MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
Everone is still conviniently pretending the lib dems don't exist...
It is not a question of pretending that they exist it's just an acceptance that since they were screwed by Nick Clegg and Vince Cable they have become an irrelevance when discussing alternatives to the Tories and Labour.
At the last general election the LibDems received 11% of the vote which is about half of what they were getting under Charles Kennedy. Current opinion polls typically puts them on about 13-14% which isn't much of an improvement on a pretty low level of support.
The only party other than Reform UK which has seen a significant increase in support are the Greens, support for them appears to have doubled since the general election. And it is them who are proportionally likely to suffer the most from the creation of a new left-wing social democratic party.
Currant Affairs?
With a nod to previous affairs. 😉
Everone is still conviniently pretending the lib dems don't exist...
It is not a question of pretending that they exist it's just an acceptance that since they were screwed by Nick Clegg and Vince Cable they have become an irrelevance when discussing alternatives to the Tories and Labour.
At the last general election the LibDems received 11% of the vote which is about half of what they were getting under Charles Kennedy. Current opinion polls typically puts them on about 13-14% which isn't much of an improvement on a pretty low level of support.
The only party other than Reform UK which has seen a significant increase in support are the Greens, support for them appears to have doubled since the general election. And it is them who are proportionally likely to suffer the most from the creation of a new left-wing social democratic party.
Well, if you look at it through the prism of FPTP it's distorted. Number of votes doesn't = Number of MP's.
Even so the lib dems are the 3rd largest party, with a much larger share of seats than before, so it really depends on what angle you want to look at it from, and how you want to paint a picture or set a particular narrative.
It's ultimatley bull crap - we need electoral reform (not to be confused with Farrages facist party) from FPTP to a PR type system.
And it will be a bumpy road as the electorate adjust teir mindset to voting for who they actually want, as opposed to voting to keep the party they dislike the most, out.
Until that happens its 'all for the birds' anyway.
- One legislative / policy change from the efforts of the left wing factions outside of the labour party?
- ?????
- Anyone? Just one tiny example of this?
- Pretty much all the great reforms of the last hundred years which have benefited ordinary working people started life as a motion at a trade union branch meeting, from there they have progressed through the union to the national conference, and then from there to Labour Party Conference.
- Once those hurdles were overcome the real fight began to make them Labour government policy. The fight typically was between the left and the right of the Parliamentary Labour Party.
- The Labour Party as a federation of socialist societies and trade unions has always been quite unique in the western industrialised world. It has historically been a broad church/big tent political party covering a wide political spectrum.
- There was little point in having other competing political parties purporting to represent ordinary working people when the Labour Party mostly provided the vehicle needed.
- All that has now very clearly changed. The Labour Party is no longer a broad church. It now only represents very narrow centrist interests and certainly not a wide political spectrum.
- No one outside the narrow leadership clique has any control over policy. I very confidently predict that this current government will be the first Labour government in history not to pass any great reforms which have a significant impact on the lives of ordinary working people.
- It's time to smell the coffee and face up to reality. Sir Keir Starmer claims to have "changed the DNA" of the Labour Party and he has. Or at least Morgan McSweeney has.
Edit : I have absolutely no idea why the paragraphs are numbered, I certainly didn't do it, presumably I clicked on something accidentally. I can't to be arsed to re-format the post. Apologies.
I’m off the left
So is Starmer!
With a nod to previous affairs. 😉
A date with a sultana?
Very dry wit!
And it is them who are proportionally likely to suffer the most from the creation of a new left-wing social democratic party.
Yup. The new Corbyn (don’t call it a personality cult) Party risks removing “momentum” from the Greens at a critical time for them, while also amplifying disquiet at Labour not fixing everything everywhere all at once. Only Reform stand to gain. Hopefully his party will sink without a trace well before then next general election, and we can get more Green MPs, and not too many more Reform MPs (there will be more). Personally I want the Labour seat count to hold up enough to stop Reform being the largest party… but that’s just wishful thinking at this stage. Hopefully Labour MPs can mark their mark on this government in the coming years, and that their efforts are noticed by their constituents.
The new Corbyn (don’t call it a personality cult) Party risks removing “momentum” from the Greens at a critical time for them
Firstly it is very far from certain that he wants to be leader, it appears that the most he is prepared to consider ATM is interim/provisional leader.
And secondly this could actually represent an opportunity for the Green Party. I think it is highly likely if not inevitable that the new party will form an electoral alliance with the Greens, this could put them both in a much stronger position.
