The Labour Government

I see the carrier Prince of Wales has been put under NATO control for the first time NATO has a strike group under its command for exercises.

The government acting on its NATO first plan (yes @WRicko a plan!! ;) ) and strengthening ties with Europe as we build a European capability aimed directly at the Russian threat.

This government’s foreign policy has been one of its few highlights - and I appreciate they haven’t got everything right here but largely done well IMHO.
 
Uncle Wally One Ball said:
Well lets hope this introspection starts with an honest reappraisal that we at home may be the piss takers. Lucky enough to have a council house? Yes thanks, and Ive been here 55yrs me and Clive. But Clive died so Im on my own here now, but I cant downsize cos its the family home you know. Where are your family then Elsie? Well our Sharon was brought up here but she met Gary round the corner at 15 and got pregnant so she got given her own house round the corner. Gary had already filled Shaznay though, so she had a house too. Anyway when Sharon and Gary eventually split they had their little Kaya and Beyonce and they had all kinds of problems and couldnt go to work and then one of the kids was diagnosed with adhd which was a shock so we had to sublet one of the council houses and then etc.........the migrants are not the problem here. We are. People have taken the piss for generations. If I was @ChicagoBlue here I would feel strongly enough to say, LOOK MORE CLOSELY TO HOME to see who the wankers are in this country
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with this. We are definitely the problem, not immigrants per se (although they are far from problem free) . But that is not to deny that we are actually fucked. And whilst we are, I think we cannot afford to continue to be so charitable.
 
WRicko said:
That wasn’t your argument it was about France being safe under that logic we wouldn’t take anyone unless there was war in France or Ireland.

The country will probably never be rich enough etc under your above logic. Not that services etc really have much to do with asylum seekers.

Other countries with similar or far worse gdp take refugees some take far more including France Germany. Most refugees are actual in poor countries that border the country they are fleeing.
Click to expand...
Your argument would hold some water if the countries you allude to were happy with the situation. They aren't either.
 
hilts said:
It gets more bizarre by the day.
Click to expand...
They genuinely seem to believe that telling racists they'll be horrible to asylum seekers will get the racists to vote for them whilst keeping non-racists on side.

When they're already losing a lot more voters to non-racist parties (green and libdem).

Aside from morally bankrupt, it's politically brain dead. And won't actually work either.

Other than that, it's a masterstroke.
 
Vic said:
Of course we can afford a socialised health service. As US health insurance premiums rocket, so could the USA.
Click to expand...
All evidence points to the contrary for Britain.

The USA will never have socialized medicine, although it would be good to at least have universal basic healthcare.
 
mosssideblue said:
Haven't seen her proposal today but was that formally announced as being part of the policy the UK are taking?
Click to expand...
The headline in the Guardian (or is it the Daily Mail?) says "could be". Generally the words "could be" are there to get clicks and exasperation from that particular papers "Gammon". They do it because they generally succeed.
 
Last edited:
roubaixtuesday said:
They genuinely seem to believe that telling racists they'll be horrible to asylum seekers will get the racists to vote for them whilst keeping non-racists on side.

When they're already losing a lot more voters to non-racist parties (green and libdem).

Aside from morally bankrupt, it's politically brain dead. And won't actually work either.

Other than that, it's a masterstroke.
Click to expand...
I think political.parties in general are scrambling in desperation trying to come up with solutions for impossible situations.
 
Gorbachev said:
I've never understood why true wealth of a country isn't based on GDP per capita.

Ireland have double the GDP per capita then UK has for example.

It becomes such an easy stat for politicians to over exaggerate the actual quality of life this country has.

Just as when the big finance guys big up how well a stock market is doing when probably 90% of the population don't invest in it. Only benefits a small percentage.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. It's total fallacy to think that we are near the top of the pile, sadly. And it's worse than I remembered. According to the IMF (2025) the following countries are better off than us in raw GDP per capita terms:

Rank Country GDP per Capita (USD)
1 Monaco $256,581
2 Liechtenstein $201,150
3 Luxembourg $141,080
4 Bermuda $125,842
5 Switzerland $111,716
6 Ireland $107,243
7 Cayman Islands $97,583
8 Singapore $93,956
9 Norway $90,320
10 Iceland $90,111
11 United States $89,678
12 Macau $84,276
13 Qatar $72,760
14 Denmark $71,967
15 Netherlands $70,606
16 Australia $67,979
17 San Marino $61,518
18 Austria $61,080
19 Sweden $59,508
20 Belgium $58,248
21 Germany $57,914
22 Finland $57,183
23 Canada $55,890
24 Hong Kong $55,608
25 Israel $54,370

We are 26th with $54,280. Allowing for how much your money actually buys you (Purchasing Power Parity, PPP) we are 31st! Just look at the list of countries where people are better off than we are in the UK. It's really quite depressing.

But in fact it's much worse than that because so much of our wealth is in the southeast. So tens of millions of people not in the southeast are much worse off than that. People really need to reflect upon this before spouting out the usual nonsense about how loaded we are and how we can easily afford x, y or z.
 
