Continuation General UK Politics III - Dumb and Dumber

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Lothian

I am sure many of them will vote Tory in order to stop Corbyn getting in.

Well, the Labor idiocy in making Corbyn their leader is one reason the UK is in the mess it's in.

[dudalb]

As a non UK citizen, I am not thrilled with either major party in the UK at the moment.
Labor is better then the Tories, but better is not the same as good.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by dudalb

As a non UK citizen, I am not thrilled with either major party in the UK at the moment.
Labor is better then the Tories, but better is not the same as good.

What, specifically, are your concerns about the Labour Party and their policies?

[The Don]

Originally Posted by dudalb

To be fair, i suspect any politician in that situation nowdays would do that.
I can't see anybody in UK politics who is capable or rallying people to sacrifice with a "I have Nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat".I think a Labor PM faced with having to do those things would try to disguise them.

You'd be wrong. The Labour Party has been very clear about the need to raise taxes and w.r.t. the energy crisis have presented a fully costed plan funded by windfall taxes on energy company profits.

[P.J. Denyer]

Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King

That is astoundingly generous: any evidence that he's ever thought as far ahead as next week, Saturdays excluded, of course.

Fair point.

[wobs]

Election is predicted to be on its way sooner rather than later, given things are going to get worse for Truss this winter.

An alternative theory is that she'll hang on through winter, and come up with some late rescue package, and people will laud her/Tories as their saviour, "aren't they great" type thing. Bit like how BJ was lauded during covid.

Funny how Tories seem to do well in the poles during times of crisis, nomatter how well they respond.

In other news, BJ is still desperate for a photo op. He's clearly jumped the shark at this point, and a major security headache for a head of state:
https://metro.co.uk/2022/08/31/man-w...flat-17277598/

[The Don]

Looks like Liz Truss' promises regarding defence spending are unfunded:

Quote:

Tory leadership hopeful Liz Truss would have to raise taxes or make cuts elsewhere to meet her spending pledges on defence, a think tank has said.

In a report, the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi) said her commitment to spend 3% of national income on defence by 2030 would cost an extra £157bn.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62765529

Of course Liz Truss is promising to reduce taxes but.....

Quote:

In its report, Rusi calculates that, accounting for increased inflation, she would have to increase defence spending by 60% in real terms to meet her spending pledge if she wins power.

Its author, Prof Malcolm Chalmers, wrote that funding this through taxes would require income tax to go up by 5p in the pound, or the standard VAT rate to go up from 20% to 25%.

So where is this extra £157bn going to come from if not taxation ?

Plus the tens of billions to be spent on mitigating the effects of the energy crisis.

[3point14]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Well, the Labor idiocy in making Corbyn their leader is one reason the UK is in the mess it's in.

Un-Be-*******-Lievable.

The party in power for the last 12 years bears sole responsibility.

Do you work for the Barclay brothers?

[Carrot Flower King]

Originally Posted by 3point14

Un-Be-*******-Lievable.

The party in power for the last 12 years bears sole responsibility.

Do you work for the Barclay brothers?

Didn't you know that Corbyn was a time traveller and went back to 2010 and told Cameron, Osborn and Clegg how to institute all those austerity policies which have ****** up pretty much the entire public sector? And that he told Miliband to be photographed eating a bacon sandwich "weirdly"? And came up with the idea of the "Ed Stone"?

Of course it's Corbyn's fault: the time travelling git!

[3point14]

Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King

Didn't you know that Corbyn was a time traveller and went back to 2010 and told Cameron, Osborn and Clegg how to institute all those austerity policies which have ****** up pretty much the entire public sector? And that he told Miliband to be photographed eating a bacon sandwich "weirdly"? And came up with the idea of the "Ed Stone"?

Of course it's Corbyn's fault: the time travelling git!

It's maddening how may people are gullible enough to buy this line from the right-wing, billionaire owned press.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King

Didn't you know that Corbyn was a time traveller and went back to 2010 and told Cameron, Osborn and Clegg how to institute all those austerity policies which have ****** up pretty much the entire public sector? And that he told Miliband to be photographed eating a bacon sandwich "weirdly"? And came up with the idea of the "Ed Stone"?

Of course it's Corbyn's fault: the time travelling git!

And the fact that austerity led to the breakdown of local services which could be conveniently blamed on immigrants and were a significant factor in the Brexit vote was also down to that bearded time-traveller.

