Westminster Politics

Maticmaker said:
I would agree with most of the above, however, the highlighted bit though I think is almost always true, and it's a mistake that Cameron failed to avoid. Having recently won a GE, seen off the SNP on independence, he was 'cock-a-hoop' and going for the treble, mainly to see off his 'bother-boys' in the Tory party who had always wanted out. What he failed to see was that whilst there was one clear reason for voting remain, there were umpteen reasons, real and imagined for voting to leave, and that's what did for him... and for staying in the EU. With 52% believing that leaving the EU would solve 'their' particular grumble.

Que Sera, Sera!
Click to expand...

Except he only won the GE based on this, because of his fear about UKIP and those to the further right of his own Party.

And I'm sorry, but 'Que Sera, Sera!' - what?!?!? How about you go to the people who's small / medium sized businesses have gone under because of the friction & costs of trading with our neighbours now. Tell that to the students who potentially we're planning or hoping to use ERASMUS or similar schemes to study abroad without friction. Or how about the touring musicians (not the Elton Johns of this world) who now face the expense of needing paperwork for every single country they tour in for their equipment? Or anyone in the NHS waiting lists as thousands of NHS staff who didn't have or couldn't afford to apply for settled status left to 'go back home', or the same for dentists and teachers? How about those who had the right to study here taken away from them, or had the cost of doing so multiply exponentially!

Que se-fecking-ra!
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
Their priority is not to spook the markets and cost the country £50 billion like Lizz Truss. Then do what they can afford to do.

I know its crazy.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's perfectly affordable to let the school and hospital system fall into rack and ruin. No bill to foot there. This is a continuous refrain made by those that find it easier to add up columns on a sheet of paper than attend to the less exact matter of fixing the crumbling columns holding up the room they're sitting in.
 
It is strange that out of an election campaign the BBC are doing a live feed on this green policy for labour. What are the Tory's doing, they actually have power, yet there is nothing on them at all. It's bizarre.
 
pacifictheme said:
It is strange that out of an election campaign the BBC are doing a live feed on this green policy for labour. What are the Tory's doing, they actually have power, yet there is nothing on them at all. It's bizarre.
Click to expand...

Also it looks like the EU are backing down to the farm protests and binning/ delaying their environmental targets.
 
Ekkie Thump said:
Yeah, it's perfectly affordable to let the school and hospital system fall into rack and ruin. No bill to foot there. This is a continuous refrain made by those that find it easier to add up columns on a sheet of paper than attend to the less exact matter of fixing the crumbling columns holding up the room they're sitting in.
Click to expand...

Blah blah blah says a man in a dream world. We can't pretend away the reality that we have to borrow the money to run things as they are and those lending that money will stop doing so if you don't cost your plans.

You are just the other side of the coin of Liz Truss special thinking.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
Blah blah blah says a man in a dream world. We can't pretend away the reality that we have to borrow the money to run things as they are and those lending that money will stop doing so if you don't cost your plans.

You are just the other side of the coin of Liz Truss special thinking.
Click to expand...
What's the goal here? Genuine question.

Let's say Starmer wins and comes in and implements his Tory lite policies. What happens then? He's already telling us not to expect anything will get better because there's no money, so at best we have to assume things in this country are going to stay at the same shitty level for another five years.

But what happens after that? We've already seen austerity doesn't work or actually improve an economy. So what happens after five years of Labour austerity? The economy is still going to be trash so where then is the money going to come from to improve things? Do you think that this time austerity will work because it's happening under Labour?
 
Mogget said:
What's the goal here? Genuine question.

Let's say Starmer wins and comes in and implements his Tory lite policies. What happens then? He's already telling us not to expect anything will get better because there's no money, so at best we have to assume things in this country are going to stay at the same shitty level for another five years.

But what happens after that? We've already seen austerity doesn't work or actually improve an economy. So what happens after five years of Labour austerity? The economy is still going to be trash so where then is the money going to come from to improve things? Do you think that this time austerity will work because it's happening under Labour?
Click to expand...
The Tories get reelected and show Labour how to run a country properly.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
Blah blah blah says a man in a dream world. We can't pretend away the reality that we have to borrow the money to run things as they are and those lending that money will stop doing so if you don't cost your plans.

