The Labour Government

Gorbachev said:
It astonishes me that in a democratic country, the electorate don't have the means to go on a website to see exactly where their money is going and who it is going to in an easy to read system and graph.

It would eliminate a lot of the bickering between the parties on any of the money issues and would allow the public to decipher fully and question any parties ambitions of changing the spending.

Any money investigated or caught off the books should equal a permanent expulsion from that party ever getting back into power with it's leaders put in a courtroom for trials of corruption and treason.
Click to expand...


Published every year .... plus those that are Self Employed get a link once their tax submission has been accepted.

www.gov.uk

How public spending was calculated in your tax summary

www.gov.uk www.gov.uk
 
jrb said:
If you’re not working, and you are living off benefits, don’t have kids you can’t afford to bring up and pay for. Why should tax payers subsidise the children of parents who aren’t working and aren’t paying into the system that keeps their kids fed, watered, clothed, etc. I’m sure those parents will be more than happy to vote for Labour at the next general election after receiving more money off the already hard pressed government and tax payer for their additional children that their parents can’t provide for without free state benefits. Anyone would think there’s a bottomless pit of money, even though Reeves is about to make tax increases, and is finding every way possible to take more money off hard working people.
Click to expand...



Rob Burrows holding on line one .......wasn't his fault he fell ill mate.
 
jrb said:
If you’re not working, and you are living off benefits, don’t have kids you can’t afford to bring up and pay for. Why should tax payers subsidise the children of parents who aren’t working and aren’t paying into the system that keeps their kids fed, watered, clothed, etc. I’m sure those parents will be more than happy to vote for Labour at the next general election after receiving more money off the already hard pressed government and tax payer for their additional children that their parents can’t provide for without free state benefits. Anyone would think there’s a bottomless pit of money, even though Reeves is about to make tax increases, and is finding every way possible to take more money off hard working people.
Click to expand...
The vast majority of benefits are made up of the state pension and IN WORK benefits. That's where the biggest changes/savings can and should be made. Employers paying shit wages and so being subisidised by the benefit system. The unsustainable triple lock. The group you choose to ostracise makes up a very small part of the overall benefit spend, but I guess you need a target to blame if it's not the immigrants, boats. There certainly does need to be some reform in the areas you are concerned about but if it was easy to do, successive governments wouldn't have struggled with it for so long.
 
Vic said:
How are we going to select these paragons of business virtue to look after our interests?
Click to expand...

Apparently there's an ex stockbroker who's going to fix it all. He's well connected to loads of successful business people, billionaires no less. Some people say he has only one policy, around immigration. I say that's wrong. He does only have one policy but it's that the nation dons a giant collective gimp mask whilst him and the sociopaths who back him do their worst.
 
Vic said:
How are we going to select these paragons of business virtue to look after our interests?
Click to expand...
We're not. They gonna stay where they feel they can make a difference and achieve in their chosen field. We are gonna be left till the end of time electing a selection of glib talkers, gobshites and free loaders. it's a thoroughly depressing scenario. Until the nation is put first before party we've had it. It's a fuckin' good job we have City to watch!
 
Palerider said:
If Labour, who I have voted for in every possible election, put up income taxes then seriously, what is the point of having those pre election TV debates or even manifestos? Why should anyone believe a word any politician says?
Click to expand...
So that we can confirm, yet again, that we have elected a bunch of lying charlatans. is it that we are gullible or just hopeful that this time they are gonna stick to what they've said.
 
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader said:
We're not. They gonna stay where they feel they can make a difference and achieve in their chosen field. We are gonna be left till the end of time electing a selection of glib talkers, gobshites and free loaders. it's a thoroughly depressing scenario. Until the nation is put first before party we've had it. It's a fuckin' good job we have City to watch!
Click to expand...

I think there was a post war era where this happened, both main parties to some degree moderated their natural instincts in the national interest. In the 80s we started to import the type of US partisanship that Newt Gingrich really ramped up in the 90s. Since then we've continued to import many aspects of US politics and economic thinking mostly to our detriment. Its taken us decades to get here and it'll probably take decades to recover. The issue is that our political landscape, and particularly our media and a range of powerful actors opposed to traditional western democracy means that there's little to no chance of achieving that in the current model. No sane person would want to be a politician or expect to make a difference in the current environment.