Btw, austerity also ****** up the charity sector as well because charities were being asked to plug the gaps in local services caused by austerity whilst at the same time facing a funding squeeze.

I have no love for Jeremy Corbyn but I cannot blame him for the UK's current state.

[Carrot Flower King]

Originally Posted by The Don

Btw, austerity also ****** up the charity sector as well because charities were being asked to plug the gaps in local services caused by austerity whilst at the same time facing a funding squeeze.

I have no love for Jeremy Corbyn but I cannot blame him for the UK's current state.

Oh yeah, I saw at first hand what the first couple of years of austerity did to several children's charities up here, who used to provide some very good services: hacked to ribbons by cuts to local authority spending. We were expected to pick up the slack, while also picking up the slack for cuts in educational psychology, educational welfare, children's services, school nursing, and all while having our own budgets cut and experienced staff like me being edged out...

But no doubt that was all to do with Gordon Brown or Corbyn or anyone not called Cameron, Osborn, Clegg, Laws and the like...

[The Don]

....and what makes it all the more painful is that "Austerity" didn't even manage to do what it was billed to - cut overall public expenditure - it just ruined lives

edited to add....

In that way it's like the UK's Covid response

Somehow we managed to end up with some of the worst death rates, combined with a very expensive response, a massive economic hit compared with other similar economies and huge levels of fraud and grift.

[Carrot Flower King]

^Yup, there was a good section on Inside Science on R4 yesterday, which looked at several aspects of UK-ian Covid responses in light of Sunak's recent bollocky claims. It highlighted that the heel dragging over lockdowns and other things have probably cost more than a more rapid and shorter lockdown would...

But that was just some scientists talking...

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King

^Yup, there was a good section on Inside Science on R4 yesterday, which looked at several aspects of UK-ian Covid responses in light of Sunak's recent bollocky claims. It highlighted that the heel dragging over lockdowns and other things have probably cost more than a more rapid and shorter lockdown would...

But that was just some scientists talking...

That's what happens when the government is full of dithering idiots who are only interested in positive headlines, not governing. By the time public opinion has formed, it's too late and public opinion is too fickle to base policy on.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by 3point14

Un-Be-*******-Lievable.

The party in power for the last 12 years bears sole responsibility.

Do you work for the Barclay brothers?

But they are hiring 20,000 police officers. Granted this is over a period of years and there will still not be as many police officers as there was in 2010 but they are the tough on crime party…

[Darat]

I had thought we’d plumbed the depths when Johnson became PM, but now we have Liz Truss I was wrong.

….Shown calculations setting out that her planned reversal of a recent rise in national insurance would benefit top earners by about £1,800 a year, and the lowest earner by about £7, and asked if this was fair, Truss said: “Yes, it is fair.”…

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...es-action-plan

When asked if a glass was half full or half empty Liz Truss grabbed the glass and turned it upside down to peer into it.

[Mojo]

Originally Posted by The Don

That's what happens when the government is full of dithering idiots who are only interested in positive headlines, not governing.

A lot of the time the policy seemed to be governed by bad headlines, not good. Decisions had a remarkable tendency to be taken when Boris needed some good news, or a dead cat to throw on the table.

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by The Don

...

I have no love for Jeremy Corbyn but I cannot blame him for the UK's current state.

I blame Corbyn for two things: For Brexit*, through the part he didn't play in campaigning for a Remain vote, and for making absolutely certain that the Tories got reelected.

*No of course I don't blame him solely. It took a whole cavalcade of rogues and fools to make it happen, but with the result as close as it was, his contribution alone could have tipped the balance.

[Garrison]

Originally Posted by Darat

I had thought we’d plumbed the depths when Johnson became PM, but now we have Liz Truss I was wrong.

….Shown calculations setting out that her planned reversal of a recent rise in national insurance would benefit top earners by about £1,800 a year, and the lowest earner by about £7, and asked if this was fair, Truss said: “Yes, it is fair.”…

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...es-action-plan

When asked if a glass was half full or half empty Liz Truss grabbed the glass and turned it upside down to peer into it.

if they really wanted to help people at the bottom of the scale they would increase personal allowances, taking a lot of people out of paying income tax in the first place. Of course even this begs the question of what will they cut to pay for it?

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Garrison

if they really wanted to help people at the bottom of the scale they would increase personal allowances, taking a lot of people out of paying income tax in the first place. Of course even this begs the question of what will they cut to pay for it?

