Keir Starmer

Mr Kobayashi said:
Not true. An electorate can be persuaded away from reality. Austerity is a policy and practice that isn't based in economic reality but the electorate have voted it in time and again
Click to expand...
The problem is who ever wins there will be austerity particularly when we are subject to world events.
Anyone who says otherwise is telling porkies.
 
halfmist said:
The problem is who ever wins there will be austerity particularly when we are subject to world events.
Anyone who says otherwise is telling porkies.
Click to expand...
In 2010 we opted for austerity on the basis of the global shock of the world financial crisis. Whilst I supported it at the time at least for a couple of years, it retrospect it was a terrible idea that has led this country to being in a much worse state than its peers, partly because of the austerity policy itself and partly because it led to a pissed off population to vote against its best interests in 2016 when they thought they had little to lose. This time round we are starting from a much worse position than our peers because of 12 years of austerity and Brexit so applying policies for growth now would compound the inflationary spiral that we're in so basically we're fairly short of options.
It's not world events that require austerity it's our unique situation due the sanctions we have placed on ourselves that prevent our economy growing as it should.
 
Last edited:
west didsblue said:
In 2010 we opted for austerity on the basis of the global shock of the world financial crisis. Whilst I supported it at the time at least for a couple of years, it retrospect it was a terrible idea that has led this country to being in a much worse state than its peers, partly because of the austerity policy itself and partly because it led to a pissed off population to vote against its best interests in 2016 when they thought they had little to lose. This time round we are starting from a much worse position than our peers because of 12 years of austerity and Brexit so applying policies for growth now would compound the inflationary spiral that we're in so basically we're fairly short of options.
It's not world events that require austerity it's our unique situation due the sanctions we have placed on ourselves that prevent our economy growing as it should.
Click to expand...
So, lets assume your right. Where is the money coming from to fund a double digit pay rise (just to tread water with inflation) , for EVERYONE, not just those with a bit of Union clout behind them. A lot of businesses in the private sector just cannot stand the cost , that is reality.
 
halfmist said:
So, lets assume your right. Where is the money coming from to fund a double digit pay rise (just to tread water with inflation) , for EVERYONE, not just those with a bit of Union clout behind them. A lot of businesses in the private sector just cannot stand the cost , that is reality.
Click to expand...

What has that got to do with government austerity policy?
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
What has that got to do with government austerity policy?
Click to expand...
If you go back and read the post I was replying to he states "we opted for austerity"
Its the people who suffer austerity not the Government
To avoid austerity people require an increase in their income.
My question was how is this increase in income to be funded
 
halfmist said:
So, lets assume your right. Where is the money coming from to fund a double digit pay rise (just to tread water with inflation) , for EVERYONE, not just those with a bit of Union clout behind them. A lot of businesses in the private sector just cannot stand the cost , that is reality.
Click to expand...
Where do you think the money came from to pay for furlough or test, track and trace, or HS2 or any number of other things? Government finances don't work like your bank account. It's a complicated trade off between public spending, GDP growth and debt affordability. With a economy that is healthy relative to its peers, taking on additional debt is not necessarily inflationary and GDP growth can more than cover the increased costs of servicing the debt. Going for the austerity option, in theory debt goes up less but so does growth. That's what they opted for in 2010 and stuck with it until recently. Now they are in a position where our economy is weaker than its peers so increasing public spending is very likely to be inflationary. That is the hole that this appalling government has got us into. I have no confidence that they can get us out of it either and it's likely to take a few years of pain and competent government to get us out of this mess.
 
halfmist said:
If you go back and read the post I was replying to he states "we opted for austerity"
Its the people who suffer austerity not the Government
To avoid austerity people require an increase in their income.
My question was how is this increase in income to be funded
Click to expand...

No sorry that's nonsense. But I haven't got the time or inclination to waste on going round in circles with someone who believes neo-classical bollocks.
 
Gray said:
What is the point of Starmer coming up with a plan for fuel/electricity he has at least 2 years to go before a general election?
Click to expand...
Knowing how someone would deal with a crisis is a pretty good thing before you vote them in. The only thing one has to be wary about is if they are just promising all sorts of shit to gain popularity. Politicians do have form for this:-)

That is for the electorate to decide so God help us but that's democracy.
 
halfmist said:
I am afraid there are many on the left who dominate the politics sub forum cannot accept reality.
They think the answer to getting comprehensively beaten at the last election is to press ahead with a wish list of .. left wing policies that would cost a fortune to implement.
This scares off the moderates in the Electorate as they know in reality the policies have to be paid for by borrowing or by the poor sods who are on PAYE.
Everyone has a conscience and would say yes they would like to live in a fairer Society providing someone else is paying for it.
Click to expand...
Economics not really a strongpoint for those on the right who have been hoodwinked into believing neo liberal bollox.

The austerity myth needs to be smashed to pieces not reinforced by the fucking centrist loons
 
hilts said:
Knowing how someone would deal with a crisis is a pretty good thing before you vote them in. The only thing one has to be wary about is if they are just promising all sorts of shit to gain popularity. Politicians do have form for this:-)

That is for the electorate to decide so God help us but that's democracy.
Click to expand...
As a friend of mine pointed out what is the point of freezing prices those living in huge mansions and earning fortunes will benefit more than the ordinary man in the street.

Let the prices find their own level and give a rebate to all customers the rich will then pay more than the poor.
 
Gray said:
What is the point of Starmer coming up with a plan for fuel/electricity he has at least 2 years to go before a general election?
Click to expand...
It just highlights that the Tories don't have a plan.

Until they nick Starmer's.
 
Gray said:
As a friend of mine pointed out what is the point of freezing prices those living in huge mansions and earning fortunes will benefit more than the ordinary man in the street.

Let the prices find their own level and give a rebate to all customers the rich will then pay more than the poor.
Click to expand...
Isn’t your argument flawed in the fact that rebates are usually given on the basis of the amount put in.
So the rich in their huge mansions will get bigger rebates.
There will be a few on here that will not be happy with that.
 
Rascal said:
Economics not really a strongpoint for those on the right who have been hoodwinked into believing neo liberal bollox.

The austerity myth needs to be smashed to pieces not reinforced by the fucking centrist loons
Click to expand...

They need some help mate.



It’s an oldie but a goodie.

 
halfmist said:
Isn’t your argument flawed in the fact that rebates are usually given on the basis of the amount put in.
So the rich in their huge mansions will get bigger rebates.
There will be a few on here that will not be happy with that.
Click to expand...
Not based on payments but a flat rate across the board.

So if prices rise by 100% somebody who paid £1k a year previously would get a £1k rebate and end up paying the same. The wealthy bloke who paid £3k per year previously would also get a £1k rebate but would be now paying £5k.

That is roughly what my mate was suggesting. Seems quite a good idea as the more wealthy you are the more you will pay.
 
Gray said:
Not based on payments but a flat rate across the board.

So if prices rise by 100% somebody who paid £1k a year previously would get a £1k rebate and end up paying the same. The wealthy bloke who paid £3k per year previously would also get a £1k rebate but would be now paying £5k.

That is roughly what my mate was suggesting. Seems quite a good idea as the more wealthy you are the more you will pay.
Click to expand...
I see what your getting at now. It wasn’t clear in your original post.
I think you will find those who live in mansions are there by choice and not because of the size of their family.
On that basis they only heat the rooms they use on a regular basis, so their heating bills are not based on their ability to pay.
 
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