Hopefully Labour MPs can mark their mark on this government in the coming years, and that their efforts are noticed by their constituents.
Dont bank on it, I've written to my labour MP, on april 16th 2025, on the subject of cosying up to trump and inviting a convicted sex offender and fraudster into the country on an official state visit, and what sort of tone he thinks that will set.
Trump shouldn't even be granted a visa, never mind having the red carpet rolled out for him, where's 'Tommy two-names' when he's needed? lol 🤔
The self-important double-barrel surnamed **** hasn't even had the common decency to even get one of his lakies to even acknowledge my concerns, never mind give me any kind of reply at all.
They never can be… unless you set up your own party where you have the final say and the strongest voice that is.
As always your wisdom dazzles me almost as much as your sneering attitude. As such I hesitate to mention it but doesnt this come back to your outrage about creating a party rather than joining the green party which, as any sixth former could tell you, has limited overlap with Corbyn etc. The "green party" (by which I assume you mean the English/Welsh variant vs the Scottish version) serves a different group from traditional left wing voters.
Another advantage of the new party is that it will undoubtedly sound the death knell of George Galloway's Workers Party, an irritating and unhelpful distraction in UK politics.
Galloway has made overtures to Corbyn but these have been very firmly rejected.
As such I hesitate to mention it but doesnt this come back to your outrage about creating a party rather than joining the green party which, as any sixth former could tell you, has limited overlap with Corbyn etc.
No outrage. Just consider it the move of a self serving politician, as you probably would if it was anyone else.
Yup. The new Corbyn (don’t call it a personality cult)
Nudge nudge wink wink hey? Its fascinating how people like you happily amplify the hard right attack lines. I mean you could just actually pay some attention and spot the obvious fact Corbyn doesnt seem to keen on the idea but nope just dive straight in and help out the hard right.
also amplifying disquiet at Labour not fixing everything everywhere all at once
Can you come out with any more half arsed cliches? The problem is they are fixing **** all and just going in for Johnson style politics. To fix stuff they needed to have started last year as per the post war Labour government and not punt all the decisions into future commissions. That is being grown up and pragmatic.
Making the hard decisions now so either a)we benefit from them by the next election or b)even if the next government takes the credit at least they will be hard to back out. Again see post war Labour and the NHS.
Hopefully Labour MPs can mark their mark on this government in the coming years, and that their efforts are noticed by their constituents.
Only and this is a big if they tell McSweeney and co to **** off with their arse kissing of the "hero voters". Unfortunately they wont and aside from a few people like yourself who will keep announcing we just need to wait for the glorious grown up leader to stop chasing the hard right vote everyone else will decide either a)just vote for the hard right or b)vote for a fragmented opposition.
At which point I am sure you will start announcing that we should have waited till the next next election at which point Starmer and McSweeney would have stopped being so hard right.
Everone is still conviniently pretending the lib dems don't exist...
Unfortunately it is effectively true. Unless they manage to convince the media to give them a tenth of the attention ukip gets then they are going to be in a tight spot with Daveys having to do stupid stunts to get a tenth of the attention Farage gets reluctantly sipping a pint of beer in a pub whilst wishing he could be in the club drinking wine.
the obvious fact Corbyn doesnt seem to keen on the idea
Getting Sultana to do all the public floating of the idea fools no one.
and help out the hard right
That’s exactly what Corbyn risks doing.
as you probably would if it was anyone else.
Well aside from, as Ernie pointed out to you, its unclear whether he is keen on the idea. Its also difficult to see why being in a party would be any better for him than running as an independent? Being an independent didnt exactly hurt him last time round did it?
Its odd how, again, you parrot the hard right attack line of " self serving politician" aka they are all the same and in it from themselves.
Perhaps you might want to consider who is actually helping reform here?
Just consider it the move of a self serving politician,
I am not Corbyn's number one fan but I cannot think of a less appropriate description, are you for real?
If you see Corbyn as a self-serving politician what is Sir Keir Starmer in your alternative universe, some sort of selfless conviction politician?
Getting Sultana to do all the public floating of the idea fools no one.
If you actually think that you are betraying how little you understand about the situation.
There will be no "public floating of the idea". This party in the making might be news to you but some serious work has been going on for months.
Much of the debate is whether it should be a normal structured party or alternatively a loose alliance of local initiatives, something which exists to an extent at the moment and could be expanded nationwide. I think it might be tilting to the latter which could obviously work well if it involved an alliance with the Greens.
