Starmer's vision quest

[BoldonLad]

Nice idea.
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ress-keir-starmer-to-set-out-wealth-tax-plans

According to the article, there are c218,000 UHNW* individuals IN THE WORLD. Even if they all lived in the UK, and, continued to do so, the claim that "Even modest wealth taxes could raise tens of billions" seems very doubtful to me. So, to raise "tens of billions" in this way, the bar for what counts as "wealthy" is going to have to be lowered.

Further down the article, the figure of assets of £10million is mentioned (not by Labour I hasten to add).

The question will be, "how low is the bar going to go"?

Not saying that I disagree with the principle, why would I?, even at the lowered £10,000,000 bar, it is not going to impact me.

But, to get enough people to vote for it, some actual £ numbers are going be needed, so that self interest can be satisfied.

*ie assets of £43million+

 

[Bromptonaut]

I can't get it either.

Why on earth is the multi-millionaire man of the people Sir Keir Starmer not seen as any different to the multi-millionaire man of the people Mr Rishi Sunak?

To be honest, to be seen as different Labour need Jeremy back. Sadly though they would then be seen as anti-Semitic, incompetent, weak and unelectable.

As is well known Starmer was knighted for his work as a lawyer. It does not imply any privilege of birth nor in current life.

Do you have a source for him being a multi-millionaire?

Sure he owns a home in London but pretty much whatever it's nonsense on stilts to suggest he's in the same league financially as Rishi Sunak.

 

[BoldonLad]

As is well known Starmer was knighted for his work as a lawyer. It does not imply any privilege of birth nor in current life.

Do you have a source for him being a multi-millionaire?

Sure he owns a home in London but pretty much whatever it's nonsense on stilts to suggest he's in the same league financially as Rishi Sunak.

If, to be an acceptable PM, or, indeed Minister, it is necessary to be an “ordinary person” (whatever that might mean), does that mean potential PMs/Ministers, must be average earners, with no inherited wealth?

 

[Craig the cyclist]

Sure he owns a home in London but pretty much whatever it's nonsense on stilts to suggest he's in the same league financially as Rishi Sunak.

I didn't suggest he was, but it is equal nonsense to suggest he is a man of the people. He has a massive bucket of cash and a knighthood yet people can't really relate to him, who would have thought it eh?

 

[Bromptonaut]

I didn't suggest he was, but it is equal nonsense to suggest he is a man of the people. He has a massive bucket of cash and a knighthood yet people can't really relate to him, who would have thought it eh?

Do you actually have evidence of this 'bucket of cash'?

 

[AndyRM]

Do you actually have evidence of this 'bucket of cash'?

I think it's fair to say he's not exactly short of a bob or two.

 

[Rusty Nails]

I didn't suggest he was, but it is equal nonsense to suggest he is a man of the people. He has a massive bucket of cash and a knighthood yet people can't really relate to him, who would have thought it eh?

Is anybody other than you talking about "man of the people"?

What is your definition of (wo)man of the people? Is it based on current level of wealth/poverty or on their upbringing/education/inherited wealth? I would have thought that just about every party leader in recent years, of either main party, has either been a millionnaire or public school educated, or both, including the last Labour leader. Johnson was often described as a man of the people when nothing could have been further from the truth and he cared nothing about "ordinary" people other than how he could fool them into furthering his career and future wealth. I suspect he would have run a mile rather than socialise with truly "ordinary" people.

I have no issue with anyone making a lot of money out of their own chosen, honest career, especially if they weren't born with that silver spoon in their mouth, and don't see how that stops them representing their electorate. It is not that which possibly stops people relating to Starmer but more his lack of a personality and the fact that no one knows what he actually stands for.

 

[theclaud]

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/the-prime-ministers-choice-save-the-economy-or-save-brexit/

That is the choice. Total doom or a rejoin like new agreement with the EU. The Starmer route.
But are not the turkeys are already dead?

 

[albion]

Just don't call it rejoin. Rejig his fine.
Brexit is Brexit. Rejig is Rejig.

Relax says Frankie.

 

[Deleted member 49]

Mandleson ! The same one who undermined the last Labour leader at every opportunity ?
“I am working every day to bring down Jeremy Corbyn”
But he wants us back in the EU 🙄

 

[winjim]

Here's Starmer saying we've got too many foreigners in the NHS but we need more rich factory owners...


View: https://twitter.com/jrc1921/status/1589201343499341825?t=cPXthGse8umCIygesbGzjg&s=19



W, and I can't stress this enough, TF?

 

[Deleted member 49]

But the polls love him....🙄

 

[C R]

But the polls love him....🙄

Do the polls love him or do the polls hate the tories?

 

[Deleted member 49]

Here's Starmer saying we've got too many foreigners in the NHS but we need more rich factory owners...


View: https://twitter.com/jrc1921/status/1589201343499341825?t=cPXthGse8umCIygesbGzjg&s=19



W, and I can't stress this enough, TF?

The correct answer....

View: https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1589264026319851520?t=1-XxxDVk_DFZ2KoJrM-AmQ&s=19

 

[Rusty Nails]

The correct answer....

View: https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1589264026319851520?t=1-XxxDVk_DFZ2KoJrM-AmQ&s=19

The two statements are not mutually exclusive if taken in context.

If successive governments over many years had made nursing a more attractive career in terms of salaries, conditions and training opportunities then we would likely not have needed to have raided so many other poorer countries of their trained and experienced nursing staff to make up for our lack of foresight and our shortages. He was not saying we shouldn't have foreign nurses, but highlighting our failures. Whether a Labour government under Starmer would resolve those issues is a different matter.

Corbyn is also correct by stating the obvious.