The Labour Government

[The Future’s Blue!]

Just tell me how much you think the financial crash of 2008, Brexit, COVID and the war in Ukraine and ensuing huge inflation, have been contributing factors?

Don't give me any diversionary bollocks. I just want to hear you be honest, or lie. Over to you. How much?

Massively. And I’ll include Truss in those factors.

 

[Vic]

Just tell me how much you think the financial crash of 2008, Brexit, COVID and the war in Ukraine and ensuing huge inflation, have been contributing factors?

Don't give me any diversionary bollocks. I just want to hear you be honest, or lie. Over to you. How much?

The Tories have never needed excuses (aka contributing factors) to be the Nasty Party.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Massively. And I’ll include Truss in those factors.

Fair enough. I think these factors are far too often ignored.

I'm not a Tory fanboy by any means, and they certainly made lots of mistakes - though we may disagree on what those are. But where we are now is not all their fault, and it is hugely debatable that were Labour in power all that time, things would be any better. I would argue things would be much worse, although on this thread, views may vary. Lol :-)

 

[Chippy_boy]

The Tories have never needed excuses (aka contributing factors) to be the Nasty Party.

Utter nonsense, as per.

Consistency is one of your greatest strengths.

BTW, Did the Tories cancel the WFA when in a financial hole?

 

[Brewster's millions]

Utter nonsense, as per.

Consistency is one of your greatest strengths.

BTW, Did the Tories cancel the WFA when in a financial hole?

Laughable how they still think they can preach to people after some of the tricks they’ve pulled, not least Starmer’s Enoch Powell speech.

I don’t know whether it’s because they’ve got some proper neck on them, or if they’re just utterly deluded. I’m leaning towards the latter.

 

[hampshireblue]

Fair enough. I think these factors are far too often ignored.

I'm not a Tory fanboy by any means, and they certainly made lots of mistakes - though we may disagree on what those are. But where we are now is not all their fault, and it is hugely debatable that were Labour in power all that time, things would be any better. I would argue things would be much worse, although on this thread, views may vary. Lol :-)

If Labour had been in power, it's highly unlikely Brexit would have happened. I also doubt very much austerity and the subsequent decimation of public services would have happened too.

No, it's not all down to the Tories, but much of it is. They came in and the roof had a leak, by the time they left power, the whole roof was at the point of collapsing.

 

[hilts]

You know what’s bad, that the first year under this government, that has had so many shots in the foot, is still massively better than what we’ve had in the last decade, or so.

Tories, Brexit Party (Reform), have both caused self-arm, undermining working people, yet people still want to turn to them to look after your future?

Absolute barm-pots!!!

Brill! You've only been in a year and have admitted its not been great, you can't have it both ways if a year isn't long enough to be good it's also not enough time to be as bad as the last lot.

 

[metalblue]

Would it? So the pension funds have to buy more shares in British companies. That pushes their share prices up, but doesn't do anything for their growth or profits.

OK, so the companies with higher valuations can perhaps borrow money more easily and maybe do a takeover or something, but the higher share price does nothing directly for their performance or growth.

And on the contrary, if the pension funds are currently invested in e.g. the US and getting a return fo X, and then are forced to invest in the UK and get a lower return (which clearly they would, or else they'd be invested here in the first place!) then actually all it does is depresses pension pots, lowers pension income and associated tax revenues.

In short, I'd need to be convinced that was a good idea!

The benefits to British companies would be ability to raise money to invest in expansion etc etc. More jobs, more income and corp tax paid, better for treasury. Or even expansion abroad (corp tax paid in UK). One thing for sure is increasing taxes is not going to do anything for growth, quite the opposite.

Of course you’re right that pension returns may “suffer” as a result but I wouldn’t advocate having 100% being mandated to be invested but say 20-25% so in overall scheme of things it ought not have too much of a negative impact - put it this way it’s far less harmful for returns to do this than reduce the amount people can invest tax free in to their pots.

It doesn’t just have to be in to British companies either, we have pension fund could build a hospital and do a PFI style return (less punitive terms).

 

[hampshireblue]

Brill! You've only been in a year and have admitted its not been great, you can't have it both ways if a year isn't long enough to be good it's also not enough time to be as bad as the last lot.

It's not been great because the mess was so great. It takes more than one year to turn around 14 years of mis-management.

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

Fair enough. I think these factors are far too often ignored.

I'm not a Tory fanboy by any means, and they certainly made lots of mistakes - though we may disagree on what those are. But where we are now is not all their fault, and it is hugely debatable that were Labour in power all that time, things would be any better. I would argue things would be much worse, although on this thread, views may vary. Lol :-)

I’d suggest that it would’ve been difficult for whoever was in charge. Like you, I don’t have a party favourite, I choose on what they are offering and what I believe is best for the country at that time. The truth was that the Tories had run out of steam, many years ago, and were kept alive by the Brexit question. I could sort of live with them but they really started to grate on me in about 2017, and pissed me off even more with Johnson as Foreign Secretary. For me, it all spiralled out of control from there with many of the real politicians being sidelined and Johnson’s corrupt actors taking over.

