Westminster Politics

Pexbo said:
I’m nearing my 40s, a homeowner with children and savings and I have absolutely zero inclination to move to the right because I can see how damaging the lack of socialism has been to the foundations of this country. It’s about a few getting rich and the rest getting nothing. feck that and feck you.
Click to expand...
I could not agree more, I'm in my 50s also a home owner with children and savings, I find the older I get the more I move to the left, for exactly the same reasons. Like many others, I've watched as the Tories have wrecked this country, schools, NHS, legal aid, immigration, Brexit, social services, councils, etc the list goes on and on, there's very little in the UK that isn't broken and people are being conned into more and more division with the spiteful and hateful politics of fear.

Feck that.
 
Pexbo said:
With a decimated NHS? The majority of people’s inheritance will be used to pay for care long before they see a penny of it.

My partner’s gran was one of a generation who bought her house for 5 figures and it’s now worth half a million. She’s been in a care home for the last couple of years and there isn’t expected to be any capital left in the home when she does finally pop her clogs. If you think that’s purely an anecdote you’re grossly mistaken.
Click to expand...

£5.5 trillion is expected to pass between generations over the next 30 years with the peak occuring 10 years from now i.e. when we are talking about the next government likely getting stale. By far the biggest wealth transfer in history. You might know somebody who will spend it all on care but unfortunately that's just not how it's going to be for many people.
 
11101 said:
£5.5 trillion is expected to pass between generations over the next 30 years with the peak occuring 10 years from now i.e. when we are talking about the next government likely getting stale. By far the biggest wealth transfer in history. You might know somebody who will spend it all on care but unfortunately that's just not how it's going to be for many people.
Click to expand...
wat
 
When the tories bring up old economic times such as the famous banking crash, why don't other parties remind them of black Wednesday?
 
Are Labour in danger of having a policy today? Presumably only because they got to do a bit of flag shagging in there with Great British Railways but still.
 
Labour have pledged to renationlise the railway system within 5 years.

Did this just get announced? I literally saw it scrolling on the news.
 
11101 said:
£5.5 trillion is expected to pass between generations over the next 30 years with the peak occuring 10 years from now i.e. when we are talking about the next government likely getting stale. By far the biggest wealth transfer in history. You might know somebody who will spend it all on care but unfortunately that's just not how it's going to be for many people.
Click to expand...

Just to point out that this is people's money, savings, investments and houses which have been worked for and in the main, taxes including IHT paid for.

It is not the government money and they should keep their fing thieving hands off.
 
Rolandofgilead said:
Labour have pledged to renationlise the railway system within 5 years.

Did this just get announced? I literally saw it scrolling on the news.
Click to expand...


"Labour is also not planning to nationalise rail freight companies or rolling stock companies."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68889345

They have to do this to make any sort of difference.

https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/publica...t-why-its-time-to-take-control-of-uk-rolling/

https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog...-first-step-of-many-labour-will-need-to-take/
 
Buster15 said:
Just to point out that this is people's money, savings, investments and houses which have been worked for and in the main, taxes including IHT paid for.

It is not the government money and they should keep their fing thieving hands off.
Click to expand...

Tbf the majority of it probably belongs to those who inherited great wealth from their parents because inequality is rife. But yes, the people who would get clobbered would almost certainly not be those people.
 
Is there a thread for Scottish politics knocking around? Just watched Hamza Yousaf's press conference and keen to hear thoughts on what happens next up in Holyrood.
 
Last edited:
Phil Jones Face said:
I broadly agree, however I do wonder if the Tories have fecked themselves demographically for a generation.

Broadly speaking, the average voter adopts more right wing positions as they get older, while they accumulate wealth, aquire property and form a family. They have "assets" to conserve. For 20 & 30 year olds currently, budgets are tight, home ownership is often a dream and starting a family is being delayed because of the associated costs. For this generation, this will be the Tories legacy, while the older right wing voters slowly die off.

Labour will of course have no short term fix, but I can't help but think there will be everlasting resentment to the Tories for the above, much like there is for Thatcher. In 10, 20 years time people won't remember the confected culture war issue of today. They will remember how the Tories made their life much more difficult.
Click to expand...
My experience during canvasing in the local elections last year is that a large amount of 20 - 30 somethings can't be arsed to vote, until it's an App on their iPhone.
The turnout at those elections was well under 30%, of course you can expect more for a GE, but I suspect the overwhelming majority of voters will be over 40
 
The Boy said:
I could not agree more, I'm in my 50s also a home owner with children and savings, I find the older I get the more I move to the left, for exactly the same reasons. Like many others, I've watched as the Tories have wrecked this country, schools, NHS, legal aid, immigration, Brexit, social services, councils, etc the list goes on and on, there's very little in the UK that isn't broken and people are being conned into more and more division with the spiteful and hateful politics of fear.

Feck that.
Click to expand...
There was me thinking Blair was Labour
 
Rolandofgilead said:
Labour have pledged to renationlise the railway system within 5 years.

Did this just get announced? I literally saw it scrolling on the news.
Click to expand...

5 years is the interesting number there as it gives them a get out clause if they havent delivered it by next election.

Personally I have zero trust in anything Labour say anyway due to their obscene amount of UTurns on policies. In theory, yeah brilliant policy, but have no confidence Labour will deliver it at all.
 
