MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
What I am 100 percent sure on is that the first step to getting anywhere with anything is getting the Tories out for a long time and to rebuild the whole system , so right now he’s the only option .
True but the big risk is that if people see no meaningful change in 5 years they will just vote tory again next time as per usual and revert to form. I don't know why they do it, presumably they can't remember how bad the tory government was as even if Labour don't make much of a difference I can't believe they would actually be worse for the vast majority of people.
When Labour last lost power to the tories did the tories make anything better, clearly not, but for some reason people thought they would - based on what?
Given the current position of the tories Starmer could have been a LOT more progressive and still been in the same position so why hasn't he been? Why would he suddenly become more progressive a year after winning, is it some sort of master plan?
He hasn't been more progressive because he's not. All this sucking up to big business and austerity rhetoric isn't a front, they mean it. What's keeping the Abbot case alive is that many MPs are beginning to be made to feel vulnerable themselves.
Has Starmer said or done anything to make you believe he’ll enact those changes once he has the keys to number 10?
Many on here seem to think that Starmer u-turns on everything so what makes you think that once elected he won't turn from being a tory-lite austerity fan into an avid mmt proponent?
Starmer isn't trying to appeal to 'Tory' voters, as they will vote tory no matter what, he is trying to appeal to the undecided voters, who tend to change dependent on how they feel about the parties, last election, they predominantly voted Tory, if Labour don't try to appeal to these voters, then they will never win, again i'm not even sure what the whole philosophy is around Labour should be going for the left only, i've never been around to see a leftist government, 'New' Labour suffered the same name calling from the left back in 1997 as Starmer's Labour is getting today.
for some reason people thought they would – based on what
Im confident that a large part of the electorate doesn’t even attempt to be aware of the political or economic ramifications and are just taken in by media projected populist sound bites. Let’s face it, some fairly significant leverage was placed within the image of a narcissistic clown with an 8yo’s hairstyle on several occasions over the last few years.
True but the big risk is that if people see no meaningful change in 5 years they will just vote tory again next time as per usual and revert to form
I have some sympathy with this . People will expect improvements in basic services and if this doesn't happen blaming the Tories will only get them so far , I suspect the majority will be big enough that a 2nd term will be pretty likely.
The other side of that is what happens to the Tories, how do they respond and rebuild. A Lurch further to the right might make some inroads but I don't think it makes them a prospect for government.
‘New’ Labour suffered the same name calling from the left back in 1997 as Starmer’s Labour is getting today.
Had policies that Thatcher had instigated and then invaded Iraq. Blair then promised a referendum on Lisbon. New Labour were very much a part of the swing to the right in British politics and I'm sceptical about Starmer doing anything but continue it if left to do his thing..
It's fantastic.
Starmer is refusing to play the Tories' game and differentiate himself from the them wherever possible (and slightly overdoing it IMO). He's refusing to get dragged into the Culture War shite.
So what do the left-wing faction in his own party do? Fan the flames of their own internal culture war.
Brilliant.
We are so close to being rid of this awful, corrupt, morally bankrupt GINO. The UK cannot afford to eff this up.
Is this such a crime , trying to appeal to Tory voters I mean not daily mail columnists .
Well it's certainly an arse about face way of doing things.
Generally politicians come up with convincing arguments explaining to voters why their solutions are the correct ones.
Politicians are not generally themselves won over by voters with opposing views. After all that is the whole point of forming a political party, otherwise why bother? Unless politics is just a career move and not driven by any commitment or sense of mission.
Imagine a Labour politician out canvassing and knocking on a Tory voter's door, after 20 minutes the Labour politician walks away having been unable to convince the Tory voter, but the good news is that the Tory voter has convinced him and he now supports Tory policies. Is that really something to celebrate?
And to apply all that to the current Diane Abbott nonsense it is being suggested that the whole row was deliberately orchestrated to appeal to Tory voters - Starmer's strategists wanted a high profile media row with headlines that would appeal to them.
That strategy was used with some effect by Tony Blair - he deliberately went out of his way to pick high profile rows with the left in an attempt to appeal to Tory voters and right-wing columnists.
The problem currently now appears to be that Morgan McSweeney and David Evans are amateurs and the thing has spun out of control, with even blairite politicians appalled by the treatment that Diane Abbott has received and yesterday the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party no longer sticking to the script:
https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-labours-fight-the-left-risks-spinning-out-control/
We are so close to being rid of this awful, corrupt, morally bankrupt GINO. The UK cannot afford to eff this up.
Great, let's get Tories out. I'd love nothing more. But...