You are just the other side of the coin of Liz Truss special thinking.
Click to expand...

Who said Labour shouldn't cost their plans?

Is that really your assumption because someone said maybe don't let schools and hospitals crumble?
 
It’s worth reminding everyone @Don't Kill Bill thinks climate change is like going to your local GP
Don't Kill Bill said:
Alternatively,

I went to the doctor and he said I was overweight and I needed to exercise more and eat less. I went back few years later and he said I was underweight and exhausted, so I had to eat more and rest more.

Doctors, changing their minds all the time, the idiots.
Click to expand...

It’s just a waste of time to even attempt to debate this level on nonsense.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
Blah blah blah says a man in a dream world. We can't pretend away the reality that we have to borrow the money to run things as they are and those lending that money will stop doing so if you don't cost your plans.

You are just the other side of the coin of Liz Truss special thinking.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about not costing plans? By all means let's have some costed plans!! Your type would rather build a straw man than a school. Instead of a costed program of investment you'd just rather a managed decline. Maybe because it's slightly easier to write down on a ledger.
 
Mogget said:
What's the goal here? Genuine question.

Let's say Starmer wins and comes in and implements his Tory lite policies. What happens then? He's already telling us not to expect anything will get better because there's no money, so at best we have to assume things in this country are going to stay at the same shitty level for another five years.

But what happens after that? We've already seen austerity doesn't work or actually improve an economy. So what happens after five years of Labour austerity? The economy is still going to be trash so where then is the money going to come from to improve things? Do you think that this time austerity will work because it's happening under Labour?
Click to expand...

Read my post above. Don't spook the market. If Labour does then we will be just as fecked as we were by Truss' budget.

How does Starmer help anyone or any of the issues you want addressing if we push the limit on borrowing any further because what scares me is how quickly people forget just how bad that was.

Look at the debt level and interest payments and explain to me how you are going to raise tax levels high enough to afford a wish list of spending commitments?

Over time, with great difficulty and still loads of hardship to come for most people, Labour can turn this around by doing the right things. There isn't any short cut and more borrowing for growth only works if you are not already massively in debt to the limit the markets will allow. Which we pretty much are right now.

Its depressing but sometimes the truth is depressing. Hiding from it doesn't help, and you better believe that things can and will get much worse if we try.
 
Sweet Square said:
It’s worth reminding everyone @Don't Kill Bill thinks climate change is like going to your local GP


It’s just a waste of time to even attempt to debate this level on nonsense.
Click to expand...

Out of context and wrong as usual. I was addressing why a good idea you could afford before might not be a good idea if you find out you are billions and billions of pounds further in debt.

Never let the facts change your mind though do you Sweet and when you can't answer the point attack the poster that is great form too. Well done very consistent.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
Out of context and wrong as usual. I was addressing why a good idea you could afford before might not be a good idea if you find out you are billions and billions of pounds further in debt.

Never let the facts change your mind though do you Sweet and when you can't answer the point attack the poster that is great form too. Well done very consistent.
Click to expand...
I think you just genuinely don’t understand climate change. It’s not something you can put off to the side and deal with later. In fact the longer it takes to even attempt to deal with climate change the more costly it will be.

We’ve just had the hottest January ever observed. We are going to need mass global coordination and at least some “radical” reforms. Anything less than this is climate denialism because and this might be a shock to some.……the climate doesn’t care about the markets.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
Read my post above. Don't spook the market. If Labour does then we will be just as fecked as we were by Truss' budget.

How does Starmer help anyone or any of the issues you want addressing if we push the limit on borrowing any further because what scares me is how quickly people forget just how bad that was.

Look at the debt level and interest payments and explain to me how you are going to raise tax levels high enough to afford a wish list of spending commitments?

Over time, with great difficulty and still loads of hardship to come for most people, Labour can turn this around by doing the right things. There isn't any short cut and more borrowing for growth only works if you are not already massively in debt to the limit the markets will allow. Which we pretty much are right now.

Its depressing but sometimes the truth is depressing. Hiding from it doesn't help, and you better believe that things can and will get much worse if we try.
Click to expand...

So you think that moving towards a green economy is a... wishlist.
At some point, it is going to have to be done. And investing in a green economy is going to give some return on investment. Obviously I can't put a figure on that. But the quicker we move the quicker the return.
A couple of examples.
Who is the world leader in solar panel production.
Who is the world leader in EV battery production.
China.
 


