BBC Debate

It was a pity that the presenter did not stop some of the interrupting - but on the whole it was a good old debate. My view on TM not attending is in the thread "under the stairs" - p*ss poor. We live in a democracy and we want our people interested and voting (whatever their views). What an example to set.

Regarding a winner - there was no clearcut winner. All of them did OK apart from Paul Nuttall. He lacks any depth or gravitas to make a decent politician. Although I do agree if Brits want to go and fight abroad for Jihaadists we should do all we can not to let them back. JC certainly didnt do any harm to his chances by attending and the Green leader spoke well. .
I felt a bit sorry for Rudd being dropped in to replace the "strong" leader! In the circs she did alright.

But I am Welsh and as Wood said I do not want us to be invisible. We would be just an afterthought and get no coverage without them. Look at the media and politicians emphasis on Scotland - next to nothing on Wales and Northern Ireland. at present I think I will go for Plaid.

Farron did well tonight and his "Bake Off" jibe at the end was priceless but overall, and yet again, Jeremy Corbyn came across as the most personable and likeable. Agree or disagree with his politics but he is making a real fist of this election campaign.

Going to be an interesting final week.

I agree with you

Wez isn't racist, he's just English,

I missed it. Did the Scouse fantasist call Leanne "Natalie" again? If so I hoped she nutted the nutter!

Wez isn't racist, he's just English,

Wrong Cardiff born

cutting foreign aid and spending it on the nhs racist please tell me ?

This is the same Paul Nuttal who in a series of posts set out his views on privatising the NHS?

"I would like to congratulate the coalition government for bringing a whiff of privatisation into the beleaguered National Health Service"
"I would argue that the very existence of the NHS stifles competition, and as competition drives quality and choice, innovation and improvements are restricted."

What i can't understand is Mrs may right from the start made this a presidential election yet when she has a chance to debate face to face she doesn't turn up

Btw its not racist to hate a religious ideology,keep your head in the sand

The holocaust was not racist?

cutting foreign aid and spending it on the nhs racist please tell me ?

This is the same Paul Nuttal who in a series of posts set out his views on privatising the NHS?

"I would like to congratulate the coalition government for bringing a whiff of privatisation into the beleaguered National Health Service"
"I would argue that the very existence of the NHS stifles competition, and as competition drives quality and choice, innovation and improvements are restricted."

As ge said tonight his views have changed but it shoukd always br free at point of service

I do think the conservatives are struggling to get their policies over which is worrying me.

They HAVE cut the deficit. It was explained on the radio(lbc) that borrowing was increased deliberately to bring the deficit down while borrowing was cheap. A bit like getting a 0% balance transfer credit card.

With the deficit gone then the borrowing debt would be repaid.

This dementia tax is a bit of a hoax.

Firstly they already take people's houses. What is proposed is that instead of keeping around 20k you could keep 100k.
Surely that's an improvement??

Corbyn says no one earring less than 80k will pay more tax. Ok. Well I'm worried about the various stealth taxes. This land value tax is particularly worrying.

However no one. Not one person points out that user conservative proposals EVERYONE will pay less tax as the tax free threshold will be increased to 12k

It has been shown repeatedly that punitive taxation does not raise what it is intended to. Lowering the labour 50% tax bracket generate more than when it was higher. That's because give companies more money and they can invest more and employ more.

The tax the rich obsession is wearing thin. They already pay a massive amount of tax. The conservatives also did
Far more reduce tax avoidance than any other party before them.

There is no privatisation of the NHS. There
May be some service provision but at no point has anyone said insurance or pay as you go will be implemented for our care. Just scaremongering.

A few people need to face up to the fact that not everyone is left leaning. A hell of a lot are right of centre. We have only one party to represent us.

Also the tuition fees winds me. Labour brought the fees in in the first place!!! Then committed that money to other things.

I can't quite believe there's 14 people that believe the Tory's had the better of last nights debate. What on earth were they watching?