Starmer is refusing to play the Tories’ game and differentiate himself from the them
If they're replaced by a party that is no different then what will change?
If they’re replaced by a party that is no different then what will change?
They are different. Thinking all parties/politicians are the same is a Tory trap. Would I like them to be more different? Absolutely. I'm sure they could afford to be a bit more to the left, but right now step one is get the Tories out
Many on here seem to think that Starmer u-turns on everything
That is a very strange thing to say. 'Seem to think' and 'on here'??
Every man and his dog knows that Keir Starmer has carried out spectacular U-turns, it has become the stuff of political legends.
From the immediate U-turns on his dishonestly called 10 "Pledges" to his much more recent U-turn on the £28 billion Green pledge. His period as Labour leader has been characterized by his never-ending handbrake turns.
Having said that I do agree with the point that you were trying to make - no one knows how Starmer will behave when he becomes Prime Minister after July 4th.
Yes he could turn out to be a radical leftie, which is something that the Tories are trying to exploit by suggesting, quite rightly, that Starmer will say anything to win an election. Although I have to confess that I consider it somewhat unlikely.
Has the added bonus from the Tories’ POV that all the students will be at home.
Been thinking about students. As universities tend to be in urban more lefty places that aren't going to go Tory anyway, wouldn't it benefit the Tories to have an election when they're away from their Shire homes?
They are different. Thinking all parties/politicians are the same is a Tory trap.
Apart from when they are pretty much the same on things that make any difference to peoples lives. Yes I would hope Labour won't be so corrupt, wouldn't give their mates the returns, won't be so vindictive and so on but that doesn't really make much difference to peoples day to day lives.
What makes a difference are the policies and strategies of the party to improve services, increase equality etc,. and I can't see any real difference between what Labour are stating and what the Tories are stating they will do.
Again, this whole 'Tory' voter thing is just a weird phrase, Labour are appealing to those who may change their vote, they're not Tory, they're not Labour, they're people who have a vote. It's just another thing on here to try and belittle Starmer and Labour as always, same as the 'centre right' stuff about those who back Labour under Starmer.
If Labour go for just those who are leftists, then it'll be another blowout, maybe if the UK had more left/far left voters it would be easier for Starmer to sell policies against that, but there isn't, the UK has been right of centre for the last decade or so, it was just left of centre before that, i can't remember it ever being proper left.
The people who are saying, 'The only thing that matters is to get the Tories out!' sound like the Underpants Gnomes.
Phase 1: Get the Tories out!
Phase 2: ?
Phase 3: Sunlit Uplands!
The rest of us are very interested in step 2 so to be constantly told it doesn't matter is getting annoying.
Edit - forget I said anything.
it does matter but without 1 there is no 2
Without a Phase 2 then Phase 3 is an even more crackpot Tory government in 5 years.
Anyway the Daily Telegraph are lovin it:
Angela is a Northern lass, ain’t she?
I'm not sure quoting the Telegraph preaching to its readership is quite the support for your view that you think it is.
The whole thing has been badly handled by Starmer/the Labour Party. Let's focus on that rather than the election campaign and indeed the country that have been badly handled by the Tory party for the last 14 years.
Focus people!
I think it’s reasonable to assume Lab will win with an outright majority too.
Yeah but if you assume you make a sum in the middle of ase or something. It's going to be a long five weeks with christ knows what twists and turns to come.
As already mentioned, labour need to appeal to the swing vote, not the hard left. That’s how elections are won. And if they do that and the tories still win because the hard left decided they didn’t like labour policies and didnt vote for them, well that’s the very definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face imo..
last election, they predominantly voted Tory
Actually they didnt. The undecided seemed to mostly stay at home or vote for libdem etc. Its always worth looking at the actual numbers vs percentages.
May did a far better job of increasing the tory vote than Johnson did. The difference was in 2019 the labour vote collapsed by a couple of million with the tory vote increasing by 300k.
again i’m not even sure what the whole philosophy is around Labour should be going for the left only
Possibly because you are making it up? The problem is Labour is currently going for the centrists and right only. Even under Blair there was more of a compromise with things being offered to the left but now its absolutely no compromise or attempt to appeal to the left. Just shouts about "tory enablers" whilst being busy welcoming hard right ERG members to the party and purging the left.
‘New’ Labour suffered the same name calling from the left back in 1997 as Starmer’s Labour is getting today.
Again new Labour were moderated to some degree by the left wing of the party. Notice how Starmer has relentlessly purged those?
Plus as arguments go its pretty weak one considering how much new labour normalised hard right policies to the extent that come Cameron they could do things even Thatcher thought were a bit extreme right.
