Forum menu
Then the Tories will be back and more outrage.
Truer words were never spoken.
Drop your pants, bend over, and think of England.
Just be grateful that it's Labour shafting you.
Drop your pants, bend over, and think of England.
If there was something good at the end of it all .... Lol.
Starting to think the Tories exist to keep James O'Brien in a job and the STW forum busy.
Does the forum server overheat on *surprise* Tory outrage?
https://twitter.com/MarinaPurkiss/status/1668699571252256769?t=3jdtxJOwcSASp907UF1Niw&s=19
Centrists realise that Starmer's net is catching a few of them.
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1668708100688232448?t=HGbJay2lnPqjz_8MBN5h3Q&s=19
Starmer is a ****
Free childcare would have an absolutely massive positive effect, I think that it's one of the most socially important policies being talked about at the moment. And it would probably be economically huge as well because it would immediately bring loads of people into the job market - and improve the productivity of others.
He really is getting worse by the week. Come the election the better choice may actually be Sunak!
Seeing a Republican on C4 news last night who was saying he would vote for Trump whatever he gets done for as he is voting for Republican as can't possibly vote Democrat made me think that is similar to how I feel. If we only had two parties I would vote Labour however much of a dick the leader was as I cannot vote Tory as the two parties have clear differences in how they see society but that clear difference has got a lot smaller.
I will still be voting Green and seeing my lifer Tory MP win with another 60% so there is that.
Nailed it Molgrips.
So the government fixes something with public money that solves a societal problem and the effect generates many real benefits for all.
There is absolutely no need to be doing what Labour are doing.
What he has been doing though is sat cheerleading GoogleUK. These stupid MPs - thinking it all starts with big business. Where does he think business gets its money from?
Just be grateful that it’s Labour shafting you.
In 2010 after the tories won the election I joked with my mates that at least we could feel better about hating the govt again rather than being outraged and disappointed by it. These centrists seem to have the opposite view. I expect working people like myself to get shafted by the tories, that's what they do. So I'm always more outraged and angry when the Labour party - who are supposed to represent my interests - do the same.
The irony of course is that if a leftwing govt came in and did all the things a left wing govt should do, these same people would be cock-a-hoop. Instead though they prefer to laugh and make jokes about 'loony lefties' and reinforce tory charicatures of cardigan-clad allotment dwellers and hippy peace protestors. It'd be funny if it wasn't so tragically self-defeating.
This is the level of Centrist commentary.
Starmer is a ****
Rats in a sack.
Interested to know how you felt shafted by Blair and browns governments?
A comment from the time of a mate who is a mechanic and MOT tester for a local authority was that he'd never felt better off after 10 years of new labour.
Rats in a sack.
Thing is the left are always expected to fall in line, and mostly they do. That doesn't apply to the centrists though who are quite happy to see a tory govt in power if it stops the left. You don't see the likes of John McDonnell or Diane Abbot saying they'd rather have a tory govt than one lead by Starmer. 🤷♂️
Interested to know how you felt shafted by Blair and browns governments?
It would be risible of me to claim I'm shafted by any govt. I might be a working person but I'm a fairly comfortable one so I'm not complaining about my standard of living. That doesn't stop me being angry at how those less well off are shafted though, because that's where I came from. And there are specific things like the imposition of tuition fees which have had or will have a direct affect on me and my family. And then of course there's stuff like the Iraq war. Some people might not care about that but I do.
Labour rules out universal childcare for young children in fiscal credibility drive
It looks like Ultra-New Labour's 'economic competence' has taken a step backwards. I don't know why:
https://twitter.com/DeltapollUK/status/1668225202935808002
If Labour wants to play the 'economic competence' game according to Tory rules the Tories will always eventually win.
"We are more conservative than the Tories" is a difficult argument to win, no matter how hard you try.
