Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop
The extreme - deranged if you like - right wing response to limited deal is unsurprising but actually useful.
They have nowhere to go in terms of ramping up the rhetoric if future deals go further. When they kick off people will just think - here goes Farage/Badenoch again - blah blah - nothing bad happened last time.
As I said further up the thread it creates space for Labour to get more breadth to the deal over time whilst the right try to out do each other on Brexit orthodoxy
Let's hope the government take the opportunity
sorry wrong link above! https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2e7z72r0eo
It's good to see them finally speaking out about Isreal as well - I think this will be an interesting time for a government - some abhorrent unforgivable things, & some actual good things.
Won't be enough to keep them in power. But who knows where we'll be in 4 years.
It's good to see them finally speaking out about Isreal as well - I think this will be an interesting time for a government - some abhorrent unforgivable things, & some actual good things.
yes I was thinking that, probably for the gaza thread but it seems to be spiraling further, the government really should be taking a stand, though ultimately Netenyahu will do whatever he wants regardless, its only USA that can really influence & trump is too busy being bribed by the gulf states
Israel is nuclear armed and a US client.
Anyone else's approach seems to be calibrated to reach supposed breaking point about five minutes after the last Palestinian leaves Gaza - either on foot or in a body bag.
The whole thing shrinks into insignificance when you consider that Games Workshop contribution to the UK economy is bigger than the whole seafood sector.
Its truely insane when you look at it from that perspective but Boats, it’s always the least insignificant stuff that seems to be heavily focused on and turned into one of the main reasons that a bunch of eu haters can bang on about.
In of it,out of it the EU and the unelected bureaucrats are still being used as one of the bogey men, and so returns Boris as the gravy train wheels start to slowly turn again and off we go on the ‘Giving up Brexit benefits’ those magical things that only get mentioned when they are er threatened and seem to have evaded everyone at any other time.
It’s hard to think that Brexit vote was 10 years ago and still we are having it used, I reckon in another 10 years they can roll it out again and go the other way and rejoin,it’s been a brilliant mcGuffin for a few people, like Farage and Johnson and tbh anyone whose been a Tory PM or MP even , without it they wouldn’t have had the opportunity to stuff at the trough.
and so returns Boris
Oh, has that particular turd bobbed back to the surface?
I'm surprised he can be bothered. He already got everything he wanted out of the original Brexit con. He must be doing a (paid) favour for someone.
I'm surprised he can be bothered. He already got everything he wanted out of the original Brexit con.
He left government as a failure. That has to hurt his ego and combined with how Churchill returned triumphant I suspect he does still have some fantasies along those lines. Guess it depends how much he has managed to grift so far..
It’s hard to think that Brexit vote was 10 years ago and still we are having it used
It will always be used until the UK governments take action on wealth distribution and the cost of living crisis. In or out of the EU if they don't do that then they will always need the convenient dead cat of the EU and immigration.
It will always be used until the UK governments take action on wealth distribution and the cost of living crisis.
Absolutely. Life was hardly a bed of roses whilst being in the EU for many irrespective.
Forgotten due to the noises made by the you-made-my-ski-trip-harder mob. (And yes I count myself in that group.)
God I hate that kind of inverse snobbery. Millions of us in lower paid households understand the negative effects of Brexit, it’s not just the skiing and caviar brigade… most of whom won’t be feeling the effects at all. Brexit made it more expensive to be poor, and removed rights from the working class that those with the means can always find a way to pay their way around.
Brexit: the 'gift' that just keeps giving! 😣
God I hate that kind of inverse snobbery. Millions of us in lower paid households understand the negative effects of Brexit, it’s not just the skiing and caviar brigade… most of whom won’t be feeling the effects at all. Brexit made it more expensive to be poor, and removed rights from the working class that those with the means can always find a way to pay their way around.
Well said, never earned over £15k and spent most of life on disability benefits yet I knew Brexit was an utter **** ing stupidity ignorant idea
It will always be used until the UK governments take action on wealth distribution and the cost of living crisis.
Absolutely. Life was hardly a bed of roses whilst being in the EU for many irrespective.
Forgotten due to the noises made by the you-made-my-ski-trip-harder mob. (And yes I count myself in that group.)