With regards to the leadership Corbyn is known to prefer a collective leadership but there is talk of interim leadership. Zarah Sultana has impressed a lot of people but she actually has little experience in politics so it has been suggested that her youthful energy should be complimented with Corbyn's decades of political experience. Corbyn has yet to make a decision but it looks likely that he might agree to co-lead in the short term.
Sultana jumping the gun and announcing that she is launching a new party with Corbyn and forcing him to release an unplanned statement is probably a testament to Sultana's naivety and lack of experience. Any announcement of the birth of a new high profile party is generally done in a planned way via a press conference.
I am not even sure that Sultana has had much to do with the formation of any party, until a couple of days ago she was a fully paid up member the Labour Party. The discussions concerning the possibility launching a new party on the left have been going on for a very long time.
That’s exactly what Corbyn risks doing.
Doesn't really matter as far as the next election cycle goes, it's either Reform or a right wing for a Labour party government. Or some car crash of a basically right wing for the UK hung parliament.
The UK is at least 10 years away from a "left" wing Government. If you want, I'd bet you (not everyone) a Lochinver Pie delivery on that.
One legislative / policy change from the efforts of the left wing factions outside of the labour party?
?????
Anyone? Just one tiny example of this?
You still have not provided an example of a left wing party outside of the labour party having actually achieved anything at Westminster. the system is rigged so they cannot. there have been loads of left wing parties created over the years. Not one has acheived anything
Just consider it the move of a self serving politician,
I am not Corbyn's number one fan but I cannot think of a less appropriate description, are you for real?
If you see Corbyn as a self-serving politician what is Sir Keir Starmer in your alternative universe, some sort of selfless conviction politician?
I agree with you on that.
You still have not provided an example of a left wing party outside of the labour party having actually achieved anything at Westminster.
No I haven't, because I have explained why that wasn't necessary. The unique nature of the Labour Party, an association of affiliated socialist societies and trade unions, rendered that unnecessary. Read my post again.
The Labour Party was the mass party of working people, its democratic structures and very wide spectrum of political opinions made it an effective vehicle for change without the need for other left-wing political parties. Political organisations rooted in the communities that wished to present their own arguments could affiliate to the Labour Party (the obvious exception to that was the banning of marxists, but that's a separate story)
All that has now changed, the Labour Party is no more. And that's the problem, you seem to think that the current government is a "Labour" government, it isn't, it is simply trading under that name. As I previously said it will be the first government in history which calls itself Labour that doesn't introduce reforms that change the lives of ordinary working people in a real and meaningful way. It is the first government in history which calls itself Labour that is increasing poverty.
Stop living in the past and kidding yourself that nothing has changed. Even a broken clock is correct twice every day, Sir Keir Starmer was correct when he said that he had changed the DNA of the party. The Labour Party as you once knew it is no more.
Previously there would have been no need for Zahra Sultana to join a separate political party because her rightful place was in the Labour Party. She didn't create the current situation, the centrists who are failing their voters did, she was suspended from the PLP with little likelihood of being re-admitted for standing up for the founding principles of the Labour Party.
The electorate appear to be accepting more and more than the shelf life of the established parties have expired, maybe you should too TJ ?
All that has now changed, the Labour Party is no more. And that's the problem, you seem to think that the current government is a "Labour" government, it isn't, it is simply trading under that name.
I really do not. I have stopped voting labour as it has moved so far to the right which has been since well before Starmer. I stopped voting labour when they made a pact with the tories in Scotland that resulted in a tory government at westminster
I simply do not believe that this proposed new party will actually achieve anything. None of the other left wing parties have, why will this one? If they could get their shit together and act together then maybe but all this is doing is splitting the left further. Its a gift to the right
I believe the only way is from within the labour party
We will see in the fullness of time
The Labour Party was the mass party of working people, its democratic structures and very wide spectrum of political opinions made it an effective vehicle for change without the need for other left-wing political parties.
This has not been the actuality for 30+ years
I simply do not believe that this proposed new party will actually achieve anything. None of the other left wing parties have, why will this one? If they could get their shit together and act together then maybe but all this is doing is splitting the left further. Its a gift to the right
I believe the only way is from within the labour party
I think splitting the left is a valid concern. Labour got in because the Tories and Reform split the vote on the left, there are lessons to be learned from that.
I would love to see Labour moving back to the left, offering a vision of opportunity and equality to all. But I'm not even sure enough voters want that now. They want "stuff" not a society, and they want someone to blame if they aren't getting it, apart from their own lack of moral fibre and that of the performative politicians they vote for.