We’re a totally normal country.
 
Frosty said:
I'm glad they discovered they had money for this, given all the things we apparently cannot afford. Who needs free school meals when your kids can be fed with this instead?
Click to expand...
Dude, stop being so cynical. This is to counter the possibility that when the school concrete crumbles and falls on our kids head, they might start empathising with Palestinians.
 
TheGame said:
Why is he smirking when talking about a serious matter? I really despise this cnut.

Click to expand...


He's such a fecking tool. Yes it was legitimate to point out U-Turns, but not needed to point out the trans issue

Why is he not being questioned on that part of his answer
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
Read my post above. Don't spook the market. If Labour does then we will be just as fecked as we were by Truss' budget.
Click to expand...

I can never figure out why any amount was stipulated by the Labour Party that far out from the GE. Surely the thing to say was "that we will borrow for spending on a Green economy, how much will depend on conditions at the time".

Suspect Starmer is trying to foresee which 'big sticks' the Tories will use to come after him with at the GE and shorten them, or otherwise neutralise them as much as he can.
Perhaps it was Ms Reeves learning on-the-job, or as it appears, Sir Keir is accepting 'collective responsibility.'.. it is the right thing to do at this juncture.
 
Maticmaker said:
I can never figure out why any amount was stipulated by the Labour Party that far out from the GE. Surely the thing to say was "that we will borrow for spending on a Green economy, how much will depend on conditions at the time".

Suspect Starmer is trying to foresee which 'big sticks' the Tories will use to come after him with at the GE and shorten them, or otherwise neutralise them as much as he can.
Perhaps it was Ms Reeves learning on-the-job, or as it appears, Sir Keir is accepting 'collective responsibility.'.. it is the right thing to do at this juncture.
Click to expand...

It could be politicking before the election, Yes.

We don't know what information/predictions he is being given as to the state of finances though. My concern isn't that he has suddenly changed his mind on climate change, as that seems far fetched to me, the bigger worry is that he knows we just don't have and can't raise the money to do it. Could be he wants to commit to another big promise (lets say on housing for example) and knows it won't be credible with this money assigned to the green deal.

Guess work at the moment.
 
Sweet Square said:
Click to expand...

So fecking infuriating. National budgets are not a credit facility. You’re creating money to invest which in turn grows your economy. In the case of green investment you are investing in your future to reduce and mitigate the impacts of climate change so to not invest is an absolutely catastrophic decision economically. It’s farcical to say you don’t have the money to invest in it.
 
Pexbo said:
So fecking infuriating. National budgets are not a credit facility. You’re creating money to invest which in turn grows your economy. In the case of green investment you are investing in your future to reduce and mitigate the impacts of climate change so to not invest is an absolutely catastrophic decision economically. It’s farcical to say you don’t have the money to invest in it.
Click to expand...
Agree. I also wish someone would ask him if the reason is the economy why was he supporting the pledge only two days ago.

Tbh I’m guessing the answer is the party has received a big donation from some oil company. The same thing happened when he got rid of the tax on tech companies.
 
Sweet Square said:
Agree. I also wish someone would ask him if the reason is the economy why was he supporting the pledge only two days ago.

Tbh I’m guessing the answer is the party has received a big donation from some oil company. The same thing happened when he got rid of the tax on tech companies.

Click to expand...



I don't even think there is a donation. They knew the Tories would attack the pledge, and Starmer's instinct is to back down and ensure there is no policy to attack. We have seen this time and again. The judgment is always that a U-turn is better than defending a policy that could be criticised (so any policy really).
 
Here's noted know nothing and Chief Economist of the IMF Pierre Gourinchas embarrassing himself in public:

economically illiterate loony left idiot said:
Now, in this context, what we are saying also in the U.K. and in a number of other countries, is there is a need to put in place medium term fiscal plans that will accommodate very significant increase in spending pressures.

In the case of the U.K., you might think of spending on healthcare and modernizing the NHS, spending on social care, on education, you might think about critical public investment to address the climate transition, but also to boost growth. And so it's very important to have in place medium term fiscal plans that accommodate these pressures, at the same time ensuring that debt dynamics remain stable and contained.

https://www.imf.org/en/News/Article...ipt-of-january-2024-weo-update-press-briefing
Click to expand...

