Forum menu
Sausages......
Country First, Party Second.........
This lot are so full of crap.....
I’m glad the sausages got a mention.
Link?
Good work.
The BoE QT rules are currently moving to ‘get rid’ of debts quicker or within a shorter time frame than perhaps is necessary – it’s not completely arbitrary, but if the “rules are changed” to write them down over a longer period (or let bonds naturally come to their end) could ‘save’ the treasury billions in payments, which could instead be used for investment/spending
I did offer this up last week!
However 10bn is not much really. But we should be grateful apparently to an institution that takes its orders from the government for helping the government out ?
(It's not necessary though they can just create the money like they do every single day.)
It does demonstrate the power of money creation though because all bonds purchased through Q/E were with created money.
Q/T is used to also keep support higher interest rates. Which is an indication that they won't be cutting any time soon.
There's no way we will get through this cycle without Q/E though. When interest rates eventually settle down.
Just checked in – good to see it’s still all the fault of the bastard centralists.
They are in government?
So now the Centrist's attack line to us progressives is that we're talking the government down and being negative?
Lol - wasn't that the tactic from the last lot criticising people for talking the country down. Defo heard Bozza say that.
Do you Centrists have anything that isn't a remotely worn down excuse from the last lot?
Because that's the basis of the new government. Excuse after excuse.
Bloody centrists, coming over here, stifling our progressiveness!
So now the Centrist’s attack line to us progressives
Do you Centrists have anything that isn’t a remotely worn down excuse from the last lot?
Oh my sweet summer child... what on earth are you talking about?
You fling phrases around as insults and sound bites, pretend that centrist and progressive are mutually exlusive.
I'm progressive and technically centrist, does that mean we are political enemies? of course not.
Does It mean I'm happy with the current labour government, also not.
Does it mean I think the curent labour government is better than the outgoing conservatives? That would be an astounding YES! but it's a very low bar to beat, to be honest.
So now the Centrist’s attack line to us progressives is that we’re talking the government down and being negative?
Lol – wasn’t that the tactic from the last lot criticising people for talking the country down. Defo heard Bozza say that.
Do you Centrists have anything that isn’t a remotely worn down excuse from the last lot?
Johnson's criticism was of his opponents talking the country down.
The accusation here is of talking the Government down. Which you're entitled to do, but it's two different things.
I think rone is conflating political philosophy with reality.
You mustn’t group yourselves like that, Ransos gets really cross.
I thought you'd left?
Still love that sketch Martyfez. Saw something yesterday about why he felt he wouldn’t do it today… and that the online clips always stop before the “nothing” crescendo… will look for it…
Luckily for you, I stuck around and was able to defend your wish not to be lumped in with the others that you articulated so strongly yesterday.
I'm ruddy confused as much as anything else.
Depending upon the political or social subject I can be progressive, regressive,a leftie, centre left or centrist.
On top of that lot I'm a pragmatist on occasion but one that knows the world is changed for the better much of the time by those that are not; the dreamers**/ idealists** that can actually make the world a better place to live in and the people that many pragmatists actually admire whether they admit it or not.
Like so many things in life and in this thread, pragmatism isn't the enemy of idealism or visa versa, the real magic happens when they compliment each other.
I find myself agreeing with every regular poster on this thread much of the time, based upon the subject and that individual post. I don't see opposing and incompatible views here, just people disagreeing on how to make the country's lot a better one. None if you lot are bad actors, argumentative buggers that can't see the wood for trees sometimes yes (me included), but not bad actors. 😉
**Most definitely not a put down, to be crystal clear. The absolute opposite.
It's almost like the Donald Trump rhetoric when he demonises 'liberals'
The fact is the Labour Party is closer to centrist than to an actual Labour Party. That is why some of us are disappointed. The Labour Party was used as a vehicle to get into power because not many other options with a two party system but ideally all the Starmer supporters should have really just voted Lib Dem leaving left wing people with their Labour Party. That would have mean't a Lib Dem government but at least it would have been true to itself.
It is not great when we are left with a tory party and a slightly less tory party is it as it will be very easy for people to swing between the two which I guess we will see in 5 years time.
Luckily for you, I stuck around and was able to defend your wish not to be lumped in with the others that you articulated so strongly yesterday.
Great to hear, but rest assured, I can fight my own battles, should the need arise.
And we’d have had a Tory government again.
We've still got one 🙂
when people on any extreme of the political spectrum use the term ‘centrist’ as an insult to people who are more moderate
No people are described as "centrist" because its a political term. Admittedly a problematic one just like "left", "right" or "extreme" but so far all attempts to replace them with the political compass etc have had limited success because its such a messy subject.
In the UK its generally defined as politically right wing and socially left wing. Note though that there doesnt have to be anything "moderate" about those positions. Someone can hold extreme positions whilst still being a centrist and can be just as inflexible and unwilling to change their mind as anyone else on the political spectrum.
A lot of people like calling themselves centrists, I think they equate it to moderation or being well balanced with a mix of views.
They don't tend to share which right wing policies keep them in the centre..
Starmer supporters should have really just voted Lib Dem leaving left wing people with their Labour Party
I keep saying this, but i don't think any of us are 'Starmer supporters', we support the government at this moment in time, of which, Starmer is the PM. You give Starmer too much credit, as if he is some type of individual who has the capacity to control a party, and then an entire government, he is just a little cog in the government machine.
The fact is the Labour Party is closer to centrist than to an actual Labour Party.
