Sir Ralph

I feel privileged to be off his hit list - it’s a big day for me. 😆

I forgot about that - You mean this one?

😆

Well they are about to balls things up so I suspect at some point somebody will have to cut public services again (whether this government or the next one) to fix the problems Labour hasn’t created. The issue is they haven’t really even tried to address the inefficiencies. They have just massively increased day to day public sector spending. It’s like taking over a company, seeing there are inefficiencies but just giving the business more money to significantly increase wages, without really tackling the inefficiencies. I’m happy to pay more tax if the government isn’t just going to waste it. Currently there is too much waste and Labour hasn’t addressed it. To busy hoping that taxing businesses and rich people will be politically more popular. You say selfish I say sensible. If you already pay multiples in tax compared to the average citizen and keep being asked to pay more. Leave until you have a more friendly government. Why spend half your day working for the government to take it and waste it. But that’s all rubbish anyway because nobody is leaving and the economy is booming!

It’s a principle I’m highlighting, but that should be clear. So far Labour has just taxed and I’m saying that’s not the solution (albeit many people who think they are very clever have told me on here that this economic approach is sound - not looking as clever at the moment). Again dismissal with no rebuttal. A common theme. Just keep taxing then I suspect that’s what you think? That’s working really well isn’t it.

I’ve noticed a shift on here - the regular defence of the Labour Party’s economic strategy is now subsiding into (1) a suggestion of alternatives that they should be putting forward or (2) deflection that other parties messed up or wouldn’t do as well. This indicates a silent acceptance that their policies aren’t up to it. To be honest they have even surprised me with how quickly they managed to balls it up - the only time they have exceeded expectations!

I agree that brexit isn’t economically good. I didn’t vote for it. If we went back in it would be economically better. However the Conservatives and Labour Governments have and are working in this framework. I agree that spending on infrastructure and subsidy to encourage economic growth can justify increased public spending if the net outcome is economic growth. However as soon as it came in, labour increased spending. In fact it is the largest real terms increase in day to day spending in 20 years (oh and significantly more than she said before the election). Increase if £23 billion for 24/25 and £39 billion for 25/26. This was mainly paid for by taxing businesses. So the principle of government policy to date is tax business and use that to increase day to day spending. The much needed welfare cuts were binned (those anticipated savings will now be paid by businesses and me). That doesn’t grow an economy - it’s all one way. I don’t understand why you still defend their policies - it’s absolutely obvious they are all over the place. On reform you can take a view on what you think will happen. My point is that nobody really knows how they will do. We know how labour is doing so an assessment of labour is more credible as a matter of fact

I appreciate a vote of no confidence is unfortunately unlikely. The chances would increase if things get really bad. We aren’t talking about reform. They aren’t in government - you can’t speculate about how they will do. We are talking about labour and their terrible economic strategy. We can say how they are doing because they are unfortunately currently in government

I appreciate a vote of no confidence is unfortunately unlikely. The chances would increase if things get really bad. I fully agree they want to see prudence. Reduce public spending! There is vast levels of waste and incompetency. You should focus on dealing with that first, before you start taxing everyone. The public sector is too bloated.

Because they have done so far. Ideologically, the Labour government think taxing anyone who isnt reliant on the state is a sound strategy for reducing the budget deficit and staying within the fiscal rules - any idiot will tell you that it wont work on its own. It needs a long term plan for growth. They have only taxed because they have shown a lack of backbone when it comes to reforming and cutting. We are now, quite quickly, starting to see the outcome of their policies and its a mess. Starmer should change course to some degree, but I doubt he will because his backbenchers have already shown they have clout. There are also external factors, of course, but they have done their fair share to get us to this point.

If they get a grip of the budget they might reduce the damage. Unfortunately they are so blinkered they could bollox it up for us. I have zero confidence in them to manage this properly.