And if they do that and the tories still win because the hard left decided they didn’t like labour policies and didnt vote for them, well that’s the very definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face imo..
And also a good example of what happened in 2019.
So what do the left-wing faction in his own party do? Fan the flames of their own internal culture war.
Oh give over. The left wing have done nothing of the sort, the only fanning of flames has been from Starmer and his right wing cabal who think purging the left is more important than conducting their election campaign. No one in the country actually cares if Diane Abbot stands to be an MP or not, and yet the Labour leadership have bizarrely blown it up into the major issue in their campaign when they could have just let her stand and no one would have noticed or cared.
Anyway I'm still sticking to voting green. Elphicke was the last straw, this idiocy just confirms it.
I’m not sure quoting the Telegraph preaching to its readership is quite the support for your view that you think it is.
The link shows that the Daily Telegraph is exploiting the divisions that the Diane Abbott row has caused at the very top of the Labour Party.
It makes my point perfectly.
And if they do that and the tories still win because the hard left decided they didn’t like labour policies and didnt vote for them, well that’s the very definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face imo..
This is rather flawed logic.
So swing voters are allowed to look at policies and decide which way to vote and hence policies need to be aimed at them?
Whereas the moderate left (lets get rid of this bollox hard left considering labour have welcomed the hard right erg members) shouldnt take the same approach because, why exactly?
This is the problem. Why shouldnt the left use the same approach as the right and demand concessions for votes?
If they dont then they will continue to be ignored whilst the right wingers are pandered to.
No one in the country actually cares if Diane Abbot stands to be an MP or not, and yet the Labour leadership have bizarrely blown it up into the major issue in their campaign when they could have just let her stand and no one would have noticed or cared.
Exactly this.
If the hard left don't like the current version of the Labour Party why don't they all toddle off and form their own party - like Reform UK have on the right.
Because they know the middle ground is where the votes are, and they'd rather like to keep their jobs!
Yes I would hope Labour won’t be so corrupt, wouldn’t give their mates the returns, won’t be so vindictive and so on but that doesn’t really make much difference to peoples day to day lives.
If you are homeless/disabled/immigrant etc then the "vindictive" part of your sentence probably does matter to your day to day life. As a lucky middle class white guy will I be in a better place on 5th July with the tories out? Probably not but then I'm not suffering in todays world - but perhaps I'll despair less about the points you made and that would be enough to actually make me feel happier about living in this country. If a politician can get you to vote for them because their tone makes you happier either they are very good or the alternative is bad.
If the hard left don’t like the current version of the Labour Party why don’t they all toddle off and form their own party – like Reform UK have on the right.
Because they know the middle ground is where the votes are, and they’d rather like to keep their jobs!
Actually they might - if they all agree enough on how hard etc. BUT as Reform and others have shown in the past it's much harder to get traction forming a new party in the 2 party state we live in than it should be. I think, given how recently Corbin was leader, they also feel Labour IS "their" party and it should change from within. After all 20-25 years ago if you were a Eurosceptic tory, the cry was "why don't you toddle off to join/form UKIP" - that changed dramatically and now I imagine the message is "if you are a Europhile tory, why don't you join LibDems or form your own party". Lets sat 10% of the party, and 10% of the parliamentary party wanted to form a "more left" version of labour - should they be entitled to take 10% of the assets of the party? What if it was 50% - then you essentially have "divorce" proceedings between two factions. In fact if you had 10% of your MPs who were driving divisions - might it be in your interests to give them 10% of the cash to F off and form their own party!
I'm not convinced that he'd left or hard right do things for votes - that's the whole point they are conviction led not trying to temper their convictions to win support.
No one in the country actually cares if Diane Abbot stands to be an MP or not, and yet the Labour leadership have bizarrely blown it up into the major issue in their campaign when they could have just let her stand and no one would have noticed or cared.
Oddly I don't think the labour leadership have blown it into a story - the media have. Perhaps labour have been naive in thinking they control what's headline grabbing and could have extinguished the burning embers quicker but the media have made this a story, presumably stoked by Tory supporters, ironically aided and abetted by the hard left, the racists and the anti-semites all cooperating together! However, whilst its a story for people in politics who care - it won't be the topic of conversation around 98% of British dinner tables.
Because they know the middle ground is where the votes are, and they’d rather like to keep their jobs!
Aside from the middle ground isnt where the votes are. Otherwise the libdems would be in perpetual power. The middle ground is, currently, the ones who can be swayed to either side.
However that relies on both the left and right playing along with it.
