The Labour Government

[mexico1970]

You summed it up perfectly. The political capital expended to justify this move will not justified by the raising of 1.4 billion by going through with this policy. The math all most seems easy enough that it could be understood by school grade students.

People voted for change and it isn't happening, now if the incumbent PM was real Labour he wouldn't be doing this.

From the first day in office he has complained and don't nothing for the poor, nothing at all.

 

[BlueHammer85]

The policies that Labour are keeping should annoy real Labour voters but it looks like they'd support Labour policies just because they are Labour policies.

Effectively they are just Tories, it's why many of them are angry at that fact being pointed out to them, two tier Keir isn't going to last the innings his lies and false promises are going to catch him out.

Labour voters know the horrific mess they have inherited and understand it will take some painful decisions and time to turn things around.

 

[mexico1970]

Labour voters know the horrific mess they have inherited and understand it will take some painful decisions and time to turn things around.

Labour voters aren't really Labour voters now, it's just a game to them. You can spot the real Labour supporters on this board because they are livid with this charlatan and his party of moral thieves.

I have said it before, it's always painful for the same people it was painful for when the last lot were in, for them nothing at all has changed.

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

How about reigning in public service pensions?
Just sayin' like.

Already done following the Hutton review in 2011 .... People on Public Service pensions are now subject to a lifetime career average rather than final salary. (existing rights are protected tho )

10 public sector pension myths busted by the Hutton review

Lord Hutton's interim report on public sector pensions sheds a lot of light into the complex issues around pension provision in the UK.

citywire.com

Please stop reading the Mail / Express.

 

[Roachy]

This country is much more divided than it was even in Thatcher's time.

I remember an old PM, possibly Callaghan but maybe Thatcher saying the country was in danger of being 'ungovernable'.

I think that's a more realistic possibility now. Because people seem to have no faith whatever in politicians. Therefore, they are more likely to believe charlatans.

Moreover, I think this is being deliberately engineered by certain malign influences.

Maybe when those at the top start behaving themselves, those at the bottom might.

 

[bluenova]

People voted for change and it isn't happening, now if the incumbent PM was real Labour he wouldn't be doing this.

From the first day in office he has complained and don't nothing for the poor, nothing at all.

What do you expect to happen on day one, before they've had a budget?

The energy plans, the housing plans, improvements to the NHS, free breakfast clubs, clearing the asylum backlog etc. don't happen overnight. All of them will ultimately save money, provide housing, help with poor people's health and family lives.

If you look at the tax rises that pretty much every economics editor, of financial advisor is predicting, they're mostly things like inheritance, capital gains, limits on larger pensions, that will affect the wealthy.

They didn't promise all these things on day one, and they can't be done on day one. It's likely the biggest improvements will take years.

 

[inbetween]

All of this backlash over a maximum of £1.3bn saved. It was an idiotic political decision by an idiotic pair of politicians, even more so than an idiotic financial one.

Now they are in a real hole. The sensible thing to do, which they may gain an atom of respect from, would be to say,

"you know what, we've only by in for 8 weeks, we're doing our best, we're trying to make changes for the better, but inevitably we will make mistakes, and on this ocassion, clealy we got this one wrong. We are not so up ourselves to be unable to admit mistakes and we are reversing this decision".

Instead, we have them just overtly LYING, trying to justify the unjustifiable. About how this £1.3bn saving is ESSENTIAL to save the economy, whilst at the same time approving giving £11bn away to foreign climate change initiatives.

No-one believes this for 1 second, and it just shows Starmer and Reeves up as being dishonest. And obviously, politically incompetent.

The payment will still be available to the poorest pensioners as those on means tested benefits will still get it so it isn't quite as damaging as you'd think.

As for the remainder, do the 20-25% of pensioners who for example are asset millionaires really need that £200? Our in-laws spend their £200 in Benidorm. It should at least be means tested.

There are however many pensioners who are eligible for pension credit and aren't claiming it. Given this new found awareness I'd imagine that the £1.3bn saved is about to get eaten up anyway...

 

[mexico1970]

What do you expect to happen on day one, before they've had a budget?

The energy plans, the housing plans, improvements to the NHS, free breakfast clubs, clearing the asylum backlog etc. don't happen overnight. All of them will ultimately save money, provide housing, help with poor people's health and family lives.