The daily good news Labour story. Increased borrowing caused in part by Labour policy and the markets fear of the decisions they will make in the next budget and how sustainable they are - of course they just want to tax everyone. The only upside to crashing the economy is a possible vote of confidence and no more Labour for 20-30 years. https://bmmagazine.co.uk/news/uk-borrowing-costs-g7-gilt-yields-2025/

So please respond to the point being made then because I think you are just dismissing something from a specialist who has more experience in the field than you. Will these potential policies help to increase housebuilding (Labour policy) and increase economic activity (Labour policy)? Its all good providing flippant one line responses but it doesnt actually address the issue. Here's a response from the Chairman of the Conveyancing Society with 40 years experience but I suspect that he doesnt know how the world works either . https://todaysconveyancer.co.uk/eddie-goldsmith-shares-profound-concerns-property-tax-open-letter/

So do you think that these proposed policies will help to address house building to increase home ownership and encourage economic growth? A alternative view could be that you are dismissing the view of a specialist in their field with no rebuttal. I find it bizarre that people still defend them. The Tories were a shambles but these lot are something else. Their policy approach is incoherent other than they consistently want to tax people more. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/aug/28/property-tax-threat-slow-down-housing-market-uk-agents

More ideas which run contrary to their target of delivering more housing at a substantial level - one of their headline policy approaches. If they bring it in it’s another example of promoting tax over economic growth. Notwithstanding this it will hit labours polling figures in some urban areas (Bristol, Brighton and London) which will be further damaging to any seat numbers they get in the next election. I suspect something else they haven’t considered, as well as increasing the housing costs for local authorities. In turn this will mean government funding for local authorities will need to increase. https://www.lettingagenttoday.co.uk/breaking-news/2025/09/labour-tax-grab-is-final-nail-in-property-investment-coffin/

The problem with Labour is exactly this - they are seen as untrustworthy- they have u-turned on so many policies that people don’t trust them anymore. Thats another reason why Farage will get elected. So it’s fine to say you think he’s untrustworthy but to the man on the street why is Starmer and cabinet any more trustworthy? My opinion is they haven’t demonstrated this. If they had they would be in less trouble in the polls. Indeed the reason that Reform is doing well and Labour not so well isn’t just because of “popularism” it’s because people don’t trust Labour. So they have themselves to blame to some degree. I agree that you need a rationale long term strategy to address the country’s issues. I disagree about needing to tax significantly more as the go to solution, noting that Reeves has already raised taxes for businesses significantly. Even if you did, the problem with this Government is currently they are only interested taxing and not about reforming or cutting, which is also needed. Keeping taxing more and you won’t improve the economy - that’s not the solution. Starmer and Cabinet does not have back bench support for policies that might be unpopular as was shown with their failure to cut welfare costs. Therefore they aren’t making unpopular decisions that are needed….at least yet.

I agree that one of the concerns with Reform is how coherent they will be as a party and whether they can manage in government. They have a lack of people who understand how government works. On the flip side one of the issues with two main political parties is that they have too many “seasoned” politicians that have don’t real world experience. If Reform did secure a substantial number of seats a coalition with the conservatives might be an outcome which at least moves in the right direction to addressing this. I think they might win an outright majority anyway

It’s hardly the most unlikely story. Regardless the NHS does need significant reform to stop it draining money as, if it doesn’t, I can’t see it being sustainable in the longer term. Lots of people working in the NHS say the same about it needing to be reformed. Needs political will and a lack of fear about backlash for doing so.

Before the 2024 election this was a summary of the key issues that the Electorate were concerned with: The cost of living tops the list, with 45% of Britons saying it is one of the most important issues in deciding their vote. Health comes in a distant second, on 34%, followed closely by ‘the economy in general’ on 32%, and then immigration in fourth on 26%. Whilst the Tories lost heavily because they didn’t address these matters, most people’s view is that healthcare is probably the only thing that has improved under Labour (I appreciate they are only one year in). Unless they address economic issues and immigration (which I think they will struggle on both), the electorate will keep looking g for a party that can move the country in the right direction on these matters. Thats not a party political statement it’s just what I expect to happen.

Putting a fiver on them going down then😆

You would have made a much more rationale response than normal, if that was the case.😉

@badgerx16 why are you laughing? I wasn’t blaming Labour - I said they are in trouble over it but they had no choice but to defend their position.

Politically the Bell Hotel issue is a nightmare for Labour. They had to defend the position as there is no alternative for relocating the asylum seekers got removed from hotels. However, to most people, despite what Starmer has says, it looks like he and his cabinet has sent the Home Office out to defend asylum seekers over locals and won. This is going to be a big problem for him that is going to rumble on the more and more media attention this gets.