Given the mess the country is in after too much time pandering to the centrists its not surprising that people are increasingly questioning it especially given the centrists inability to compromise at all.
Insane energy bills
Frightening food prices
Stratospheric levels of immigration and abused asylum system and inevitable housing shortage
Long NHS waiting lists
Police failing to prevent or investigate crimes such as burglaries
Can't wait to hear what the different parties propose to solve the country's problems. So far Labour have come up with nationalised GB Energy which will fix the cost of living crisis with "green" energy- wind and solar are more expensive so energy bills will go up not down
If they’re replaced by a party that is no different then what will change?
That's is a deep flaw hidden within that sentence.
Labour could have gone full Corbyn, *again*, and Labour would have lost. *Again*. Blame the electorate, the media, whatever, it doesn't matter. The UK at the moment won't swing that far left as much as I wish it would. It's a fact of UK politics at the moment.
Look, I voted for Corbyn twice as I'm pragmatic and he/Labour were the best chance of ridding us of the Tories but it didn't work. Even as I voted I knew it was a lost cause.
I'm sick and tired of labour being an opposition protest party standing upon principle and forever dooming itself to opposition.
Right or wrong Starmer can't go towards Corbyn policies during an election.
If he does we know the outcome and I for one am sick and tired of that outcome.
Get these *****ers out!
Oddly I don’t think the labour leadership have blown it into a story – the media have.
Nah, Britain's first ever black female MP (and someone who has been an MP for 37 years) being told that no decision has been made concerning whether she can stand as a candidate on July 4th, was always going to be a big story. Starmer and his strategists damn well knew that - there is no possibility that they thought it would be ignored. They are not idiots.
Diane Abbott is black and left-wing, she is hated by Tory Party supporters. The Tory Party chief donor said that she made him want to hate all black women and that someone should shoot her.
A public row with Diane Abbott was exactly what Starmer and his advisors wanted, as they try to appeal to Tory voters. But they just didn't expect it to all spiral out of control. By now it undoubtedly should have been announced that she won't be allowed to stand, but the pushback has been too great for them to make the announcement.
The link shows that the Daily Telegraph is exploiting the divisions that the Diane Abbott row has caused at the very top of the Labour Party.
It makes my point perfectly.
I'm not sure many "centrist" or left wing voters read or are influenced by the Torygraph. Very much preaching to their own choir.
grimep
Free Member
Insane energy bills
Frightening food prices
Stratospheric levels of immigration and abused asylum system and inevitable housing shortage
Long NHS waiting lists
Police failing to prevent or investigate crimes such as burglaries
And I had you down as a Tory supporter grimep!
I had no idea that you are so critical of the current Tory government, who will you be voting for - Reform UK?
Do tell. Although it was a bit of a laugh yesterday this thread has become a tad boring today, just going round in circles really now. It needs a new fun angle I reckon.
I’m not sure many “centrist” or left wing voters read or are influenced by the Torygraph. Very much preaching to their own choir.
No Tory voters read the Daily Telegraph, obviously.
The very people that Starmer is apparently trying to appeal to. Or are you going to deny that?
Starmer regularly writes articles for Daily Telegraph readers to read.
Fill yer boots:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/authors/k/ka-ke/keir-starmer/
This is rather flawed logic.
So swing voters are allowed to look at policies and decide which way to vote and hence policies need to be aimed at them?
It’s not flawed logic, it’s the reality of how you win elections. You may not like the fact, neither do I particularly, but it is what it is
Under apartheid in SA there was a definite pecking order something along the lines of 1. whites (but differences between Boers and others). 2. Asians . 3 'Cape coloureds' 4. black Africans 5. San. In Abbott's defence, it would be ludicrous to suggest that everyone suffered/s under racism equally and I'm pretty sure gingers weren't categorised under the Group Areas Act. The fuss over Abbott's letter seems more of a culture war over the race to the greatest victimhood to fit whatever agenda.
It’s not flawed logic, it’s the reality of how you win elections
If and only if people play along.
As soon as they decide not to then the party has to adapt or in the case of the labour rightwingers shout about tory enablers whilst busily changing the party to attract tories.
So again why should left wingers provide an unconditional vote to labour vs taking the same approach as the centrists?
No policies which appeal, no vote.
I’m pretty sure gingers weren’t categorised under the Group Areas Act.
It's a very British thing.
TBH, if Starmer appeared at the lectern outside No 10 and said:
"It's all been lies, we're winding the clock back, nationalising essential industries, applying to join the EU forthwith, filing our own arrest warrant for Netanyahu and outlawing private education".
I would be delighted.
But what I want is all secondary to what we all need - this incarnation of the Tories out of power.
