General Election

[danumdon]

What avenues that labour has ruled out would you like to see used dd?

Bump for DD.

Come on DD otherwise what you said above is just waffle.

You know exactly what i'm referring to but i'll indulge you anyway.

Labour have promised to not raise tax on income, vat or national insurance. They have promised to make limited borrowing on the strength of a tax on non-doms and private schools. They have indicated that they will not rape the country on CGT or stamp duty.

Everyone and his dog knows this is nowhere near enough to maintain what we currently have and with their commitment to raise and improve public services this looks very doubtful.

To state that they will be able to implement their program on blind faith that growth will suddenly appear under their watch is fanciful and not realistic.

The only conclusion you can make is that this is a massive charade and when attaining power will revert to the tried and tested under the false assumption that "things are worse than we expected" and we need to rip it up and start again.

Never to be trusted, Labour and someone else's money.

[SydneyRover]

What avenues that labour has ruled out would you like to see used dd?

Bump for DD.

Come on DD otherwise what you said above is just waffle.

You know exactly what i'm referring to but i'll indulge you anyway.

Labour have promised to not raise tax on income, vat or national insurance. They have promised to make limited borrowing on the strength of a tax on non-doms and private schools. They have indicated that they will not rape the country on CGT or stamp duty.

Everyone and his dog knows this is nowhere near enough to maintain what we currently have and with their commitment to raise and improve public services this looks very doubtful.

To state that they will be able to implement their program on blind faith that growth will suddenly appear under their watch is fanciful and not realistic.

The only conclusion you can make is that this is a massive charade and when attaining power will revert to the tried and tested under the false assumption that "things are worse than we expected" and we need to rip it up and start again.

Never to be trusted, Labour and someone else's money.

And yet the tories are saying they are going to do it and cut taxes???

You haven't been watching have you, Starmer has said time and time again that the economy cannot be fixed overnight.

Maybe you and Albie would make a good team?

[albie]

As you are kind enough to give me a mention, I feel that I should point out that Keith's understanding of economics is virtually nil.

Starmer has no plan to fix the economy apart from wishful thinking.

On reflection, I take that back....it is absolutely nil!

[SydneyRover]

As you are kind enough to give me a mention, I feel that I should point out that Keith's understanding of economics is virtually nil.

Starmer has no plan to fix the economy apart from wishful thinking.

On reflection, I take that back....it is absolutely nil!

I would think that he's been working in close consultation with Reeves, but you seem to know better Albie.

[danumdon]

What avenues that labour has ruled out would you like to see used dd?

Bump for DD.

Come on DD otherwise what you said above is just waffle.

You know exactly what i'm referring to but i'll indulge you anyway.

Labour have promised to not raise tax on income, vat or national insurance. They have promised to make limited borrowing on the strength of a tax on non-doms and private schools. They have indicated that they will not rape the country on CGT or stamp duty.

Everyone and his dog knows this is nowhere near enough to maintain what we currently have and with their commitment to raise and improve public services this looks very doubtful.

To state that they will be able to implement their program on blind faith that growth will suddenly appear under their watch is fanciful and not realistic.

The only conclusion you can make is that this is a massive charade and when attaining power will revert to the tried and tested under the false assumption that "things are worse than we expected" and we need to rip it up and start again.

Never to be trusted, Labour and someone else's money.

And yet the tories are saying they are going to do it and cut taxes???

You haven't been watching have you, Starmer has said time and time again that the economy cannot be fixed overnight.

Maybe you and Albie would make a good team?

Why do you keep quoting the Tories?

What do they have to do with the price of fish, everyone knows they are now a busted flush and irrelevant.

What we all want to know is what Starmer is going to do, he will be in the driving seat.

So what's he going to do?

So far no one's buying the BS, he's either a fantasist or Billy liar, which is it?

[SydneyRover]

And just for good measure Albie 99% of your predictions about the demise of the labour party have been totally wrong so why would anyone believe you?