True, but now we don't even have the pretty flowers and petals, we just have the left over thorns and rotten stems.
Well played. 🙄
Beginning of the end for Starmer/Reeves?
Whilst I don't mind a u-turn on some things, this has been such a hash, and clearly a reaction to polling - recent results etc. This is too little too late and looks like they've done it for cynical reasons. The press will hammer them. This WFA move was absolutely ridiculous from the outset. Terrible politics and economics. All for a mystical 1.4bn which now becomes less I'm guessing.
The logical economic rule is to make things better first then tax back later. That follows exactly how the procedure of monetary operations is laid out and works well politically.
Inflation up - unsurprisingly. (We all knew this was coming with energy rises.) yet they were telling everyone how it was coming down last week. They really can't tip toe in and out of inflation - pretending they're responsible when it suits
Battle with Streeting and Rayner?
Starmer is damaged goods and is not coming back from all of this. (reshuffle first perhaps?)
All that said leaders have a knack of hanging on don't they!
The good news is if they get shut now and recalibrate their priorities maybe they could still get on with the job. It would require some serious political calculations and investment. And the ability to block out all noise about spending.
Improve people's living standards asap.
One final thing - at this point they've got nothing to lose with the looks of it.
Brexit: the 'gift' that just keeps giving! 😣
FTFY:
Brexit: the 'grift' that just keeps giving! 😣
Improve people's living standards asap.
Absolutely. But hand outs to well off pensioners shouldn’t be at the top of anyone’s priority. If WFA becomes universal again, I hope they look at increasing taxation on those pensioners that can easily afford to pay more.
The good news is if they get shut now and recalibrate their priorities maybe they could still get on with the job.
Undoubtedly they could but it won't happen imo. The Labour Party has been changing ever since the days of New Labour and that change accelerated during the last five years under Keir Starmer's leadership.
I have no doubt that the Parliamentary Labour Party, and the wider party establishment, are now even more hostile to a social-democratic alternative to the Tory-Labour-LibDem neoliberal consensus than they were under Jeremy Corbyn's leadership.
Sure there are a few remaining social-democratic Labour MPs such John McDonnell who haven't been weeded out yet but they have no influence in the direction of the party. Corbyn's successful leadership bid was entirely due to the party membership and in the face of staunch opposition from the PLP, that party membership has also now dramatically changed since the centrists seized power.
I fear that the Labour Party will simply just repeat the same mistakes as the Tories and fall into the trap of believing that changing the leader without changing the political direction in any significant way will save them from electoral armageddon. Or at least they will do that because they can't think of palatable alternative.
Keir Starmer might lack the charisma and connection with ordinary working people but that isn't the primary problem, that is the economic model which all four major political parties are welded to. Next it will be Reform's turn to take to the stage and have a go at making austerity/neoliberalism work.
Yes that is the trajectory.
You think Starmer and Reeves will last?
Keir Starmer might lack the charisma and connection with ordinary working people but that isn't the primary problem, that is the economic model which all four major political parties are welded to. Next it will be Reform's turn to take to the stage and have a go at making austerity/neoliberalism work
I think it goes beyond that - Starmer is liked by whom? His popularity is shocking.
Your latter comment i couldn't agree more. We are stuck in a failed economic system. I can see that probably more than most.
(Also bear in mind that Trump is very much moving their economic model sideways and possibly backwards of you think imports are ner gain. Point is things don't stay the same forever.)
If WFA becomes universal again, I hope they look at increasing taxation on those pensioners that can easily afford to pay more.
Better than that, just raise capital gains tax to the same levels as income tax, the right wing love "hard working families" so why not create a balanced system so that wealth from assets are taxed at the same rate as wealth from "hard work". No need to focus on age groups, those wealthy pensioners will be taxed without the easy excuse of age discrimination.
Absolutely. But hand outs to well off pensioners shouldn’t be at the top of anyone’s priority. If WFA becomes universal again, I hope they look at increasing taxation on those pensioners that can easily afford to pay more.
It's a barely an economic relevance in terms of revenue if even you accept tax and spend. (Which I don't as you know.)
It's a trapping of economic frustration to believe that 1.4bn will make a sod of difference compared the noise it created.
