioners to continue to pay NI for example. Better to be taken from the estate.I can't understand why people are so concerned about the amount of the cap, either. The house owner(s) are dead. The only people it will affect are those hoping to inherit. I would rather it go towards the cost of the social care than hopeful inheritors.
I think the point about the cap is we don't know what level it might be set at. People assume it will only affect the fairly wealthy; but it could just as easily be set at the Pension Credit benefit level, for example, affecting most (10m) pensioners.
The Wealth Tax has already been floated in the Labour manifesto as an option but doesn't say how it will work. Kezia Dugdale (Scottish Labour leader) has said though the the Wealth Tax would tax London and the South East to redistribute to other areas in the UK as it is needed. I doubt it would be restricted to London and the South East.I agree. The money has to come from somewhere. Alternatives are wealth taxes or for pensioners to continue to pay NI for example. Better to be taken from the estate.
The last labour government left us all poor, I have not had a pay rise in over 8 years from my employer but thanks to the conservatives my take home pay has risen.Well tories feed the rich and labour feed the poor.
Which one needs it the most?
I agree, and it's because of labour's ridiculous policies that we need austerity at all. Spending what we haven't got always feels good at the time, not so good when we have to pay it back plus interest.The last labour government left us all poor, I have not had a pay rise in over 8 years from my employer but thanks to the conservatives my take home pay has risen.
I think they've learnt their lesson. They won't fall into that trap again.I agree, and it's because of labour's ridiculous policies that we need austerity at all. Spending what we haven't got always feels good at the time, not so good when we have to pay it back plus interest.
Sorry. I was, wrongly, thinking of the Winter fuel allowance, which is why I edited my post to correct it.It won't affect ANYONE, wealthy or poor other than the people hoping to inherit something after the home owners have died. It certainly won't affect the home owners. They will be in their graves. Where would you rather see the proceeds from the house sale go (over and above the £100,000) Towards the ever increasing social care costs or the ones expecting to inherit it?
It is a vast improvement on the present system, which as I said earlier, forces the home owners to sell up as soon as they go in residential care, and they can only keep £23,000. Sometimes there are still other people living in that house who aren't the owners - they suffer as they either have to buy it themselves at normal market value or find somewhere else to live. Under the proposed system, no-one suffers apart from the inheritors, and they still get to keep £100,000. It isn't a tax on pensioners at all and the amount of the cap is irrelevant to the pensioners.
No, I wouldn't have thought so. It would apply more widely.The Wealth Tax has already been floated in the Labour manifesto as an option but doesn't say how it will work. Kezia Dugdale (Scottish Labour leader) has said though the the Wealth Tax would tax London and the South East to redistribute to other areas in the UK as it is needed. I doubt it would be restricted to London and the South East.
No it has not. Average weekly earnings in real terms are less than they were before the financial crisis in 2007. You may have had a cash increase, but joy one that has kept pace with inflation - unless you are not the average person of course.The last labour government left us all poor, I have not had a pay rise in over 8 years from my employer but thanks to the conservatives my take home pay has risen.
@Ian_Laye. I should really read these posts before replying. If you are talking about rises in the personal tax allowance, you are still wrongNo it has not. Average weekly earnings in real terms are less than they were before the financial crisis in 2007. You may have had a cash increase, but joy one that has kept pace with inflation - unless you are not the average person of course.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?