The Labour Party has changed because society has changed, the Labour Party was the voice of working people who had no voice, no employment protections and no access to opportunities. Whilst today's employed might not value what we have we do have employment protection and opportunities for moving out of the job you started working in.
The other big change is the number of people not working because they can't or wont (there's a big overlap), they were not traditionally the core Labour sought to represent. The Labour Party has split with the more centrist elements representing the working people (there were always a lot of Tory working class voters), people who care about their standard of living (a traditional Labour voter) rather than inclusion, welfare etc. The left of the party has moved more towards support for those who don't work. Thats why the Labour Party is struggling, it can't reconcile these two view points. Corbyn as always is an irrelevance, hie undoubtedly conviction based politics and nuanced arguments will not cut through to the average voters. Farage knows this which is why his messaging is conviction free and simple. He knows what his audience wants to hear, not what they need to hear.
I think splitting the left is a valid concern.
This is not about "splitting the left", the Labour Party is not a left-wing party!
In fact what is being proposed is the complete opposite of that, ie reconstructing the Left which has been fractured and split by the Centrists through expulsions, suspensions, and embracing right-wing Tory policies (TINA)
Btw MCTD do you consider yourself to be Left or Centrist? You can't by definition be both
The Labour Party has changed because society has changed, the Labour Party was the voice of working people who had no voice, no employment protections and no access to opportunities. Whilst today's employed might not value what we have we do have employment protection and opportunities for moving out of the job you started working in.
I don't particularly mean to rag on you, @stumpyjon, but I think this illustrates perfectly the victory of the oligarchy in our society. A small number of people are getting richer and richer and the poor are getting poorer and poorer, and an ordinary person with a middling income (I'm guessing) thinks it's all fine. Just as the Tories have managed to get working people to vote against their own interests, now Bezos and co have convinced normal people that working a lifetime to make the rich richer is the way things should be.
Yeah - you'll need some bigger leaflets in 2029 on your little round to explain to everyone else how well Labour have done.
Labour has only enjoyed success through lying its way to power using left-wing messaging "Change" to get there and pulling the rug when in power. (If a company did this you'd be on to trade descriptions.)
It's been a god-awful disaster that many of us saw coming (although honestly not to this degree) and those going on about Corbyn in a negative light should be putting Starmer and Co in their sights for what he has done to the Labour party and brand.
It's Starmer who has damaged whatever people will perceive the Labour party to be going forward. He would have been elected and enjoyed success following through on his top ten lefty lies that put him there, and we'd all be better off as result.
It's been a shockingly awful first 12 months - just thinking back fries my brain; from the bollocks of Centrist baiting black-holes to the freebie summer period. The mess of the WFA and benefits bill. Nothing but a bloody shambles that has set the country and Labour back years.
To not recognise this is literally an ignorant embarrassment of critical thinking and lack of economic understanding of what the country needs to address many of its problems.
Just pretend the Tories did all this and you will get it.
(Let's also face some truths - Starmer is not even a very good right-winger either.)
The classic hilarious 6th Form response!
Still it's gotta be simpler than coming up with a coherent grown-up response.
Politics is hard 😟
Oh look, the grown ups are posting pictures again. I expect we're a page away from them claiming they're being bullied.
“It’s the worst start, for any newly elected government, any newly elected prime minister, either Labour or Conservative.”
Labour’s approval rate is around 24%, and there are multiple reasons for Starmer’s fall in public support, explains politics professor, Sir John Curtice.
The electorate appear to be accepting more and more than the shelf life of the established parties have expired, maybe you should too TJ ?
This x 100. Here in this stereotypical working class semi-rural town, literally everyone I know thinks the Labour party no longer represents them and only speaks for well off/rich middle class professionals who mostly inhabit big cities and their suburbs. Many tell me they will be voting Reform in future because even though they don't like Farage, he is the only politician who dares to speak up about the concerns of working class white people (yes, immigration is high up the list), many others who can't stomach reform say they will not vote at all because there is no one to vote for, the rest say they'll vote for fringe parties like the greens. Even the Labour diehards who've been members and activists all their lives are either leaving the party or are very disillusioned.
For those on here like TJ who say the Labour party is the only way to defeat the hard right, I really don't think you understand the scale of opposition or outright hatred towards Starmer and the Labour party in working class, mostly white, places like Todmorden, and if that sentiment is replicated across the country (and I have no reason to believe it isn't), Labour are going to be decimated at the next election.