Can I also point out that removing money from pensionsers is a removal of money from the economy. The exact opposite thing to do if you want growth.
So mechanically there is an argument to chase well off people who have too much stuff. Targeting pensioners alone is totally defeating.
Especially if we all want a good life as we get older.
Probably best not to think it as a hand-out and more as subsidy to a group of potentially vulnerable people. It's also an inflation hedge to people who don't have the capacity to earn money as easily as working people.
Wrong group of people, wrong policy and not worth the effort for an opener.
Some of us have to grit our teeth as certain cohorts might benefit - that we don't like as long as the overall picture is to reduce inequality and improve lives. 1.4bn won't do that.
A much bigger picture is needed and I'm not excluding taxation from that as you alluded to - somewhere along the way.
The trick is to seperate taxation from spending. Taxation as a means to limit consumption/resources/redistribute where its needed and spending to target the areas that need money.
The Labour right have already shown they'd prefer a Tory government to an eg Corbyn government. However, there must be quite a few backbenchers who don't want their careers terminated by a dimwitted neoliberal who can't resist a freebie. If the current leadership have guaranteed electoral failure, there's no harm in giving another lot a chance just in case. Rayner seems to have been silenced and is tellingly distancing herself from the leadership. Even if there were to be a party coup, enough austerity damage would have been done to make it very difficult to turn it around and improve the picture by the next election. It's almost as if Starmer is doing a Johnson.
Quite.
I'm zoning in on that leaked memo where Rayner called for tax rises.
Even if there were to be a party coup, enough austerity damage would have been done to make it very difficult to turn it around and improve the picture by the next election.
I think if people saw hope they could at least fend off Reform to a degree.
There's nothing to lose really as I see it.
It will take years to make a dent for sure.
wealth from assets are taxed at the same rate as wealth from "hard work".
One of the changes in France I've very much approved of despite it costing a bit more tax. It's very unfair when income that requires selling ones life, travelling to work etc. gets taxed less than investment income whether rental income, ISAs, shares, bitcoin or whatever. It sould incur NI payment too. (CSG in France)
As for WFA I'd find it outrageous if I became eleligble for it next year when I officially retire. Not being elegible for pension credits as a test seems very reasonable to me.
I filled in my tax declaration yesterday, even in what CNBC commentators used to refer to as 'socialist land' I don't feel I'm paying enough tax, however before junior left home I felt I was paying as much as I could afford. It strikes me that the tax system hits young people with no wealth too hard especially if they have children, and people of my age and wealth not hard enough. Following relatives in the uK it's more extreme - some of the younger ones are delaying having kids till they can afford it whereas the older ones are considering which expensive toy to buy, holiday to go on or property to invest in. I believe in vertical solidarity in families so will hand over the money I think I should be paying in tax to junior.
Migration levels for 2024 down by around 50%.
That is a massive drop
Fantastic interview with a Labour MP and select committee member this morning - I didn't catch her name.
Apparently she was 'very clear' with the producer that she had no opinions of her own and was only there to discuss the work of her committee...
Which she then couldn't really discuss because that work (a paper) might be published around 11th of June. So she basically quoted its TOR to the interviewer.
I would actually support a BBC interviewer just saying "well, **** off then, if you're not actually going to answer anything". Which she did on a practical level by just cutting the interview short.
But overall it was a triumph of not saying anything at all.
🙄🙄🙄
Can I also point out that removing money from pensionsers is a removal of money from the economy.
Who the money goes to is key. Who money is then recovered from in taxation is key.
This is too little too late and looks like they've done it for cynical reasons
Don't you mean democratic reasons?
People: Government, we elected you, you do what we want.
Govt: Ok, how about this?
People: Nooo!! Not that! This instead!
Govt: Ok done.
People: Spineless U-turn!
Migration levels for 2024 down by around 50%.
That is a massive drop
Won't please Reform/Tories or their voters as still too high - in fact they will only be happy when more people are leaving the country than coming into it.
Migration levels for 2024 down by around 50%.
That is a massive drop
Won't please Reform/Tories or their voters as still too high - in fact they will only be happy when more people are leaving the country than coming into it.
Something else Starmer can blame the Tories for
Migration levels for 2024 down by around 50%.