But the harsh truth is we've got the politicians we deserve because we've chosen as a society to focus inwards on ourselves, to think less, to shout at each other more and to allow ourselves to be easily manipulated.

As far as I can tell the only way out of this is to...

Reject the Americanisation of our politics and this includes rejecting Reform which is essentially styled on Trumpism.

Somehow get control of the level of misinformation and bile that our media of all types spew out.

Focus on trying to understand why things have become so hard for ordinary people and how structural economic issues work against the majority of us.

Accept that the way our political parties behave now means that FPTP is entirely unsuitable and replace it.

The trouble is our politicians are incapable of doing any of this unless forced to, so it will take a mass movement to achieve it but let's not kid ourselves about how challenging that will be. We could start by abandoning the use of social media platforms that rely on various types of misinformation and/or conflict for their business models but what's the likelihood of that happening?

The current crop of politicians are the symptom not the problem. I say again, we get the politicians we deserve.
 
threespires said:
Apparently there's an ex stockbroker who's going to fix it all. He's well connected to loads of successful business people, billionaires no less. Some people say he has only one policy, around immigration. I say that's wrong. He does only have one policy but it's that the nation dons a giant collective gimp mask whilst him and the sociopaths who back him do their worst.
Click to expand...

He was a former commodity broker, I used to work with him.
 
hampshireblue said:
The vast majority of benefits are made up of the state pension and IN WORK benefits. That's where the biggest changes/savings can and should be made. Employers paying shit wages and so being subisidised by the benefit system. The unsustainable triple lock. The group you choose to ostracise makes up a very small part of the overall benefit spend, but I guess you need a target to blame if it's not the immigrants, boats. There certainly does need to be some reform in the areas you are concerned about but if it was easy to do, successive governments wouldn't have struggled with it for so long.
Click to expand...

I 100% agree with you about in work benefits. Work should always pay, someone I know this month earned £1,490 from working and got docket £1,430 from their universal credit. Out of that £60 they paid to go to work and for parking so probably ended up worse off, no wonder people think fuck it I might as well not bother.

Regarding the 2 child benefit cap, the optics look terrible if she announces this come the budget. Stick up taxes to fix the chancellor’s latest black hole whilst simultaneously handing out £3.6bn. Tax payers are obviously going look at that as a government raising taxes to save their political skins and be unhappy (when the choice is to raise less in taxes), although I suppose some will be better off. The two events should be as far away as possible from each other. Tax rises now and announce the 2 child cap going in the spring ahead of the local elections at the earliest, they’ll likely get a bit of a bounce with a lot less flak. Still the genie is out of the bottle now because someone leaked it to the press.
 
metalblue said:
He was a former commodity broker, I used to work with him.
Click to expand...

Yes that was sloppy of me he worked on the LME didn't he? Have you mentioned this titbit before and I've just missed it? Semi-tangentially, I once worked for a guy who'd been at Drexel Burnham Lambert, I really liked him but sadly he like them ended up a cautionary tale.
 
threespires said:
. . . . . . . . . . . .

Accept that the way our political parties behave now means that FPTP is entirely unsuitable and replace it.

. . . . . . . . .
Click to expand...
MPs should not be elected when it's obvious that a majority of the constituents haven't voted for them. It isn't rocket science to elect an MP where there is clearly a majority who would find a candidate to be acceptable. Unfortunately, I think the FPTP system suits those sitting on the green benches, and they have been and would continue to be more than reluctant to adopt a system that would possibly put them out of a job.
 
threespires said:
Yes that was sloppy of me he worked on the LME didn't he? Have you mentioned this titbit before and I've just missed it? Semi-tangentially, I once worked for a guy who'd been at Drexel Burnham Lambert, I really liked him but sadly he like them ended up a cautionary tale.
Click to expand...

The metal in my user name is from the LME days. I have mentioned before I worked with him on here, he wasn’t on the floor by then (LME), was running his commodity brokerage business with his brother.

The vast majority got through it largely unscathed but a few sad stories from over indulgence.

I’m still in the metals business.
 
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader said:
So that we can confirm, yet again, that we have elected a bunch of lying charlatans. is it that we are gullible or just hopeful that this time they are gonna stick to what they've said.
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting that if Labour had said in their manifesto that they will be rising income tax to put right the mess the Tories had created, they would still have won the election?
 
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