Universal childcare is an obvious casualty as it clearly comes across as a very left-wing policy. The sort of policy that someone like Jeremy Corbyn would support:
https://labour.org.uk/press/childcare-for-the-many-labours-universal/
It is certainly not seen as a conservative policy.
Interested to know how you felt shafted by Blair and browns governments?
I thought it was a great period and I felt people were just generally happier and it was a better more positive time.
Clearly it was no socialist dream but A LOT of things were done better than they have been since 2010.
Yeah, don't mention the war - that was just another war in a world full of constant wars for me.
I thought it was a great period and I felt people were just generally happier and it was a better more positive time.
Wasn't that just because everyone was busy running up huge interest free credit card debts because their house had just doubled in value from the previous year?
Either it didn't have much to do with New Labour or, even worse, it did.
That doesn’t apply to the centrists though who are quite happy to see a tory govt in power if it stops the left. You don’t see the likes of John McDonnell or Diane Abbot saying they’d rather have a tory govt than one lead by Starmer
What? Do you see Blair or Brown saying they'd rather a Tory government than a labour government?
Wasn’t that just because everyone was busy running up huge interest free credit card debts because their house had just doubled in value from the previous year?
Nope, I felt the culture was better and society was not as divided. May have just been me but I felt a difference in those Labour years compared to the previous and current tory periods.
Nope, I felt the culture was better and society was not as divided.
Culture and unity is a lot easier when the majority aren't wondering if they are going to be choosing between paying rent and eating in the near future.
Correlation doesn't always equal causation but when people think things are on the up and are going to be up for the foreseeable future it tends to lead to a better overall mood. And like I said, if this good feeling was down to New Labour then they have to take responsibility for the hangover that inevitably followed.
Unfortunately, the Tories' idea of a hangover cure is a hot coffee enema that never ends.
Do you see Blair or Brown saying they’d rather a Tory government than a labour government?
Blair is on record as saying he couldn't/wouldn't support a Corbyn govt. Peter Mandelson too. Brown to his credit kept his mouth shut but was hardly supportive. Back then loads of labour centrist/rightwingers were happy to denounce the prospect of a left wing labour govt. How many labour lefties do you now hear saying the same about Starmer? Almost none!
My take on the Blair job - is where we are now - the Tories shafted things so much that any level of Labour government is seen as breath of fresh air - but it's superficial and runs out of steam as it's drowned by its own narrative of lack of money and genuine long term ideas.
Labour voters are so so desperate they will take anything. That's not a slur as I get it but we should have higher standards and be economically tuned in to the way we are constantly sold a pup by the establishment.
Markets are a tool not a necessity - if they stop serving us why are we still using them? There is no good counter narrative.
Wasn’t that just because everyone was busy running up huge interest free credit card debts because their house had just doubled in value from the previous year?
Either it didn’t have much to do with New Labour or, even worse, it did
Yes - in other words no real fixes just a bigger group of people being inflated by random market activities.
Solved nothing and suckered the middle ground into believing they had created wealth.
Remember the whole model is broken - Labour and the Tories operate within that framework. To solve the problem you have to rebuild the framework itself.
<p style="text-align: left;">If Labour wants to play the ‘economic competence’ game according to Tory rules the Tories will always eventually win.</p>
See what comes out of this one. Eventually Labour will be facing in the exact opposite direction to the electorate's needs.
molgrips
Full MemberFree childcare would have an absolutely massive positive effect, I think that it’s one of the most socially important policies being talked about at the moment. And it would probably be economically huge as well because it would immediately bring loads of people into the job market – and improve the productivity of others.
This particular one honestly feels like they might have gone "Right, let's fine a policy that's really popular and that makes total sense that would win us votes and progress our goals and help people. Ah yeah this is perfect, now let's rule it out". Almost as though not doing something difficult or controversial doesn't achieve the goal of showing how economically cautious and conservative they are, so they had do to it with something that'd be popular and vote winning.
They will of course do expensive and pointless things as long as they're conservative expensive and pointless things.