That is a massive drop
So who is going to take credit for that, Labour or the Tories? They were both in power in 2024 for approximately the same amount of time and I distinctly remember being told on this very thread not to expect anything that Starmer's government might do to have any significant effect for the first few months........"they've only been in government 3 months, you can't expect them to do anything very quickly after 14 years of Tory governments blah blah"
It is a massive drop though but only a massive drop on the previous year's post-covid pandemic distorted figure, it is a significant increase on the previous 3 years figure.
And no, of course it won't be enough for Reform/Tory voters who firmly believe that net migration should be no higher than zero, a narrative which Starmer is now enthusiastically feeding with talk of "incalculable damage" and "an island of strangers".
Realistically the drop in immigration is unlikely to be due to the Labour government, though they will no doubt claim it.
BBC credits Tory policies for the drop, and COVID.
Won't please Reform/Tories or their voters as still too high - in fact they will only be happy when more people are leaving the country than coming into it.
In the case of Reform voters they won't be happy until the country is 100% white British.
Well that's obviously untrue.
True, many of them wouldn't be happy then, either.
Life was hardly a bed of roses whilst being in the EU for many irrespective.
I'm calling bullshit on this, the vast majority of people voting for brexit were reasonably comfortably off, indeed it was only as a consequence of their reasonably comfortable lives largely built on the back of "globalisation" (ie the trade and migration that has driven the development of human civilisation and economic growth over centuries) that they could afford the luxury of conspiracy theories and obsessing over trivial irrelevancies and then set out to spitefully cause such monumental harm to the country.
It strikes me that the tax system hits young people with no wealth too hard especially if they have children, and people of my age and wealth not hard enough
A back-loaded tax system would actually work pretty well, I think.
I'm calling bullshit on this, the vast majority of people voting for brexit were reasonably comfortably off,
You'd be ignoring the effects of Thatcherism and all the 'bullshit' that came with that (de-industrialised communities.) Not forgetting areas like mine (redwall) that voted in strength for it - that are extremely deprived.
I think the remainers were largely made up of the people you describe as they had nothing to put the 'blame' on for their decent lifestyles whilst ignoring the broader decline of communities and growth in inequality. Basically lucky well-meaning people that had done well out of HPI.
There's probably a clique at the JRM level that thought they would benefit. That's a very small number of asset rich folk really.
Neoliberalism tends to benefit the people who already have stuff. Like we've discussed there are right-wingers who want to exploit migration and those that want them out. Same thing is happening with the Republicans.
- The poorest households, with incomes of less than £20,000 per year, were much more likely to support leaving the EU than the wealthiest households, as were the unemployed, people in low-skilled and manual occupations, people who feel that their financial situation has worsened, and those with no qualifications
- Authorities that recorded some of the highest levels of support for Brexit include the working-class communities of Castle Point, Great Yarmouth, Mansfield, Ashfield, Stoke-on-Trent, and Doncaster. In such communities the types of opportunities and life experiences contrast sharply with those in areas that are filled with more affluent, highly-educated, and diverse populations, which gave some of the strongest support to remaining in the EU, such as Islington, Edinburgh, Cambridge, Oxford and Richmond upon Thames.
It strikes me that the tax system hits young people with no wealth too hard especially if they have children, and people of my age and wealth not hard enough
Totally. We have a regressive tax system.
That needs adjusting, but there's little appetite for it which is why the need for resource/inflation control (taxation) should be separated from the need for public investment as there's no real political desire to tax more. (Mechanically they're not linked anyway in the current system.) This is why fiscal rules are doomed because it's the wrong metric applied to real problems. Designed by people like George Osborne is hardly a good place to be. Labour are stuck in 2010 with seriously daft decisions making based on household finances.
Handy for limiting spending for political purposes.
The only process that makes sense - is can we resource it and what do we want for better public purpose?
(Low income and expensive living costs is more of a problem than taxation perhaps though.)
It strikes me that the tax system hits young people with no wealth too hard especially if they have children, and people of my age and wealth not hard enough
Totally. We have a regressive tax system.