Okay let's take one step back and leave the labels alone.
Simply construct good arguments and offer appropriate solutions.
There are no good arguments nor solutions coming out of the Labour camp currently. Just reactionary manoeuvres around a collapsing Tory party.
Every time Reeves or Starmer say the public finances are in disarray it's a flat out lie design to cosy certain voters. Sort of like telling your kid Santa exists so teddies aren't thrown.
The public finances are always good to go - hence the magic of the COVID measures being delivered out of nowhere for the sum of circa 400bn.
Parliamentary record.
So when we talk about spending 28bn a year being a squeeze, it's a fundamental lie - depriving millions of a better future.
If Labour spent more time with pragmatic well argued solutions they might not need to keep shifting policy to the right to appeal the very people the Sunak thread hates!
fenderextender
Free Member
TBH, if Starmer appeared at the lectern outside No 10 and said:“It’s all been lies, we’re winding the clock back, nationalising essential industries, applying to join the EU forthwith, filing our own arrest warrant for Netanyahu and outlawing private education”.
I would be delighted.
But what I want is all secondary to what we all need – this incarnation of the Tories out of power.
This is where I am at.
“It’s all been lies, we’re winding the clock back, nationalising essential industries, applying to join the EU forthwith, filing our own arrest warrant for Netanyahu and outlawing private education
But the point is no one is asking for everything all at once just a few good ideas that would run. Starmer has toasted the few good ideas.
I mean, I can tolerate flags and water nationalisation at the same time.
But being honest in politics appears to be a rare thing these days. No wonder people say they're all the same.
But what I want is all secondary to what we all need – this incarnation of the Tories out of power.
I hate to tell you but the Tories will be back in power, it's just a question of when. A lot of people seems to be pretending that the size of the majority matters.
It doesn't. Not anymore.
The swing in this election is going to be huge but that's just the way things are now. People are voting out of disillusionment with a party rather than because they believe in what they are being sold.
It all points to a democracy that is in crisis and unless someone acknowledges this and starts giving people something to actually believe in and vote for then it's just going to be a cycle of voting parties out of power rather than into power and ever more extreme forms of populism.
This is where I am at.
Then don't expect much change if you don't set out what you would like to happen beyond this.
Progressives have been smacked around and the plan is to beat you down. Don't fall for it and hand the money to the people creating problems for us.
Or don't spend ages moaning about Tories because you're getting Conservative driven ideas from Labour party. I don't think it's good enough.
Every time Reeves or Starmer say the public finances are in disarray it’s a flat out lie design to cosy certain voters. Sort of like telling your kid Santa exists so teddies aren’t thrown.
The public finances are always good to go – hence the magic of the COVID measures being delivered out of nowhere for the sum of circa 400bn.
The problem with that argument is that a lot of voters feel that they are personally worse off since Covid and possibly feel that the 400bn magicked out of nowhere might have something to do with that. Trying to explain MMT to a population that fundamentally believes that the finances of the country need to be in balance or bad things happen might be a laudable aim, but probably isn't going to get you elected.
So again why should left wingers provide an unconditional vote to labour vs taking the same approach as the centrists?
No policies which appeal, no vote.
Your prerogative of course, but by doing that you are far more likely to end up with a Tory government. But if that is the cost of adhering to your principals then bash on
I get your point, you want long term change, but ultimately as things currently stand it’s a 2 party system so whilst I disagree with much of labour policy, I know which way I’ll be voting (any way that will ensure the tories don’t win)
The problem with that argument is that a lot of voters feel that they are personally worse off since Covid and possibly feel that the 400bn magicked out of nowhere might have something to do with that. Trying to explain MMT to a population that fundamentally believes that the finances of the country need to be in balance or bad things happen might be a laudable aim, but probably isn’t going to get you elected.
You don't need to explain MMT - but it's relatively easy to demonstrate that deficits are normal to a functioning government using FIAT. Journalism is just so shit it never goes there.
Like a lot of Neoliberal interpretations it's a fiction to state otherwise
Of course COVID enacted a detrimental impact but would be have been way worse without the state supporting some of the economy. Again right-wingers like to tell you otherwise because it makes a mockery of small-state.
We are doomed to failure without big state intervention. Can you live with that just because Starmer doesn't want to tell the truth or upset people?
rone
Full Member
"This is where I am at."Then don’t expect much change if you don’t set out what you would like to happen beyond this.
Progressives have been smacked around and the plan is to beat you down. Don’t fall for it and hand the money to the people creating problems for us.