If you look at the tax rises that pretty much every economics editor, of financial advisor is predicting, they're mostly things like inheritance, capital gains, limits on larger pensions, that will affect the wealthy.

They didn't promise all these things on day one, and they can't be done on day one. It's likely the biggest improvements will take years.

They did however promise not to do them didn't they? The very policies that they called the Tories out on they are keeping, but they are getting a free run at this aren't they?

Most of what you mention in the first paragraph is nonsense and you know it, a free breakfast and build more houses? Well most of the kids wouldn't get there early enough for a breakfast which will probably be funded down to the bone and if you bother to look everywhere in this country we are building houses of every kind on every available plot.

However we can't keep up with the net migration we can't build them fast enough or for the right people ie the people with no money to buy them.

2 child policy
Bedroom tax

Start with those 2 but they wont will they?

 

[bluenova]

They did however promise not to do them didn't they? The very policies that they called the Tories out on they are keeping, but they are getting a free run at this aren't they?

Most of what you mention in the first paragraph is nonsense and you know it, a free breakfast and build more houses? Well most of the kids wouldn't get there early enough for a breakfast which will probably be funded down to the bone and if you bother to look everywhere in this country we are building houses of every kind on every available plot.

However we can't keep up with the net migration we can't build them fast enough or for the right people ie the people with no money to buy them.

2 child policy
Bedroom tax

Start with those 2 but they wont will they?

What do you expect, if you think the main policies in their manifesto, that they've started work on already were 'nonsense'?

They were pretty clear that they weren't going to raise benefits on day one. The 'bedroom tax' I suspect won't go, but I'd happily bet large on the 2 child policy going before the end of this Parliament.

 

[mexico1970]

What do you expect, if you think the main policies in their manifesto, that they've started work on already were 'nonsense'?

They were pretty clear that they weren't going to raise benefits on day one. The 'bedroom tax' I suspect won't go, but I'd happily bet large on the 2 child policy going before the end of this Parliament.

They will announce that they will look at the 2 child policy just before the next GE and after it they'll do nothing about it. There is nothing in what he is doing now that suggests that he is genuine Labour, in fact he could be a Tory PM very easily.

I can't believe people are even suggesting that he can make a dent in the housing crisis, he's very much like Burnham in that regard when he told us that he was going to solve homelessness.

We need more people yet this govt wont scrap the policy.

Labour MP calls two-child benefit cap ‘heinous’ in latest call to scrap policy

Keir Starmer under pressure to scrap limit as more than dozen MPs thought to support king’s speech amendment

www.theguardian.com

 

[bluenova]

They will announce that they will look at the 2 child policy just before the next GE and after it they'll do nothing about it. There is nothing in what he is doing now that suggests that he is genuine Labour, in fact he could be a Tory PM very easily.

I can't believe people are even suggesting that he can make a dent in the housing crisis, he's very much like Burnham in that regard when he told us that he was going to solve homelessness.

We need more people yet this govt wont scrap the policy.

Labour MP calls two-child benefit cap ‘heinous’ in latest call to scrap policy

Keir Starmer under pressure to scrap limit as more than dozen MPs thought to support king’s speech amendment

www.theguardian.com

Starmer has also said they'll scrap the policy when the money is there. As I said, I'd be amazed if that doesn't go, once the current "look at the mess the Tories left" politicking dies down. If you think he's lying then I can't really argue with that.

He's also got a much better chance of dealing with homelessness than Burnham, who can only ever tinker at the edges. I used to work with people on the streets, and it's the tip of an iceberg, that involves millions of people who are living in overcrowded homes, are in temporary accommodation, are sleeping on friends couches etc. If more than 1.5m homes are built in the next five years, and Labour ensure that plenty of them are social housing, then it will make moving people off the streets a possibility.

 

[hammocity]

In an effort to save cash, the TOC’s trained fewer and fewer drivers but relied on the existing drivers working their days off. Once they decided they’d like to not give up their days off, the TOC’s decided to still not train enough drivers.
As mad as it seems, once the government decided it was so wedded to privatisation that it’d pay companies not to run trains, you can sort of see the logic of not doing so. An example of the “supply and demand mantra’ biting them on the arse.
Of course, they could bring immigrants in on £9 an hour……

£11.42!

