Starmer's vision quest

[Deleted member 28]

Like feck I do....you think wanting basic things like bringing kids out of poverty isn't the very least Labour should be aiming for...I mean I know you keep coming back to the dreary there's no money 🙄 Were a rich country,this is the very least we should be aiming for.
Not one shadow cabinet member opposed Starmer's plan to keep the 2-child benefit cap...it's piss poor.

Don't suppose working for a living, having the amount of kids you can actually afford to bring up and stop relying on government to pay for you (maybe not you personally)has ever crossed your mind?

 

[multitool]

Don't suppose working for a living, having the amount of kids you can actually afford to bring up and stop relying on government to pay for you (maybe not you personally)has ever crossed your mind?

All it takes is a man walking out to plunge a family into poverty.

 

[Deleted member 49]

Don't suppose working for a living, having the amount of kids you can actually afford to bring up and stop relying on government to pay for you (maybe not you personally)has ever crossed your mind?

Now there's a thought...I don't suppose it's ever crossed your mind that it's usually the kids from working families that are affected.
"68% of working-age adults in poverty live in a household where at least one adult is in work. 7 in 10 children in poverty are in a working household"
Lazy bastards get a second job or work harder?

 

[multitool]

One of the lies of Brexit was about pushing wages up by removing foreign labour.

Hasn't happened, has it.

 

[BoldonLad]

That's my issue. They should be making a positive case to remove both the two child limit and the overall benefit cap. There should also be regular, no longer then annual, revalorisation of Local Housing Allowance. The latter might need to be moderated with action to provide at least light touch rent regulation.

That is an allowance which, in my opinion, needs to be reconsidered. At present:

there seems to be little or no examination of the standard of housing being paid for via the allowance, allowing landlords to profit from unsuitable housing

It is, effectively, a subsidy to Landlords, rather than tenants

 

[BoldonLad]

One of the lies of Brexit was about pushing wages up by removing foreign labour.

Hasn't happened, has it.

Presumably, it hasn't happened, because, as you say, it was a lie.

 

[Deleted member 49]

https://labour.org.uk/stronger-together/a-fairer-greener-future/families-first/

There's loads of stuff in there about child poverty. You are doing your headless chicken thing again.

Surely as leader of the Labour party you have to stand for something ? Standing for not being cruel against families and children is a easy one...but fiscal rules ?
Do I think they’ll win anyway ? Yes and more than likely by quite a bit, but landslides are hard won and they’re not convincing.

 

[Deleted member 49]

Just for you Tool.

View: https://twitter.com/YLU19s/status/1681352575130517518?t=Eiv3hecR08m99CUCEqJ5_w&s=19

 

[Bromptonaut]

That is an allowance which, in my opinion, needs to be reconsidered. At present:

there seems to be little or no examination of the standard of housing being paid for via the allowance, allowing landlords to profit from unsuitable housing

It is, effectively, a subsidy to Landlords, rather than tenants

It's absolutely a subsidy to LLs. Landlord Benefit has been professional slang for Housing Benefit since God was a wee lad.

The mechanism by which it's set is market rates in the area. If people will pay £1k/month for substandard housing (say) within the M25, and they will whether or not they're on benefits it needs way more policing than going round benefit claimants' gaffs.

 

[Rusty Nails]

First and foremost being in a position to enact change.

It might not be every change you want, but that is because you hold an idealised rather than a pragmatic view of how politics functions.

The first part Is almost true imo.

But before even getting into power a Party should have an agreed, fully thought out idea of what it wants to achieve rather than just letting the electorate in on it after the election. The public deserves to be told exactly what they are being asked to vote for rather than just be considered as crosses on ballot cards.

I agree with the earlier comments you made about Corbyn being a hindrance to Labour's electoral prospects, but so far Starmer's main achievement has been to show who he is not i.e. Corbyn/Johnson, while trying to show he can match Sunak for fiscal responsibility. All of those were good tactics especially as the Tories seem intent on self-destruction and they have worked so far, but I sense some cynicism creeping into the electorate about whether Starmer is actually just the least worst option.

There is a reasonably long time before the next GE and he has time to show that he has some policies to offer that one would expect of a social democratic party, as it is clear that the term Socialism is not the vote winner that some in the party think it should be. I hope that he does this but does not continue to try to be all things to all people e.g. the mixed message of "Rising child poverty is a chronic injustice that scars society" from the Future for Families document, while tacitly supporting the two-child benefit cap that exacerbates child poverty.

 

[cookiemonster]

View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eM0d4TPddHk&t=264s


View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sugu7Rl-BX8

 

[newfhouse]

while trying to show he can match Sunak for fiscal responsibility.

Is not being Kwarteng the limit of Labour’s ambition now?

 

[newfhouse]

Is not being Kwarteng the limit of Labour’s ambition now?

Apparently not. They’re also keen to leave every single dirty Tory policy in place because we can’t have Big Oil getting nervous, can we?


View: https://twitter.com/saulstaniforth/status/1681548330638139393?s=61&t=IaNHN0MzKohAo3Ktl0DsFQ

 

[Deleted member 49]

The first part Is almost true imo.

But before even getting into power a Party should have an agreed, fully thought out idea of what it wants to achieve rather than just letting the electorate in on it after the election. The public deserves to be told exactly what they are being asked to vote for rather than just be considered as crosses on ballot cards.

I agree with the earlier comments you made about Corbyn being a hindrance to Labour's electoral prospects, but so far Starmer's main achievement has been to show who he is not i.e. Corbyn/Johnson, while trying to show he can match Sunak for fiscal responsibility. All of those were good tactics especially as the Tories seem intent on self-destruction and they have worked so far, but I sense some cynicism creeping into the electorate about whether Starmer is actually just the least worst option.

There is a reasonably long time before the next GE and he has time to show that he has some policies to offer that one would expect of a social democratic party, as it is clear that the term Socialism is not the vote winner that some in the party think it should be. I hope that he does this but does not continue to try to be all things to all people e.g. the mixed message of "Rising child poverty is a chronic injustice that scars society" from the Future for Families document, while tacitly supporting the two-child benefit cap that exacerbates child poverty.

How does any Labour leader look at the last 13 years of decline under the Tories,the public services and infrastructure and think that we don't urgently need more public investment & better funded public services ?
A Labour Party that should be renationalising public utilities, raising taxes, and lifting kids out of poverty isn't even a big ask,it should be the very least.This is for those that vaguely want things to be better, but would prefer not to really change that much.

 

[Deleted member 49]

Lol...

View: https://twitter.com/jrc1921/status/1681557150538014721?t=7WN4_gTES-qhgEW76nB2Cg&s=19