Also the tuition fees winds me. Labour brought the fees in in the first place!!! Then committed that money to other things.

Exactly also privitised the nhs through pfi,they sold a hospital off also gave more private contracts out in there time in power,they are a joke

Also the tuition fees winds me. Labour brought the fees in in the first place!!! Then committed that money to other things.

Exactly also privitised the nhs through pfi,they sold a hospital off also gave more private contracts out in there time in power,they are a joke

Wez, there's been more cuts to the NHS in the last 7 years than there has been in it's history. Nurses are eating from food banks Honestly mate, the shit that comes out of your mouth is bizarre

Also the tuition fees winds me. Labour brought the fees in in the first place!!! Then committed that money to other things.

Exactly also privitised the nhs through pfi,they sold a hospital off also gave more private contracts out in there time in power,they are a joke

You can't really tar corbyn with any of that though can you, since he voted against all of it

Also the tuition fees winds me. Labour brought the fees in in the first place!!! Then committed that money to other things.

Exactly also privitised the nhs through pfi,they sold a hospital off also gave more private contracts out in there time in power,they are a joke

You can't really tar corbyn with any of that though can you, since he voted against all of it

You can't really, although there are posters who regularly refer back to policies from Thatcher's days when explaining what the Conservatives are all about. Like most things in politics, there are usually two sides to everything, it's just that we tend to only look at things from one point of view, and not accept that there may be another point. Labour target the younger voters on the basis of scrapping tuition fees, but don't actually inform the same youngsters who introduced them and why they were introduced.

I do think the conservatives are struggling to get their policies over which is worrying me.

They HAVE cut the deficit. It was explained on the radio(lbc) that borrowing was increased deliberately to bring the deficit down while borrowing was cheap. A bit like getting a 0% balance transfer credit card.

With the deficit gone then the borrowing debt would be repaid.

This dementia tax is a bit of a hoax.

Firstly they already take people's houses. What is proposed is that instead of keeping around 20k you could keep 100k.
Surely that's an improvement??

Corbyn says no one earring less than 80k will pay more tax. Ok. Well I'm worried about the various stealth taxes. This land value tax is particularly worrying.

However no one. Not one person points out that user conservative proposals EVERYONE will pay less tax as the tax free threshold will be increased to 12k

It has been shown repeatedly that punitive taxation does not raise what it is intended to. Lowering the labour 50% tax bracket generate more than when it was higher. That's because give companies more money and they can invest more and employ more.

The tax the rich obsession is wearing thin. They already pay a massive amount of tax. The conservatives also did
Far more reduce tax avoidance than any other party before them.

There is no privatisation of the NHS. There
May be some service provision but at no point has anyone said insurance or pay as you go will be implemented for our care. Just scaremongering.

A few people need to face up to the fact that not everyone is left leaning. A hell of a lot are right of centre. We have only one party to represent us.

If the Tories have really conned you into thinking that they have 'cut the deficit' by 'borrowing millions more' then you must be one of the most gullible voters out there

You are also wrong on social care. At present you pay for your care until your savings reach £23,000 and then it becomes free. However, assets such as the value of your house are not included. So in theory you can leave your house and £23,000 for your children to inherit.

The 'new' policy is ALL your assets including the value of your home are included. The care is provided free but you build up a tab. When you die the Government reclaims the cost from your estate. The estate is allowed an allowance of £100,000 (which can be passed onto children) and everything above that the Government have first call on to settle the care bill.

So at present you are allowed £23000 + value of house (average £230,000) under the new system you are allowed £100,000 + whatever is left after care bills have been paid.

This is why it has been named the 'dementia tax'. Those who die of cancer for example might only require a few months of care. However, an Alzheimer suffer could have up to 10 years of care which would basically wipe out the value of his/hers savings and value of their house bar £100,000

I do think the conservatives are struggling to get their policies over which is worrying me.

They HAVE cut the deficit. It was explained on the radio(lbc) that borrowing was increased deliberately to bring the deficit down while borrowing was cheap. A bit like getting a 0% balance transfer credit card.

With the deficit gone then the borrowing debt would be repaid.

This dementia tax is a bit of a hoax.

Firstly they already take people's houses. What is proposed is that instead of keeping around 20k you could keep 100k.
Surely that's an improvement??

Corbyn says no one earring less than 80k will pay more tax. Ok. Well I'm worried about the various stealth taxes. This land value tax is particularly worrying.

However no one. Not one person points out that user conservative proposals EVERYONE will pay less tax as the tax free threshold will be increased to 12k

It has been shown repeatedly that punitive taxation does not raise what it is intended to. Lowering the labour 50% tax bracket generate more than when it was higher. That's because give companies more money and they can invest more and employ more.

The tax the rich obsession is wearing thin. They already pay a massive amount of tax. The conservatives also did
Far more reduce tax avoidance than any other party before them.

There is no privatisation of the NHS. There
May be some service provision but at no point has anyone said insurance or pay as you go will be implemented for our care. Just scaremongering.

A few people need to face up to the fact that not everyone is left leaning. A hell of a lot are right of centre. We have only one party to represent us.

If the Tories have really conned you into thinking that they have 'cut the deficit' by 'borrowing millions more' then you must be one of the most gullible voters out there

You are also wrong on social care. At present you pay for your care until your savings reach £23,000 and then it becomes free. However, assets such as the value of your house are not included. So in theory you can leave your house and £23,000 for your children to inherit.

The 'new' policy is ALL your assets including the value of your home are included. The care is provided free but you build up a tab. When you die the Government reclaims the cost from your estate. The estate is allowed an allowance of £100,000 (which can be passed onto children) and everything above that the Government have first call on to settle the care bill.

So at present you are allowed £23000 + value of house (average £230,000) under the new system you are allowed £100,000 + whatever is left after care bills have been paid.

This is why it has been named the 'dementia tax'. Those who die of cancer for example might only require a few months of care. However, an Alzheimer suffer could have up to 10 years of care which would basically wipe out the value of his/hers savings and value of their house bar £100,000

The bit I still don't understand is if when I was working I hit hard times, I would still have been expected to take responsibility for myself, which may have included having to sell my house in order to make ends meet. Now I am older, if I am unfortunate to become ill and need extensive and expensive care, I should expect the taxpayer to pay for my needs so that I can leave my children a property to sell so that they can have a more exotic lifestyle than they currently have. It's fine by me, because unfortunately I am approaching that age where this could become a reality. I understand we have a responsibilty to take care of people who have no means of managing without assistance, but I am still not convinced that in this day and age when there is not enough money to pay for essential services, that working people should pay for my care when I have the means to look after myself.

Also the tuition fees winds me. Labour brought the fees in in the first place!!! Then committed that money to other things.

Exactly also privitised the nhs through pfi,they sold a hospital off also gave more private contracts out in there time in power,they are a joke

You can't really tar corbyn with any of that though can you, since he voted against all of it

You can't really, although there are posters who regularly refer back to policies from Thatcher's days when explaining what the Conservatives are all about. Like most things in politics, there are usually two sides to everything, it's just that we tend to only look at things from one point of view, and not accept that there may be another point. Labour target the younger voters on the basis of scrapping tuition fees, but don't actually inform the same youngsters who introduced them and why they were introduced.

Fair point, I regularly bring up Thatcher in regards to Tories But the Tories do regularly champion her.

Also the tuition fees winds me. Labour brought the fees in in the first place!!! Then committed that money to other things.

Exactly also privitised the nhs through pfi,they sold a hospital off also gave more private contracts out in there time in power,they are a joke

You can't really tar corbyn with any of that though can you, since he voted against all of it

You can't really, although there are posters who regularly refer back to policies from Thatcher's days when explaining what the Conservatives are all about. Like most things in politics, there are usually two sides to everything, it's just that we tend to only look at things from one point of view, and not accept that there may be another point. Labour target the younger voters on the basis of scrapping tuition fees, but don't actually inform the same youngsters who introduced them and why they were introduced.

Fair point, I regularly bring up Thatcher in regards to Tories But the Tories do regularly champion her.

You are not alone, I have mentioned Foot, Milliband and Kinnock as being unelectable leaders and compared them to Corbyn.

Regards my comments on the deficit and borrowing. My information did NOT come from the conservatives. It was an independent financial guy (I won say expert as i have no way of vouching for him!) being interviewed on lbc. So I'm not gullable falling for consecutive spin ta very much

The bit I still don't understand is if when I was working I hit hard times, I would still have been expected to take responsibility for myself, which may have included having to sell my house in order to make ends meet. Now I am older, if I am unfortunate to become ill and need extensive and expensive care, I should expect the taxpayer to pay for my needs so that I can leave my children a property to sell so that they can have a more exotic lifestyle than they currently have. It's fine by me, because unfortunately I am approaching that age where this could become a reality. I understand we have a responsibilty to take care of people who have no means of managing without assistance, but I am still not convinced that in this day and age when there is not enough money to pay for essential services, that working people should pay for my care when I have the means to look after myself.

Actually my personal feelings are not a million miles away from yours.

However, playing devils advocate the argument against would be that having worked all your life and paid National Insurance and Income Tax into the welfare system is it not right that at the point you need care it should be provided free?

That's why the new Tory measures have been labelled as a 'tax' (Dementia).

Personally I think the old system was more fair but of course the heartless Tories think differently.

Regards my comments on the deficit and borrowing. My information did NOT come from the conservatives. It was an independent financial guy (I won say expert as i have no way of vouching for him!) being interviewed on lbc. So I'm not gullable falling for consecutive spin ta very much

Well in your post you said "the Tories HAVE cut the deficit" so you fell for some kind of spin

You are not alone, I have mentioned Foot, Milliband and Kinnock as being unelectable leaders and compared them to Corbyn.

With aid of hindsight you were correct, Foot, Kinnock and Milliband were unelectable!

The bit I still don't understand is if when I was working I hit hard times, I would still have been expected to take responsibility for myself, which may have included having to sell my house in order to make ends meet. Now I am older, if I am unfortunate to become ill and need extensive and expensive care, I should expect the taxpayer to pay for my needs so that I can leave my children a property to sell so that they can have a more exotic lifestyle than they currently have. It's fine by me, because unfortunately I am approaching that age where this could become a reality. I understand we have a responsibilty to take care of people who have no means of managing without assistance, but I am still not convinced that in this day and age when there is not enough money to pay for essential services, that working people should pay for my care when I have the means to look after myself.

Actually my personal feelings are not a million miles away from yours.

However, playing devils advocate the argument against would be that having worked all your life and paid National Insurance and Income Tax into the welfare system is it not right that at the point you need care it should be provided free?

That's why the new Tory measures have been labelled as a 'tax' (Dementia).

Personally I think the old system was more fair but of course the heartless Tories think differently.

The way I look at it Tony is that my mother is still alive, but obviously well in her later years. Fortunately she is good health right now. If she had to go into care, would it be fair that most of the costs would be the tax payers responsibilty rather than hers. She has a valuable property, and if she was in care and paid for by the taxpayer, I would 100% be getting myself an Aston Martin as well being able to see my wife finish work well before retirement age and enjoying holidays in warmer climates with me. If she was responsible for her own care costs, those dreams would be out the window. Ultimately, if I get my car and spend large chunks of the year in exotic countries, it would be because the taxpayer would be funding my mother, which in turn means that it could be said they are funding meto live the dream. Just my personal view, but it seems a bit mean that when there is not enough money raised from taxes to provide the NHS, education etc. with much needed funds , we expect the working people to help me out with my dream car and holidays.