Or don’t spend ages moaning about Tories because you’re getting Conservative driven ideas from Labour party. I don’t think it’s good enough.
Then what do you suggest I, as an individual voter, do about this situation at the GE?
Your prerogative of course, but by doing that you are far more likely to end up with a Tory government.
Another Tory government is inevitable.
The only question is, is it going to be a Tory government emboldened by Labour's rightward shift to implement even more damaging policies or one that is far more cautious because Labour have shifted the centre further to the left?
Then what do you suggest I, as an individual voter, do about this situation at the GE?
Look at the party manifestos and vote for the one that most closely aligns with your views.
Every time Reeves or Starmer say the public finances are in disarray it’s a flat out lie design to cosy certain voters. Sort of like telling your kid Santa exists so teddies aren’t thrown.
The public finances are always good to go – hence the magic of the COVID measures being delivered out of nowhere for the sum of circa 400bn.
I don't even disagree, but public sector debt related to GDP is the highest it's been since the early 60s when the country was still paying for WWII, and you can say it doesn't matter but plenty of people think lower debt and higher GDP would be better. You can't wave your hands and make this go away. And for messaging during a GE a debate about how economies work versus "tories have stuffed it up, we'll do better on growth"... I don't think it's too hard to see why lab would opt for the latter.
BruceWee
Full Member
Then what do you suggest I, as an individual voter, do about this situation at the GE?Look at the party manifestos and vote for the one that most closely aligns with your views.
We have an incumbent Tory MP, she's been our MP since 2015.
I could make a protest by voting Green or Libdem but I might as well just stay home and hope for the best.
We gained a Labour controlled council last year and any vote here other than for Labour just aids the Tories in my constituency.
I'm not willing to do that under any circumstances.
Look at the party manifestos and vote for the one that most closely aligns with your views.
meh - IMO until we can dump FPTP, tactical voting to remove the threat of the worst thing is so much more effective than crossing yr fingers
TBH, despite them all being riddled with weaselly, platitudinous claptrap I am giving manifestos/standpoints a go and I'm increasingly coming to the view that (greens aside - see FPTP) it's only the liberals who're offering what I want, what I really really want for the mid=term future (PR and something approaching reversal of Brexit)
- <li style="list-style-type: none;">
<li style="list-style-type: none;">
- <li style="text-align: left;">
don’t even disagree, but public sector debt related to GDP is the highest it’s been since the early 60s when the country was still paying for WWII, and you can say it doesn’t matter but plenty of people think lower debt and higher GDP would be better. You can’t wave your hands and make this go away. And for messaging during a GE a debate about how economies work versus “tories have stuffed it up, we’ll do better on growth”… I don’t think it’s too hard to see why lab would opt for the latter.
It's doesn't need to go away. It's the Neoliberal narrative that's a bad thing.
Public debt has been rising for several hundred years without issue to sovereign states. But I can point to the damage that is caused by paying it down. You're never on the hook for the public debt - start there. You as an individual do not pay it down.
Clinton and Osborne's attempts for instance to pay it down failed dismally in the wider economy and society.
Creating debt is a policy choice by the way. There is no need to match government spending with bond issuance. (It creates a few issues but to do with overnight interests rates and clearing reserves.)
I'm not saying go the whole hog - lots of people just don't seem to grapple with the idea the government via the BoE creates money every time it spends. Not just Covid. Right or Left. That's how it works.
But Starmer has got it wrong that we're constrained by lack of money. That's the lie part.
Tackle the myth a little. Because Starmer even a few years ago agreed that the household analogy was off.
People are worse off because of the overall economic system not because of Covid - but raising interest rates was another unnecessary disaster too.
So the response was flawed of course.
Is it so hard to believe that you've been sold a generally piss-poor interpretation of public finances given the well accepted shoddy pro-Brexit arguments about 350mn going back to the exchequer?
Anyway it's going to be done deal soon as Nationalisation will be the only way for Thames. It will be forced on us- just like the private sector Banking system had to be bailed by the state. There will be no choice.
Government is the lender of last resort and the only institution with the power to solve problems like this as it issues the the pound - a tax liability that underpins all of your cash.
I could make a protest by voting Green or Libdem but I might as well just stay home and hope for the best.
Sorry, but that shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how to effect real change in the country.
I've said this numerous times but the people who went out and voted UKIP did more to change the UK than any other voters in modern times. All having never returned an MP.
Tories chased the UKIP voters, Labour chased the Tory voters, and before you knew it we were out of the EU and the government is UKIP in all but name.
Stay home if you want but that is the only way it is actually possible to 'waste' your vote.
