The Labour Government

I found this article quite useful for seeing what a tough hand Reeves has been dealt. I'm no fan by the way as I think she is spectacularly under qualified for the job but that doesn't change the fact that she faces a very tough scenario.
Economic growth is what the country desperately needs but where it is going to come from god only knows.

www.theguardian.com

Visual analysis: How the markets boxed in Rachel Reeves

The chancellor lacks room to manoeuvre before her spring statement thanks to the cost of debt interest payments
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
Saddleworth2 said:
I found this article quite useful for seeing what a tough hand Reeves has been dealt. I'm no fan by the way as I think she is spectacularly under qualified for the job but that doesn't change the fact that she faces a very tough scenario.
Economic growth is what the country desperately needs but where it is going to come from god only knows.

www.theguardian.com

Visual analysis: How the markets boxed in Rachel Reeves

The chancellor lacks room to manoeuvre before her spring statement thanks to the cost of debt interest payments
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
Maybe she and her party shouldn't make promises they know they can't deliver on then?
 
Saddleworth2 said:
I found this article quite useful for seeing what a tough hand Reeves has been dealt. I'm no fan by the way as I think she is spectacularly under qualified for the job but that doesn't change the fact that she faces a very tough scenario.
Economic growth is what the country desperately needs but where it is going to come from god only knows.

www.theguardian.com

Visual analysis: How the markets boxed in Rachel Reeves

The chancellor lacks room to manoeuvre before her spring statement thanks to the cost of debt interest payments
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...

I'll have a read later, but the "spectacularly under qualified for the job" I always find a little odd. I'm not surprised she's getting criticism, and in her position it's part and parcel of the role, however the narrative around her being under qualified and all the "Rachel from Accounts" stuff has more than a whiff of sexism (not suggesting you are sexist).

Brown was a journalist when he entered Parliament, and had previously been a lecturer. Osborne was also a journalist for a very short time, but spent almost all his career in politics. In comparison she's arguably the most qualified Chancellor we've had in the last few decades.

Here's a list of the last 10 chancellors and their background:
www.accountingcpd.net

Is Rachel Reeves an Economist?

Alan Nelson answers one of the most frequently searched terms that lead people to accountingcpd. Is Rachel Reeves an economist?
www.accountingcpd.net www.accountingcpd.net
 
bluenova said:
I'll have a read later, but the "spectacularly under qualified for the job" I always find a little odd. I'm not surprised she's getting criticism, and in her position it's part and parcel of the role, however the narrative around her being under qualified and all the "Rachel from Accounts" stuff has more than a whiff of sexism (not suggesting you are sexist).

Brown was a journalist when he entered Parliament, and had previously been a lecturer. Osborne was also a journalist for a very short time, but spent almost all his career in politics. In comparison she's arguably the most qualified Chancellor we've had in the last few decades.

Here's a list of the last 10 chancellors and their background:
www.accountingcpd.net

Is Rachel Reeves an Economist?

Alan Nelson answers one of the most frequently searched terms that lead people to accountingcpd. Is Rachel Reeves an economist?
www.accountingcpd.net www.accountingcpd.net
Click to expand...
I stand by my assessment. And you are right, sexism doesn't come into it. I can't go into any more detail or the Daily Mail will be after me again.
 
bluenova said:
I'll have a read later, but the "spectacularly under qualified for the job" I always find a little odd. I'm not surprised she's getting criticism, and in her position it's part and parcel of the role, however the narrative around her being under qualified and all the "Rachel from Accounts" stuff has more than a whiff of sexism (not suggesting you are sexist).

Brown was a journalist when he entered Parliament, and had previously been a lecturer. Osborne was also a journalist for a very short time, but spent almost all his career in politics. In comparison she's arguably the most qualified Chancellor we've had in the last few decades.

Here's a list of the last 10 chancellors and their background:
www.accountingcpd.net

Is Rachel Reeves an Economist?

Alan Nelson answers one of the most frequently searched terms that lead people to accountingcpd. Is Rachel Reeves an economist?
www.accountingcpd.net www.accountingcpd.net
Click to expand...
novaramedia.com

Labour Will End Neoliberalism. Just Not in a Good Way | Novara Media

Shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves has been compared to Margaret Thatcher. But that's just spin, writes James Meadway.
novaramedia.com novaramedia.com
 
hilts said:
Maybe she and her party shouldn't make promises they know they can't deliver on then?
Click to expand...

Or use excuses like “the world has changed” when they wouldn’t allow anyone else to do similar.

