Demitri_C Posted July 24 Author Share Posted July 24 1 minute ago, sidcow said: THEYVE......GOT.........NO.......MONEY. Why is this so hard? Funding stuff you can't afford us Trussonomics. They set out their stall. This was never part of it. No need to shout. Relax Have they got no money though? Is this the excuse and free pass starmers gonna get in next 5 years then? I do remember very well when Cameron took over and he got left the note from labour "that there is no money" and it was deemed a funny joke on here by certian posters. Na not for me im not given the tories a free pass because the previous government failed. They failed because they were shit. Labour are the government they have inherited a mess but if they can't help the poorest in society they shouldn't be in government either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 19 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Labour are the government they have inherited a mess but if they can't help the poorest in society they shouldn't be in government either. Yep. There's money in this country. Plenty of it. Depends if they want to go and get it from those that have the most, and redistribute a bit of it to those that have **** all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted July 24 VT Supporter Share Posted July 24 1 hour ago, Jon said: Yep. There's money in this country. Plenty of it. Depends if they want to go and get it from those that have the most, and redistribute a bit of it to those that have **** all. Yep, should give it to the people who have chosen to have a third child and **** the doctors and nurses pay rise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 Labour are going to have an issue with speeding up asylum applications. It's going to lead to large numbers being granted the right to asylum and large numbers being deported and as a result they're going to get it from both sides. It's almost as if the Tories planned it this way, and that piling them all up in hotels (and barges) was a tactical choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 35 minutes ago, sidcow said: Yep, should give it to the people who have chosen to have a third child and **** the doctors and nurses pay rise. Oh, I can play this game too, we should give the money to people who went into a job knowing what the wages and conditions were, and **** the kids going hungry 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cizzler Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 3 hours ago, sidcow said: As they're taking the same general direction we can expect the NHS strikes to continue with no Government intervention, continuing the chaos in our NHS. Continue to treat Assylum seekers like criminals, continue to prop up their mates in the Oil and Gas industry at the expense of doing their bit to save the planet, continue to ensure there is a serious housing shortage to ensure their property owning mates see their property investments rise at multiples of general inflation. In short, they're exactly the same at Tories. They’ve been in charge 3 weeks? Did you genuinely expect them to have resolved the public sector pay disputes, resolve the immigration issue, get us to Net Zero and end the housing crisis in less than a month? Obviously you didn’t, so I don’t really see how you’ve reached your conclusion. The Labour Party rhetoric has actually been directed at addressing all your points. The country is at 100% debt: GDP ratio, and the economy isn’t growing (on a p/capita basis and hasn’t for years). Not sure why people think these are easy policy decisions. Out of the tax money this country does collect, we already spend ~25% on welfare and pensions. Clearly we can’t keep borrowing to pay this. The answer shouldn’t always be more free money for people. Your post is bizarre, because the early direction of government addresses the points you’re whining aren’t already resolved. Reeves has said public sector pay rises will be above inflation and Streeting has spoken with the Unions (what’s he supposed to do? Just cave in and pay 35% more from the magic money tree?), Rwanda has been scrapped, so’s the barge - this is clearly a more humane approach to the asylum crisis. They’ve said they’re going to undertake the biggest house building programme in decades (proof is in the pudding, obviously) - but feel like we have to give them time before they’re judged to not deliver this? They’ve u-turned the Tory policy on land-based wind… what do you actually want them to do here? Pull every North Sea oil rig out of the ground because the UK contributes 1% of the world’s omissions. Progressive public sector policies have to be funded by something - and closing a huge employer and tax paying industry is obviously dense. It’s not even like they e granted new licenses. And shockingly you lose the whip if you vote against the manifesto you were elected in on. Is this really a stick to beat him with. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 (edited) It's broadly a good post @Cizzler, but I'd like to think that by paragraph 5 I'd have given my head a wobble and considered if I were reading the tone of the post correctly. Edited July 24 by Davkaus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desensitized43 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 2 hours ago, Demitri_C said: No need to shout. Relax Have they got no money though? Is this the excuse and free pass starmers gonna get in next 5 years then? I do remember very well when Cameron took over and he got left the note from labour "that there is no money" and it was deemed a funny joke on here by certian posters. Na not for me im not given the tories a free pass because the previous government failed. They failed because they were shit. Labour are the government they have inherited a mess but if they can't help the poorest in society they shouldn't be in government either. I was very much of your opinion as well where I was like "where is all the money going if we're taxed up to the ballsack?" I think when all the independent bodies producing data are all saying the same thing it's probably time to 'listen to the experts' to borrow a phrase. I'm sure that if the money was there they'd have done it to make all of this pathetic whining about it go away. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted July 24 VT Supporter Share Posted July 24 45 minutes ago, Cizzler said: They’ve been in charge 3 weeks? Did you genuinely expect them to have resolved the public sector pay disputes, resolve the immigration issue, get us to Net Zero and end the housing crisis in less than a month? Obviously you didn’t, so I don’t really see how you’ve reached your conclusion. The Labour Party rhetoric has actually been directed at addressing all your points. The country is at 100% debt: GDP ratio, and the economy isn’t growing (on a p/capita basis and hasn’t for years). Not sure why people think these are easy policy decisions. Out of the tax money this country does collect, we already spend ~25% on welfare and pensions. Clearly we can’t keep borrowing to pay this. The answer shouldn’t always be more free money for people. Your post is bizarre, because the early direction of government addresses the points you’re whining aren’t already resolved. Reeves has said public sector pay rises will be above inflation and Streeting has spoken with the Unions (what’s he supposed to do? Just cave in and pay 35% more from the magic money