Voting for a party you fundamentally disagree with would be worse than a waste, imo.
If the hard left don’t like the current version of the Labour Party why don’t they all toddle off and form their own party – like Reform UK have on the right.
We know how this plays out because it's what happened twice in Scotland - Alba from the SNP and the Scottish Socialist Party from the Labour movement.
There are no good arguments nor solutions coming out of the Labour camp currently. Just reactionary manoeuvres around a collapsing Tory party...Every time Reeves or Starmer say the public finances
Yeah but this position about the government having infinite money if only it could believe hard enough is your hobby horse, isn't it? There's nothing Reeves could say to convince you short of totally signing up to your somewhat esoteric economic theory.
But if that is the cost of adhering to your principals then bash on
Its not the cost of adhering to my principles but the cost of the right wingers in labour adhering to their principles and then expecting votes from anyone left of Thatcher to be theirs by right.
I mean its not exactly a logically coherent argument is it? Vote for a right wing labour government which is targeting its policies at tories or get tories?
For those who are concerned about the state of the economy the good news is that according to the next Labour Chancellor of the Exchequer there is apparently no great urgency to do anything in a hurry. The first Labour budget will be two and a half months after the general election:
Rachel Reeves has said there will be no budget until September if Labour wins the election
And apparently:
Reeves said there would be no new measures proposed or “black holes” to fill.
So it turns out that things aren't that bad after all - the Tories have got their taxation and spending correct and there aren't any black holes. Who knew that?
The Tories should trumpet their sound fiscal policies more. I was under the impression that things were in a mess.
BruceWee
Full Member
I could make a protest by voting Green or Libdem but I might as well just stay home and hope for the best.Sorry, but that shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how to effect real change in the country.
No yeah change van happen with another 5 years of Tory governance. It's a simple matter of fact.
I and millions of others will be voting for the party that has the best chance of unseating their Tory MP and the party itself.
To do anything else is just fanciful thinking and I'll be no part of it.
We fundamentally disagree here, which is fine but I have one singular goal at this point and that is to rid us of the current Tory party.
Until that point they will get my unconditional vote given the constituency I live in.
That's all I'll say on this for the moment, you disagree and I respect that but neither of us will change our stance here.
Yeah but this position about the government having infinite money if only it could believe hard enough is your hobby horse, isn’t it? There’s nothing Reeves could say to convince you short of totally signing up to your somewhat esoteric economic theory.
Technically incorrect, but expected from you.
The government doesn't hold cash.
It creates what it needs to spend by marking up accounts from the BoE consolidated fund - which is then spent into existence at commercial accounts making its way into the non-governmental sector.
You are defending the Tory lie of lack of money from an institution that creates it. It's so ignorant as to being ridiculous.
Who the hell do you think creates the pound and the currency we use?
As a Centrist you have been conned into a world where solutions can't possibly exist because according to your false logic there is only one pot of money that has ever been swilling around since the gold standard went away. Spend one minute thinking about that.
Why does the national debt grow then?
It grows because money is added to it, because it is a normal function.
Reeves is wrong; she's just excusing Tory policy. You tell me where the pound comes from then if this view is esoteric?
I'm glad you want the future to be even more unfit for purpose than it already is.
I and millions of others will be voting for the party that has the best chance of unseating their Tory MP and the party itself.
To do anything else is just fanciful thinking and I’ll be no part of it.
Then we can look forward to an even more extreme version of the current Tory government in 5 years time.
Intentionally voting for no real change and expecting things to change is fanciful thinking.
If truss taught us one thing its that the markets dont like unfunded spending
Ive not heard any MMT proponents explain how that can be dodged
anyway I see Iain Dales plan to become an MP was short lived
https://twitter.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1796472660773261454
personally I dont think it was just his comments, I think he just saw the dire state of the Tory party
Then we can look forward to an even more extreme version of the current Tory government in 5 years time.
Intentionally voting for no real change and expecting things to change is fanciful thinking.
It's just come down to power. That's it. Nothing else.
The fundamentals of a progressive society are being destroyed because red team good blue team bad.
We're gonna find out soon enough.
If truss taught us one thing its that the markets dont like unfunded spending
There's loads of things that the Market doesn't like. Were you under the impression that Market knows best?
The primary role of a government is to control the Market. All the problems that inevitably arise are the result of the behaviour of the Market.
We’re gonna find out soon enough.
Some will some won't.
Some will be mortified by the failure of a Starmer government to deliver. Some will simply carry on making excuses......."do you want the Tories to win the next general election?"
Edit: I reckon that I have a reasonably good idea who will be disappointed on here and who won't be. It's fairly obvious imo.