Labour’s approval rate is around 24%
Yeah I think a lot of people are in deep denial of how much has changed in UK politics. Labour's support has been at approx 23-24% for months (it's 22% in the very latest poll) As far as I am aware no governing party has ever had such a low level of support in its first year in power, certainly not in modern history.
There is no reasonable chance that Labour will win the next general election which makes the "don't split the so-called left-wing vote" argument even weaker.
Some people seem to be applying the old and now defunct rule that it's "the Tories or Labour" and yet that is very clearly no longer the case.
Just two parties have doubled their support since the general election - Reform and the Greens. Rightly or wrongly neither are viewed as establishment parties by the electorate. I think it is obvious that voters are desperate for change, not the deary certainties of the failed status quo.
given the examples from history that the only thing a new left wing party will do is make it more likely for the tories to win the next election you are making the same mistake as the labour right who preferred a tory win to a left wing labour win. Look where that got us? Brexit and another 5 years of tory austerity. and yes - the labour right did cause this with the tory / labour pact in Scotland and Mandelson and his "undermine corbyn every day"
I hold no truck with our current labour party but they are the only party capable of beating tories and reform. That you would prefer a tory / reform government to a highly imperfect labour one is very telling.
The enemy of your enemy is not your friend
Or are you really think that this new left wing party will actually win? I don't believe they will even attract those left wing economically right wing socially voters Dazh mentions - because they are not going to be attractive to them at all. They will be seen as metropilitan elites more concerned with Gaza than with being racist
I think splitting the left is a valid concern.
This is not about "splitting the left", the Labour Party is not a left-wing party!
In fact what is being proposed is the complete opposite of that, ie reconstructing the Left which has been fractured and split by the Centrists through expulsions, suspensions, and embracing right-wing Tory policies (TINA)
Btw MCTD do you consider yourself to be Left or Centrist? You can't by definition be both
I agree Labour is not a left wing party, hence why I went on to say I'd like to see them moving back to the left. Maybe Corbyn's group of misfits will see enough support to tempt the ditherers in Labour to move back that way but I don't see it.
I'd like to be a centrist, as i believe extremes seldom work well, especially for the vulnerable. The continued failure of the current economic systems under Labour and Tories are pushing me more to the left as I get older.
the only thing a new left wing party will do is make it more likely for the tories to win the next election
I honestly don't intend to be rude but you seem to be living in some sort of alternative universe. You are saying stuff which might possibly have been valid a few years ago but there is now zero chance of the Tories winning any general election, anytime soon.
There is pretty much no chance whatsoever of Labour winning one the next general election either.
You are basing your argument on a past reality which is now history.
The continued failure of the current economic systems under Labour and Tories are pushing me more to the left as I get older.
This hits the nail on the head.
You can quickly cut through a lot of crap with this approach.
(Although I would add the only extreme we seem to get is to the right barely ever the left.)
Rotheram, a former MP who was elected as first Liverpool city region mayor in 2017, said the government appeared “disjointed” from the rest of Labour.
The fact the government appears disjointed from the rest of Labour should surprise no-one. Starmer and his clique spent their time in opposition not attacking the Tories in any meaningful way but attacking members of the Labour Party with an unprecedented level of enthusiasm.
You can't expect an authoritarian leadership which stamps out and silences dissent through expulsions, suspensions, and intimidation, to have any sort of real connection with its membership.
The candidate selection process was designed to as much as possible create political clones who would obediently toe the line dictated by the leader, although that all went tits up last week.
The Idea that the Starmerites would act differently in government than when in opposition was never feasible.
So Neil Kinnock thinks we should have a wealth tax. It really is a no-brainer but I can't see it happening. As Kinnock himself says, inocmes have stagnated while asset values have inflated massively, yet we tax the former and not the latter, and then wonder why the govt can't fund public services.
Clive Lewis gets it.
https://twitter.com/labourlewis/status/1941931176173735938?t=XIl1xL42jAGgu93Tc_GVvQ&s=19
As this is primarily a cycling forum, former member of the UK government, Norman Tebbit passed today, the son of an avid cycling job seeker.
Wasn't too keen on the man myself but RIP.
Rotheram, a former MP who was elected as first Liverpool city region mayor in 2017, said the government appeared “disjointed” from the rest of Labour.
Looks like Steve Coogan agrees.
Interesting Facebook post by Zarah Sulrana
Parliament and Hansard have removed “We are all Palestine Action” from my speech on Wednesday 2 July 2025 — despite me saying it.