I can't keep banging the drum enough about being fiscally conservative - if they want growth - how do they expect it to occur without spending?
Total beans.
UK voters are a bit too left-wing and lack fiscal discipline for Starmer
Starmer ought to give voters lessons on fiscal prudence like Thatcher used to. And also explain why privatisation is such a great idea.
Yes THAT Bill Cash.
I may have missed my moment...
VAT on private education is something good.
VAT on private education is something good.
What i'd prefer is they removed loopholes that allow private schools avoid paying VAT on certain services.
Example - I produce a film for my local independent school - they get a VAT exemption but I have to charge VAT, and because I'm I'm flat rate I end up paying the VAT for them with no reclaim. Totally regressive.
There are many examples as they straddle a business and charity.
And I say all this as my partner works at one. But they do give me work so not all is lost in the local economy.
Independent Schools simply need to operate more in the private market possibly without access to certain reliefs. Many would close due to high costs of operation. Old expensive buildings etc.
No bad thing long term perhaps.
But on the politics of VAT on private schools - lame. Invest in the state school structure and private schools might be less of an option anyway.
Students flocked to independent schools during the pandemic because of their lower class sizes and better school from home benefits.
Simply make state schools better.
I expect current Labour to not do anything in these areas anyway.
From the above article:
as Labour moves further ahead in the polls
I don't know why they make that claim. Very slowly but steadily the gap between Labour and the Tories has been closing all this year:
https://www.politico.eu/europe-poll-of-polls/united-kingdom/
And the very latest poll is no exception:
https://twitter.com/DeltapollUK/status/1668221351407022080
I still feel confident that Labour will win the next general election, after all their two greatest foes, the Tories and the SNP, are in dire crisis, but there is no need to state as fact something for which there is no evidence.
<p style="text-align: left;">I don’t know why they make that claim. Very slowly but steadily the gap between Labour and the Tories has been closing all this year:</p>
There are so many views and possible timelines but what if ... Starmer's approach starts to have the opposite effect on Starmeroids (fanbase) and inflation starts to drop a tiny bit, summer field good etc - before the big slump in winter. Are the Tories going to want to ride another winter?
However if interest rates get to 6% that reckons to be the tipping point for trouble where the benefits of income interest bumping inflation is overtaken by proper slowing of the economy, unemployment, repossessions.
I'm going out for an October election this year.
All in. That's my prediction. Before thing get so bad that Tories simply can't correct.
Please put that poll in the Sunak forum.
Hopefully he's just planning on stuffing more Lords in there to make it easier to abolish.
Not just u-turned on yet another pledge.
Selling Ice Creams without a license, huh... what a wrong un...
Some other things...
Wise move to base the new publicly owned energy company in Scotland... as that's where the transition to green energy has the most potential for both removing and adding jobs.
The House of Lords stuff... it'll need to be stuffed before it is reformed. And all the noise about not voting in the Lords to stop the government... that makes more sense when considering just how stacked against any Labour government the Lords will be when it first takes office.
It turns out that a Labour government would have rather similar policies to the current Tory government with regards to public sector pay.
"And I’ve also always been very clear that Labour’s fiscal rules are absolutely non-negotiable.
But unlike the Conservatives, myself and my colleagues would sit down with workers in the NHS, in our schools and negotiate, whereas this Government refuses to do that."
So Labour’s fiscal rules are absolutely "non-negotiable" but the difference with the Tories is that Labour would "negotiate" these "non-negotiable" rules.
I am sure that workers in the NHS and our schools will be warmly reassured by the thought of a Labour government sitting down and discussing with them the reasons why they can't have the rises recommended by independent pay review bodies.
According to Rachel Reeves any wage settlement will have to be in line with Labour's fiscal rule – that debt must be falling as a share of national income after five years.
Perhaps Reeves will personally sit down with workers in the NHS and our schools and explain to them why they are responsible for the national debt.
