To consider the Conservatives' manifesto pretty decent on the whole?

[Puzzledandpissedoff]

Pretty decent in terms in principles, that is ... as so often with manifestos it's too thin on costings

Main points here: www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39960311

Full version here: www.conservatives.com/manifesto

I totally agree that that an economy should be not be built around inflated house prices (but with the post-Brexit crash that is surely coming, not unreasonable to leave them as before!). But in terms of a cap, surely calculations did take into account that not all people will need that care and some wealthier people will pay for their own. The unpredictability of future care costs is why a cap was better. May's proposal will hit those who are not wealthy enough to make their own arrangements but those who already need to claim allowances for help i.e. those with a low income or savings but who also own a house.

leave 'them' as before i.e. IHT bands. In a way,

May is shifting the burden of old age away from the state and on to individuals, and by upping the amount when you can get help from 23kish to 100k, she is also enforcing more people to sort it out themselves. She's making it explicit that wealthier individuals will have to pay their care but for all the arguments already posted, it is not clear how much money that might generate, because some people already pay for it themselves anyway. A cap or a death tax (as proposed by Labour) would be more predictable in terms of financing and acknowledge the shared burden. Better policy (in my view).

I agree, Citroen. I think the conservative policy is very short termist and basically and unequal, unreliable tax. Not a good way to run a "strong and stable" society imo

I totally agree that that an economy should be not be built around inflated house prices

Absolutely! And this proposal seems totally oblivious to that.

And isn't there something fundamentally wrong in an economy which seems to only function now at a bank rate of 0%?

The reasons for not voting Tory are many, but for me, the historical inability to build sound economies based on sustainable growth is the strongest! Someone on HIGNFY last night suggested that May was Thatcher's last horcrux. The Tories will get a landslide but they need an opposition.

Citreon, it can't be said enough!

Citroen you are after my own heart!

I would favour a universal scheme that shares the risk as suggested by Gordon Brown's government in 2010 and the current Labour manifesto says they would consider a levy paid by everyone.

makeourfuture only said it once now (thanks admins...don't know why it posted three times), but still believe it 300%!

I believe the scheme is not too different from the care home one now - that you do not actually pay the local authority for the care at home. Instead it builds up with 2% interest (as with current people in care homes who have a house not being sold) and on death then it is taken by the local authority.

So if instead you choose to use people you hire yourself (as my father did) for the care then there is no charge on the house. If you never need care no charge on the house. If your family does the caring no charge/loss.

I think it's a fairly fair scheme and I am not sure why some people are objecting to it so much.

It is very very different to how things are now. Care within the home never took the value of a house into the package. Some people do already pay for care in their home. If a couple or someone is living in your house then the house was not included as an asset for nursing home fees. If a single person then yes the families will benefit from the new increase in fees.

How is it fair that if you have cancer or other life limiting illnesses the state pays for it, but if you have Alzheimer's or other degenerative diseases the individual pays? Treatment for cancer is not cheap!
Why not have a tax for everyone over a certain age (say 45) so you're not penalising individuals for the misfortune of their death?

It's INSANE that people in this country are so anti-tax they would rather lose all of their assets than pay a bit more. Totally irrational and the ultimate victory of Thatcherism.

Also now the house is taken into account for care at home this will effect not only the elderly but disabled people of all ages who own a home and who need care.

A levy on everybody's estate at death to go into a national social care fund shares the risk and still the one I would favour.

This will not help anyone rich or poor. Care homes and care agencies can already choose which clients they take on. They are already choosing paying clients over social funded as that's the way they make money. That's why there is so much bed blocking already.

@Bolshybookworm, I agree with you. The idea of collectively pooling risk as we do with the NHS so no individual faces huge care costs would be my choice. Yet as you said, sadly, many now seem against universal schemes. Is it a reflection of the individual mindset in our society now?

Bolshybookworm I agree too this should be a collective responsibility.

Breakfast

I come from an area where 80% of children don't have breakfast before they go to school. Studies have shown time and time again, that children cannot learn without breakfast. By not ensuring children have access to breakfast before we are asking and expecting them to learn we are immediately setting them off on a serious inequality with regards to their education.

Giving children breakfast gives them a chance to benefit from our education system. Giving children lunch gives them a chance to burn off some energy in the afternoon. It's a bit of a no brainer to me about which is more important.

Yabu

And if I had to pick which bit of the day is most productive for learning based on experience with my dc, I'd say mornings, so you want them raring to go first thing.

What about all the wasted money on building kitchens and arranging for lunches to be brought in that the schools had to fund themselves out if their budgets to provide all primary school kids with lunch then? All that wasted money. All they get for breakfast is cereal toast and fruit, you don't need s fully equipped kitchen for that!

YABU. Hope this helps.

Sostenueto, I have to say that's why I assumed the Tories are envisaging that some kind of hot breakfast be served to the whole school.

But yes, possibly that massive capital investment in infant schools has all been wasted.