Starmer's vision quest

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

multitool

Guest
They can't. But the economics of running an economy is a lot different from managing the housekeeping money (despite what Tool and Mrs T would have us believe).

I see Bob the Nob is still pumping out the straw men.

What a twat.
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
They can't. But the economics of running an economy is a lot different from managing the housekeeping money (despite what Tool and Mrs T would have us believe).

"They can't" as in, it is not true, or, as in they are not capable?

If the former, then, there are consequences, sooner or later.

I never suggested running the economy was like running the housekeeping money, I also freely admit, I have little knowledge of Economic Theory. It would appear, I am not alone in the latter state, I am simply willing to own up to it.
 
D

Deleted member 49

Guest
What happened to Starmer....did somebody perform a lobotomy on him ?
Screenshot_20230515-151207-669.png

Screenshot_20230515-151146-551.png
 

multitool

Guest
In the spirit of 'I listened so you don't have to', perhaps you could pick out the bits that are either surprising, persuasive, or suitably contrite?

Well, as ever, you asked and so I granted. Just know that in order so to do I had to forego my usual choice of Showaddywaddy's Greatest Hits whilst on the bike for an hour very early this morning and listen to this instead.

Unfortunately, what with the intense demands of work, I've forgotten most of the salient points, but actually that is the point in that it was quite anodyne, at least from Osborne. It struck me that he is far from a great intellect, very little academic weight to what he said and no real insights. Actually, I don't mind that, because part of why I listen/read to these people is to find out who they are and how they think.

He gave the impression of Tory politics as a chumocracy as he seemed able to wave away the dire consequences of the Johnson era with a few humorous anecdotes of Johnson's renegade behaviour, whilst having just said that Johnson achieved nothing. Didn't have many nice words to say about May, seeing her as rather unnecessarily spiteful. Again, in terms of her treatment of colleagues rather than anything else.

In terms of reflecting on his time in politics he did not budge on austerity and presented it as the only choice at the time. He also attempted to say that shadow Chancellor Alistair Darling was also proposing deep cuts. Campbell tried to pin him down suggesting that Osborne had to accept that the current crisis in public services was his legacy, but Osborne wouldn't take responsibility for anything.

There was some talk of Labour's current situation and here he emphasised the need to communicate a strong message offering something, which he felt Labour were not currently doing. WRT to Starmer he pointed out that during the Corbyn era (which he excoriated) Starmer had to swallow things he didn't agree with. I know this is contentious on this forum, but I appreciate what he means. If you are part of a leadership team you have to present a united front even when, inevitably, there are aspects you do not like.

What else? Some talk of Brexit, and how it came about, with Campbell succeeding in not allowing Osborne to pretend that the referendum was answering national questions about, say, immigration, rather than an attempt to shut down the eurosceptic wing of his own party by Cameron.

Yeah it was a bit bland, but then he is bland. We are also a little to close to his time in power, I feel. Possibly the most interesting part was about his time in opposition and how effective he felt the Labour triumvirate of Blair, Brown and Campbell were. He also rued the poor quality of Conservative leaders during their time in opposition. IDS coming out particularly badly.
 
D

Deleted member 49

Guest
Why 12.8 million people voted Labour in 2017....top answer the Manifesto/policies !

Screenshot_20230516-110838-359.png

Fairer taxation,Tax the wealthy
Secure funded NHS
Good housing,as in council and affordable.
Decent education system,end tuition fees.
Energy and water nationalised, not in the hands of shareholders.
Stop spouting the drivel that there's no money and were in for a rough ride,which we all know means more austerity.
 
D

Deleted member 49

Guest
Did they win?
With a better leader....as in a piece of wood in a suit.Surely he could build on that ?
I mean I still think Labour will win this next election by default...let's be honest it's not because they've got anything about them so to speak.
"Labour gained seats in an election for the 1st time since 1997, and increased the Labour share of the vote by more than at any election since 1945"
 
  • Like
Reactions: C R

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
Why 12.8 million people voted Labour in 2017....top answer the Manifesto/policies !

View attachment 3869
Fairer taxation,Tax the wealthy
Secure funded NHS
Good housing,as in council and affordable.
Decent education system,end tuition fees.
Energy and water nationalised, not in the hands of shareholders.
Stop spouting the drivel that there's no money and were in for a rough ride,which we all know means more austerity.

That is a survey of 645 Labour Voters out of 12.8 million (your number), how statistically relevant is that?
 
D

Deleted member 49

Guest
That is a survey of 645 Labour Voters out of 12.8 million (your number), how statistically relevant is that?
How irrelevant is it ? What was the reason Labour got 40% of votes ? The vast majority of working age people.
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
How irrelevant is it ? What was the reason Labour got 40% of votes ? The vast majority of working age people.

Since when was 40% a "vast majority"?

Taking your figures, as correct (I am not disputing them), 40% of the electorate who bothered to vote, that is not the same as 40% of the electorate.

I have no idea why people (other than myself) voted as they did, but, that does not mean I am willing to believe a survey of 645 people.
 
D

Deleted member 49

Guest
Since when was 40% a "vast majority"?

Taking your figures, as correct (I am not disputing them), 40% of the electorate who bothered to vote, that is not the same as 40% of the electorate.

I have no idea why people (other than myself) voted as they did, but, that does not mean I am willing to believe a survey of 645 people.
Do you ever have a point to you're questions....just curious.
Screenshot_20230516-162550-750.png


Screenshot_20230516-163109-393.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top Bottom