Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Manuel,

Post 76953

Bugger off Jack.

Seems you believe in the "I am alright Jack" approach to other peoples' lives.

I think you are getting to be a little creaky.

Watch out they have care plans for you.

-=-=-=-=

Could scrap Trident, which will probably be obsolete by the time of introduction, and as a right winged banana state the UK won't need it.

so come on the fred ...... you're great at slagging off everyone and everything, so tell us how you would propose to fund nhs ..... scrapping trident might give you a one-off saving - let's ignore how it would decimate the scottish economy yet further - but what then?

certainly you (profess to) hate anything to do with inherited wealth, so why would you suddenly spring to its defense?
in this instance, it becomes a version of iht, and presumably not even enforceable until the 2nd partner has died, and that leaves aside how this tax might be mitigated or even circumvented by other perfectly legit means

Nothing wrong with the tax except the amount which can be kept is too low. I can see this being adjusted upwards before the law is passed.

"inherited wealth".

Interesting expression.

Reminds me of typical torrid party morality and its values:

"O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
But it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play,"

and

"If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,"

-=-=-=-=-=

The wealth or of a country is produced by "all" of that country. (Not necessarily in easily observed ways. How that wealth is distributed is the problem.

Your luck is probably down to the family you were born into. Their luck is questionable.

8-)

fred - you weren't even skillful in evading the question ..... with all the practice you've had, i'ld have thought you could do much better

Manuel,

I can't afford the time to try to educate you.

"there's none so blind as those who will not see" comes to mind when somebody uses blindness to defend their position.

Get a better pair of glasses.

9¬)

Way above my head you two , ( c & F ) but you do chicken out Freda when the going gets tough . Denier and Bluffer .

Fernando Alonso will start his first Indianapolis 500 from the middle of the second row of the grid after qualifying fifth for the race on 28 May.

The McLaren Formula 1 driver set an average of 231.300mph on his four-lap qualifying run, while New Zealander Scott Dixon took pole at 232.164mph.

It was an impressive performance from the two-time F1 champion - he had not driven an IndyCar until this month.

To put Alonso's performance into context, 1992 F1 world champion Nigel Mansell qualified eighth on his debut in 1993, in what was the Englishman's fourth IndyCar race after switching to the US-based series. Consequently, Mansell started his race in the middle of the three cars on the third row. Mansell managed to finish in 3rd place. Later that same year, Mansell won the Michigan 500 and went on to win the 1993 CART IndyCar championship. Mansell was honored with the Driver of the Year award, the Autosport International Racing Driver Award and an ESPY.

No champagne for the winner of the Indy 500. The winner traditionally drinks milk in the victory lane.

The Indy 500 is 'watchable' for Free on BT Sport as an 'Extra' for BT customers.

just typical fred obfuscation
he pretends that he has answered (which of course he has not) but as always merely says "oh i can't be bothered to explain to you dimwits"

How about cutting the oversea's aid to at LEAST half of what it is, How about
cutting drastically those from abroad coming here and claiming benefits they
have NEVER contributed too..And IF we are not conned, the 9 billion pounds
sent to Brussels every year..And the subsidies given to Scotland that run
under the Barnett formula..

overseas aid is much more subtle than you (choose to) think and invariably has political-economic links attaching

certainly a fair amount of aid gets misappropriated, and equally certainly, some countries should not even be on the aid spectrum ..... nevertheless, to scrap it as some might suggest, would be foolish in the extreme

Manuel,

Rubbish.

It is you who shoot your mouth off with fantasy solutions without considering the consequences of suggested actions.

A bit like Theresa Maybe and immigration and fake employment figures.

She is like a death wish for the country.

.

Haha..May does a U-turn...What is it about these fools who think they can
bring in policies like the death tax and not even consider the consequencies
of such actions..

They deserve all the ridicule and incompetent tags that heads their way...

And there is still time for that useless tart may to do a u-turn on brexit.

Regarding foreign aid, I've said before, give whatever is necessary but don't have a mandatory % of gdp. That leads to waste.
Re the so called "dementia tax", maybe it will lead to more people taking care of their elderly parents rather than the State. From what I have heard, the monthly cost of a care home is way above the average monthly wage. Once children see that their possible inheritance would be drained at an alarming rate, they may think twice about dumping them on the local council. Much of dementia care is feeding, dressing and preventing self harm, rather than medicinal. Perhaps a scheme could be arranged whereby home carers are paid to look after their parents, with the care payments being offset against the eventual sale or remortgaging of the family home after the death of both parents. The family should benefit more from their assets and the demand on care homes will be reduced. If children don't wish to care for their parents, then the May proposal looks reasonable.

I suppose it depends how long you have care for as to whether it's fair or not, just imagine being cared for for 2 weeks and then you depart and the government say thank you very much for that £400k or more.

DEMENTIA CARE
certainly something of an own-goal through a lack of prior consultation, or failing that, a mention that there would be consultation
nevertheless, i think the concept has much merit for all sorts of reasons, but a fair level needs to be determined - £100k is too low but £500k probably too high

As for foreign aid I believe that if the government is intent on looking after others before their own then ALL AID to foreigners should come out of that budget. I agree with cynic (to a point) re foreign aid and economical-political argument.

foreign aid is two-sided which no doubt is why the likes of zimbabwe get none - it has nothing to offer in return

Some over-75s could lose free TV licences under BBC proposal

Corporation may limit free licences to households who only contain over-75s when it loses government subsidy in 2020

The BBC is also considering means-testing older people for the TV licence.

Free TV licences for over-75s could be limited to those who live with someone else also over the age of 75 in a plan being considered by the BBC that could save it about £150m a year.

It comes as the corporation tries to work out how to shoulder the £650m-plus sum of paying for the free licence fees from 2020, which it had to agree to as part of a funding deal with the government.

The BBC is currently compensated by the Department for Work and Pensions for the television benefit. But from next year the subsidy will be phased out and by 2020 the BBC will foot the whole bill, which will cost the corporation about a fifth of its £3.7bn income.

By not giving free licences to over-75s who live with someone who is not eligible for the benefit – such as a spouse or partner under the age of 75 – it is thought the BBC could save about £150m. That is almost the equivalent of the combined annual budget of Radio 4 and BBC4.