[SydneyRover]

What avenues that labour has ruled out would you like to see used dd?

Bump for DD.

Come on DD otherwise what you said above is just waffle.

You know exactly what i'm referring to but i'll indulge you anyway.

Labour have promised to not raise tax on income, vat or national insurance. They have promised to make limited borrowing on the strength of a tax on non-doms and private schools. They have indicated that they will not rape the country on CGT or stamp duty.

Everyone and his dog knows this is nowhere near enough to maintain what we currently have and with their commitment to raise and improve public services this looks very doubtful.

To state that they will be able to implement their program on blind faith that growth will suddenly appear under their watch is fanciful and not realistic.

The only conclusion you can make is that this is a massive charade and when attaining power will revert to the tried and tested under the false assumption that "things are worse than we expected" and we need to rip it up and start again.

Never to be trusted, Labour and someone else's money.

And yet the tories are saying they are going to do it and cut taxes???

You haven't been watching have you, Starmer has said time and time again that the economy cannot be fixed overnight.

Maybe you and Albie would make a good team?

Why do you keep quoting the Tories?

What do they have to do with the price of fish, everyone knows they are now a busted flush and irrelevant.

What we all want to know is what Starmer is going to do, he will be in the driving seat.

So what's he going to do?

So far no one's buying the BS, he's either a fantasist or Billy liar, which is it?

All the polls must be wrong then, I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[wilts rover]

What avenues that labour has ruled out would you like to see used dd?

Bump for DD.

Come on DD otherwise what you said above is just waffle.

You know exactly what i'm referring to but i'll indulge you anyway.

Labour have promised to not raise tax on income, vat or national insurance. They have promised to make limited borrowing on the strength of a tax on non-doms and private schools. They have indicated that they will not rape the country on CGT or stamp duty.

Everyone and his dog knows this is nowhere near enough to maintain what we currently have and with their commitment to raise and improve public services this looks very doubtful.

To state that they will be able to implement their program on blind faith that growth will suddenly appear under their watch is fanciful and not realistic.

The only conclusion you can make is that this is a massive charade and when attaining power will revert to the tried and tested under the false assumption that "things are worse than we expected" and we need to rip it up and start again.

Never to be trusted, Labour and someone else's money.

And yet the tories are saying they are going to do it and cut taxes???

You haven't been watching have you, Starmer has said time and time again that the economy cannot be fixed overnight.

Maybe you and Albie would make a good team?

Why do you keep quoting the Tories?

What do they have to do with the price of fish, everyone knows they are now a busted flush and irrelevant.

What we all want to know is what Starmer is going to do, he will be in the driving seat.

So what's he going to do?

So far no one's buying the BS, he's either a fantasist or Billy liar, which is it?

Starmer has answered this in nearly every interview throughout the campaign and before. He made a particular point of answering it at the Manifesto launch. It's almost as if people dont want to listen to him - they just want to imagine what they think he has said.

He is going to grow the economy. That economic growth will lead to higher GDP and thus higher tax take.

Is this realistic or achievable? No idea. But as people have said - this is exactly the same aim that both Sunak and Farage have said they have - and no-one appears to be questioning them on it?

[albie]

And just for good measure Albie 99% of your predictions about the demise of the labour party have been totally wrong so why would anyone believe you?

I haven't made any predictions about the imminent demise of the Labour Party, Syd.
The voices in your head are singing the wrong song again.

[SydneyRover]

And just for good measure Albie 99% of your predictions about the demise of the labour party have been totally wrong so why would anyone believe you?

I haven't made any predictions about the imminent demise of the Labour Party, Syd.
The voices in your head are singing the wrong song again.

It must have been the other Albie's diatribe about falling membership, costly legal matters from the corbyn era. etc

[BillyStubbsTears]

What avenues that labour has ruled out would you like to see used dd?

Bump for DD.