For me, Labour was the only option. And with the absolute lunacy of the governments actions during COVID, and even though I thought that the Starmer led opposition weren’t up to scratch at that time, all that I personally wanted was the Tories out of government.

We all have our own opinions, mine was that the Tories had been done for a long time, and that Labour were a better option, even if they had to grow into the role.

 

[Chippy_boy]

I’d suggest that it would’ve been difficult for whoever was in charge. Like you, I don’t have a party favourite, I choose on what they are offering and what I believe is best for the country at that time. The truth was that the Tories had run out of steam, many years ago, and were kept alive by the Brexit question. I could sort of live with them but they really started to grate on me in about 2017, and pissed me off even more with Johnson as Foreign Secretary. For me, it all spiralled out of control from there with many of the real politicians being sidelined and Johnson’s corrupt actors taking over.

For me, Labour was the only option. And with the absolute lunacy of the governments actions during COVID, and even though I thought that the Starmer led opposition weren’t up to scratch at that time, all that I personally wanted was the Tories out of government.

We all have our own opinions, mine was that the Tories had been done for a long time, and that Labour were a better option, even if they had to grow into the role.

Fair enough mate. I agree with you that things could not continue as they were, and unfortunately for me, Labour in 2024 was the only other option. I could never bring myself to vote for them however, because whilst some of them might be reasonable, there's too many lunatic Angela Rayner types who if given their way would wreak absolute havoc and destruction.

 

[Chippy_boy]

The benefits to British companies would be ability to raise money to invest in expansion etc etc. More jobs, more income and corp tax paid, better for treasury. Or even expansion abroad (corp tax paid in UK). One thing for sure is increasing taxes is not going to do anything for growth, quite the opposite.

Of course you’re right that pension returns may “suffer” as a result but I wouldn’t advocate having 100% being mandated to be invested but say 20-25% so in overall scheme of things it ought not have too much of a negative impact - put it this way it’s far less harmful for returns to do this than reduce the amount people can invest tax free in to their pots.

It doesn’t just have to be in to British companies either, we have pension fund could build a hospital and do a PFI style return (less punitive terms).

All fair comment. Fair enough. In fact the UK pension funds used to be invested mainly in the UK blue chips. I don't know when that started to change but IIRC it's now only to a pitiful level - like 4% or something.

There used to be a very valid argument that nobbling our UK companies with things like windfall taxes was bad for our pensions, but that's not true any more.

 

[Chippy_boy]

If Labour had been in power, it's highly unlikely Brexit would have happened. I also doubt very much austerity and the subsequent decimation of public services would have happened too.

Brexit, I will agree although of course we can never be sure. The fact that the UK voted for it is an indication of public feeling on the matter and I have never been persuaded by an argument that a government should deliberately avoid a referendum so they can deny the public what they may actually want. That doesn't sound very democratic.

Regards your 2nd sentence, yes but at what cost? I don't believe you achieve economic growth - which is absolutely essential for a country to maintain, let alone improve, its public services over time - by taking more and more money off people. In fact I am certain doing that achieves the very opposite, and I fear that is what Labour would have done. I fear it's what they will continue to do for the next 4 years. And if they get in again, for another 5 years. Rinse and repeat until we are truly fucked.

The difference with Blair was (a) he wasn't very Labour, and (b) he started out with the economy in good shape and room to increase taxes and borrowing. So it took a long time for the wheels to fall off, though of course they did eventually. Starmer et al are not in that position. They have very little scope to increase either taxes or borrowing, but I fear they will press ahead with at least tax increases and probably borrowing increases as well.

 

[Chippy_boy]

It's not been great because the mess was so great. It takes more than one year to turn around 14 years of mis-management.

14 years of mismanagement my arse. Some bad decisions were made - politically more than fiscally. But to categorize the whole 14 years as being of mismanagement is just derranged Labour nonsense.

 

[hampshireblue]

14 years of mismanagement my arse. Some bad decisions were made - politically more than fiscally. But to categorize the whole 14 years as being of mismanagement is just derranged Labour nonsense.

Nothing like putting a label on someone for having a different view especially when you assume I am/was a Labour voter.

I could say you were an arse for being so much up your own arse that you can't see the mess they caused, normally I wouldn't but on this occasion....

 

[hampshireblue]

Brexit, I will agree although of course we can never be sure. The fact that the UK voted for it is an indication of public feeling on the matter and I have never been persuaded by an argument that a government should deliberately avoid a referendum so they can deny the public what they may actually want. That doesn't sound very democratic.

