ks.234
Half way to Infinity
But this is bollocks
Labour Leader: Keir Starmer VII
- Thread starter Seeker_UK
- Start date
Seanm
pfm Member
They're crystal clear *now* that they can't afford to do it, having been crystal clear as recently as Tuesday that they *would* do it. This is after years of anonymous briefings from Labour trying to spike the pledge, and public statements saying they were absolutely committed to the pledge. Obviously the tory press is the Tory press, but this one's all on Labour: it could be reported dead straight and most disinterested readers would still come away thinking: these guys do not have a plan, are not pulling in the same direction, and cannot be trusted.
Here are two articles from *allies* of the Labour right, who are, IMO, pulling their punches and going out of their way not to put the pieces together.
The bad blood behind Starmer’s £28bn U-turn
Labour is in a strategic hole of its own making
Labour is in a strategic hole of its own making
Party’s retreat from £28bn-a-year green plan still leaves it open to Tory attack and has dealt a blow to Keir Starmer’s authority
Mullardman
Moderately extreme...
In your interpretation of Economics with which I have some sympathy..it may well be bollocks, but as I keep on saying..this is not about you, or me, but the way in which the parties are portrayed by each other, and in the Media.
The Tories have been spraying our money about like confetti since Sunak's near hysterical give away in 2020..and borrowing like crazy ever since, and yet for reasons I doubt either of us can adequately explain. remarkably little of it reaches 'yer average' citizen and they are never really taken to task over it..
And yet EVERYTHING that Labour propose is immediately pounced upon by Tories AND their tame media with 'How are you going to pay for THAT? with the supplementary assumptions about Tax and Spend..Labour Profligacy etc.. etc... ad ****ing nauseam.
Err hang on.. Compared to who? Could you possibly mean compared to the Tories who have broken everything, crashed our economy,..are split from A**hole to Breakfast Time, have Asset Stripped our public services.. failed to regulate Privatised Utilities, fix the Post Office debacle, the Grenfel Scandal and numerous others. Have failed to properly control illegal immigration and deliberately boosted legal migration to cover up their failures on Education Training and Employment, who have presided over crumbling schools, infrastructure etc..etc.. all but killed our NHS.. cont'd P94.
I mean I know I'm always criticising our politically illiterate electorate but they surely can't be THAT dumb?
ks.234
Half way to Infinity
ISTM that there are two possibilities. One, that Labour believe they have to adopt the Tory economic dogma in order to avoid criticism, or two, they actually believe in it.
To be honest, it doesn't matter which it is because either way Labour will have painted themselves into the same corner in which spending on public services is not possible.
Labour have done this to themselves.
Enfield boy
pfm Member
And they'll be doing it to the rest of us so we won't see the investment and improvement needed and if successful, Labour will likely be hoofed out after 1 term.
Nor are we likely to see Leveson 2, cracking down on the filthy standard of what passes for journalism while freeing up honest investigation is essential for any hope of change.
Nor are we likely to see Leveson 2, cracking down on the filthy standard of what passes for journalism while freeing up honest investigation is essential for any hope of change.
laughingboy
pfm Member
They have had help from Andrew Bailey at the Bank of England, whose obsession with Quantitative Tightening (selling government-purchased bonds back into the market at a loss, rather than just holding them until they expire) will cost us all around £130bn. Here's an economist commenting on what the Treasury committee has to say about it, as reported in the FT.
ks.234
Half way to Infinity
This is the absurdity of Labour’s position, the economic dogma that they've adopted will fail for the same reasons it has failed for the last 50 years, there will be continued economic decline, Labour will be blamed and they will lose the subsequent GE with the difference that the Tories will have the benefit of the extended privatisation that Wes Streeting will have introduced
Mullardman
Moderately extreme...
That is a valid interpretation though not quite in line with mine.
If I was making Labour policy pronouncements, they'd be along these lines, though possibly with some input from someone who knows more about the true workings of the Treasury, or how to deflect the inevitable Tory attack. If pushed I'd call this 'Economic Populism'.
1. I would either scrap or seriously re constitute Ofwat, to give it real teeth. I would legislate to cap Water Company Chief Exec's Salaries and Bonuses, plus Shareholder Dividends until they became genuinely compliant with Water Supply, Flood Management and Sewage Outflow standards. If they didn't like it, or comply, I'd Nationalise them.