Remove all or some of the personal allowance for those earning over a certain income.

[Wudang]

Originally Posted by Darat

But they are hiring 20,000 police officers. Granted this is over a period of years and there will still not be as many police officers as there was in 2010 but they are the tough on crime party…

And the courts are barely functioning as so many were sold off under a Tory government, lawyers are abandoning criminal law as they have a weird desire to work for less than the minimum wage, prosecutions now delayed by years etc etc.

[Mojo]

At last, a credible candidate for PM: https://www.theguardian.com/politics...become-next-pm

[Lothian]

Originally Posted by Garrison

if they really wanted to help people at the bottom of the scale they would increase personal allowances, taking a lot of people out of paying income tax in the first place. Of course even this begs the question of what will they cut to pay for it?

I personally would means test the state pension.why treat pensioners differently to the unemployed who claim state benefits?

Of course a party who relies on the votes of pensioners wouldn't look at this, but I can't think of many better ways to get money off those that can afford it.

[SteveAitch]

Originally Posted by Lothian

I personally would means test the state pension.why treat pensioners differently to the unemployed who claim state benefits?

Because, in my case at least, it isn't a 'benefit', it is something I paid for/into, all my working life.

Originally Posted by Lothian

Of course a party who relies on the votes of pensioners wouldn't look at this, but I can't think of many better ways to get money off those that can afford it.

1. They better not rely on MY vote, 'cause they ain't getting it.
2. Make the rich pay their taxes?

[The Don]

Originally Posted by SteveAitch

Because, in my case at least, it isn't a 'benefit', it is something I paid for/into, all my working life.

Only because it was marketed in that way, you also paid for the dole but didn't claim it for your whole working life only if and when you needed it. I fail to see how the pension should be any different.

Don't get me wrong, Mrs Don and I would very much like to receive our state pension as and when we become entitled to it but unless there are huge financial ructions, it's likely that our retirement income would be significantly higher than most peoples working income. Why should we receive an extra payment which would only go towards unnecessary indulgences whilst there are poor pensioners out there who could really use an uplift in their pension.

[Wudang]

Originally Posted by Lothian

Of course a party who relies on the votes of pensioners wouldn't look at this, but I can't think of many better ways to get money off those that can afford it.

They were/are talking about removing free prescriptions for pensioners so I'm not so sure. I expect lots of "announcements" and the square root of sod all done.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by SteveAitch

Because, in my case at least, it isn't a 'benefit', it is something I paid for/into, all my working life. ..snip...

It is still a benefit, I know paying your stamp and so on was the mentality but so was the case for unemployment benefits and those are also means tested. Indeed the grandiose plans from the Tories was to move all state support into "Universal credit" so it should be on the cards anyway...

[Lothian]

Originally Posted by SteveAitch

Because, in my case at least, it isn't a 'benefit', it is something I paid for/into, all my working life.

I don't see it that way. To me there is one big Treasury cellar piled high with money into which all government receipts get pored and which payments are taken out.

While there are rules on what goes in and out these can be changed. We like to link our payments to things we support and I accept the NICs/pension link is stronger than many but ultimately the government can change things. NICs has recently been used as a stealth income tax rise so the Tories can claim not to have raised 'Taxes'

When I started paying taxes it was so my future kids could have free education. My parents paid so I could get free milk at school. A lot were not paying taxes for nuclear weapons. Many more were paying for the NHS. I also paid in so I could get child benefit down the line and so I could get my state pension at 65. Ultimately taxes are taxes and entitlements are entitlements

The Government needs or political direction change and taxes and entitlements can be amended as a result. They can tell me I now need to work 2 years longer to get a pension and deny me child benefit for my kids. They can also tell me that my work pension and assets mean giving me £100+ a week extra is not a priority for this country.

[SteveAitch]

Originally Posted by The Don

Only because it was marketed in that way, you also paid for the dole but didn't claim it for your whole working life only if and when you needed it. I fail to see how the pension should be any different.

The difference is that the dole is an insurance scheme, you don't always need to claim on an insurance policy, whereas a pension is something you pay into and what you get when you claim it is based on what you pay in.

The fact that corrupt Tories are trying to confuse the issue for their own benefit doesn't change that.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Lothian

I personally would means test the state pension.why treat pensioners differently to the unemployed who claim state benefits?