Regards your 2nd sentence, yes but at what cost? I don't believe you achieve economic growth - which is absolutely essential for a country to maintain, let alone improve, its public services over time - by taking more and more money off people. In fact I am certain doing that achieves the very opposite, and I fear that is what Labour would have done. I fear it's what they will continue to do for the next 4 years. And if they get in again, for another 5 years. Rinse and repeat until we are truly fucked.

The difference with Blair was (a) he wasn't very Labour, and (b) he started out with the economy in good shape and room to increase taxes and borrowing. So it took a long time for the wheels to fall off, though of course they did eventually. Starmer et al are not in that position. They have very little scope to increase either taxes or borrowing, but I fear they will press ahead with at least tax increases and probably borrowing increases as well.

Before Cameron hinted at a referendum, the EU wasn't even in the top 10 issues for the electorate. Keeping his back benchers sweet was the driver for the referendum.

Are you blaming Blair et al for the GFC-because it sounds like it.

Which services are you prepared to go without to if tax increases don't happen?

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

I’d suggest that it would’ve been difficult for whoever was in charge. Like you, I don’t have a party favourite, I choose on what they are offering and what I believe is best for the country at that time. The truth was that the Tories had run out of steam, many years ago, and were kept alive by the Brexit question. I could sort of live with them but they really started to grate on me in about 2017, and pissed me off even more with Johnson as Foreign Secretary. For me, it all spiralled out of control from there with many of the real politicians being sidelined and Johnson’s corrupt actors taking over.

For me, Labour was the only option. And with the absolute lunacy of the governments actions during COVID, and even though I thought that the Starmer led opposition weren’t up to scratch at that time, all that I personally wanted was the Tories out of government.

We all have our own opinions, mine was that the Tories had been done for a long time, and that Labour were a better option, even if they had to grow into the role.

This is kind of my take on things, it's easy to forget that eventually all governments fail sooner or later. The Tories were well past their sell by date when they got voted out. But sure as eggs are eggs this one will also fail just like all those before it. They have a bit of time on their side at the moment as the opposition are a mess and divided.

 

[Hertzblue]

One was the wrong thing to do, one was the right thing to do.

This morality stuff isn't that hard.

Morality .... please lol
They couldn't stick with Rwanda because they had opposed it out of political opportunism at every turn, they are desperately trying to do the same thing themselves but with Albania.
Nothing to do with morality only poor judgement.

 

[BobKowalski]

14 years of mismanagement my arse. Some bad decisions were made - politically more than fiscally. But to categorize the whole 14 years as being of mismanagement is just derranged Labour nonsense.

2015 is when it really went off the rails. The biggest mistake at that point was turning austerity into a political mission rather than an economic one. They did the same with privatisation years before.

Since 2015 we have had six Prime Ministers in ten years. Prior to 2015 we had six Prime Minsters in forty years. This political instability reflected the instability in the country as a whole where we junked a broad political consensus on our industrial and foreign policy and lurched from a rebranded 1970’s Labour lite protectionist industrial policy - a ‘high wage economy’ as Johnson called it, to a far right low tax, minimal state and threadbare safety net for everyone. Basically, an ‘I’m all right Jack and fuck anyone who isn’t’ society. It lasted 45 days.

At this point the Tories were politically and intellectually dead. They were neither the party of business nor the party of the people. There was no intellectual coherence or even any idea of what the stood for. Sunak was left to tend the shop, made little attempt to govern and any hard decisions like overcrowding in our prisons and potential collapse of the justice system were booted into the next Parliament for a new Government to deal with. All they had was unworkable gimmicks and rhetoric. They even allowed our Union to be divided into separate economic jurisdictions - something May said was unthinkable for a Tory Government. Until Johnson threw our Union under the bus and held a funeral for the ‘Conservative and Unionist Party’.

What is their future? A change in leadership most certainly, but they also need a new identity. The far right is occupied by Reform whose obsession is immigration, but would also like to gut the State, health care and safety nets and make the rich even richer as the the GOP/Trump are doing now. For that they need marks and you are the mark. You have to con the people first before you can rob them. The beauty of marks is they can’t imagine they are marks until reality bites as it is currently doing especially in rural Republican communities in the US.

Starmer/Labour are pitching tent in the centre with a side helping of social conservatism (which has always been a feature of Labour and for which I have a strong distaste). This will push younger voters especially women towards more left leaning parties. Everyone talks about men drifting right, but the drift of women leftwards is just as pronounced if not more so.

So wither the Tories? Their right side is occupied, Labour are making a play for the centre, and they torched their reputation for competence. They need an identity, otherwise what is the point of them?

 

[hilts]

It's not been great because the mess was so great. It takes more than one year to turn around 14 years of mis-management.

In fairness some of the decisions they made were just bad decisions, I think they wanted to raise money by not being seen as typically Labour but ended up being a tad too Tory. I think a fair comment would be could do better but no expulsion or detention at this stage.