Lots of the second. None of the first, for that is "Blah, blah, blah"
 
Last edited:
Don't Kill Bill said:
Blah blah blah says a man in a dream world. We can't pretend away the reality that we have to borrow the money to run things as they are and those lending that money will stop doing so if you don't cost your plans.

You are just the other side of the coin of Liz Truss special thinking.
Click to expand...

How do you think Rachel Reeves wants to finance her across the board tax cuts?
 
She said: “We will back plans to cut taxes on working people that are affordable because it is important that everything is consistent with fiscal rules. “I'm not going to make unfunded commitments because that would be irresponsible, but my instincts are to have lower taxes.”

In the context of a cost of living crisis and the highest tax burden working people have ever had, just before an election, is it a bad idea to signal an understanding of the difficulty people are having?

It is almost like you don't want them to be elected.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
She said: “We will back plans to cut taxes on working people that are affordable because it is important that everything is consistent with fiscal rules. “I'm not going to make unfunded commitments because that would be irresponsible, but my instincts are to have lower taxes.”

In the context of a cost of living crisis and the highest tax burden working people have ever had, just before an election, is it a bad idea to signal an understanding of the difficulty people are having?

It is almost like you don't want them to be elected.
Click to expand...

tax cuts = "Signalling an understanding of the difficulty people are having"

Funding a struggling education, health and social system to help people in difficulty = "blah blah blah"

Frankly I'll elect Starmer whatever because the others are literally too bad to have anywhere near office. I'm not gonna be some nodding dog in the back of his car though. Labour's lack of policies suck
 
Ekkie Thump said:
Here's noted know nothing and Chief Economist of the IMF Pierre Gourinchas embarrassing himself in public:



Lots of the second. None of the first, for that is "Blah, blah, blah"
Click to expand...


He was a Kennedy Scholar for a year at Harvard University, and then earned a PhD degree in economic history from the University of Cambridge in 2000,

Guess who?
 
We don't build much except weapons. We rely on imports but we left the biggest, most successful trading bloc in the world that was on our doorstep. Our aging population has been brainwashed by our billionaire media barons into hating the immigrants that are so desperately needed to run the country's crumbling healthcare and other infrastructures. We elect absolute twats everywhere, who either haven't got a backbone or are barely concealed eugenicists. Every top rung in every ladder in every industry you can name - from the armed forces to the civil service, from the police to the clergy, from sports to farming, from banking to the arts - is filled with double-barrelled ballbags who all went to the same schools. And there's no plan for the future because all anyone cares about is right now.

Welcome to the UK. But only if you've paid a fortune to get in.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
She said: “We will back plans to cut taxes on working people that are affordable because it is important that everything is consistent with fiscal rules. “I'm not going to make unfunded commitments because that would be irresponsible, but my instincts are to have lower taxes.”

In the context of a cost of living crisis and the highest tax burden working people have ever had, just before an election, is it a bad idea to signal an understanding of the difficulty people are having?

It is almost like you don't want them to be elected.
Click to expand...

Yes, she's not commiting to a number, but she plans to increase spending. You're talking about the difficulty people on more than £100 000 per year are having, and I'm sure it's a tough life, but every time Labour announces a cut you talk about how important it is to be fiscally responsible and to not promise things when money aren't there. Why the sudden change?
 
Badunk said:
We don't build much except weapons. We rely on imports but we left the biggest, most successful trading bloc in the world that was on our doorstep. Our aging population has been brainwashed by our billionaire media barons into hating the immigrants that are so desperately needed to run the country's crumbling healthcare and other infrastructures. We elect absolute twats everywhere, who either haven't got a backbone or are barely concealed eugenicists. Every top rung in every ladder in every industry you can name - from the armed forces to the civil service, from the police to the clergy, from sports to farming, from banking to the arts - is filled with double-barrelled ballbags who all went to the same schools. And there's no plan for the future because all anyone cares about is right now.

Welcome to the UK. But only if you've paid a fortune to get in.
Click to expand...

A sobering description of the UK in the 21st century. And from my perspective difficult to argue with.

To the last sentence in your last but one paragraph, I would add.... because all anyone cares about is right now and only about themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.