2 + 2 ≠ 5
So Labour’s fiscal rules are absolutely “non-negotiable” but the difference with the Tories is that Labour would “negotiate” these “non-negotiable” rules
https://twitter.com/StephanieKelton/status/1670749246780309504?t=UCPpqqO3VB4mYnrWII8CaQ&s=19
Yeah we know.
https://twitter.com/StephanieKelton/status/1670896120082452480?t=Zgpd4S3ZWzhdEJYHxSubPA&s=19
Lol at NMT.
You can tell a lot about Starmer, I think, by the policies and promises that he actually stands by vs the ones he uturns on and especially the ones he uturns on more than once. When the dust settles, the only ones that actually count for anything look to be the ones about making everyone poorer.
You can tell a lot about Starmer, I think, by the policies and promises that he actually stands by vs the ones he uturns on and especially the ones he uturns on more than once
The flip side of that for me is I actually haven't figured out what he does deep down genuinely stand-for.
4D chess has really messed with my capacity to remember anything he said.
I rely on Kelvin and Ernie for the detail.
Spending on infrastructure and training far beyond anything our current lost at sea government will attempt. Main focus is green energy transition and NHS staff… mostly because they are priorities we all share across the UK (don’t we?). None of that is at odds with the “non-negotiable” rules on BAU spending. Negotiating with public sector unions on pay not ruled out (no point implying that it is when it isn’t). Spending on wages can go up if other things change (tax rules being an obvious target there). All this possible without declaring that you are wedded to MMT as a theory… and why would you? The public need reassurance… I know some of you would rather they were reeducated… but there’s this pesky thing called an election that needs winning. Government spending will be used to encourage growth. Taxation and regulation will be used to stop that money going into the wrong hands and to see off more high inflation and currency devaluation. This has all been stated. No need to mention MMT… people simply will not get it. Especially if they are being “taught” it by Labour politicians they already fear will bankrupt the UK (god knows why, it’s the Tories that have been making us all poorer).
I actually haven’t figured out what he does genuinely stand-for.
IMO he just wants to be Prime Minister.
I am sure he genuinely believes that if he purges the Labour Party of left-wing influence and aligns it as closely to the Tory Party as possible he will achieve his goal.
There is no reason at all to assume that he is wrong in his assessment, it certainly looks as if he is on track to be the next Prime Minister.
I wouldn't look beyond personal ambition with regards to what motivates Keir Starmer.
Lawyer ➡️ DDP ➡️ PM
3 years ago Starmer made "the moral case for socialism", today he makes the case for fiscal prudence and balanced budgets..... a different audience and a different election.
Labour will be spending more. Hopefully on the right things, everything announced so far suggests to me that is the case. That they use language designed to reassure people that they will stay in control of spending and the economy is because of people painting Socialism as not being about those things… they think Socialism means a country going broke… nonsense but there you are. That impression needs to be changed to get people to vote Labour into government. The Tories have helped an awful lot there… but even now people still say “it would be worse under Labour”, many really think that Tories are a safer bet when it comes to the economy and state finances than Labour, despite all the evidence. The battle to reassure the public is a massive one, and Labour aren’t there yet. More of this stuff to come, like it or not.
Labour will be spending more.
You know this because Keir Starmer said so? I've got news for you.
Labour have made it very clear that they will only go back on their word if they find that the economy is in a mess.
"economic stability, financial stability, always has to come first".
If they don't stick to their spending commitments it won't be their fault it will be the Tories's fault:
And pressed on why she made the pledge in the first place, the shadow chancellor said: "The truth is I didn't foresee what the Conservatives would do to our economy - maybe that was foolish of me."
So let's all pray that when the Tories leave office they leave behind a nice healthy economy.
Hopefully they will as Labour's plans are apparently based on that supposition.
labour have made it clear they will NOT be spending significantly more. Indeed they are promising more austerity
I think Kelvin was basing his belief on faith rather than what Labour has been publicly saying.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-64166870
When I asked him if his promise meant he would match Conservative spending limits, he didn't answer either way.