tree?), Rwanda has been scrapped, so’s the barge - this is clearly a more humane approach to the asylum crisis. They’ve said they’re going to undertake the biggest house building programme in decades (proof is in the pudding, obviously) - but feel like we have to give them time before they’re judged to not deliver this? They’ve u-turned the Tory policy on land-based wind… what do you actually want them to do here? Pull every North Sea oil rig out of the ground because the UK contributes 1% of the world’s omissions. Progressive public sector policies have to be funded by something - and closing a huge employer and tax paying industry is obviously dense. It’s not even like they e granted new licenses. And shockingly you lose the whip if you vote against the manifesto you were elected in on. Is this really a stick to beat him with. I think you've missed the sarcasm in my post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted July 24 VT Supporter Share Posted July 24 1 hour ago, Davkaus said: Oh, I can play this game too, we should give the money to people who went into a job knowing what the wages and conditions were, and **** the kids going hungry Thing is it's not a game. They've a limited budget to work with and they've prioritised what they are to spend it on. They've made it abundantly clear this was never going to be one of the things they spend it on They are spending the money they do have on other things. I'm sure if the economic gwts moving and money is easier to come by they'll get round to this. It's ridiculous the size of the stick they're being beaten with over something that isn't their doing and never promised to fix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 29 minutes ago, sidcow said: Thing is it's not a game. They've a limited budget to work with and they've prioritised what they are to spend it on. They've made it abundantly clear this was never going to be one of the things they spend it on The "game" was trivialising the alternative spending, which is what you seemed to be doing Agreed with the fact that they made it clear it wasn't happening so it's not great surprise the government didn't include it and ordered their MPs to vote against it. And opposing their own party's king speech was only going to end one way really. I am in the kind of halfway house position of thinking it should be one of the things they fixed, while being baffled by people outraged they're not doing the thing they said they wouldn't do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 It seems Starmer is going to have a nice relaxing time in PMQ's for the next few months while he's able to rub Rishi's face in all of the reasons that he lost the election, it's a somewhat less boisterous Conservative bench Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 3 hours ago, sidcow said: Yep, should give it to the people who have chosen to have a third child and **** the doctors and nurses pay rise. I don't think people are saying that. I'm certainly not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnkarl Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 2 hours ago, Davkaus said: Oh, I can play this game too, we should give the money to people who went into a job knowing what the wages and conditions were, and **** the kids going hungry I wonder how you'd solve the unemployment issue though, since you seem to be very vocal about what you don't like? Other than throwing money at it, of course. Having been in the military eons ago, going in an absolute ¤%%¤#, and coming out a bit less of a ¤#%# would be what I would do if people can't get a job. People could be doing things around their community, not necessarily going to the army. It leads to experience and building a network in an increasingly polarised and socially isolated world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 24 Moderator Share Posted July 24 29 minutes ago, magnkarl said: I wonder how you'd solve the unemployment issue though, since you seem to be very vocal about what you don't like? Other than throwing money at it, of course. Having been in the military eons ago, going in an absolute ¤%%¤#, and coming out a bit less of a ¤#%# would be what I would do if people can't get a job. People could be doing things around their community, not necessarily going to the army. It leads to experience and building a network in an increasingly polarised and socially isolated world. You can't be serious. I'm fairly confident elements of the Tory Party have suggested this numerous times. Those elements are pretty much always on the right of the party and complete wingnuts Work will set you free. It's 99% of the way there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panto_Villan Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 33 minutes ago, bickster said: You can't be serious. I'm fairly confident elements of the Tory Party have suggested this numerous times. Those elements are pretty much always on the right of the party and complete wingnuts Work will set you free. It's 99% of the way there I assume you're referring to the 1930s German work gangs here, but I'd be a bit careful - I think these days that phrase is associated more with Auschwitz than anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted July 24 VT Supporter Share Posted July 24 2 hours ago, Jon said: I don't think people are saying that. I'm certainly not That's the tightrope though. They do this, they don't do something else. That or follow Trussenomics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 24 Moderator Share Posted July 24 19 hours ago, Davkaus said: Well, it's not a good start, Keir Was it a three line whip? Yep. King's speech. Voting against your own government's manifesto (as contained within the King's speech votes ) is basically automatically lose the whip. He also had to do it for more parochial reasons of party control and discipline. The few (7?) who voted against it (and most of them are nice but dim) knew what would happen, but did it anyway. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 12 minutes ago, blandy said: Yep. King's speech. Voting against your own government's manifesto (as contained within the King's speech votes ) is basically automatically lose the whip. He also had to do it for more parochial reasons of party control and discipline. The few (7?) who voted against it (and most of them are nice but dim) knew what would happen, but did it anyway. They should have copied Dianne Abbott, find a way not to attend, but then support the rebellion after the fact without losing the whip again. She's absolutely mastered this shithousery 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 7 hours ago, magnkarl said: I wonder how you'd solve the unemployment issue though, since you seem to be very vocal about what you don't like? Other than throwing money at it, of course. Having been in the military eons ago, going in an absolute ¤%%¤#, and coming out a bit less of a ¤#%# would be what I would do if people can't get a job. People could be doing things around their community, not necessarily going to the army. It leads to experience and building a network in an increasingly polarised and socially isolated world. This is a great idea, it needs a catchy familiar name that will have brand recognition with a certain demographic. Serving the Nation? Nationalised Servicing? something along those lines, I’ll get back to you… 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts