Sir! Keir! Starmer!

Yup, you need a coalition to govern the UK. Our FPTP system hides that, by making it almost essential for a coalition to occur within a party (and for a coalition of voters to back that party).

we’re almost getting into the lizard people territory with the way the rich are made out to be in this (and other) threads.

Are you taking the piss? 800 people have just been fired with no notice and replaced by what amounts to slave labour. The richest few percent have almost doubled their wealth in the past couple of years when everyone else has seen their incomes eroded or wiped out completely thanks to covid. The tax burden on working people has increased but the rich are paying less. Millions of people need to go to food banks to feed their families and homelessness is skyrocketing. This is all happening for a reason, and it's not an accident.

You think Starmer is driven by conviction?

Not what I said. Again, stop making stuff up to start arguments.

Are you taking the piss? 800 people have just been fired with no notice and replaced by what amounts to slave labour. The richest few percent have almost doubled their wealth in the past couple of years when everyone else has seen their incomes eroded or wiped out completely thanks to covid. The tax burden on working people has increased but the rich are paying less. Millions of people need to go to food banks to feed their families and homelessness is skyrocketing. This is all happening for a reason, and it’s not an accident.

You're doing soapbox shouting with this stuff, nothing is any different today than it was last century, or the century before, no matter the government in charge, 'the rich' is just a generic statement, without any definition, what are you on about with the rich, is it billionaires, millionaires, people who earn more than 50k a year, someone who drives a BMW, what is it?

Just going on about dystopian billionaires playgrounds when you see the state of the old soviet union, or the middle east, or several other places in the world is embarrassing, could the UK be better, yes, could it be fairer, yes, but is it the worst shitshow, not even close.

could the UK be better, yes, could it be fairer, yes, but is it the worst shitshow, not even close.

You seem to be completely unaware or wilfully ignorant of the enormous levels of hardship and deprivation in this country. It's not even relative poverty any more, it's absolute. This in a supposedly developed modern western economy. If you don't think there's a problem then you really need to get out more and educate yourself.

You seem to be completely unaware or wilfully ignorant of the enormous levels of hardship and deprivation in this country. It’s not even relative poverty any more, it’s absolute. This in a supposedly developed modern western economy. If you don’t think there’s a problem then you really need to get out more and educate yourself.

You probably need to do a little review around the world to really see what 'enormous' levels of hardship and deprivation actually looks like because the UK aren't even in the top 10 for that, as stated, can the UK do better, yes, but it can also do a hell of a lot worse.

Again, stop making stuff up to start arguments.

I don't think this thread needs anyone to make anything up to start an argument.

It seems to happen with very little effort.

Edit : I'm glad you agree that Starmer isn't driven by commitment btw. It's good to agree about stuff.

You probably need to do a little review around the world to really see what ‘enormous’ levels of hardship and deprivation actually looks like

In other words, stop whining you pathetic plebs and thank your lucky stars you're not starving to death or having bombs dropped on you. 🙄

In other words, stop whining you pathetic plebs and thank your lucky stars you’re not starving to death or having bombs dropped on you. 🙄

Of course, the illuminati are currently sat round a table, twirling their moustaches and plotting on how to kill off the minions

Of course, the illuminati are currently sat round a table

No, it's a tory government sat round the cabinet table plotting how to keep their billionaire and multimillionaire friends rich whilst we plebs pay the taxes to keep the lights on. The tragedy is that the parliamentary labour party would do no different.

What a strange response. Daz's comment was perfectly valid. Certainly more valid imo than the comment that are worse things happening in the world.

Perhaps the people of Ukraine should be reminded that things were a lot worse during WW2? If Whataboutry is a valid comment.

You probably need to do a little review around the world to really see what ‘enormous’ levels of hardship and deprivation actually looks like because the UK aren’t even in the top 10 for that, as stated, can the UK do better, yes, but it can also do a hell of a lot worse

I think you need to do better than dismissing a problem because somewhere else there may be a worse problem. As dazh notes, we're one of the richest countries in the world, so there's really no reason for widespread poverty in the UK other than it being a political decision.

No, it’s a tory government sat round the cabinet table plotting how to keep their billionaire and multimillionaire friends rich whilst we plebs pay the taxes to keep the lights on.

Rishi Sunak presided over £150 Bn in covid quantitative easing. Divide that sum by the (approximate) 35M working-age adults in the UK, and you get ~£4250 per working-age adult. If you don't feel like you're £4250 better off than you were in 2020, then someone else has got that money.

Meanwhile, the net worth of millionaires and billionaires in the UK increased by 20% since then. It's clear where all the money has been funnelled.

What a strange response. Daz’s comment was perfectly valid. Certainly more valid imo than the comment that are worse things happening in the world.

Not as strange as thinking the rich are just out to kill off or feed off ‘the poor’

Also, what is ‘enormous’ levels, what is the definition of hardship or deprivation, I’ve spent my entire life in the uk and yet to see shantytowns, or any enormous groups who have no access to healthcare and welfare, we have poverty, we have those who need help the most, but these blanket statements about the rich, or the tories are just pointless

It’s clear where all the money has been funnelled.