The bit I still don't understand is if when I was working I hit hard times, I would still have been expected to take responsibility for myself, which may have included having to sell my house in order to make ends meet. Now I am older, if I am unfortunate to become ill and need extensive and expensive care, I should expect the taxpayer to pay for my needs so that I can leave my children a property to sell so that they can have a more exotic lifestyle than they currently have. It's fine by me, because unfortunately I am approaching that age where this could become a reality. I understand we have a responsibilty to take care of people who have no means of managing without assistance, but I am still not convinced that in this day and age when there is not enough money to pay for essential services, that working people should pay for my care when I have the means to look after myself.

Actually my personal feelings are not a million miles away from yours.

However, playing devils advocate the argument against would be that having worked all your life and paid National Insurance and Income Tax into the welfare system is it not right that at the point you need care it should be provided free?

That's why the new Tory measures have been labelled as a 'tax' (Dementia).

Personally I think the old system was more fair but of course the heartless Tories think differently.

The way I look at it Tony is that my mother is still alive, but obviously well in her later years. Fortunately she is good health right now. If she had to go into care, would it be fair that most of the costs would be the tax payers responsibilty rather than hers. She has a valuable property, and if she was in care and paid for by the taxpayer, I would 100% be getting myself an Aston Martin as well being able to see my wife finish work well before retirement age and enjoying holidays in warmer climates with me. If she was responsible for her own care costs, those dreams would be out the window. Ultimately, if I get my car and spend large chunks of the year in exotic countries, it would be because the taxpayer would be funding my mother, which in turn means that it could be said they are funding meto live the dream. Just my personal view, but it seems a bit mean that when there is not enough money raised from taxes to provide the NHS, education etc. with much needed funds , we expect the working people to help me out with my dream car and holidays.

Steve I agree with you a zillion per cent on this

I used to live in south Africa and had to pay about a third of my wages in health insurance. Even then I didn't have great coverage....
Please don't let this become the norm here, our NHS is the envy of the world, let's protect it from greedy capitalists!!

Tony.

This is a section from an article in the guardian.

“The deficit is now roughly back to the level it was prior to the financial crisis, although is still above its long-run average. On the tax side, the impact on the public finances of substantial tax cuts has been more than outweighed by tax raising measures,” said Carl Emmerson, deputy director of the IFS and author of the report.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... c-spending

So. As I said. The deficit has been cut.

I didn't say eliminated.

Drive. Posts like yours are precisely why I dispair at the scaremongering. No where. Ever. Have ANY Conservative party sought to charge us, in addition to our taxes, for our health cover.

The NHS is meant to be free at the point of delivery. We can argue the whys and wherefores of private firms providing services. We can argue if it's right or wrong for private firms to own buildings (pfi scheme. Labour brought those in). But there is no desire amongst any parties to make us pay health insurance or pay as we go. It's just not happening.

We have had private firms delivering NHS care for decades. Dentistry and optometry spring to mind.
It wasn't the firms that introduced co Payments. It was a labour government.

No one has suggested privatising the NHS.

Drive. Posts like yours are precisely why I dispair at the scaremongering. No where. Ever. Have ANY Conservative party sought to charge us, in addition to our taxes, for our health cover.

The NHS is meant to be free at the point of delivery. We can argue the whys and wherefores of private firms providing services. We can argue if it's right or wrong for private firms to own buildings (pfi scheme. Labour brought those in). But there is no desire amongst any parties to make us pay health insurance or pay as we go. It's just not happening.

We have had private firms delivering NHS care for decades. Dentistry and optometry spring to mind.
It wasn't the firms that introduced co Payments. It was a labour government.

No one has suggested privatising the NHS.

Same here. The only people I hear talking about scrapping the NHS are the supporters of the party that created the PFI scheme in the first place. I have'nt heard any of the parties or read anything in their manifesto's stating that the NHS is to be replaced with a private healthcare system. I can see it having to be run differently, because we no longer have a population of 50 million as we did when it was created. We no longer have a life expectancy of 65 either, so whoever is in power during the next 25 years will have some juggling to do in order to keep it functional.