The Labour Party

Plenty of assumptions about me in there but again nothing on the point initially raised.... beyond your 'ming vase theory' of course.

Rather than avoiding committing to anything unpopular they are making a firm commitment to ruling out something that has popular support. Is it really the electorate they are taking into account when making these calculations?



There is similar levels of support for public ownership/nationalisation (again ruled out) and against further private sector involvement in the NHS (very much ruled in). Maybe I'm not so out of step with public opinion as you try to portray?

As for a utopia Starmer last week vowed to 'smash the class ceiling'......seemingly by making the pie bigger without any adjustment to the size of the portions. Instead of continually telling me to put up and shut up maybe have a think about the question Goodall raises here. Not for my benefit more because it might come in handy when you are out on the stump.



The only assumption about you was that "I suspected you had good intentions". If that's not the case, then I'd be surprised. Perhaps you've misread the rest of the post?

The "point initially raised" that I addressed, was that there was little difference between the Tories and Labour.

Still, ruling out a wealth tax isn't the same as austerity. Austerity was a discredited plan to cut back on public services based on some fantasy that it was "crowding out" the private sector. While the rest of the world were trying to grow their economies, after the 2008 crash, Osborne was on some mission to cut as much public spending as he could before the public realised it was a stupid plan. Labour in 1997 were ruling out plenty of tax rises, and rises in public spending, but I don't think anyone looks back and suggests the 1997-2010 government was defined by anything like Austerity.

I've said before, and probably to you, that I think Labour could be bolder, but it's very clear what they've decided to do (the ming vase theory isn't mine - it's been mentioned numerous times in the press), and misrepresenting it is playing straight into the Tories hands. I've not told you to shut up, and I'm not trying to change your mind, I'm just disagreeing with you. If you want to spend your time on politics forums being critical of Labour rather than the Tories, then it's up to you, and I'll continue to disagree with you ;)
 
There is a case for Labour getting into power (at all costs) governing competently but not doing anything much else for a term, and thus building trust. And then trying to start to reform stuff in a second term.

I can see how that might play with political strategists. But it really is a policy of barren despair. If how we are now, but a bit better managed, is the best we can achieve, we might as well all top ourselves, or emigrate.

I thank God every day that I am not young.
 
There is a case for Labour getting into power (at all costs) governing competently but not doing anything much else for a term, and thus building trust. And then trying to start to reform stuff in a second term.

I can see how that might play with political strategists. But it really is a policy of barren despair. If how we are now, but a bit better managed, is the best we can achieve, we might as well all top ourselves, or emigrate.

I thank God every day that I am not young.
I think the political reality is the case for austerity as made by Cameron way back, is now actually valid. The tories despite implementing austerity measures have fkd everything. Especially with Brexit and covid on top.

So there is very little you can do. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't vote for them. The tories deserve to be wiped out at the next election. Absolute shower of arseholes and I truly hope they are reduced to 3rd party status.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.