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

In order to save money on this (free breakfasts for all) wont the cost per pupil have to be much cheaper? What nutritional value will these breakfasts have? Cold cereals? Will it be porridge? Cheap white toast? Will the children who are most in need of breakfast be at school early enough to get breakfast?
At least with lunches you've got the child there to feed.

Again the deprived children will suffer. The more I hear the more sick to my stomach I feel about the massive division in our country. May will divide it even more and there is nothing I can do to change it.

I thought free breakfast just for the poor or is it for everyone?

Porridge is hot and pretty nutritious. Whats wrong with it for breakfast?

I thought it was everyone. If it's just 'the poor' it makes little sense to replace a hot meal with a cold, cheap meal. And starts again with singling out 'the poor' whilst potentially missing out the children of parents who could but just don't bother to provide breakfast.

Porridge is hot and pretty nutritious. Whats wrong with it for breakfast?

Maybe that's why she's asking?

May will divide it even more and there is nothing I can do to change it.

It is indeed her plan. It's a long battle yet though.

I didn't say there was anything wrong with it Jaime. It's served hot though and will that be prepared? Or will it be cold cereals only?

Where are the staff coming from to serve this breakfast? Do the tories want teachers to go in even earlier or lunch time staff to cover?
Who looks after teachers and school kitchen helpers kids while they are on brekkers duty?

Do the tories want teachers to go in even earlier

My guess.

I am sure that people have to pay for homemade now even those without savings. When my mum needed help she was charge about £16 per hour. She never owned her own home and had much less than 23k in savings. But because she was frugal and received some disability payments and pension credit she had to pay.
Tbh the thought of my three children inheriting 100k between them only when our estate is currently worth about 600k is enough to take myself off to dignitas.

Ivan's Re breakfast. Our school foes a breakfast club. It is really a childcare facility for working families. It cost ££5 per day so is a great money spinner for the school. Breakfast is cereal or toast but I have just discovered that my four year old just says no and they don't question it. So on the days he goes he ironically doesn't get breakfast.
So no idea how this school is going to deal with this.
Plus it is a really under hand way to return money to education. Money that they have already taken.

Yes there is an income threshold as well fab. Though I thought disability payments might be disregarded for that - sounds as though that may be wrong.
It isn't clear just how many additional people will have to pay for domiciliary care - sounds as though many already do pay anyway. Anyone found any stats for the numbers of people receiving free home care?

My concern with the removal of infant universal fsm is that many parents are working poor. No better off than those getting universal fsm but because they claim wtc they don't qualify.

Found this from Age UK

www.ageuk.org.uk/home-and-care/social-care-how-much-do-you-really-know/

Incidentally those with larger estates have also been hit with a probate fee price hike. This came in at the same time as they drastically reduced widow/ers parents allowance.

Actually I think the probate fees increase got lost when the election was announced didn't it - not time to bring in the legislation? I read that somewhere.

Still, plenty of time to bring it in after the election, obviously.

Quite right,

www.telegraph.co.uk/tax/inheritance/new-death-tax-confirmed-probate-fees-20000-will-apply-may/

Have read several posters say they would rather go to Dignitas to entrench their own children's privilege and inheritance. That's a valid choice and an indication that a lot of people put their own children's wealth above a fair society. So let them do that, it's not a reason for saying, 'oh no we cant have that, lets make the poor working class pay to advantage the wealthy's privileged children.

Its very telling how people really only vote to protect their own wealth, or take it off someone else and give it to them. Its never really about fairness, or equality.

Oh well if the family have to pay probate fees out of their 100k inheritance there really isn't going to be a lot left. Care is £22 to £24 an hour for 1 carer on average now. If you need 2 because you are either bedbound or severely disabled just double the amount.

have read several posters say they would rather go to Dignitas to entrench their own children's privilege and inheritance.

I havent seen this, I honestly miss a lot so it doesn't surprise me

That's nothing Jaime earlier in the thread there were people discussing the many ways to avoid having the house disregarded in the new shake up. I didn't know wealthy people employed money managers to avoid all sorts of legislation and expenses including paying for care. And it seemed some were only concerned about making sure they still got £100k.

Digitas was a little tongue in cheek.

Would society be better if we were all born equal, if we all had the same start in life? We rose or fell on our own merits?

Well it wont happen ever over night, but lets make a start. At least trying to use the trillions billions millions of pounds locked up in property to help pay for carers to look after the elderly and redistribute wealth around the country based on need not privilege is surly a good first step in the process.

I really am shocked that JC and so many people are so against this.

The more I read about this policy the more I'm shocked that anyone wants to vote Tory really. By requiring all those who have assets worth 100k (instead of 27k) to pay for their own care will certainly boost the government coffers (which they'll need in the post Brexit meltdown). The wealthier focus is maybe just smoke and mirrors. The real savings will come from many more people trapped in the middle. Council care budgets are already super stretched so that they can no longer provide the sort of services such as meals on wheels or low-level caring (washing, shopping) that enable people to live independently and with some dignity, it's ONLY about the costs of social care, not the quality but it's also crap policy. NHS admissions are much more expensive. Does Theresa May listen to educators? Or Age UK? Or the NHS?