Nothing has changed, our government, regardless of colour still thinks the poorest and weakest in society should bear the burden!
 
bluenova said:
I'll have a read later, but the "spectacularly under qualified for the job" I always find a little odd. I'm not surprised she's getting criticism, and in her position it's part and parcel of the role, however the narrative around her being under qualified and all the "Rachel from Accounts" stuff has more than a whiff of sexism (not suggesting you are sexist).

Brown was a journalist when he entered Parliament, and had previously been a lecturer. Osborne was also a journalist for a very short time, but spent almost all his career in politics. In comparison she's arguably the most qualified Chancellor we've had in the last few decades.

Here's a list of the last 10 chancellors and their background:
www.accountingcpd.net

Is Rachel Reeves an Economist?

Alan Nelson answers one of the most frequently searched terms that lead people to accountingcpd. Is Rachel Reeves an economist?
www.accountingcpd.net www.accountingcpd.net
Click to expand...

We don’t have a technocracy her biggest problem is she is politically a bit shit.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
Mate first of all I'm sorry to hear about your personal circumstances best wishes to you for the future. I take on board your points and yes I do have some experiences of means testing for claimants, as my best mate died of cancer and while on his death bed assessors came round to check he was still entitled to be claiming which was needless and very upsetting for all involved. I have also had family members claiming disability benefits.

I am not a heartless person and strongly believe in the NHS and a supportive welfare state. I do not wish the state to deprive a single person claiming which they are entitled to and should claim.

But the fact is there are people claiming benefits that could and should work and when the do this they take away money from those that do need it. I know that's stating the obvious, but we do need a system that works better to identify these people. There are clearly people better placed than me to make happen, lets hope they make the right decisions to improve things for everyone.

All the best Rascal.
Click to expand...
If we taxed the cunts at the top fleecing the system we’d not even notice the odd benefit claimed unjustly. But we won’t, we’ll just point downwards and demonise those at the bottom.

Regardless of who’s in power by the looks of it.

Labour my arse, still not in touch with the ‘working man’.
 
metalblue said:
We don’t have a technocracy her biggest problem is she is politically a bit shit.
Click to expand...

I'd agree with that, but wouldn't write her off quite yet. Her satisfaction ratings aren't that different to George Osborne's during the coalition, and again in Cameron's second term, and overall satisfaction ratings for politicians were a lot better at that time.
 
Nice pay rise......for them all...........

This would take their annual pay from £91,346 to £93,904 and represents a rise of nearly £20,000 over the past 10 years.
Click to expand...
with expenses for staffing, office costs, accommodation and travel paid in addition.
 
Last edited:
bluenova said:
I'd agree with that, but wouldn't write her off quite yet. Her satisfaction ratings aren't that different to George Osborne's during the coalition, and again in Cameron's second term, and overall satisfaction ratings for politicians were a lot better at that time.
Click to expand...

No way Starmer is going to bin her off anytime soon. She’s not doing well but let’s see where we are in a year or so when her policies are really coming through in the numbers.

Talking of which that Heidi Alexander has talked herself in to getting binned off in the anticipated reshuffle in May / June. Absolute car crash of an interview today, not across her brief at all.
 
inchy14 said:
If we taxed the cunts at the top fleecing the system we’d not even notice the odd benefit claimed unjustly. But we won’t, we’ll just point downwards and demonise those at the bottom.

Regardless of who’s in power by the looks of it.

Labour my arse, still not in touch with the ‘working man’.
Click to expand...

If, by fleecing the system, you mean tax fraud then both tax fraud and benefit fraud cost the treasury about the same - with most tax fraud being committed by cash in hand workers (by definition not the wealthy).

Demonising those at the top or bottom isn’t really the slam dunk those pointing up or down think it is.
 
Last edited:
metalblue said:
If, by fleecing the system, you mean tax fraud then both tax fraud and benefit fraud cost the treasury about the same - with most tax fraud being committed by cash in hand workers (by definition not the wealthy).

Demonising those at the top or bottom isn’t really the slam dunk those pointing up or down think it is.
Click to expand...

The very wealthy are obviously a lot better at avoiding tax rather than evading.
 
metalblue said:
No way Starmer is going to bin her off anytime soon. She’s not doing well but let’s see where we are in a year or so when her policies are really coming through in the numbers.
Click to expand...
I strongly believe the impact of her direct policies will begin to have a detrimental effect on the country by the end of the first quarter 25/26.

This huge majority could begin to crumble in the second quarter.... not entirely but cracks will begin appearing. IMO
 
BigJoe#1 said:
I strongly believe the impact of her direct policies will begin to have a detrimental effect on the country by the end of the first quarter 25/26.

This huge majority could begin to crumble in the second quarter.... not entirely but cracks will begin appearing. IMO
Click to expand...
So, the next 3 months, and 3 months after that.

Looks like Starmer’s gonna do a Truss.
 
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