The Labour Party

[Cheer Up Peter Reid]

They have made people's mortgages more expensive?

Well mortgages are more expensive because the Bank of England has raised interest rates. The reason the BoE has raised interest rates is to attempt to control inflation. The primary reasons for the recent high inflation are rising energy prices due to the Russians and the supply chain Issues following Covid. So I think it's disingenuous to claim that the Tories have made everyone's mortgages more expensive. Don't get me wrong, I am no fan of the Tories, but why can't the opposition set out what they would do differently rather than trying to slander their opponents.

 

[west didsblue]

Well mortgages are more expensive because the Bank of England has raised interest rates. The reason the BoE has raised interest rates is to attempt to control inflation. The primary reasons for the recent high inflation are rising energy prices due to the Russians and the supply chain Issues following Covid. So I think it's disingenuous to claim that the Tories have made everyone's mortgages more expensive. Don't get me wrong, I am no fan of the Tories, but why can't the opposition set out what they would do differently rather than trying to slander their opponents.

You've missed out the bit where Kwarteng spooked the market, causing bond yields to surge which made government borrowing more expensive, and consequently mortgage providers withdrew half their products and only kept ones that were double the interest rate of what was available the week before. That was before any additional base rate rises. So it's not disingenuous to claim that they have made things worse than they needed to be.

 

[Don Karleone]

Is anybody able to tell me what she said that was wrong?

 

[Bill]

Well mortgages are more expensive because the Bank of England has raised interest rates. The reason the BoE has raised interest rates is to attempt to control inflation. The primary reasons for the recent high inflation are rising energy prices due to the Russians and the supply chain Issues following Covid. So I think it's disingenuous to claim that the Tories have made everyone's mortgages more expensive. Don't get me wrong, I am no fan of the Tories, but why can't the opposition set out what they would do differently rather than trying to slander their opponents.

good luck with that .

 

[threespires]

Is anybody able to tell me what she said that was wrong?

That was exactly my response too when I read it, why you would be suspended for that I can't see

 

[Metal Biker]

Is anybody able to tell me what she said that was wrong?

Probably the suggestion that if you're rich, successful or are financially solvent means having to return your 'Asian ethnic card'. You can be rich and still be representative of a community. Being someone of Asian heritage does not mean you must also have a socialist political leaning or it means you're not "a member" and it is arrogance to assume so.

It's the "no true Scotsman" fallacy. You can dislike him for his stance, his political leanings (if you are opposed to them) sure, but to suggest he's not 'representative' of his ethnicity because of it? Ooh that's naughty!

 

[domalino]

Is anybody able to tell me what she said that was wrong?

Whether you agree with his politics or not, the country having it's first non-white, first asian, first Indian, first post-colonial immigration Prime Minister is a pretty big deal and definitely a win for representation.

The second half of her tweet should have been enough.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Probably the suggestion that if you're rich, successful or are financially solvent means having to return your 'Asian ethnic card'. You can be rich and still be representative of a community. Being someone of Asian heritage does not mean you must also have a socialist political leaning or it means you're not "a member" and it is arrogance to assume so.

It's the "no true Scotsman" fallacy. You can dislike him for his stance, his political leanings (if you are opposed to them) sure, but to suggest he's not 'representative' because of it? Ooh that's naughty!

He's not representative of anyone outside his narrow economic group.

She's absolutely spot on about that, he's an embarrassing affectation and doesn't have any connection to the working class and middle class ethnic minorities or majorities.

She shouldn't have mentioned race just for the optics, it's not racist to highlight this isn't a big win.

Especially as he secured power by re-appointing a right wing nutter who dreams of ripping up rights and sending asylum seekers to a police state that massacred as many as a million citizens less than 30 years ago.

 

[City Hobgoblin]

His heritage is irrelevant, social class not so much.

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

I tried to listen to a couple of the Labour reactions last night but it reminded me why I stopped listening to any politicians after Brexit. Why can they not have a proper debate on Issues rather than just making shit up to create a false perception. Yvette Cooper was getting pressed on what Labour would do in response to the financial crisis. Her final answer was that the Tories have made everyone's mortgages more expensive. Either she is not clever enough to understand the macro-economic factors that have led to the recent inflation or maybe she thinks the general population are not clever enough, either way, I'm out!

Labour won't know exactly how big the black hole in the government finances are. So its very difficult for Labour to say exactly how they would respond. They can't say we will do this with taxation or that with public spending until they have seen the numbers and worked out their own strategy.

