If the Tories formed a government but May got ousted who would replace her? Boris? Who else?

Given the vast majority of the establishment are opposed to brexit this is a real possibility. Ironically those who place brexit above all else would be better voting for JC as he has an ideological opposition to the EU as opposed to the puppet TM.

By those numbers 350k (HSCIC estimate of those receiving long term government funded care at home) will definitely be worse off but 250k possibly better off and don't forget we already had the proposed cap of £72k that this government was supposed to implement last year but instead delayed til 2020 and until the U turn appeared to have scrapped.
The £100k with no cap on all care would have been a far far bigger earner.
The Health and Social Care information Centre estimate the number of pensioners receiving essential care allowing them to live independently at 850,000 - often in the form of family members acting as carers - nothing has been mentioned about carers allowance being included in the cost.
Likewise short term care after release from hospital.

Ill thought out,callous and arrogant.
But that's the tories for you.

It's not 100% whoever wins.

I'd love to see Labour do well enough to form at least a minority government but I'm also fervently anti-brexit and suspect the best hope would be a Labour led coalition with pro-remain coalition partners.

Leaving the EU is quite close to 100%

There are a degree of options scaling from a hard brexit to "remaining in all but name" that are all possible that the exact outcome of the election could determine.

Tory leadership elections are always highly unpredictable but you can expect the same motley crew of Bonkers Boris and some of Rudd/Davis/Gove/Fox to want to represent the right of the party and probably Hammond and AN Other the centre/left.

Care at home is not free, and never has been. If you have more than £23500 in assets (including the value of your home) you have to pay. Once your assets are depleted to this level, you get it free. So they will not "definitely be worse off".

This is why so many relatives care for family members.

I agree it's ill thought out though. Where are all the additional careers going to come from, when relatives decide that with £100k guaranteed coming their way, they would rather pay someone else to look after a relative.

The value of your home is not included in your assets for care at home.
That's why this was such a cash grab

You might want to read the whole article next time you quote it.

What it's talking about there is the means test. So, when they are deciding how much you have to pay, they do not count the value of your home.

The last sentence is key:

The bottom line is that if the current system was the £100k floor, and Theresa May has just reduced it to £23500, opposition to her would still be ranting about a "dementia tax". In fact, I think they would be apoplectic - and not because they have even thought about or understand the change, but:

I'm not sure either system is good, however I think the newer one is a slight improvement on the old one, as it removes the lottery of if you have someone who requires long-term care, watching their entire asset pool deplete to £23500 - the new system, you always get that £100k.

You're totally (and possibly deliberately) missing the point.

Currently for care in the home you are means tested and then asked to contribute. If you have assets not including your home of over £23,500 you will be asked to pay the full cost until your assets fall below that figure.If your assets are between £14,250 and £23,500 the council will contribute.
Below £14,250 and your assets are not counted. You pay what you can according to the means test.
Say you live in your own home worth £200,000 and have assets of £10,000 and a weekly income of £300 made up of state pension,disability premium and attendance allowance then you will be asked to pay a maximum based on means testing of roughly £50 regardless of the cost of your home care which would be between £15 and £20 an hour. Your home is safe regardless.
Under the proposed dementia tax your assets now include your home and as such you will be charged the full cost of your care until your assets of £10k are gone and your home is saddled with £100k of debt. There was no cap on the total contribution proposed.
Under the old system there was a cap.

Quite. My family has recent experience of the system in operation. It's grim, and it costs, a lot, but it's reasonable. Now that the government is proposing to rip into the value of your home -- you're delusional if you think older people are going to vote for that. They aren't. And the Conservatives depend on the votes of older people.

Plus there's that.

As has mine - both home care, and residential care.

Home care might cost around £5k a year for 1 hour a day, or £10k a year for 2 hours a day.*

Residential care is averaged at £30k a year for residential care; £40k if you need nursing.

The point I'm making is that if you're unlucky enough to need residential care, it would wipe out your entire assets down to £23500 in less than 5 years in Epcfast's example.

No one is going to argue that under the new system, people needing care at home are going to be better off - they are not. However, people needing residential care most probably are, and as I've pointed out earlier there is always going to be a relationship where people needing home care eventually need residential care - so they lose on home care, and gain on residential care.

Anyway, this is just my view having experienced the system. I'd personally rather know I'm guaranteed £100k, rather than face the care home lottery where I might get more, but I might also just get £23500.

It wouldn't because under the current scheme there is a cap of £72000 total that was supposed to come in last year but the tories delayed til 2020
The reason why they delayed it is to see if they could "get away with" this dementia tax unnoticed.

First graph correct
gogogo

Fot the few not the many

Interesting article
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...-a7770831.html


"Jeremy Corbyn is a right-wing Red Tory who offers no alternative to the Government"

Thats hardly relevant to the current discussion, seeing as its never actually been implemented.

However much i and i expect most people dont agree with uncapped caring fees.

I mostly agree. The problem i see with that argument is just that the continental European and British (legal and political) culture is to different. At the moment it looks like the EU might be reformed if Macron and Merkel push for it a bit more, but whatever this reform will be, will mean more fiscal and political integration within the EU, which is exactly what the UK does not want.

Of course it's relevant,
You're comparing a new (capless until the u-turn)scheme that will come with the existing scheme which already includes a cap to come in by 2020.
You were completely wrong about care at home including your home as an asset under the present scheme and are now just nitpicking.

oh ffs