It is reasonable to assume that a Starmer government might well significantly increase spending after winning an election.
After all we know that Starmer said whatever he felt was necessary to say to win the Labour leadership election, despite clearly having no intention of sticking to his pledges.
It is just anyone's guess what Starmer would do as PM. It would be very foolish to make any claim based on what he is currently saying.
I think Kelvin was basing his belief on faith rather than what Labour has been publicly saying.
there is a lot of that going on especially over the B word I must not mention 🙂
It is reasonable to assume that a Starmer government might well significantly increase spending after winning an election.
There won't be a choice of they don't want to disappear into an economic nightmare.
Or maybe they do.
There won’t be a choice of they don’t want to disappear into an economic nightmare.
Precisely. Just look at George W. Bush, he entered the US presidency as a neo-conservative and left office a socialist.
To paraphrase my favourite Tory prime minister Harold Macmillan......."events, dear boy, events".
Starmer appears to be as honest as BoJo, just wants to be PM and not interested in the little people or morals and integrity, really like his attitude towards Scotland lets keep the Jocks in their place whilst taking our power and natural resources makes Thatcher look caring.
rone
Free MemberThe flip side of that for me is I actually haven’t figured out what he does deep down genuinely stand-for.
I used to think he was just pretty much an empty suit blowing whichever way the wind took him, but over time I've stopped giving him the benefit of the doubt on that, like I say the few things he actually seems to really stand for are the most right wing parts of his platform. That's the direction he moves in most confidently, that's the only place where the promises seem to mean anything. And any excuses that "he has to do that to win" look completely ridiculous now- if he thinks that, he's incompetent but I don't think he does, I think his lead has given him the confidence to go exactly where he wants.
The tory collapse should be giving Labour the confidence to push real alternatives, instead they're using it to move right. Sound familiar? Because it's not just this election he's trying to win, it's the next 10 years and more of the lies Labour will tell itself.
Even that linked piece details investment in training NHS paid for by taxation changes.
And the investment in the transition to green energy is on the record, despite it realistically not paying for itself for 10 years (Labour pushing through this transition only for a future Tory government to ride in and take the credit for the economic results is a very real risk, but we absolutely have to get on with it).
For some people that’s not enough and just “red Tory”… despite it being absolutely contrary to what the Tories have been doing.
The idea that spending will be “limitless” under Labour, with no regard to what’s happening in the wider economy and the tax take, will be ruthlessly quashed over the next year, don’t expect anything else. And don’t expect the front bench to even mention MMT, obviously.
For some people that’s not enough and just “red Tory”…
Well of course the green prosperity plan is not enough - why would it be ffs?
And they are already backtracking on it anyway :
https://news.sky.com/story/labours-rachel-reeves-backtracks-on-28bn-green-prosperity-scheme-12899279
Labour's Rachel Reeves backtracks on £28bn green prosperity scheme
And I don't know who you think is calling Starmer a "red Tory" but I do know that he is proud to call himself a conservative:
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/labour-real-conservatives-keir-starmer-protect-way-life-2337576
Starmer is clearly doing whatever it takes to become PM. Whether that is part of some master plan to get Labour into power and then do some slightly socialist stuff we will have to wait and see.
Starmer is clearly doing whatever it takes to become PM. Whether that is part of some master plan to get Labour into power and then do some slightly socialist stuff we will have to wait and see.
Yeah but to maintain power then it follows he would have to continue this path.
And also, surely to gain power he might be looking at the electorate's current wants and needs - and go a bit more left perhaps on things that have polling support?
I mean who's going to argue about water nationalisation currently?
Starmer is clearly doing whatever it takes to become PM.
Its unclear that is the case. Considering the gains are mostly from the tories imploding rather than him.
The whatever it takes is problematic in itself. Johnson also believed in that approach.
