Local Elections | Thu 7 May 26

threespires said:
The trouble with the economy ticking along with gradual improvement is that unless we can create and distribute wealth for government/ordinary people faster than the existing wealthy can acquire further wealth, then we remain stuck in the self-fulfilling spiral of destructive wealth concentration.

Unfortunately, there's nothing to suggest that we can achieve growth rates that will allow that to happen. Arguably the one thing on the horizon that could provide that boost is AI except there's nothing there currently to suggest that this will do anything other than concentrate wealth further and from my understanding of the governments interactions with the AI industry they seem ill equipped to address this.

So the only ways to break the spiralling concentrations of wealth are some catastrophic shock (where the wealthy aren't bailed out) or some sort of government policy interventions around dysfunctional wealth concentration (e.g. incentivising/forcing the wealthy to inject their wealth into the real economy rather than hoard it or using it to hover up existing assets). Without that I fear Labour are just trying to paper over the cracks, they'll get kicked out and we'll end up with a different government who actually accelerate the problem and lead us to something closer to societal collapse than not.
Click to expand...

We have had a series of catastrophic shocks from the financial crisis to a pandemic and a major war in Europe. Add in Brexit and austerity it’s a wonder the system still functions at all. Given this I figured a period of stability with no major calamities would give us some breathing space - and then the Yanks elected Trump and off we go again with dumb trade wars and actual wars creating an energy shock to the world economy.

We seem addicted to doing dumb shit and electing people to carry out dumb shit. Perhaps the first step is to stop electing people to carry out dumb shit and see how we get on.

Not to much to ask is it?
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
He's even more fucking hopeless about policy. And I say that as someone who naturally tends towards the Labour Party.

I've just read a book about Gordon Brown as PM and I'd always thought of him as someone who had real conviction, particularly about poverty and global development. But if he did, he never articulated that conviction until very late in his premiership.

I don't think Starmer has any convictions or political values at all. I read the book 'Get In' about his rise to the leadership of the Labour Party and I think he just wanted to be PM. I doubt he's even a socialist of any sort. He could just as easily have been a Tory. It's just a series of ill-thought out stuff with him, which inevitably results in a complete u-turn.

He's fucking useless and hopefully he'll be put on his ear in the next few days.
Click to expand...

I don’t think Starmer has any deep political convictions. I’ve never once looked at Starmer and thought ‘this is the man who will lead us to the promised land’ but then I wasn’t looking for a messiah. I was looking for some boring, middle management competence with respect to the economy. I was also looking forward to not having to read about the latest batshit nonsense coming out of the Government on a daily basis. We do still get nonsense - glasses, dresses, Mandelson, or ideas which belly flop, but these are what I term political ‘scandals’ which (for me) are standard fare for any Government and I largely don’t care.

I did think Starmer would have some modicum of political nous and ability to read the fucking room, but alas it is not to be. Starmer is a technocrat. He could easily be a Tory technocrat as he is a Labour technocrat and that was obvious from the start so I ain’t knocking him for that. Sunak was similar, in fact they are fairly interchangeable.

Other than it would be nice to keep a PM for longer than two fucking years - remember those days? Was quite normal until we voted to fuck ourselves with the B word. Anyway I digress. Whether Labour ditches Starmer now or later is kind of moot as it will happen at some point as it will with Badenoch. Personally, I would give him another year as he is a lightening rod for everyone’s hostility and that insulates Labour. The same happened in Canada last year, where Trudeau was extremely unpopular and the Liberals were trailing by 20 points in the polls. Trudeau out, Carney in and three months later the Liberals won the election.

PS: Carney is also a technocrat, but with some political nous.
 
BobKowalski said:
I don’t think Starmer has any deep political convictions. I’ve never once looked at Starmer and thought ‘this is the man who will lead us to the promised land’ but then I wasn’t looking for a messiah. I was looking for some boring, middle management competence with respect to the economy. I was also looking forward to not having to read about the latest batshit nonsense coming out of the Government on a daily basis. We do still get nonsense - glasses, dresses, Mandelson, or ideas which belly flop, but these are what I term political ‘scandals’ which (for me) are standard fare for any Government and I largely don’t care.

I did think Starmer would have some modicum of political nous and ability to read the fucking room, but alas it is not to be. Starmer is a technocrat. He could easily be a Tory technocrat as he is a Labour technocrat and that was obvious from the start so I ain’t knocking him for that. Sunak was similar, in fact they are fairly interchangeable.

Other than it would be nice to keep a PM for longer than two fucking years - remember those days? Was quite normal until we voted to fuck ourselves with the B word. Anyway I digress. Whether Labour ditches Starmer now or later is kind of moot as it will happen at some point as it will with Badenoch. Personally, I would give him another year as he is a lightening rod for everyone’s hostility and that insulates Labour. The same happened in Canada last year, where Trudeau was extremely unpopular and the Liberals were trailing by 20 points in the polls. Trudeau out, Carney in and three months later the Liberals won the election.

PS: Carney is also a technocrat, but with some political nous.
Click to expand...
Completely agree.

As I said, I've just finished the Seldon/Lodge book on Gordon Brown's tenure in 10 Downing Street and he was completely incapable of running a government.

Held most of the Cabinet in contempt and couldn't manage them, bar his former SPADs Ed Balls, Ed Milliband and Douglas Alexander, only worked with his inner circle and had no time for anyone who didn't share his views, briefed relentlessly against anyone he suspected of disloyalty, was indecisive and vacillated on key matters, and had no overarching strategy.

It'd be nice to have a PM who was a real leader. Blair was, but had a number of faults, not least his obsequience to George Bush. Thatcher was another who was a true leader but her faults were legion.
 
BobKowalski said:
I don’t think Starmer has any deep political convictions. I’ve never once looked at Starmer and thought ‘this is the man who will lead us to the promised land’ but then I wasn’t looking for a messiah. I was looking for some boring, middle management competence with respect to the economy. I was also looking forward to not having to read about the latest batshit nonsense coming out of the Government on a daily basis. We do still get nonsense - glasses, dresses, Mandelson, or ideas which belly flop, but these are what I term political ‘scandals’ which (for me) are standard fare for any Government and I largely don’t care.

I did think Starmer would have some modicum of political nous and ability to read the fucking room, but alas it is not to be. Starmer is a technocrat. He could easily be a Tory technocrat as he is a Labour technocrat and that was obvious from the start so I ain’t knocking him for that. Sunak was similar, in fact they are fairly interchangeable.

Other than it would be nice to keep a PM for longer than two fucking years - remember those days? Was quite normal until we voted to fuck ourselves with the B word. Anyway I digress. Whether Labour ditches Starmer now or later is kind of moot as it will happen at some point as it will with Badenoch. Personally, I would give him another year as he is a lightening rod for everyone’s hostility and that insulates Labour. The same happened in Canada last year, where Trudeau was extremely unpopular and the Liberals were trailing by 20 points in the polls. Trudeau out, Carney in and three months later the Liberals won the election.

PS: Carney is also a technocrat, but with some political nous.
Click to expand...


Mandelson is a bit more than nonsense. It should be, anyway.
 
johnny crossan said:
Starmer will probably survive for now.
Click to expand...
They’d be stupid to bin him at this time, there’s realistically nobody to take the job. And why not let him take the heat.

Saying that, Labour have always torn themselves apart, and probably why I’ve never trusted them.
 
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