Come on DD otherwise what you said above is just waffle.

You know exactly what i'm referring to but i'll indulge you anyway.

Labour have promised to not raise tax on income, vat or national insurance. They have promised to make limited borrowing on the strength of a tax on non-doms and private schools. They have indicated that they will not rape the country on CGT or stamp duty.

Everyone and his dog knows this is nowhere near enough to maintain what we currently have and with their commitment to raise and improve public services this looks very doubtful.

To state that they will be able to implement their program on blind faith that growth will suddenly appear under their watch is fanciful and not realistic.

The only conclusion you can make is that this is a massive charade and when attaining power will revert to the tried and tested under the false assumption that "things are worse than we expected" and we need to rip it up and start again.

Never to be trusted, Labour and someone else's money.

Because...err...the last time Labour got to power then ripped up the manifesto and went off to the Left was...










You're going to have to help me out here DD.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Have the Tories totally given up?

This from the minister Greg Hands today in the Telegraph:

"Labour’s new 20% tax on independent school parents will have a catastrophic impact on Britain’s choirs."

[Iberian Red]

Have the Tories totally given up?

This from the minister Greg Hands today in the Telegraph:

"Labour’s new 20% tax on independent school parents will have a catastrophic impact on Britain’s choirs."

That's pure comedy.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Have the Tories totally given up?

This from the minister Greg Hands today in the Telegraph:

"Labour’s new 20% tax on independent school parents will have a catastrophic impact on Britain’s choirs."

That's pure comedy.

It's black comedy.

One in five state schools running food banks? No problem.

Threaten private school choirs? Time for class war my fellow Conservatives.

[albie]

And just for good measure Albie 99% of your predictions about the demise of the labour party have been totally wrong so why would anyone believe you?

I haven't made any predictions about the imminent demise of the Labour Party, Syd.
The voices in your head are singing the wrong song again.

It must have been the other Albie's diatribe about falling membership, costly legal matters from the corbyn era. etc

Syd, the points you raise have already been covered on here.
Telling silly lies that are easily proven wrong is not a helpful approach to a discussion.

Labour membership has fallen dramatically from the peak under Corbyn, reducing income from subscriptions.
Membership reached a peak at the end of 2019 when it hit over 532,000.

Party general secretary, David Evans, revealed that membership, which had stood at 390,000 in January (2024), had plummeted to 366,604 at the latest count, with more than 11,700 of these being in arrears (according to your Guardian).

Since then, further resignations have been made in response to the pro-Israel stance of Starmer.

Starmer incurred avoidable costs for the legal action he had to settle out of court.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3ggr3pg4ljo
The final amount is not yet known.

[SydneyRover]

And just for good measure Albie 99% of your predictions about the demise of the labour party have been totally wrong so why would anyone believe you?

I haven't made any predictions about the imminent demise of the Labour Party, Syd.
The voices in your head are singing the wrong song again.

It must have been the other Albie's diatribe about falling membership, costly legal matters from the corbyn era. etc

Syd, the points you raise have already been covered on here.
Telling silly lies that are easily proven wrong is not a helpful approach to a discussion.

Labour membership has fallen dramatically from the peak under Corbyn, reducing income from subscriptions.
Membership reached a peak at the end of 2019 when it hit over 532,000.

Party general secretary, David Evans, revealed that membership, which had stood at 390,000 in January (2024), had plummeted to 366,604 at the latest count, with more than 11,700 of these being in arrears (according to your Guardian).

Since then, further resignations have been made in response to the pro-Israel stance of Starmer.

Starmer incurred avoidable costs for the legal action he had to settle out of court.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3ggr3pg4ljo
The final amount is not yet known.

Yes but as with all your posts about the labour party your intention appears to show that labour with Starmer won't amount to anything, they won't win or they will win but somehow unfairly that they are no better than the tories.

You use projections to show that those that win seats for labour won't work for labour or the people they will work in the interests of business. 