This is a blatant attempt to censor me and rewrite the record.
on who’s authority is this censorship taking place?
Rotheram, a former MP who was elected as first Liverpool city region mayor in 2017, said the government appeared “disjointed” from the rest of Labour.
Looks like Steve Coogan agrees.
Bang on.
This is what happens when you have no convictions of your own and simply parrot what others tell you to parrot....
In an interview with the Observer, the prime minister said he should have read the speech more carefully and “held it up to the light a bit more”.
I had no idea – and my speechwriters didn’t know either.
And this is how Starmer deals with a highly controversial and sensitive subject such as immigration, he doesn't bother to read carefully the speech he is about to make.
I wouldn’t have used those words if I had known they were, or even would be, interpreted as an echo of Powell.
He still doesn't get it, it is the intent of his speach and policy that is wrong and racist, the comparison to the Enoch Powel speach just confirms it. It isn't because the speeches' are comparable that is the problem, it would still be racist fearmongering if Powel had never existed.
About time. What took him so long?
He said it was the case that <a href=" removed link " data-link-name="in body link" data-component="auto-linked-tag">Labour had “become too distant from working-class people on things like immigration”, but he said: “This wasn’t the way to do it in this current environment.”
It's a conundrum. It absolutely wasn't the way to do it. But I'd argue there isn't a way to do it. Anything Labour do, be it policy, tone, language... Reform are sitting there ready to say it's either not enough, or Labour are pretending to get it when really they don't.
This is what is causing "incalculable damage" to the UK economy, wealthy powerful ****s for who having everything would still not be enough and will always demand more. These are the people, the abusers of so many lives, a labour leader should be standing up to, instead of punching down on the poor, the vulnerable, the desperate and the disabled.
It isn't because the speeches' are comparable that is the problem, it would still be racist fearmongering if Powel had never existed.
Quite. And the point is that anyone with a reasonable interest in politics, such a prime minister and his speech writers, would be expected to be aware of Enoch Powell's infamous Rivers of Blood speech.
You don't need to know the details of the actual words used in Powell's speech to know the general thrust of the speech and the message it was conveying. Anyone with a basic understanding of contemporary UK politics would have automatically made the connection between the two speeches.
It is also worth remembering that when Starmer was desperate to become Labour leader he boasted of his alleged forensic skills as a barrister in his "10 Pledges" which he concluded by pledging "forensic opposition to the Tories in Parliament".
I am sure that a barrister with an abundance of forensic skills fully understands the likely effect of using the term "incalculable damage" when discussing recent immigration into the UK.
I suspect the only thing Starmer actually "regrets" with regards to that gutter-raking speech of his is that it didn't have the desired effect, ie it didn't give Labour a big boost in the opinion polls, in fact it probably gave Reform a boost.
I am sure that had Starmer's tribute act to Enoch Powell given his government a reasonable popularity boost Starmer would have taken all the criticism from lefties and liberals in his stride and regretted nothing.
Electrification of the Midlands main line has been paused (cancelled) just as it was finally starting to reach areas that would actually feel the difference. The north continues to languish in the dark ages whilst the rest of the modern world has been on electric rails for decades. I guess we'll continue with climate change and choking on train fumes for a good while longer then.
Economy has shrunk a bit ... In May. That's two consecutive months.
Governments will never get it will they? They don't get growth without new money being spent on the proper investment.
That's why we sit here flat-lining.
Not necessarily me who wants growth but they claim they do.
We really are stuck with these malfunctioning economies.
The pipes need to open but fiscal rules and OBR analysis stop all that.
Absolute dead-end thinking.
https://twitter.com/PatriciaNPino/status/1942567203661840443?t=iB6_oEUvM6mfatEt2kCDcQ&s=19
Economy has shrunk a bit ... In May. That's two consecutive months.
Jeezus Rachel in Accounts isn't going to start crying again is she???
FFS the last time she got all tearful it spooked the markets and the cost of government borrowing rose significantly.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2l99eegzpo
Well that's the stupid game they play.
The 'markets' follow expectations of where they believe future interest rates are going.
Who's in charge of rates? Ahem.
So there's a thing for her and the BoE to figure out. Meaning they could cut them sooner and quicker because that would serve public purpose (rather than pay income to people with wealth).
The market has no choice but to follow.
Our Chancellor believes the bond market is some mythical entity guiding the sovereign decision making that she - unbelievably as it may seem has the power to control.
Bond issuance is a political choice that serves the wealthy so everything else can suffer and sit under the demands of an engineered market.