This is definitely a Green proposal.
2. I'd make similar proposals around Energy and Public Transport..especially Rail. A Green element here too.
3. I would legislate to stop any further 'Absentee' a.k.a. foreign investment in UK housing stock and consider the threat of compulsory purchase to 'encourage' sale of such back into UK ownership.
4. I would use similar tactics to end the ownership and control of UK infrastructure, transport, waste disposal energy and other essentials by foreign companies, especially where those companies are in turn owned by foreign govt.s
5. I would aim to reduce Legal Migration of otherwise non vulnerable individuals into such as Health Care, Social Care, Hospitality etc.., by increasing training of UK citizens to resolve self inflicted labour shortages and by ensuring minimum salaries.
6. I would end numerous Tax loopholes. I'm not talking about just 'Taxing the Rich', which is too vague and too easily attacked, but issues such as 'Non Dom Status' etc. Also I'd be asking serious questions about why it is that someone whose salary allows them to invest say £50k per year in investments and THEN get tax relief on top and still have take home pay of multiples of most people's Gross pay?.....
7. I would seriously 'go after' the crooks responsible for Grenfell, The Post Office Scandal etc.
8. I would end the tax breaks and 'Charitable Status for ALL religions and for ALL Independent Schools.
Why do they and their membership deserve benefits which Atheists and Agnostics, or even those of 'independent' faith do not enjoy?
The likes of Eton College already supply us with a disproportionately high number of (mostly Right Wing) Politicians etc. Why should we subsidise them?
I reckon that most habitual Labour and huge numbers of Lib Dem, Left Wing Tory etc. voters would find little to disagree with in that lot. It might even hoover up a few of the dummies who support 'Reform' because they only really see its immigration drivel and haven't read the rest of its horrific manifesto.
Enfield boy
pfm Member
Begins to sound more like a Corbyn manifesto! Not that there's much wrong with that.
Mullardman
Moderately extreme...
But isn't it horrifying that a series of proposals which would hardly have raised a 'Harrumph' from 'Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells' up until Thatcher.. is now seen as dangerously radical?
ff1d1l
pfm Member
Like that very much. It'd get my vote.
Would get monstered by the media though.
ks.234
Half way to Infinity
Yes. One of Thatcher’s big lies was ‘government has no money’. 50 years later, Labour are still repeating it. It is this dogma that is still assumed despite it’s abject failure in both practice and principle over many decades, that is the problem.
Tony L
Administrator
This man’s all for turning; a convenient repository of Starmer’s many clumsy 180 degree rotations.
www.politico.eu
All Keir Starmer’s Labour U-turns in one place
POLITICO lists 27 (and counting) key walkbacks in Starmer’s spell as opposition leader.
www.politico.eu
paulfromcamden
Baffled
Would this be a total ban on foreign nationals buying property in the UK?
Will Brits be forced to sell up their holiday apartments in France in retaliation?
Seanm
pfm Member
Well I don't think they are that dumb, which is why Labour are so far ahead in the polls: they can see Labour aren't as bad as the Tories. But any comparison is double edged because it's bound to reveal how much the two sides have in common. And this is with Labour being treated with an almost unprecedented level of indulgence by the media: I think if the public came to know Labour in the same way they now know the Tories their disgust would be shared out a lot more evenly. The current Labour bunch really are exceptionally unlikable people, even putting aside their very unpopular politics. Don't know if you read that Times article I linked to upthread, but it's worth it just to see how Starmer's *supporters* talk about him. The Tories can't match them for treachery and snideness.
Anyway, this is all to say that it's pretty reckless for Labour to let it all hang out, as they have over the last week or so. Not being quite as bad as the Tories will be enough to get them in this time, but there are pretty obvious downsides to making that the whole of your electoral strategy.
ks.234
Half way to Infinity
ks.234
Half way to Infinity
Household economics. Reeves is Thatcher and I claim my £5
ks.234
Half way to Infinity
All that would happen is that everyone would put their house into a trust. Problem over.
There's a lot of it about even at Mr Average level.
Mullardman
Moderately extreme...
That would not be my intention. I'm getting at speculative ownership of multiple properties for rent, or even the purchase of whole apartment blocks/ developments purely for investment. All actions which restrict supply and drive up rents/prices.