I happen to think that under Starmer they won't duplicate the maladministration of the tories that Starmer will be a better leader than that.

Starmer is by no means perfect or a magician and his government will have problems, but not like anything we've seen for the past 14+ years.

[albie]

You can believe whatever you like Syd, but the evidence you keep ignoring sits in plain sight.

Keith has promoted a private health businessman as candidate for Labour in Islington North, without the consent of the local party members.
The Labour manifesto on health relies upon greater involvement of the sector, despite there being no significant additional capacity, and despite a competitive reliance on NHS qualified staff.

A briefing here from your favourite news source;
https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/jun/15/labour-and-tories-would-both-leave-nhs-worse-off-than-under-austerity-says-thinktank
Both main parties have policies which impoverish the NHS, and go nowhere near addressing the issues it faces.

If you can't see that candidates wearing 2 hats are going to be interested in supporting their financial backers, I don't know what to say.
That is entirely the point of them taking the role!

[BillyStubbsTears]

Halfway through the campaign and it's astonishing how little any of the big shots in the Tory party have been involved.

Where's Hunt? Or Cleverly? Or Rees-Mogg? Or Braverman? Or Patel? Who even IS the Health Secretary?

[MachoMadness]

Probably a lot are focused on local campaigning. Suspect a couple of those names will be out of a job come 5th July, if you believe the MRP polling. Badenoch another name to add to that list.

As for Braverman...
https://x.com/PoliticsMoments/status/1802090458958479863?t=4W3X_-BfwXjiMxd4UgjxAg&s=19

[Bristol Red Rover]

Syd, Starmer is not the leader, he is a figurehead. There is little sign of him speaking from his heart, or even his self. Labour may well manage the country more successfully than the Tories under every guise they've had, it'd be hard not to. But this will not be down to Leadership. I think you'll see the cracks appear soon enough. Even the rhetoric will be fkakey. I wouldn't employ Starmer as a lawyer, there is little forensic reality in his skill set. He is the safe figurehead of those who are in power above him. Safe to a robotic level. This won't work out when he is leader of the country.

[SydneyRover]

Syd, Starmer is not the leader, he is a figurehead. There is little sign of him speaking from his heart, or even his self. Labour may well manage the country more successfully than the Tories under every guise they've had, it'd be hard not to. But this will not be down to Leadership. I think you'll see the cracks appear soon enough. Even the rhetoric will be fkakey. I wouldn't employ Starmer as a lawyer, there is little forensic reality in his skill set. He is the safe figurehead of those who are in power above him. Safe to a robotic level. This won't work out when he is leader of the country.

So just your opinion really then

[Bristol Red Rover]

Syd, Starmer is not the leader, he is a figurehead. There is little sign of him speaking from his heart, or even his self. Labour may well manage the country more successfully than the Tories under every guise they've had, it'd be hard not to. But this will not be down to Leadership. I think you'll see the cracks appear soon enough. Even the rhetoric will be fkakey. I wouldn't employ Starmer as a lawyer, there is little forensic reality in his skill set. He is the safe figurehead of those who are in power above him. Safe to a robotic level. This won't work out when he is leader of the country.

So just your opinion really then

We can all only have an opinion. Some are deluded that by quoting others opinions, whether illustrated by opinion based figures and stats or not, whether published in a journal, paper or not, they are passing on fact. Take the Graniad for example.

Meanwhile, the Starmer robot continues to not answer questions he is asked on the telly and wireless. As if he is pre programmed. Maybe you have another explanation than him being robotic? Maybe you haven't conceived how the Labour Party is controlled by others than the leader and NEC? Maybe you have yet to experience the Dreamtime, and are trapped in a blink of reality that people want you to be in? I'm not having a go, just suggesting that all you see and read is not as you think it is.