Chippy_boy said:
Absolutely. It's total fallacy to think that we are near the top of the pile, sadly. And it's worse than I remembered. According to the IMF (2025) the following countries are better off than us in raw GDP per capita terms:

Rank Country GDP per Capita (USD)
1 Monaco $256,581
2 Liechtenstein $201,150
3 Luxembourg $141,080
4 Bermuda $125,842
5 Switzerland $111,716
6 Ireland $107,243
7 Cayman Islands $97,583
8 Singapore $93,956
9 Norway $90,320
10 Iceland $90,111
11 United States $89,678
12 Macau $84,276
13 Qatar $72,760
14 Denmark $71,967
15 Netherlands $70,606
16 Australia $67,979
17 San Marino $61,518
18 Austria $61,080
19 Sweden $59,508
20 Belgium $58,248
21 Germany $57,914
22 Finland $57,183
23 Canada $55,890
24 Hong Kong $55,608
25 Israel $54,370

We are 26th with $54,280. Allowing for how much your money actually buys you (Purchasing Power Parity, PPP) we are 31st! Just look at the list of countries where people are better off than we are in the UK. It's really quite depressing.

But in fact it's much worse than that because so much of our wealth is in the southeast. So tens of millions of people not in the southeast are much worse off than that. People really need to reflect upon this before spouting out the usual nonsense about how loaded we are and how we can easily afford x, y or z.
Click to expand...
Interesting table and why any sane person can see that getting as many people off benefits and working is the Holy Grail. The more people that work the higher our GDP, the lower our welfare bill, the less need for immigration (legal and illegal), the more money we will have to improve services and therefore peoples lives. The key really is getting people working. Starmer and Reeves have had a go at this but look to have failed sadly. Tough as it may be, getting people off benefits will both improve their lives and their mental health.
 
hilts said:
I think political.parties in general are scrambling in desperation trying to come up with solutions for impossible situations.
Click to expand...
I agree, but also they're deliberately putting forward things they know won't work but they hope will strike a chord with voters - performative politics.

Which only compounds the problem.
 
moomba said:
It's like a competition to see who can come up with the nastiest policies relating to people who (in the main) have already been through a lot.
Click to expand...

Officials at the UK border will not be "taking sentimental pieces or seizing jewellery" off of asylum seekers, Number 10 has insisted.

It follows reports that wealthy claimants might have valuable items they possess taken off them to pay for the cost of housing and feeding them.

A spokesperson said: "It's right that if people have money in their bank accounts, or e-bikes, they should be contributing to the cost of taxpayer accommodation.

"We will not seize items of jewellery at the border, and we will not take sentimental pieces."
 
hilts said:
I think political.parties in general are scrambling in desperation trying to come up with solutions for impossible situations.
Click to expand...

Winning an election being the main situation they're trying to solve.

Suspect most dont give a toss about immigration and migrants.
 
BlueHammer85 said:
Officials at the UK border will not be "taking sentimental pieces or seizing jewellery" off of asylum seekers, Number 10 has insisted.

It follows reports that wealthy claimants might have valuable items they possess taken off them to pay for the cost of housing and feeding them.

A spokesperson said: "It's right that if people have money in their bank accounts, or e-bikes, they should be contributing to the cost of taxpayer accommodation.

"We will not seize items of jewellery at the border, and we will not take sentimental pieces."
Click to expand...
Good
 
hilts said:
I think political.parties in general are scrambling in desperation trying to come up with solutions for impossible situations.
Click to expand...
Nobody in their right mind can blame anyone for trying to improve the quality of life for themselves (and possibly their family). It's possible, that, with climate change, large parts of the world will become uninhabitable so again, who can blame anyone trying to better themselves in the lottery of life. Realistically the only way to stop the current high levels of immigration is to make every country on the planet relatively equal economically and also at peace so that economic migration is pretty pointless. Trouble is, it means levelling down for the rich countries which makes it pretty much impossible.
 
Palerider said:
Interesting table and why any sane person can see that getting as many people off benefits and working is the Holy Grail. The more people that work the higher our GDP, the lower our welfare bill, the less need for immigration (legal and illegal), the more money we will have to improve services and therefore peoples lives. The key really is getting people working. Starmer and Reeves have had a go at this but look to have failed sadly. Tough as it may be, getting people off benefits will both improve their lives and their mental health.
Click to expand...
Yep. We're now in a situation where the country needs a hard reset, which is why it needs a completely new government unhindered by its previous failings.

Sadly, we have engrained into too many in our population the idea that "feeling a bit cheesed off" = "I can't work, it's affecting my mental health". We need to get 1m+ off their backsides and back into a job, paying taxes, and crucially, improving their own lives not just the country's economy.

Our idiotic woke ideology is responsible for SO much damage. Hiring the wrong people due to idiotic DEI policies. Kids being taught that it's perfectly fine for men to want to become women. That it's right that a convicted sex offender cannot be deported because he might get persecuted in his own country. ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC. Starmer epitomises everything that is wrong with the country. And people now realise it, which is why he is the most unpopular prime minister on record.

All of this bullshit must go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top