The Labour Government

Two Gun Bob said:
I'm led to believe that there's a possibility of Labour removing or heavily reducing the LCWRA element of U.C. This is only awarded to claimants who through no fault of their own cannot enter the workforce, as they're too ill to work. Also the adult PIP test is to be made far more difficult to procreate a succesful claim, but I was under the impression that the bar on the eligability test for pip was already set very high?

I can think of many ways to save money, rather than attack the weak in our society who cannot fight back, such as our pensioners and disabled. I am not a Labour voter, but feel that over their short tenure, they've gone out of their way to dissapoint, and surely their reckoning will come home to roost when it's time to return to the ballot box.

Spring is in the air so if you want to really save money why not place all the illegal boat crossers into tents or caravans, to free up the hideous costs associated with Hotels, or would that be an infringement on their human rights?

A travesty of a Faux political party that have always espoused to care for the elderly, the infirm, the sick and the under priviliged, yet upon acheiving Nirvana, acheived nothing save to throw their support to the wolves.

Mr Corbyn love him or hate him, had more empathy in his little toe, than Starmer will ever have in his whole body.

Shame Shame Shame.
9q4Rtts.gif
Click to expand...

Yeah but they're not Farage or Trump:-)
 
blueinsa said:
Not really a ringing endorsement of the Labour Party but a bit of deflection is probably all many have at the moment.
Click to expand...

Or the fact they’ve stopped the strikes in the NHS, Trains, repairing the damage of 14 years of Tories , not increased our taxes, working wonders on the international stage and bringing closer ties with Europe, increasing the defence spending, dealt with the Farage riots, sorted out prison space, tougher measures on immigration ,much needed changes for workers rights bill and more. We’re in good hands.
 
Last edited:
BlueHammer85 said:
Or the fact they’ve stopped the strikes in the NHS, Trains, repairing the damage of 14 years of Labour, not increased our taxes, working wonders on the international stage and bringing closer ties with Europe, increasing the defence spending, dealt with the Farage riots, sorted out Prison space, much needed changes for workers rights bill and more. We’re in good hands.
Click to expand...

Nearly the full house, nearly…
 
BigJoe#1 said:
You asked a question

You don’t want to see benefits being cut but wouldn’t mind us getting rid of free healthcare…?!

I answered it.

I would rather benefits and free healthcare remain ahead of ploughing taxpayers money into enabling a new football stadium being built.
Click to expand...

You didn’t answer it, you said it wasn’t your decision to make. Now you’ve answered it but with a non sequitur.

I’m sure everyone would rather what you’ve said there, which I don’t think is happening anyway. I’m still not sure how not wanting benefits to be cut and but also not seeing a downside in a healthcare insurance model are compatible positions though.
 
Its a shame my prediction all throughout the last 3 years that we would get cameron/osbourne 2.0 was true.

The sliver of hope starmer would drift more socially kind once elected has been eroded.


we are now stuck with tory lite in charge
and 2 sets of hard right tory nutters in oppositon
 
urban genie said:
Its a shame my prediction all throughout the last 3 years that we would get cameron/osbourne 2.0 was true.

The sliver of hope starmer would drift more socially kind once elected has been eroded.


we are now stuck with tory lite in charge
and 2 sets of hard right tory nutters in oppositon
Click to expand...

I really don't understand this at all.

Cameron and Osborne very deliberately tried to run down the size of the state, under the guise of now debunked theories about it "crowding out" the private sector. They reversed many of the employment rights changes we'd seen under New Labour. The NHS got progressively worse. Social housing was sold off with ultra generous right to buy discounts - and as a result, a huge percentage is now privately rented at much higher prices.

While you may disagree with some of what Labour have done, they've been clear that the state should be doing more. Sharon Graham has said their employment rights bill is first time in a generation that employees rights are being taken seriously.

You can argue that the tax rises didn't go far enough, but look at the full range. Higher taxes on the sale of shares. Freezing inheritance tax thresholds, and bringing pensions into inheritance tax. Changes to IHT on farms - something that was considered for years as a loophole for the rich, driving up land prices. Huge increases on taxes on private air travel. An increase on taxes paid by private equity managers. The NI taxes are more complex, but the majority of the burden is on large companies, and smaller employers with payrolls under approx £150,000 a year saw their NI reduced.

Pretty much all those tax rises are aimed directly at the wealthier in our society.

There are plenty of things they've done that I don't agree with, but to suggest they're anything like the 2010 Tory government is grossly unfair. We've had years of the Tories doing fuck all except argue amongst themselves, when they should have been running the country. The NHS won't be turned around in a few weeks. Social housing won't be built in a few months. Net zero won't happen in the first year. But they've committed to making a difference in all those areas this Parliament - areas that the Tories spent years ignoring, or with climate change, actively weaponizing conspiracy theories for cheap votes. If we come back at the end of this Parliament and they've "cut the green crap", sold off social housing, given up on the NHS, and introduced tax cuts for the wealthy, then I'll sadly agree with you. But for now, I don't at all.
 
bluenova said:
I really don't understand this at all.