Indeed. What we have in this country is socialism for the rich. Money flows upwards, and the result is misery, stress, mental health problems and suffering for those at the bottom. It may not be a deliberate action by the rich but they benefit directly from the same policies which cause poverty and deprivation. Ultimately the rich can afford to be a little poorer in order to improve the lives of millions of people at the other end of the spectrum. The fact that they (and argee apparently) think this is unacceptable tells us all we need to know about them.

https://twitter.com/adamcorlett/status/1507385634180243467?s=21&t=JJvtrvTXQqSVWEDwgeqVTA

There was a piece on the bbc the other day, about how the sanctions on Russian oligarchs had little impact because these oligarchs had protected their assets in trusts. They hadn't done this now to avoid sanctions, this was a long standing method to avoid tax. They also hadn't created the system that allowed them to do so, they just slotted in to the system used by western oligarchs.

The Tories keep shifting the tax burden towards lower paid workers (why have an NI rate increase rather than an income tax increase at all if that isn't your aim), and reducing the real term value of benefits. They do this in plain sight. Yet people still choose not to see it in action.

Russian, Indian, Saudi Arabian, etc, etc have been doing that for generations, check up on any person who had power and sucked the money from their countries coffers and you’ll find millions in assets owned by children, parents, relatives or friends.

Even with the unexplained wealth orders they still can’t get at them, you get diplomatic immunity and so on.

The spoils of victory always tend to go up the chain, have done since we created currency.

Yes, inequality, and life for those that are at the lower end of income/wealth distribution is worse elsewhere. And yes, go back far enough and they were far worse here. But now, here, in this age, we're choosing to make it worse (by supporting/electing politicians who tell us how they're going to make it worse here, and then do). We're going backwards, and cheering it on.

So what has Keir Starmer got to say about all this, to get back on topic?

What solution is he offering? Or is the problem too big?

Any ideas binners, since you hate to hear him being criticised?

My understanding is that Labour have opposed the changes to both taxation and benefits that the Tories are putting in place to shift the tax burden towards lower earners, and away from those that are either higher earners or get their income from investments. If you weren’t so busy claiming that there is no real difference between Conservative and Labour positions (presumably because you, like many of the rest of us, would like there to be a greater separation), you’d see that.

Labour have opposed the changes to both taxation and benefits

So Labour isn't offering any solution other than one to stop things getting worse?

Well I guess that if you are happy with where we are today that's fine.

If you weren’t so busy claiming that there is no real difference between Conservative and Labour positions

You are telling me that Labour wants to maintain the status quo, at least you haven't offered any evidence that they want to change it.

I will remind you that the Tories have been in government for the last 12 years.

So Labour isn’t offering any solution other than one to stop things getting worse?

Well, it would be a good start. But, no, it’s not all their offering. You should read and listen to what the front bench have to say occasionally. Hang on, were you not at a rally recently were Labour front benchers told attendees and the media about some of the ways that want the situation for workers to be improved?

So voters need to attend rallies to find out what Keir Starmer's alternative vision is?

He wasn't there btw.

Recent global events have disadvantaged Starmer and benefitted johnson - both disproportionately.
During any crisis the government - and principally the PM - will always get much more airtime and media coverage than the opposition; that's how it's always been.
Starmer's opportunities to get his point across and present an alternative to johnson are severely limited.
He needs more media coverage away from the narrow political spectrum - PMQs, political/politically focussed programmes and current affairs coverage aren't of general mainstream interest.
Regardless of how compelling his vision may (or may not) be he can't force the media to give him airtime.
johnson has been more than fortunate with one crisis after another deflecting the focus away from him and his administration.
First covid, now Ukraine - what next?

Recent global events have disadvantaged Starmer and benefitted johnson – both disproportionately.

I disagree, they have actually brought into sharp focus the folly of current economic practice. The vacuum of action on climate change has left the west reliant on even more corrupt nations for our energy needs, and our financial system has allowed them not only to buy leverage into our economies, but also political finance system has allowed them to buy power and influence over those who are meant to be our democratic representatives.

But too many are quite happy for Starmer to merely murmur disapproval. In case he should actually seize the moment to show he has some real backbone, just in case that is seen as making a political point. He is a political leader FFS in the middle of a world event, and he is meant to shy away from it to appease who exactly?

So voters need to attend rallies to find out what Keir Starmer’s alternative vision is?

He wasn’t there btw.

If it was the P&O rally ran by the unions and having Louise Haigh speak, then it wasn't really any alternative visions as captured by the Labour party if i understand it, it was basically a union led backlash against P&O and what they did.

We're not in an election year yet, so i'd hope Labour are doing more about becoming one party with a real way forward for the next election, which means all these good ideas need to be assessed, funded and given a timeline for implementation, then trade offs will occur, nothing worse than opening up their manifesto and it's a bit like the LibDems, i.e. stating they will change the world, knowing they'll never get power and never have to justify why 70% of it is pie in the sky.

If it was the P&O rally ran by the unions and having Louise Haigh speak, then it wasn’t really any alternative visions as captured by the Labour party if i understand it, it was basically a union led backlash against P&O and what they did.

I think Kelvin is referring to the rally in support of P&O employees outside parliament last Monday where Angela Rayner spoke, Louise Haigh didn't speak at that one.

I don't know why he thinks it was a good way of finding out Keir Starmer's alternative vision for Britian. I'm not even sure that most speakers were members of the Labour Party.

We’re not in an election year yet....

I'm not convinced that waiting until we are and hoping for a sprint finish is a good idea.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/mar/18/boris-johnson-kicking-off-two-year-election-campaign-in-may

“We are going to have to fight this one seat by seat, promise delivered by promise delivered, doorstep by doorstep,” he said. “And from May, we will begin our two-year election campaign with the launch of our target seat strategy, building on the experience of the 40:40 campaign in 2015, building capacity, developing profile and framing the choice.”