Of course a party who relies on the votes of pensioners wouldn't look at this, but I can't think of many better ways to get money off those that can afford it.

State pensions are a form of social contract whereby today's generation are promised a guaranteed state pension at retirement age in exchange for proving you have worked X no. of years in the form of National Insurance contributions or credits (for example, women temporarily unemployed to have babies). The UK state pension is far less than the typical European one. Here in Finland the average state pension is €1,600. However, it is calculated different (average final salary) and the lowest median gets €1,200, still substantially better than the UK one. The UK one is intended as a safety net. It is cheaper for the government to just give the OAP's the £800 or so per month than to have them all queuing up to be means tested or having to be treated in hospital for poverty-related illnesses. The expectation is that each OAP has savings to draw on top of this, usually in the form of a company or private pension fund, and there are handsome tax incentives for both employer an employee to do this.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by The Don

Only because it was marketed in that way, you also paid for the dole but didn't claim it for your whole working life only if and when you needed it. I fail to see how the pension should be any different.

Don't get me wrong, Mrs Don and I would very much like to receive our state pension as and when we become entitled to it but unless there are huge financial ructions, it's likely that our retirement income would be significantly higher than most peoples working income. Why should we receive an extra payment which would only go towards unnecessary indulgences whilst there are poor pensioners out there who could really use an uplift in their pension.

You are not obliged to take your state pension. No-one is forcing it upon you.

[3point14]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

I blame Corbyn for two things: For Brexit*, through the part he didn't play in campaigning for a Remain vote, and for making absolutely certain that the Tories got reelected.

*No of course I don't blame him solely. It took a whole cavalcade of rogues and fools to make it happen, but with the result as close as it was, his contribution alone could have tipped the balance.

Jesus wept.

Blame the people that did the the thing for the thing.

The twisty thinking required to align your views with those of the Murdoch rags is ludicrous.

[Filippo Lippi]

I do blame the people who did the thing for the thing. Corbyn is one of them

[3point14]

Originally Posted by Filippo Lippi

I do blame the people who did the thing for the thing. Corbyn is one of them

No, he wasn't. All the decisions that have ****** this country up have been of Tory making.


"We did this stupid thing because xxx didn't stop us" is a ******** excuse.

[Lothian]

Originally Posted by 3point14

No, he wasn't. All the decisions that have ****** this country up have been of Tory making.


"We did this stupid thing because xxx didn't stop us" is a ******** excuse.

That is not right. Vote leave had a fair few labour supporters and many Labour MPs voted in parliament for forms of brexit
Corbyn was not part of the official leave campaign but I think he supported it. He did 'Remain' no favours.

Overall he is well down the list of those to be lined up against the wall but he is on it.

[GlennB]

Meanwhile, Survation has a Lab lead over Con at 10% in GE voting intentions, but with Trusss as PM that jumps to 17%. There is yet hope.


"NEW Westminster Voting Intention, named party leaders including Liz Truss. Change vs today's standard voting intention. LAB lead of 17 points:
CON 29% (-5) change was -4.5, rounds to 5
LAB 46% (+3)
LD 11% (nc)"

[Ian Osborne]

Originally Posted by Lothian

That is not right. Vote leave had a fair few labour supporters and many Labour MPs voted in parliament for forms of brexit
Corbyn was not part of the official leave campaign but I think he supported it. He did 'Remain' no favours.

Overall he is well down the list of those to be lined up against the wall but he is on it.

This, exactly this. If he'd have thrown his weight behind the Remain campaign instead of sitting on the fence, the referendum might well have gone the other way.

[3point14]

Originally Posted by Lothian

That is not right. Vote leave had a fair few labour supporters and many Labour MPs voted in parliament for forms of brexit
Corbyn was not part of the official leave campaign but I think he supported it. He did 'Remain' no favours.

Overall he is well down the list of those to be lined up against the wall but he is on it.

He is responsible for literally zero of the decisions involved in bringing the country to it's current state.

I think your position is utter lunacy.

[3point14]

Originally Posted by Ian Osborne

This, exactly this. If he'd have thrown his weight behind the Remain campaign instead of sitting on the fence, the referendum might well have gone the other way.

So?

How many parliments has he presided over? How many of his policies have been implimented? how many bills has he pushed through parliment?


If the answer is >0 then perhaps you have a point. But it isn't, so you don't.