Cameron and Osborne very deliberately tried to run down the size of the state, under the guise of now debunked theories about it "crowding out" the private sector. They reversed many of the employment rights changes we'd seen under New Labour. The NHS got progressively worse. Social housing was sold off with ultra generous right to buy discounts - and as a result, a huge percentage is now privately rented at much higher prices.

While you may disagree with some of what Labour have done, they've been clear that the state should be doing more. Sharon Graham has said their employment rights bill is first time in a generation that employees rights are being taken seriously.

You can argue that the tax rises didn't go far enough, but look at the full range. Higher taxes on the sale of shares. Freezing inheritance tax thresholds, and bringing pensions into inheritance tax. Changes to IHT on farms - something that was considered for years as a loophole for the rich, driving up land prices. Huge increases on taxes on private air travel. An increase on taxes paid by private equity managers. The NI taxes are more complex, but the majority of the burden is on large companies, and smaller employers with payrolls under approx £150,000 a year saw their NI reduced.

Pretty much all those tax rises are aimed directly at the wealthier in our society.

There are plenty of things they've done that I don't agree with, but to suggest they're anything like the 2010 Tory government is grossly unfair. We've had years of the Tories doing fuck all except argue amongst themselves, when they should have been running the country. The NHS won't be turned around in a few weeks. Social housing won't be built in a few months. Net zero won't happen in the first year. But they've committed to making a difference in all those areas this Parliament - areas that the Tories spent years ignoring, or with climate change, actively weaponizing conspiracy theories for cheap votes. If we come back at the end of this Parliament and they've "cut the green crap", sold off social housing, given up on the NHS, and introduced tax cuts for the wealthy, then I'll sadly agree with you. But for now, I don't at all.
Click to expand...
Not taxes aimed at the wealthier, sadly. Maybe on those that earn a bit more than average but a wealth tax, on the very rich, would go a long way to levelling the playing field, at least a little.
Unfortunately he’s another one who doffs his cap at the real wealth, in this society of ever increasing inequality.
 
The proposal to take over NHS ENGLAND is exactly the wrong solution. It will result in chronic underfunding as it did in the past. The correct solution to duplication for example is for the gov to butt out. Make NHS England genuinely independent and negotiate a budget and key targets just like any company negotiating with the board.
 
bluenova said:
I really don't understand this at all.

Cameron and Osborne very deliberately tried to run down the size of the state, under the guise of now debunked theories about it "crowding out" the private sector. They reversed many of the employment rights changes we'd seen under New Labour. The NHS got progressively worse. Social housing was sold off with ultra generous right to buy discounts - and as a result, a huge percentage is now privately rented at much higher prices.

While you may disagree with some of what Labour have done, they've been clear that the state should be doing more. Sharon Graham has said their employment rights bill is first time in a generation that employees rights are being taken seriously.

You can argue that the tax rises didn't go far enough, but look at the full range. Higher taxes on the sale of shares. Freezing inheritance tax thresholds, and bringing pensions into inheritance tax. Changes to IHT on farms - something that was considered for years as a loophole for the rich, driving up land prices. Huge increases on taxes on private air travel. An increase on taxes paid by private equity managers. The NI taxes are more complex, but the majority of the burden is on large companies, and smaller employers with payrolls under approx £150,000 a year saw their NI reduced.

Pretty much all those tax rises are aimed directly at the wealthier in our society.

There are plenty of things they've done that I don't agree with, but to suggest they're anything like the 2010 Tory government is grossly unfair. We've had years of the Tories doing fuck all except argue amongst themselves, when they should have been running the country. The NHS won't be turned around in a few weeks. Social housing won't be built in a few months. Net zero won't happen in the first year. But they've committed to making a difference in all those areas this Parliament - areas that the Tories spent years ignoring, or with climate change, actively weaponizing conspiracy theories for cheap votes. If we come back at the end of this Parliament and they've "cut the green crap", sold off social housing, given up on the NHS, and introduced tax cuts for the wealthy, then I'll sadly agree with you. But for now, I don't at all.
Click to expand...
We're talking the austerity solves issues bollocks that has been proven to be bullshit and bad economkcs.

Reeves obsession with the welfare state is no different than any tory chancelor, and for a labpur goveremt to not go after the rich dodging tax and targeting the disabled is disgusting.

Not say they ain't doing some good stuff, I agree NHS England needed to be gone and the work on house building and cutting waiting lists can be applauded, but lets not pretent they are not just rinse and repeat neo liberals, who won't transform the nationor be revolutiobary in making peoples lives better but keep the status quo with less cuntinshness than the tories
 
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