And the investment in the transition to green energy is on the record,
Because he's never u-turned on previous commitments...
He might appear to be an empty suit with his evanescent pledges but clearly his wealthy backers see in him something they like.
From the same polling…
Unsurprised to discover Keir Starmer is also failing to lead the Australian Labor Party (and government) in the way you want.
They’re a lot less shit than Morrison’s lot were. Just as Biden’s lot are a lot less shit than Trump’s log were. Not perfect.
Not perfect.
If we're talking Starmer, your description is doing some seriously heavy lifting.
I can’t judge Starmer as PM. If he makes it that far, then I will.
As opposition leader he has excelled. 2019 already looks so far away. Johnson gone. Sunak neutered. Poll fortunes reversed. He can still drop the ball though, especially as people get excited about a possible win and try and jostle him into their preferred positions.
As opposition leader he has excelled.
🤣😂
Johnson gone.
And Starmer is responsible for that?
As head of the CPS, Starmer was a senior civil servant and was required to consult the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (Acoba) for two years after his departure about any roles he wanted to take up.
Oops
The revelation could prove to be embarrassing for Starmer, who was labelled “Mr Rules” by his shadow frontbench colleague Lisa Nandy.
<p style="text-align: right;">As opposition leader he has excelled. 2019 already looks so far away. Johnson gone. Sunak neutered. Poll fortunes reversed</p>
And he's got nothing to say about changing anything for the better whilst being as regressive as the Tories.
You see the kids school meals thing today?
Add it to the list.
Starmer doesn't deserve votes to be honest. He's simply not worked at it - in fact if he'd been off work for 3 years the polling would be the same.
(Johnson neutered himself.)
He can still drop the ball though, especially as people get excited about a possible win and try and jostle him into their preferred positions.
Do you have a preferred position, besides victory? I'm struggling to discern a single reason to vote for him, beyond Not Tory.
Some of this, please…
https://labourlist.org/2023/05/labour-manifesto-2024-election-what-policies-npf-party/
Personally, both GB Energy and the National Wealth Fund investment paths for green energy transition, paired with no more exploration licenses for oil and gas (which the current government not only keep issuing, but giving tax breaks for oil companies that take them) is key. As is turning around what is happening in our schools and health service.
I’m struggling to discern a single reason to vote for him, beyond Not Tory.
That is precisely the conclusion that Starmer wants you to come to.
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/labour-real-conservatives-keir-starmer-protect-way-life-2337576He is a better conservative than any recent Tory leader. He promises the same philosophy, just much better implemented.
And I don't necessarily doubt him on that point.
That is precisely the conclusion that Starmer wants you to come to.
Well not really, as I've concluded that I don't want to vote for him.
Personally, both GB Energy and the National Wealth Fund investment paths for green energy transition, paired with no more exploration licenses for oil and gas (which the current government not only keep issuing, but giving tax breaks for oil companies that take them) is key. As is turning around what is happening in our schools and health service.
We can't afford it apparently.
That’s not what’s been said, it’s being tapered in over the first few years. Reason given is finances, but realistically neither can be at the year on year scale needed from year one, lots of work to be done to implement both, work that can only begin once in office. The sooner there’s an election, the sooner a new government can crack on. Hopefully. Unless voters listen to the “they’re all the same” messages from some quarters and take us further down this rabbit hole of increasing oil and gas dependancy by giving the Tories another 5 years we really can not afford.
He is a better conservative than any recent Tory leader. He promises the same philosophy, just much better implemented.
And that’s why he’s such a profound disappointment; there I was, hoping for someone offering a different philosophy, much better implemented.
Still, at least we’re better off than the Americans, who only have two parties to choose from.
That all depends on the seat, of course.
If we can get more Green MPs, great. I fear they might lose the one seat they have.
More LibDem MPs are needed as well. So many good ones lost in the last 15 years.
Plenty of seats where voting for either of those parties will just help return another Tory MP.