Starmer's vision quest

[bobzmyunkle]

I disagree - even with Liz Truss you knew what she wanted to achieve, even if she was a disaster.

So they haven't yet caused a Truss level disaster, but you disagree about their competence? Maybe I've misunderstood your statement.

 

[CXRAndy]

So they haven't yet caused a Truss level disaster, but you disagree about their competence? Maybe I've misunderstood your statement.

Labour have blown through anything Liz Truss did.

At least she was trying to stimulate business growth, Reeves has crushed business confidence.

 

[CXRAndy]

We can only hope they crack the code


View: https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/1989370960064266448?t=u544yKtXQqupIQfLhoj51w&s=19

 

[spen666]

So they haven't yet caused a Truss level disaster, but you disagree about their competence? Maybe I've misunderstood your statement.

Clearly you have misunderstood

 

[CXRAndy]

View: https://x.com/drdavidbull/status/1989303133479010503?t=9VbsrfLgNX0u53llKk_neA&s=19

 

[Stevo 666]

We had 14 years of the Tories trying to cut welfare/public spending, with nothing to show for it. Labour are pretty much following the Tory spending plans, so unsurprisingly, they've been about as successful. If you look at the numbers, there's no realistic prospect of significant savings,unless you want to slash pensions or the NHS. That's why the whole austerity thing was never going to work. If they want to fix the accounts, they need to raise revenue, by raising taxes, or growing the economy.

What numbers are you looking at that show no prospect of any significant savings?

Tax rises? - wait until the week after next. Then see what that does to our economic growth.

 

[the snail]

What numbers are you looking at that show no prospect of any significant savings?

Tax rises? - wait until the week after next. Then see what that does to our economic growth.

Reeves is talking about several billion of cuts, which is basically a rounding error. The big ticket items are NHS, pensions and working age benefits. After 14 years of austerity there just isn't that much meat on the bone. If it was that easy,why didn't your lot manage it during their 14 years in government?

 

[CXRAndy]

Stop sending billions abroad for starters

 

[AndyRM]

Our foreign aid budget is 0.5%.

It's due to drop so we can spend more on defence.

 

[Stevo 666]

Reeves is talking about several billion of cuts, which is basically a rounding error. The big ticket items are NHS, pensions and working age benefits. After 14 years of austerity there just isn't that much meat on the bone. If it was that easy,why didn't your lot manage it during their 14 years in government?

There is a lot of meat on the bone because spending is at an all time high. And unfortunately, its not sustainable.

 

[CXRAndy]

Our foreign aid budget is 0.5%.

It's due to drop so we can spend more on defence.

Its well over £12bn last year. That would go a long way to helping. Then there is the £12bn to just house illegal migrants. Plus the ballooning social security Bill with an additional 1 million plus claimants since last year.

 

[AndyRM]

Its well over £12bn last year. That would go a long way to helping. Then there is the £12bn to just house illegal migrants. Plus the ballooning social security Bill with an additional 1 million plus claimants since last year.

Helping what?

Aren't you meant to be on the ball with finances? Because you're demonstrating a pretty basic lack of understanding here.

 

[First Aspect]

There is a lot of meat on the bone because spending is at an all time high. And unfortunately, its not sustainable.

I suspect it's true to say that it isn't possible to significantly cut the current systems easily. Successive governments have failed, if they even ever tried, to change the systems we have significantly, or to remove enough of the financial disincentives to work. Personally I think this is because it takes longer than a parliamentary cycle to achieve,.and is unpopular.

 

[secretsqirrel]

I suspect it's true to say that it isn't possible to significantly cut the current systems easily. Successive governments have failed, if they even ever tried, to change the systems we have significantly, or to remove enough of the financial disincentives to work. Personally I think this is because it takes longer than a parliamentary cycle to achieve,.and is unpopular.

Didn’t Refuk councillors in Kent find out that trying to doge in a local council not as easy as it sounds?

 

[First Aspect]

Didn’t Refuk councillors in Kent find out that trying to doge in a local council not as easy as it sounds?

I think this is actually more surprising than Reform councillors going in there and completely farking it up trying.