When she goes crying and the market has a wobble - just simply watch how quickly despite all the newspaper bullshit - things rectify themselves. And if they didn't the BoE can step on and simply purchase more bonds.
Just about every major indices is rallying currently. Assets are enjoying the time of their life (crypto etc) because of scale of the money pouring into them. The same money that could be spent on the good stuff.
But there's no money for us. OBR said so. Fiscal rules said so
That's the ftse 100 following the delayed (already happend) injection of world M2.
https://twitter.com/normalislandnws/status/1944112160248148028?s=61&t=27Xz8oI3pGlaNEQvowJBcg
Oh good Christ. Labour and especially Reeves really do deserve their lack of popularity.
Reeves to say cuts to City red tape will bring trickle-down benefits to households
Imagine only having half-baked failed Tory plans in your head. Then calling yourself the Labour party.
(You see why Centrism is really about right-wing economics? It's nothing to do with being in the middle or moderate. It's to do with protecting and adding to the wealth of the already wealthy. If you thought Centrism was a solution to our problems you're no more clued up than the average Reform voter economically. But at least they come from a position of desperation.)
https://twitter.com/PositiveMoneyUK/status/1945070251399340403?t=EIejigUeSqn_Qy6g48qpPQ&s=19
And here even if hypothetical - this is good to see. Remember Starmer ejected Corbyn and therefore created the split. So none of this splitting the vote nonsense that must be attributed to the failure of Starmer's government in the first instance.
Life of Brian memes not really hitting it.
https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1944825235133337895?t=Z4gT5c62-XciQqmSyoGP_g&s=19
They really do deserve every last ounce of this. Totally of their own making.
hooray for demand side subsidy, that's worked great all the other times we've tried it
Inflation is up again. No real surprises there but it's still not a good direction for the government to be in.
Again, paying out money to people with wealth drives the price level higher - keeping interest rates high makes things more expensive. It's the general price level.
That's why inflation is sticky..
We need cuts.
Inflation is up again. No real surprises there but it's still not a good direction for the government to be in.
Again, paying out money to people with wealth drives the price level higher - keeping interest rates high makes things more expensive. It's the general price level.
That's why inflation is sticky.
We need cuts.
Again, paying out money to people with wealth drives the price level higher - keeping interest rates high makes things more expensive. It's the general price level.
If credit is cheap, people will buy more stuff, or they will pay a higher price for the same thing. Not only that but they will have more spare cash each month because debt repayments are lower (e.g. mortgage, car etc). How stupid do you have to be to think that lowering the base rate (singular, there's only one of them) will lower inflation?
Also, how stupid do you have to be to think that "wealthy people" sit in their mansions collecting interest payments off bank deposits? Jesus wept, were you born yesterday?!
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5y7zqdwzqyo
Authoritarianism really is a central feature of Starmer's pseudo-Labour Party.
An alternative strategy might be not to impose a three-line whip on Labour MPs to support Tory policies which they were never elected to implement.
How stupid do you have to be to think that lowering the base rate (singular, there's only one of them) will lower inflation?
Well clearly you don't follow real world economics do you?
You know there is no paper and no supporting evidence that high interest rates lower inflation?
I ask you how stupid are you if you've believe paying more money to the wealthy lowers inflation. A literal injection of income for the wealthy.
And also explain to me why inflation has remained sticky with high interest rates. You are literally pouring more money into people's pockets that have the power to remove resources from the rest of us.
If credit is cheap, people will buy more stuff, or they will pay a higher price for the same thing
So when the UK had low interest rates we had low inflation - largely speaking. Just look at the numbers around 2010-2020 until the pandemic showed up.
We are paying more the for the stuff now. Energy, water, housing, cars. Because high interest rates lifts the price level of everything
Think it through and study more.
Your distributional analysis is lacking.
https://twitter.com/tonywestonuk/status/1945392358687682860?t=FRgFuVn6aoaz4aEG0pF3Wg&s=19
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g8v33g1dgo
"But if you see a black person walking down the street, you see straight away that they're black. They are different types of racism"
It is truly remarkable that someone can be accused of racism and is suspended from the Labour Party for making a comment which any fair-minded person would see as being perfectly reasonable, and yet the leader of the party can make a very public comment about immigrants causing "incalculable damage" to Britain and he gets away with it without any sort disciplinary action or investigation being taken.
i cannot see anything racist about Diane Abbott's comment and whatever criticism may be levelled against her it pales into insignificance compared to Sir Keir Starmer's very nasty Enoch Powell tribute speech.