Berbasbullet said:
How did Blair wreck the country?
Click to expand...
You need me to tell you that, you are either very young or very short on memory.
Took us into an illegal war
Increased taxation that still has repercussions today.
Encouraged young girls to get pregnant to get a home
Allowed immigration to soar
He made massive promises and failed to deliver on virtually all of them, and miserably so.
He started the "Woke" society we all live in today.
New Labour were basically tories wearing red ties!
 
Matt Varnish said:
You need me to tell you that, you are either very young or very short on memory.
Took us into an illegal war
Increased taxation that still has repercussions today.
Encouraged young girls to get pregnant to get a home
Allowed immigration to soar
He made massive promises and failed to deliver on virtually all of them, and miserably so.
He started the "Woke" society we all live in today.
New Labour were basically tories wearing red ties!
Click to expand...

So both New Labour and the current Tory government have fuelled the current woke society?
 
Frosty said:
"Labour is also not planning to nationalise rail freight companies or rolling stock companies."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68889345

They have to do this to make any sort of difference.

https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/publica...t-why-its-time-to-take-control-of-uk-rolling/

https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog...-first-step-of-many-labour-will-need-to-take/
Click to expand...


I think there is a difference between a policy not going far enough and not making any sort of difference. Nationalisation should have a positive impact on the average commuter.
 
RedSky said:
but have no confidence Labour will deliver it at all.
Click to expand...

Unless Starmer gets a large majority a Labour government wont be able to deliver anything of note. Even with a large majority he will have to be ruthless with party discipline and it will take at least two terms to start to move the dial.

DanH said:
I think there is a difference between a policy not going far enough and not making any sort of difference. Nationalisation should have a positive impact on the average commuter.
Click to expand...

Key point - how many average commuters will be voting Labour if it's going to take 5 years?
 


This is one renationalisation that even an ultra-cautious Labour had to embrace: voters like it, there is no upfront outlay, and the Conservative government has already done most of the work to get there.
Click to expand...

Ownership aside, Labour’s plans for a separate arm’s-length body to run the railway are very much on the track laid out by the Conservatives – underlined by the endorsement of Keith Williams, who drew up essentially the same scheme for Boris Johnson and Grant Shapps.
Click to expand...

Full renationalisation might arguably include the rolling stock companies, or roscos, to ensure that Britain owns the trains rather than simply leases them – especially given the dividends that have exceeded the “profits leaking out to private operators” cited by Labour.

But that comes with expenditure that the party could not countenance in an election campaign. Instead, Labour have made clear that the roscos are onside.

It will also allow private “open access” train services, such as Lumo or Hull Trains, to continue, illustrating again that this renationalisation remains more pragmatic than dogmatic.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ish-railway-all-but-set-up-by-tory-government
Click to expand...

Labour underlined that it would not extend renationalisation to the ownership of the actual trains, as urged by unions including the RMT, by publicising an endorsement by Mary Grant, the highly paid chief executive of the rolling stock leasing firm Porterbrook. She said it welcomed “the party’s commitment to leverage private capital to help deliver its long-term strategy for rolling stock”.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...lisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
Click to expand...
.
 
Last edited:
Matt Varnish said:
You need me to tell you that, you are either very young or very short on memory.
Took us into an illegal war
Increased taxation that still has repercussions today.
Encouraged young girls to get pregnant to get a home
Allowed immigration to soar
He made massive promises and failed to deliver on virtually all of them, and miserably so.
He started the "Woke" society we all live in today.
New Labour were basically tories wearing red ties!
Click to expand...
Interesting to hear your thoughts, I wasn’t fishing for an argument. Genuinely curious to hear your thoughts.
 
Maticmaker said:
Key point - how many average commuters will be voting Labour if it's going to take 5 years?
Click to expand...
Not everything in politics should be about winning votes, also given the polls I would imagine far more commuters will be voting Labour than Tory
 
Frosty said:
"Labour is also not planning to nationalise rail freight companies or rolling stock companies."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68889345

They have to do this to make any sort of difference.

https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/publica...t-why-its-time-to-take-control-of-uk-rolling/

https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog...-first-step-of-many-labour-will-need-to-take/
Click to expand...

But that costs money. They can tell everybody they're renationalising something by simply letting the operator contracts expire, its free. Taking over the rolling stock means having to buy it.
 
11101 said:
But that costs money. They can tell everybody they're renationalising something by simply letting the operator contracts expire, its free. Taking over the rolling stock means having to buy it.
Click to expand...
One step at a time, the Tory government isn't exactly leaving the country rolling in cash
 
11101 said:
But that costs money. They can tell everybody they're renationalising something by simply letting the operator contracts expire, its free. Taking over the rolling stock means having to buy it.
Click to expand...

Saving money in the long run.

Richard Murphy, from the link I posted:

"Second, they are not planning to renationalise the rolling stock companies that have leeched money out of the system for decades. It would, apparently, be too costly to do that, which is nonsense since if a premium is paid now that will only and inevitably reflect the fact that this will be settled anyway over time through excessive payments over remains lives of leases. I am still baffled by where Labour gets its corporate finance advice from."
 
Three companies own 87% of rolling stock, effectively creating a cartel. That needs to be broken up at the very least. Otherwise all public ownership of the franchises would do is funnel more public money to the ROSCO companies.
 
Is there any reason why new stock wouldn't be possible to produce that is owned by the state, diluting the cartel over time?
 
Frosty said:
Yes, it has been run as a government body since 2014, with any debt accrued being added to the national debt.
Click to expand...

So what exactly would be nationalised? The ROSCO's still own the rolling stock and lease them out to operating companies. Will they lease them to the government instead if the government aren't going to buy the rolling stock?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.