[Bristol Red Rover]

A good example of Starmer being a robot is his recent Sky News interview where he mentioned his dad being a toolmaker and the audience laughed. In a GB news interview he was asked about this, and became defensive about his dad and his suppressed pain about this, not realising the bleedin obvious that he was laughed at because he ALWAYS comes out with the "my dad was a toolmaker" line.

Lord knows if he realised the other very comic angle on that repeated line of his! Implosion? He's not good in the real world is he?

[drfchound]

A good example of Starmer being a robot is his recent Sky News interview where he mentioned his dad being a toolmaker and the audience laughed. In a GB news interview he was asked about this, and became defensive about his dad and his suppressed pain about this, not realising the bleedin obvious that he was laughed at because he ALWAYS comes out with the "my dad was a toolmaker" line.

Lord knows if he realised the other very comic angle on that repeated line of his! Implosion? He's not good in the real world is he?

His dad made that have been a tool maker but he also might have owned the business.
Starmer had never denied this when asked about it.

[drfchound]

The Guardian now telling us by the the respected Nuffield Trust both the Conservative and Labour manifestos would put the NHS in a worse funding situation than they suffered under the Austerity period of the current government in 2010/11 and 2014/15.
“The assessment by the respected Nuffield Trust of the costed NHS policies of both parties, announced in their manifestos last week, says the level of funding increases would leave them struggling to pay existing staff costs, let alone the bill for massive planned increases in doctors, nurses and other staff in the long-term workforce plan agreed last year”.
Paul Johnson of the Institute for Fiscal Studies said that for Labour to deliver the change it is promising there would need to be more money on the table. “Labour’s manifesto offers no indication that there is a plan for where the money would come from to finance this,” he said.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

People don't like to hear it but the NHS model in the current modern world isn't working and we've little to no answer for it have we?

[Mike_F]

I had an interesting conversation about it with an NHS biomedical scientist yesterday. It could be much more efficietn with some fairly straightforward structural reforms. The example we discussed in most detail was supply chain.

She works in a lab at the Northern General and she was expressing frustration at the delays to deliveries on things like diagnostic kits from Germany post Brexit. I was astounded that every lab the length and breadth of the country needs to order their own kits direct from the supplier. Think how many hospitals there are in the UK needing kits for things like blood tests. It would surely make much more sense for them to manage stock like a supermarket; Roll up a forecast of how many items are needed on a weekly basis be that test kits, instruments, gloves, sharps bins, whatever and have central buyers responsible for dealing with suppliers on their portfolio of products. Have them delivered into half a dozen UK RDCs from whihc the individual hospitals/labs can call off stock as and when required.

That would mean front line staff could spend more time on front line activities and less time chasing orders, stock could be managed more quickly and efficiently, turning around important results quicker, reducing waiting times and no doubt saving huge sums of money thanks to the economies of scale and purchasing power that the central contracts would bring.

Apparently it used to work a bit like that, certainly with things like stationery which was supplied through HM stationery office to all public sector services. Thatcher's government decided to make the NHS act more like a set of competing businesses through the devolution to local NHS trusts which led to this lack of scalability and increased local bureaucracy which of course needs more managers to administer it, pulling funding away from front line services.

[Sprotyrover]

People Forget that there was a Labour Government after Thatcher!

[albie]

People don't like to hear it but the NHS model in the current modern world isn't working and we've little to no answer for it have we?

The NHS has been designed NOT to work efficiently, in order to prepare the ground for a sell off to the private sector.
The example given by MikeF above is just one case where rationalisation would bring efficiency gains.

It is perfectly possible to re-organise how the service operates within a public funding, free to use model.
Successive governments have either kicked the can down the road, or are actively opposed to a public service in all sectors.

[Herbert Anchovy]

People Forget that there was a Labour Government after Thatcher!

Being a bit of a pedant, there was actually a Tory government after Thatcher!!

Anyway, once Labour got to grips with the NHS it worked much better for more people. Not perfect, but much better.