 

[ctwrd]

Rayner today said the government made irresponsible spending plans and then in the next breath said the government is wrong to cut back.
Totally contradictory and this is the problem. They seem to be banking on getting into power by the Tories losing it rather than them winning it.

 

[meltonblue]

Whether you agree with his politics or not, the country having it's first non-white, first asian, first Indian, first post-colonial immigration Prime Minister is a pretty big deal and definitely a win for representation.

The second half of her tweet should have been enough.

Whilst it’s a win in terms of in the context of the country, it isn’t necessarily on an individual level as that then depends on the representative themselves too.

Politically I don’t think it was a good move. I don’t think she should have been told to delete it either though.

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

Rayner today said the government made irresponsible spending plans and then in the next breath said the government is wrong to cut back.
Totally contradictory and this is the problem. They seem to be banking on getting into power by the Tories losing it rather than them winning it.

I haven't seen, that but I guess she was talking about massive borrowing for the now scrapped disastrous mini-budget? And I also guess she is saying that cutting public spending now is wrong?

 

[ctwrd]

I haven't seen, that but I guess she was talking about massive borrowing for the now scrapped disastrous mini-budget? And I also guess she is saying that cutting public spending now is wrong?

Yes. Please do explain how labour spending is different to Tory spending (90% of the cost of the mini budget measures was affecting ordinary people - its the basic 20p tax rate which “the markets” objected to not the top 45p rate)

 

[west didsblue]

Rayner today said the government made irresponsible spending plans and then in the next breath said the government is wrong to cut back.
Totally contradictory and this is the problem. They seem to be banking on getting into power by the Tories losing it rather than them winning it.

Link?

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

Yes. Please do explain how labour spending is different to Tory spending (90% of the cost of the mini budget measures was affecting ordinary people - its the basic 20p tax rate which “the markets” objected to not the top 45p rate)

Well I would like to think the next time Labour are in charge of a budget, it will actually be costed to avoid the turmoil we have seen in the aftermath. I think the markets reacted because there was no plan in place for how all the tax cuts were to be paid for.

 

[ctwrd]

Well I would like to think the next time Labour are in charge of a budget, it will actually be costed to avoid the turmoil we have seen in the aftermath. I think the markets reacted because there was no plan in place for how all the tax cuts were to be paid for.

The point is they will largely only be able to do the same as what Sunak will now do. There is no big plan that will tear up the rule book and bring anything new or life changing. More of the same.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

The point is they will largely only be able to do the same as what Sunak will now do. There is no big plan that will tear up the rule book and bring anything new or life changing. More of the same.

Except it isn't true. If Labour increased borrowing to spend money on infrastructure they'd see a return on investment and the markets wouldn't be spooked.

That isn't the same as uncosted tax cuts that goes only to the rich, to increase their bank balance, buy luxury goods or inflate asset classes.

 

[Don Karleone]

Probably the suggestion that if you're rich, successful or are financially solvent means having to return your 'Asian ethnic card'. You can be rich and still be representative of a community. Being someone of Asian heritage does not mean you must also have a socialist political leaning or it means you're not "a member" and it is arrogance to assume so.

It's the "no true Scotsman" fallacy. You can dislike him for his stance, his political leanings (if you are opposed to them) sure, but to suggest he's not 'representative' of his ethnicity because of it? Ooh that's naughty!

Whether you agree with his politics or not, the country having it's first non-white, first asian, first Indian, first post-colonial immigration Prime Minister is a pretty big deal and definitely a win for representation.

The second half of her tweet should have been enough.

Disagree with it, by all means, getting it deleted and a telling off for it? It isn't like she said she was going to "break him as a man" or

anything as bad as that, is it?

 

[Metal Biker]

Disagree with it, by all means, getting it deleted and a telling off for it? It isn't like she said she was going to "break him as a man" or

anything as bad as that, is it?

No, of course it isn't anywhere near as bad as the above statements... but it is still reprimandable and was rightly deleted and action taken. Comparing one awful statement to another awful statement, in an attempt to justify it as not being as bad, still doesn't neutralise the initial sentiment that was said as being acceptable.

It was deleted because it was reprehensible to suggest that Sunak isn't representative of the Asian community because of his living status. What sort of message does that send? "Rich" Asians aren't real Asians because real Asians are meant to be from poorer backgrounds, otherwise they aren't an accurate representation of the community at large? Being of Indian and Hindu heritage isn't what Sunak is trying to be, it's who he is. The rest of the statement, about him being disconnected from regular, low income working people due to his wealth, sure. Nothing wrong there. But to state he isn't representative? It's a very odd specific for Nadia Whittome to attack him on and it was for that she was reprimanded.