It would appear that Diane Abbott's only crime is that she isn't leader of the Labour Party.
Sir Keir Starmer’s crackdown on dissent has been a troubling hallmark of his leadership. Muzzling protest over welfare cuts won’t make the policies fairer or more popular.
The problem isn’t Ms Maskell. It’s a party that can’t tolerate its conscience. Ministers who once revolted but now back the purge expose the factional logic at the heart of Starmerism.
The message from Downing Street now looks less like authority and more like insecurity, especially when the rebels’ concerns are widely shared by the public.
Unable to win by force of argument, Sir Keir opts for the argument of force. It’s a sign of weakness, not strength.
Polling shows Labour is losing support not because of internal splits but because voters are disappointed with the substance of its policies. Labour has the evidence that economic populism works, but won’t use it, reportedly out of deference to donor sensitivities.
I cannot recall ever reading a Guardian editorial more critical of Labour....... well done Keir Starmer you have managed to piss off the Guardian with your hard-right policies and authoritarianism as well as Labour voters, that is quite an achievement!
The most damning accusation in imo is the claim that Starmer is deliberately not implementing economic policies which he has evidence will work because he is putting the interests of donors before those of voters.
but won’t use it, reportedly out of deference to donor sensitivities.
And that is exactly the point I made on the voting for 16/17 year olds, and have been banging on about for ages, political finance reform is what is required, the rest is just rearranging the deckchairs on the titanic. The influence of wealth on politics has made democracy a sham, nothing more than a magicians trick where we get to vote on the "card" the magician(doners) present to us.
PR and reform of the second house will do sweet FA if the wealthy still get to stack the deck before we are allowed our rigged choice.
Diane Abbott suspended for stating the blindingly bloody obvious. As a majority skin coloured immigrant with an accent I don't experience racism (EU definition) until I open my mouth which I sometimes avoid doing. French law covers different types of race discrimintaion with suitable laws. For example if someone discriminates on the bassis of my accent the possible fine is 35 000e IIRC, if they discriminate on the basis of my name that's another law they've broken so that an employer that sorts CVs on the basis of name can also be fined. Clearly these things are hard to prove and discrimination still goes on but at least different aspects of racism are recognised by the state and illegal.
Given her her electoral record if any MP has a solid mandate to govern it's Diane Abbott. An MP of the people for the people.
political finance reform is what is required
No the problem in this case lies squarely with the current Labour Party leadership and the complete lack of meaningful democratic structures within the party.
How much an individual donates to the Labour Party should not make one iota of difference to party policy. Individual donors should be making donations because they support the party and its policies, not to create a party which supports them.
Having a political party which is democrat and that cannot be bought by individuals is perfectly achievable, it isn't pie end of sky. It doesn't require legislation.
Whether legislation is required to curb the political power of individuals is separate to the issue of Starmer embracing hard-right economic policies, he doesn't have to, it is a choice which he has made. Or at least Morgan McSweeney has.
"But if you see a black person walking down the street, you see straight away that they're black. They are different types of racism"
Why's she got to play "divide and rule" though? That's a white person's game.
The labour leadership is playing divide and rule, as was highlighted in the Forde report, which highlighted the hierarchical racism that has been weaponised to purge the left from the party, and that report was then misrepresented by labour to do exactly that. Which this is just another example of.
That's racism, multi21; attributing different characteristics to different races. Saying something is a white man's or black man's game is racist. You need to say "white supremacist's game" or something that doesn't imply all white people play "divide and rule".
She's just stating the obvious, it isn't any kind of a game, just listen to what she has to say, take it on board and treat people on the basis of how they interact with you not the colour of their skin, their accent, their name, their dress, their gender... .
Oh dear, vanishing post syndrome again, has my post dissappeared into the Internet ether or will it appear shortly?
Oh dear, vanishing post syndrome again, has my post dissappeared into the Internet ether or will it appear shortly?
Huh? Who said that?! 😉 It's there now I think!
PS. for those unaware, my "divide and rule" comment was just poking fun with one of her previous gaffes (please don't ban me mods!)
Gaffes come and gaffes go.
Irony, thankfully, is eternal - a point well demonstrated by the last few posts.
Starmer getting rid of an unfortunate self-caricature like Abbott is pretty meh, TBH. But the symbolism is not. It further demonstrates Starmer's cowardice in not wanting to rock the boat of the vested interests and little englander. Tory-lite - an accusation once levelled amusingly at the Libdems.
🙄