That needs adjusting, but there's little appetite for it which is why the need for resource/inflation control (taxation) should be separated from the need for public investment as there's no real political desire to tax more. (Mechanically they're not linked anyway in the current system.) This is why fiscal rules are doomed because it's the wrong metric applied to real problems. Designed by people like George Osborne is hardly a good place to be. Labour are stuck in 2010 with seriously daft decision making based on household finances. This is at the heart of current Labour gone wrong. And expecting growth out of this is just preposterous. (At the levels they claim they need.)
Handy for limiting spending for political purposes. Public have moved on since 2010 and we no longer accept it. Hence the resentment towards Labour.
The only process that makes sense - is can we resource it and what do we want for better public purpose?
(Low income and expensive living costs is more of a problem than taxation perhaps though.)
I'm calling bullshit on this, the vast majority of people voting for brexit were reasonably comfortably off,
I think the biggest issue is that people regardless of financial position weren’t really voting for in/out the EU.
They were voting for one of the many promises being offered by people without any office to fulfil the promise.
The issues weren't all directly related to being in the EU as shown by them still existing after leaving the EU.
Add to that that most people weren’t really banging on about the EU other than Farage , Who was an elected representative also on the fishing board(or whatever it’s called) and had a voice for the fishermen but never bothered to use it.
I'm calling bullshit on this, the vast majority of people voting for brexit were reasonably comfortably off, indeed it was only as a consequence of their reasonably comfortable lives largely built on the back of "globalisation" (ie the trade and migration that has driven the development of human civilisation and economic growth over centuries) that they could afford the luxury of conspiracy theories and obsessing over trivial irrelevancies and then set out to spitefully cause such monumental harm to the country.
I don’t disagree with this, met ex-pats who would have happily voted For Brexit or did.
Not sure how they could be so obsessed over it after taking advantage and retiring somewhere warmer, happily taking advantage about freedom of movement but happy to remove it from others and their grandchildren.
But immigrants 🙂
Here what's going on here?
Streeting talking up his bullshit and making it hard to get at the stats?
https://twitter.com/FullFact/status/1925830469246968301?t=nOsZ228DP94LrV084S7qQw&s=19
Indeed the rise of 3.6 million in the first eight months of the Labour government, which the health secretary Wes Streeting described this month as a “massive increase”, is actually smaller than the 4.2 million rise that happened in the equivalent period the year before. (This is after the figures have been standardised to account for the varying number of working days per month. Our calculations standardise the figures to the latest period, following a similar method to that used by NHS England in the published data.)
I see that Starmer's "Island of Strangers" speech is still causing a poll bump. For Reform obviously, not for Labour.
A poll out today gives Reform an 11 point lead over Labour.
https://findoutnow.co.uk/blog/voting-intention-21st-may-2025/
Streeting talking up his bullshit and making it hard to get at the stats?
Wes lies?……..well I have to say I’m utterly shocked 🙄
And the Guardian editorial writers hits the nail on head ...... most Reform voters are not traditional Labour red wall voters
Most Reform UK voters are not Labour’s to win back. They are largely embedded within a “right-Conservative” bloc
And a nice little truth here :
Labour’s centrist power brokers are fighting the last war – not against the Tories, but against Jeremy Corbyn.
Sometimes the Guardian gets it right!
The original policy, hatched in the Treasury and defended for months, had cut winter fuel payments, worth up to £300 annually, to millions of pensioners. It was unpopular, and unnecessary
From that article. It was "unpopular and unnecessary" yet at the time many a Starmer fanboy defended it as some sort of a cleverly calculated move needed to fund other things. It does no such thing.
You really didn't have to be Einstein to see it was a dreadful way of opening a government's term. The key word being unnecessary. All that headache for less than around 12% of what has been spent on Ukraine.
They're not coming back from this mess as it stands.
Vote for change eh?
Wow, they say that a week is a long time in politics.......now Starmer is being forced to move to the left by the Reform threat!
Sir Keir Starmer could decide to lift the two-child benefit cap in the autumn budget, amid further pressure from Nigel Farage to appeal to traditional Labour voters.
I see that Nigel Farage is looking to challenge George Galloway's monopoly of the prat-in-a-hat image.
I just saw that. Sorry but it's a master stroke by Farage.
While Labour dither on potent issues Farage comes in with solid noises.
