I don't give a stuff about Johnson breaking promises (thoroughly expected and unsurprising), but this furious debate about how we should pay for social care is something else. Many of the arguments about how much of your dosh you should keep before the state pays for your care, including keeping your empty house if you move into long-term care, I find to be outrageous. It seems to me that we're arguing for protecting inheritance. Well I don't think inheritance should be protected, obliging the state to pay for the care of people with large assets at a cost to much less well-off working people. If you have assets and you go into care with no prospect of that being turned around, you should pay for yourself. I see it as a pretty simple moral issue. Shoot!