Depends what you mean by 'Labour Party' . Historically the Labour Party, as opposed to the Fabian Society, have always promoted policies that are socially conservative (small 'c') with an emphasis on education, work, abstinence, public service, patriotism, law and order, and social welfare. It's the Fabien Society (historically; intellectual, wealthier, more socially liberal) that has been the progressive wing of the party since they merged in 1900. So you could make a pretty convincing argument that Starmer's Labour [so far] has been true to Labour's founding principles
We’ve still got one 🙂
No we haven't. I might not be happy with what they are doing, but they are not a Tory government.
The only difference between them at the moment is that they are not such big ****s but let's wait and see what real differences anyone notices after 5 years.
I keep saying this, but i don’t think any of us are ‘Starmer supporters’, we support the government at this moment in time, of which, Starmer is the PM. You give Starmer too much credit
You are absolutely a Starmer supporter/apologist. Starmer is the leader of the party and is shaping the party to how he sees fit so he gets the credit for that.
Round and round…
I’m left wing. The Labour Party has always been to the right of my own preferred policies. Under every leader it has had in my lifetime. But the game I won’t play is…
”What do we want?” “Polarisation!”
”What are we against?” “Compromising with the voters!”
”Who do we hate?” “Those who seek to run the country for all, not just for me, in my way!”
You are absolutely a Starmer supporter/apologist. Starmer is the leader of the party and is shaping the party to how he sees fit so he gets the credit for that.
Never understand this type of response, as if i don't understand my own thinking, it's just a weird thing to write.
As for Starmer, yet again, the only reason i defend him (and the rest), is down to the amount of absurd accusations and conjecture stated in this thread around him, Reeves, etc, they're personal attacks without any real evidence. If he were to be found guilty of something fraudulent, or similar, i wouldn't think of backing him, and i wouldn't care who replaced him.
It just seems to be a real hatred of Starmer that i just can't get my head round, one minute we're being told on this thread that he has no understanding of the treasury and so on, and has to be hand held by Reeves, etc to make decisions, then the next minute it's all about him, he is an Elon Musk megamind style leader, it's hard to keep up with what you folk despise about him and the rest of the cabinet, well except that they're not left leaning socialists attempting to govern an entire country on whimsical policies that have never been attempted in the western world.
I keep saying this, but i don’t think any of us are ‘Starmer supporters’
I am and so’s my wife
Its because he turned on the left's messiah Corbyn who turned out to be an unelectable boy.
edit: dam, beat me to it.
They don’t tend to share which right wing policies keep them in the centre..
God there's some shite spouted on here sometimes.
On a spectrum of hard left to hard right, you can be in the centre without supporting any right wing policies.
But division has always been the best way to keep the population under control.
they’re not left leaning socialists attempting to govern an entire country on whimsical policies that have never been attempted in the western world.
WTF are you talking about? Those left-leaning 'whimsical' (I have no idea what that means BTW) policies were responsible for the largest period of economic growth, improvement in living conditions and quality of life, reduction in poverty and inequality and increase in wealth we've ever seen. The entire western world is where it is today because it implemented socialist economic policies in the 30 year period after WWII. Those policies are literally the foundation of everything we see today, and they're now being eroded and dismantled by politicians of all colours. Poverty is now out of control, inequality is destorying and polarising our societies, and the mega rich exercise oligarchic power over millions to further their own interests. Whimsical? FFS!
They don’t tend to share which right wing policies keep them in the centre...
Well, most people accept that capitalism should be part of our world... but that the state should put limits in it, both by running or owning stuff itself outright, or by laws and regulation. Most are on that spectrum now, including people I know who declare themselves communists and those who claim that they're all in favour of "free" markets. It's all degrees. Should shops selling alcohol all be state owned? Or be privately owned but strictly licensed with controls over who can run them and who they can sell to? Etc...
The only question I ever really ask of politicians is what are they doing to control, limit or reduce the wealth and power of the super-rich? Given Starmer and many labour MPs willingness to accept gifts from them I think we know where they stand. Centrists seem to have this view that the super-rich are untouchable, and their job is to make the best of whatever's left for the rest of us whilst not upsetting them. It's a peculiarly defeatist and cowardly mindset.
Which of the declared "gift givers" is against increasing taxes and control over those with capital?
Do you consider, for example, that Lord Alli helped the Labour party get elected for his own financial gain? Sounds like a different man to me.
Which of the declared “gift givers” is against increasing taxes and control over those with capital?
Can only be Lord Waheed Alli, the life peer who sits in the house of lords on the Labour benches, and who has been a labour supporter, campaigner and donor for over two decades.
is against increasing taxes and control over those with capital?
Care to tell me what labour policies are doing that? So far the three major economic things they've done is refuse to abolish the 2-child cap, take away the winter fuel allowance from people who need it, and declared a crackdown on benefit fraud. When they start talking about sweeping wealth taxes, massive increases in captial gains tax and the elimination of every loophole used by the rich to avoid paying then I'll agree. Unitl then the rest is just window dressing designed to buy them enough votes to be in power.
Tax shifts towards those with "the broadest shoulders" will be incremental, in a series of budgets. There will be no great leap forward. But Labour didn't even wait for a budget to change the tax rules for private schooling and non-doms.
Tax shifts towards those with “the broadest shoulders” will be incremental
I think we all know what that means. Taxes will be increasing for those in the middle and will barely touch the top few percent. Like I said, they're untouchable, and Labour are going to do nothing to change that.
Depends who you consider "the middle". A term often used by the top 5%, to make the rest of us think they mean us.