This is the problem - whilst Farage might well be cynical he knows how to seize the electoral gaps created by a confused Labour party.
It doesn't matter that Reform will make a hash of it (I mean Labour are making a hash of it) Reform will take the higher ground here.
Why is Starmer playing the prat? These issues wouldn't have existed in the first place if it wasn't for Starmer creating them. (I know Osborne created the benefit cap but still.) U-turn now rather than later. It's damage limitation.
People want better stuff. Labour are too embroiled in looking conservative - no one wants that any more at - least economically.
There would be good arguments against this populism if Labour weren't so incompetent and right-swinging, when people voted for change. I'm sick to the back teeth of high-brows making excuses for Starmer's strategy. It's a big fail, almost a disaster unless they don't act.
Waiting until the budget is a big problem.
Good morning magnificent 6, or 5 if I'm considered one. 😉
Farage adopting left-wing policies on stuff where he doesn't need to be nationalist, eurosceptic, economically liberal, anti-Islam, protectionist, anti-immigrant, and right-wing populist mimics the FN/RN, AfD, Vox etc. Hi-jack a few socialist policies so long as there's a nationalist/populist justification such as encouraging Britons to have more babies. A sot of neo-liberal, anti-immigration, protectionist national socialism. The sad thing is that a Labour (which is where some of us hope to find socialist policies) government ever thought the child-benefit cap was ever a good idea in the first place.
Edit: with a special good morning to our four-letter friend. 🙂
Your occasional reminder that the two child cap on child-benefit (and a number of other restrictions on child-benefit… the total claim limit and removing the benefit from households with at least one higher level tax payer) were Tory policies. Yes, it’s been a Labour government’s decision not to reform Child Benefit rules in its first year, but thinking it a “good idea” suggests they came up with the cap etc, when they didn’t. There will be likely be reforms in this area, although in the short term they are more likely to be urgent interventions in failing services aimed at children in the worst off households rather than benefit increases. Political pressure could well result in something headline grabbing about changing benefits before the next election, but it is child focussed services where the rebuild is desperately needed, they’ve been left in a right mess by previous governments. That necessary work isn’t great headline fodder though.
I was refering to what happened last year as "in the first place", Kelvin; when Starmer considered it a sufficiently "good idea" to suspend Labour MPs opposed to it.
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-labours-two-child-benefit-cap-row-explained
Anyhow I approve of his u-turn for once if he does get rid of the cap.
IMHO If labour had lifted the cap reform would probably be banging on about benefits scroungers.
I just saw that. Sorry but it's a master stroke by Farage.
While Labour dither on potent issues Farage comes in with solid noises.
This is the problem - whilst Farage might well be cynical he knows how to seize the electoral gaps created by a confused Labour party.
It doesn't matter that Reform will make a hash of it (I mean Labour are making a hash of it) Reform will take the higher ground here.
Why is Starmer playing the prat? These issues wouldn't have existed in the first place if it wasn't for Starmer creating them. (I know Osborne created the benefit cap but still.) U-turn now rather than later. It's damage limitation.
People want better stuff. Labour are too embroiled in looking conservative - no one wants that any more at - least economically.
There would be good arguments against this populism if Labour weren't so incompetent and right-swinging, when people voted for change. I'm sick to the back teeth of high-brows making excuses for Starmer's strategy. It's a big fail, almost a disaster unless they don't act.
Waiting until the budget is a big problem.
There's a lot of sense in all that. I can't believe that Labour are letting Farage set the agenda and take advantage
Your occasional reminder that the two child cap on child-benefit ..............
......That necessary work isn’t great headline fodder though.
If it is headlines that we are worried about then keeping the Tory child benefit cap can result in some not very nice headlines :
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/two-child-benefit-cap-labour-poverty-b2726970.html
This headline a week earlier was much more pleasant
Child poverty in Scotland falls
https://www.gov.scot/news/child-poverty-in-scotland-falls/
There's a lot of sense in all that. I can't believe that Labour are letting Farage set the agenda and take advantage
I can't get my head around it which is why I'm scathing.
If Labour don't get their act together - that's it for Labour in my lifetime, I can't see hope coming back.
I don't know what he's scared of.
