The Labour Government

Chippy_boy said:
Agreed. A majority of 170 when 4 people out of every 5 didn't vote for them, was always going to be "tricky".

Whatever decisions the government makes, there will be a great number of people who are not supportive of it.
Click to expand...
And surely, a great number who are.
We don't know the reasons why there was a piss poor turn out at the election
 
mosssideblue said:
And surely, a great number who are.
We don't know the reasons why there was a piss poor turn out at the election
Click to expand...

14 years of the previous lot.

14 years of Toryism where people measurably got poorer, where services were diminished, where some side roads resembled the Somme, where your kids school or local hospital started to fall down, where your bills continually went up and where despite lobbying your MP it became clear he/she could do fuck all about any of it.

It just alienated people from politics - something the Tories thought actually favoured them to the point where they tried to exclude young people from voting by messing with the system. Thankfully, despite a low turn out, there was enough to get them out. So what if it was an anyone but Tories vote? People wanted rid of them and thankfully the last 14 months have shown they are not this "winning machine" we were led to believe in. Labour has two jobs now - one to make things measurably better for people and two to re-engage with the electorate. That is what they should be judged upon.
 
mosssideblue said:
This is probably true but it doesn't necessarily mean all those now oppose what Labour are doing
Click to expand...
Did anyone say it did? This latest circle started with someone mentiong a 'majority' of people when no such thing could possibly be claimed in the context given.
That really should have been the end of it. But hey it's bluemoon.


I watched a bit of question time last night which I usually avoid like the fucking plague but before falling asleep half wayish through I noted that it was very much the same as on here.

And after all the fuckwittery, not answering directly the question put, the arguments about the boats, Trump, the wars, free speech Hitler, racism etc..... there was a little bit where tempers were fraid.

What's your solution
Well.whats your solution
Tell me yours
Im not paid to have solutions you are
So you dont have one
Well neither do you


And maybe, well very likely we are all arguing against what others are doing but on a lot of issues there appears to be no solutions. So people just insult each other, attack the opposition, defend their own and ultimately only have one thing left

Your shit sandwich tastes a bit more shitty than mine does.
 
Chippy_boy said:
BTW, this a day for great celebration. Not only has this wondeful £150bn investment deal been done, even more remarkably, we have today returned 1 illegal small boat migrant to France. Hurrah. I don't know how many replacements will be arriving from France tomorrow though. More than 1 I believe.
Click to expand...

1 more than the Tories then in 14 years.
Good start.

Plus the fact immigration has halved since Labour have come to power.
 
We've got Guardiola said:
That was the cost of the bailout but what was the wider impact? Thousands lost their jobs, homes and the recession meant that businesses went bust which means less tax too.

GDP debt was less than 40% in 2007 so we weren't living beyond our means. Thanks to the recession by 2010 it climbed to 60% and subsequent events have brought it to what is now 100%. In that period spending has fallen in real terms and it directly explains why public services have fallen behind the curve with a growing population.

Successive years of rot and underinvestment is why the country isn't growing. The elites have taught people to blame immigrants or anyone but them because all they want are tax cuts and wealth, they don't want public resources to get spent on people instead.

If new tax cuts were to come in then the average joe will be the one paying for it with even more decreased spending. There's no other choice and I don't see why that is beneficial to anyone except for the people who already have more than enough. It isn't even socialism, it's just common fairness.
Click to expand...

The financial crisis didn’t cause people to lose their homes, people losing their homes caused the financial crisis - with the recession that proceeded the financial crisis causing people to lose their homes which was caused by a “lend to anyone” attitude by certain mortgage providers. A perfect storm.

Once the dust settled we had access to effectively borrow money for free. The correlation between interest rates and growth is unbreakable even if one lags the other in certain periods.

Reeves has 3 choices;

1. Decrease spending AKA austerity
2. Increase taxes
3. Try and land somewhere in the middle.

The government have already tried 3 (tax increases and trying to cut welfare) so they perhaps try that again - whack business a bit more and cut a bit of spending in areas that the back benchers won’t revolt against. This is the middle management type of safe option, no actual strategy for growth etc just hoping something somewhere changes and digs us out of a bit of a hole. Just the sort of option Starmer and Reeves would go for I fear.

It’s all a bit of a pickle really.
 
hilts said:
Did anyone say it did? This latest circle started with someone mentiong a 'majority' of people when no such thing could possibly be claimed in the context given.
That really should have been the end of it. But hey it's bluemoon.


I watched a bit of question time last night which I usually avoid like the fucking plague but before falling asleep half wayish through I noted that it was very much the same as on here.

And after all the fuckwittery, not answering directly the question put, the arguments about the boats, Trump, the wars, free speech Hitler, racism etc..... there was a little bit where tempers were fraid.

What's your solution
Well.whats your solution
Tell me yours
Im not paid to have solutions you are
So you dont have one
Well neither do you


And maybe, well very likely we are all arguing against what others are doing but on a lot of issues there appears to be no solutions. So people just insult each other, attack the opposition, defend their own and ultimately only have one thing left

Your shit sandwich tastes a bit more shitty than mine does.
Click to expand...
Chippy_boy said:
Agreed. A majority of 170 when 4 people out of every 5 didn't vote for them, was always going to be "tricky".

Whatever decisions the government makes, there will be a great number of people who are not supportive of it.
Click to expand...
 
The Labour Party state they will recognise Palestine.

That is going to be very hard to do when it is completely obliterated. There won't be anything to recognise.
 
Chippy_boy said:
BTW, this a day for great celebration. Not only has this wondeful £150bn investment deal been done, even more remarkably, we have today returned 1 illegal small boat migrant to France. Hurrah. I don't know how many replacements will be arriving from France tomorrow though. More than 1 I believe.
Click to expand...
1000 have left France today.

And Starmer was boasting about his ridiculous agreement with France with his lapdog Trump.

1000 in
2 out.
 
Chippy_boy said:
BTW, this a day for great celebration. Not only has this wondeful £150bn investment deal been done, even more remarkably, we have today returned 1 illegal small boat migrant to France. Hurrah. I don't know how many replacements will be arriving from France tomorrow though. More than 1 I believe.
Click to expand...
Which is one more than the Tories managed with their Rwanda scheme
 
One Fan Clapping said:
1000 have left France today.

And Starmer was boasting about his ridiculous agreement with France with his lapdog Trump.

1000 in
2 out.
Click to expand...

Trump is our lapdog? I’ll take it. Perhaps we do secretly rule the world as the Russians are fond of claiming (don’t ask, I have no fucking idea).
 
M18CTID said:
Which is one more than the Tories managed with their Rwanda scheme
Click to expand...

True. If the scheme starts gaining traction and shows significant returns then it will have a deterrent effect. There is no point risking a crossing if there is a significant risk of ending back where you started.
 
M18CTID said:
Which is one more than the Tories managed with their Rwanda scheme
Click to expand...
... that Labour objected to at every stage and then cancelled before it started.

Now come off it mate - whether or not you think the Rwanda scheme was a good idea or not, you cannot seriously blame the Tories for the scheme not managing to return anyone, when it was the Labour government that cancelled it before it even got going. There's some moronic posters on here for sure, but you are not one of them.
 
mosssideblue said:
And surely, a great number who are.
We don't know the reasons why there was a piss poor turn out at the election
Click to expand...
2 out of 3 who did actually vote, didn't vote for Labour either. Hardly a ringing endorsement, and after the shit show of the Tories, a shockingly low percentage. The majority in parliament is hugely out of kilter with the popularity of Labour amongst the general population.
 
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