 

[Pedestrian]

What would be the issue with borrowing a load and building new prisons/schools/hospitals. Surely that would creat a positive financial environment and get the mood up. I’ve nothing at all positive to say about the state of the NHS but releasing prisoners early because of a lack of space is the most ridiculous and self harming policy I’ve ever heard of.

 

[hammocity]

So why is there a shortage of train drivers?

(And a reminder that privatisation was a main reason for drivers' pay rates going up, as the different companies had to compete with each other for drivers.)

As I've said it's baffling why they don't take on Drivers from within, my mate was absolutely gutted when he got the KB after his third interview. He joined Northern Rail as a guard after being told that would be the easiest route to becoming driver, he'd been there 17 years now, intelligent guy who subsidises his income betting on horse racing and sports betting. He's got restrictions on his accounts.

 

[Scottyboi]

Starmer has also said they'll scrap the policy when the money is there. As I said, I'd be amazed if that doesn't go, once the current "look at the mess the Tories left" politicking dies down. If you think he's lying then I can't really argue with that.

He's also got a much better chance of dealing with homelessness than Burnham, who can only ever tinker at the edges. I used to work with people on the streets, and it's the tip of an iceberg, that involves millions of people who are living in overcrowded homes, are in temporary accommodation, are sleeping on friends couches etc. If more than 1.5m homes are built in the next five years, and Labour ensure that plenty of them are social housing, then it will make moving people off the streets a possibility.

I don't think child poverty is something that you wait for money to be there, if you truly believe it is something heinous and cruel it is one of the first things to implement. If they don't have it ready to be changed in this budget then it will be pretty shameful especially going into winter. It won't be a popular change though as people don't care about the children who have had no choice in being born it's not their fault, but voters won't want the parents receiving extra money for having more than 2 children.

 

[mosssideblue]

Reeves obviously believes that one pensioner freezing to death is another train driver's pay increase.
And they call Thatcher the witch!

Infantile post

 

[bluenova]

I don't think child poverty is something that you wait for money to be there, if you truly believe it is something heinous and cruel it is one of the first things to implement. If they don't have it ready to be changed in this budget then it will be pretty shameful especially going into winter. It won't be a popular change though as people don't care about the children who have had no choice in being born it's not their fault, but voters won't want the parents receiving extra money for having more than 2 children.

They're essentially fighting the next election now.

We may not agree, but the Tories blamed Labour for the 2008 worldwide financial crisis, and it stuck. If the choice is between getting rid of the 2 child cap immediately, and risking the Tories convincing the public that Labour are just spending "their money" again, or doing it in one/two years, but being able to stay in power for two or more terms, and actually make a huge difference to people's lives, then the moral decision isn't quite so simple.

 

[kaz7]

What would be the issue with borrowing a load and building new prisons/schools/hospitals. Surely that would creat a positive financial environment and get the mood up. I’ve nothing at all positive to say about the state of the NHS but releasing prisoners early because of a lack of space is the most ridiculous and self harming policy I’ve ever heard of.

What can they do instead ? The tories didnt build prisons , they disgusting sat back and watched the prison places drop to one hundred , ther is no alternative but to let some prisoners out early , they will be hand picked , non violent prisoners only . Of course labour need to start building prisons , training the staff and paying them properly

There are plenty of places they could build prisons , there is one on dartmore that causes no issues so look at places like that . Lots to do

 

[Pedestrian]

They could announce a radical policy of public service rebuilding at a national level. The country is desperate for it. If it was successful it would be beneficial in encouraging young muppets that a more left leaning outlook is better.

 

[Scottyboi]

They're essentially fighting the next election now.

We may not agree, but the Tories blamed Labour for the 2008 worldwide financial crisis, and it stuck. If the choice is between getting rid of the 2 child cap immediately, and risking the Tories convincing the public that Labour are just spending "their money" again, or doing it in one/two years, but being able to stay in power for two or more terms, and actually make a huge difference to people's lives, then the moral decision isn't quite so simple.

I'm fully reserving judgement till the budget is announced, if they go in with pure doom and gloom mode I won't be happy. You can be realistic about the state of the country without making us all feel miserable and hopeless. So please have some positives Reeves fs.