I was listerning to Mark Blyth (economist - not an MMTer! for the critical) but he said Labour should pull out all the stops to get building some state-owned houses; gain an asset - which wouldl be seen as a plan by the god-damn market!
Labour are shit-scared of their Liz Truss moment and they shouldn't be. They set the effing terms of bond sales!
It's absolutely ruining everything.
(It is to be noted now that inflation may never return to the target previously set. The monetarist types will use this to absolutely clobber many of us. It would be better to simply change the target, now post-pandemic the landscape has changed.
Inflation targetting by interest rate policy is a disaster and given the States and China have done much better on inflation than us -we maybe ought to look at the stimulus policies that actually lower inflation that can only be provided by the government rather than an agent of government (BoE) through a distorted monetary lens.
Labour should pull out all the stops to get building some state-owned houses
Now that I fully agree with and a shit tonne of money into onshore renewable, both will make things way better in the long term, actually do something about the cost of living and piss off some more retired Torys.
And anyone who thinks taking WFA off wealthy pensioners in principle was a bad idea probably votes Tory / Reform anyway. It's a great Labour policy, this rather pathetic turn is very disappointing. If they want more people to get it, up the pension credits threshold and make a big fuss about it. Difficult to argue with giving the poorest pensioners a bit more at the expense of the wealthy ones.
And anyone who thinks taking WFA off wealthy pensioners in principle was a bad idea probably votes Tory / Reform anyway.
Totally. Both my parents and my in-laws found it laughable that they got the WFA. Both sets of grandparents simply put the money towards more Christmas presents for their grandchildren.
It's utterly ****ing mental that households that retired at age 55-60 with some final salary pensions and shares etc received the WFA.
And anyone who thinks taking WFA off wealthy pensioners in principle was a bad idea probably votes Tory / Reform anyway.
Given the absolute change that we needed it was barely a rational and logically economical thing to do.
Labour used this to test the political water for where they were - it failed. 1.4bn is simply not enough to warrant the shit-storm that ensued. Besides they didn't technically need to do it.
Badly targeted and implemented.
Imagine having 14 years of the last lot then coming to power with this great idea for 1.4bn.
They could have stayed well away from it and fixed many other things first. Besides the public hate the idea as we've discovered.
Labour would be one up now by not having gone near it. So no I don't like it and it wasn't a necessity when we could have been doing many other things.
Where does the idea come from the pensioners in questions are wealthy too? 18,000 for a couple is not wealthy. We have a taxation system to remove money if there's too much in one place.
Get your public onside first.
Get your public onside first.
The world's moved on, thats almost impossible these days, theres always one vocal group you'll upset and the media will jump on it.
1.4bn isn't nothing but more importantly it signalled a shift in direction, moving money to where it's needed rather than pandering to the right wing retired voters.
18,000 for a couple is not wealthy.
Agreed and I'd have been happy if all the WFA saved from the wealthy was plowed back into raising the pension credit threshold.
Badly targeted,absolutely not, badly communicated, I'll give you that, but I'd rather a government trying to do the right thing and mucking up the coms rather than the populist idiots we had before doing all the wrong things for the sounds bites. Obviously I'd like a slick government doing the right things but like unlimited resources that isn't available to us at the moment.
Still not much evidence of a poll bounce for Labour after Sir Keir Starmer's well publicised Enoch Powell tribute act.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1927662568144835001
"Labour record their lowest poll rating since October 2019"
So that will be when Jeremy Corbyn was Labour leader then.
But the public thinks he's still the best PM given a choice of all the party leaders
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/52251-who-would-be-the-best-prime-minister-may-2025
But the public thinks he's still the best PM given a choice of all the party leaders
I'm sure that will comfort him when he's back in opposition.
But the public thinks he's still the best PM given a choice of all the party leaders
That's because his main opponent is now Nigel Farage and most people think that Nigel Farage is an arsehole.
According to your link even Ed Davey and Kemi Badenoch are more popular with voters than Nigel Farage.
So imagine that....... being such a useless prime minister that you are thrashed by a political party whose leader most people don't even like. It must surely take a special level of ineptitude to achieve that?
"Mr Farage simply marched his party into the vacant political space where a centre-left party should be. Even if the government belatedly U-turns on both issues, Reform will be able to claim to have blazed the trail."