I’ve said this numerous times
not as many times as other frequent flyers have said money is just like a concept, man, or something, and they're all the same anyway so don't vote labour. I'm going to hope this topic now sinks.
.
I’ve said this numerous times but the people who went out and voted UKIP did more to change the UK than any other voters in modern times. All having never returned an MP.
UKIP (and Reform) isn't really a repeatable trick though. It's effectively a one-trick pony that has appeal to parts of both sides of the political spectrum ('til they meet round the back somwehere) - xenophobic, spiteful arseholes. One very identifiable approach, attracting voters with one overarching "principle". I don't think the logic can apply to any of the current established parties (even greens have too many points in their approach to identify the single issue). I mean, maybe you could start a "Brexin" or "PR" party and perhaps get the same sort of pseudoreferendum voting - bit like the occasional anti-sleaze candidate
Tories chased their xenophobes to "the right" (really just in xenophobe terms until Truss, anyway); labour seems to have taken the view that there's more chance of picking up worried tory-lite voters than of winning back their "own" arseholes by going more UKIP themselves.
f truss taught us one thing its that the markets dont like unfunded spending
Ive not heard any MMT proponents explain how that can be dodged.
I think I've mentioned it many many times.
Firstly I would say there is a problem with a society that builds its democratic structure on what is needed to best serve based on the what the markets think. Markets are enabled by government not the other way around.
Second: there is no such thing as unfunded or funded. It simply doesn't work like that. Just because the press ran with that doesn't make it so.
Third: the Truss situation was complex and had more to do with LDI - over leveraged assets supporting the pension structure.
Fourth: BoE stepped in and solved the issue pretty quickly as it should
Fifth: Using Truss as an example of why we can never had nice things because of xyz is a crazy way of framing policy. New Hospital, can't have one - because of Truss and markets!
Sixth: interest rates were already on their way up. That's mandated by the government.
Seventh: BoE were hardly upfront about the potential LDI issues brewing.
I'm not supporting Truss but a democratic government should be free to implement what is needs to otherwise we get to where we are now. An grossly oversimplified and nonsensical reaction to a right-wingers version of events.
Here is more detail of what actually happend.
https://capx.co/did-liz-truss-really-cause-the-bond-market-rout/
All largely irrelevant to MMT and this discussion. MMT happens all the time irrespective. That's the current explanation for spending, pretty robustly documented.
So Starmer's crises of his own making rumbles on with more heavyweights piling on the very public Labour discord.
His comments came as splits were emerging among senior party figures, with Rayner, the deputy Labour leader, telling the Guardian Abbott had not been treated “fairly or appropriately” by some Labour colleagues and she “doesn’t see any reason” why Abbott could not run now the party whip had been restored.
The London mayor, Sadiq Khan, the shadow health secretary, Wes Streeting, and the shadow home secretary, Yvette Cooper, have also expressed some form of uneasiness with the party’s treatment of Britain’s first black female MP.
Edit: To be clear Sadiq Khan, Wes Streeting, and Yvette Cooper, are all very much on the right-wing of the Labour Party (they wouldn't be senior party figures if they weren't)
So whatever this might once have been it is certainly no longer Left v Right. Well done Morgan McSweeney and David Evans *slow hand clap*
It’s effectively a one-trick pony that has appeal to parts of both sides of the political spectrum (’til they meet round the back somwehere) – xenophobic, spiteful arseholes
This is lazy stereotyping. Whilst the really keen ones did tick that box there was a large number who supported brexit for a variety of reasons. Ranging from people of Asian descent who felt the immigration policies favoured Europeans over their families to those who simply felt unrepresented by parties which expected their votes but then ignored them to chase the swing voters.
Labour are chasing the arsehole vote currently. The people who expect the country to be run just for them and have no concept of compromise to either the left or right. The people who screwed up both their party and the country and having trashed their party beyond repair now want labour as a replacement.
UKIP (and Reform) isn’t really a repeatable trick though.
It may well be a non repeatable trick but be good to test that wouldn't. If for example the Green Party got a lot more votes (I don't know, maybe from younger voters) who want a left wing party who are not trying to follow the tories would Labour recognise that they are getting closer to them in the polls/elections and try to sway the other way?
UKIP (and Reform) isn’t really a repeatable trick though.
I think I would like to see the idea tested before we resign ourselves to a rightwing death spiral.
A week to go to submission deadline and Reform currently have more candidates in place the the Tories
https://twitter.com/OwenWntr/status/1796501288517337319
the Tories still nearly 200 short!
this surprise election certainly caught someone off guard