And I see that the Guardian editorial writers have gone all Taliban-esque with their joyless lefty ideological purity :
"There is another way. Policies such as the public ownership of utilities, and the introduction of wealth taxes in an ever more unequal society, enjoy broad support both among blue-collar voters and in Labour’s urban strongholds. That suggests a broader groundswell of support for a more expansive social democratic approach – one that can deliver a more collectivist and equal society without embracing the xenophobia and extreme social conservatism that defines Mr Farage and his movement."
There is another way. Policies such as the public ownership of utilities, and the introduction of wealth taxes in an ever more unequal society, enjoy broad support both among blue-collar voters and in Labour’s urban strongholds
Wow it's not as if any of us haven't been banging on about this for yonks is it?
And I see that the Guardian editorial writers have gone all Taliban-esque with their joyless lefty ideological purity
🤣
Labour are smothered in ideological purity - just not the good type - the rotten, delusional monetarist and mythical fiscal rules type. The very definition of ideology.
Also joyless - well perhaps Labour and their attitude towards inequality, lying to the electorate and sticking their hands in the sweet box whilst we all suffer is the very definition of joyless.
Why just about all arguments in support of the WFA strip / 2CBC are idealogically informed rather than economically informed.
Another eample of the taliban-esque and joyless attitude of the current Labour party.
Starmer is apparently to attack Farage's economics as a dangerous fantasy that will make most people in the UK much poorer.
Of course, it would be a heck of a lot more punchy if he said that losing billions of pounds from the UK economy is a bit of a habit for Farage, but he's not allowed to say that - unfortunately. 🙄
And I see that the Guardian editorial writers have gone all Taliban-esque with their joyless lefty ideological purity
Where's binners with his Holy Grail or Citizen Smith picture?
Starmer is apparently to attack Farage's economics as a dangerous fantasy that will make most people in the UK much poorer.
Won't work - people already feel like that.
They've voted change not continuing wonky Conservatism built on fraudulent market delivery.
Starmer will do anything apart from the one thing that counts - fix anything.
Where's binners with his Holy Grail or Citizen Smith picture?
Can't work out what folk like this want out of society - you're either against the stuff that conservatism had failed to deliver or you're for changing stuff and delivering much better outcomes without using failed Tory driven politics and economics.
I mean if the Tories are so despicable and broken don't support Starmer when he builds on their ideas.
Red team good blue team bad.
Where's binners with his Holy Grail or Citizen Smith picture?
Can't work out what folk like this want out of society - you're either against the stuff that conservatism had failed to deliver or you're for changing stuff and delivering much better outcomes without using failed Tory driven politics and economics.
I mean if the Tories are so despicable and broken don't support Starmer when he builds on their ideas.
Red team good blue team bad.
Can't work out what folk like this want out of society
And then you answer your own question :
Red team good blue team bad.
I am afraid that for some people it's just that and nothing more.
Can't work out what folk like this want out of society
And then you answer your own question :
Red team good blue team bad.
I am afraid that for some people it's just that and nothing more.
Where's binners with his Holy Grail or Citizen Smith picture?
Can't work out what folk like this want out of society
Attacking someone when they do post is one thing, but goading someone who is not engaging anymore to rejoin the scrap? Feels a bit trolly?
Starmer will do anything apart from the one thing that counts - fix anything.
Usually I've had the good fortune to be insulated from whatever stupidity is doing the rounds in government, but now I have a situation that is very close to home - MissJ cannot get a job due to a hiring freeze resulting from NHS budget cuts. Will Reform fix the NHS? I hardly think so. But since Labour aren't doing so either, and their plan does not involve employing people inn MissJ's situation, maybe I should vote Reform just on the off chance that, whatever other disastrous car crashes it provokes, they might, for bad motives, do the right thing, i.e. provide money to hospitals to hire staff. Is that a likely scenario? Clearly not. But it might motivate someone to vote for them just in case. Multiply my experience by several million people who feel let down by the current lot, and pretty soon you have majority.
Attacking someone when they do post is one thing, but goading someone who is not engaging anymore to rejoin the scrap? Feels a bit trolly?
Very much so