The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[AlexLaw76]

1 hour ago, aintforever said:

I think the difference is you can be pretty sure Labour are cutting benefits because there is little choice, not for ideological reasons. They are traditionally the party that tends to hand out too much IMO, it’s really not hard to understand why people react to the two parties differently.

Most decisions are a choice

Edited Wednesday at 16:08 by AlexLaw76

[aintforever]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Most decisions are a choice

Yeah of course, we all know the Tories tend to choose lower tax and lower spending on benefits, Labour generally choose to go the other way.

[AlexLaw76]

2 hours ago, aintforever said:

Yeah of course, we all know the Tories tend to choose lower tax and lower spending on benefits, Labour generally choose to go the other way.

So labour cutting benefits is a political choice. But a nice and cuddly one

thanks for understanding 

[Gloucester Saint]

Some illustration of the changes in pattern of the welfare budget. The UK is not yet an outlier within the G7 or across the EU but the projections by 2030 could make us so, hence the previous and current government trying to tame it.

https://www.independent.co.uk/politics/benefits-pip-welfare-numbers-reeves-spring-statement-b2721711.html

There needs to be more carrot though and less cliff edges to get people with disabilities/neurodiversities and mental health conditions back into sustained and decent work/careers. More coaching for interviews and the NI increases tapered for charities, SMEs, Education providers. 

[whelk]

55 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

So labour cutting benefits is a political choice. But a nice and cuddly one

thanks for understanding 

Cutting benefits to a massively over pampered demographic. &nbsp
Where is the help for youngsters trying to survive on a fucking lot less than 35k?

Convenient  for opposition to have a go at callous cuts and the gammon wailing about freezing pensionersbut triple lock means most of pensioners are being massively subsidised. Stop being the victim

Edited Wednesday at 20:08 by whelk

[aintforever]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

So labour cutting benefits is a political choice. But a nice and cuddly one

thanks for understanding 

‘Nice and cuddly’ what are you on about? We all know that Labour are the party that love to blow all our hard-earned tax money on benefits for scroungers. I doubt Labour enjoyed cutting benefits any more than the last Tory government enjoyed raising our taxes.

[east-stand-nic]

18 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

So labour cutting benefits is a political choice. But a nice and cuddly one

thanks for understanding 

You can never win with left leaning people. It is a derangement syndrome. Like Trump or Musk or Farage. They could clean up world wars, end poverty and cure cancer and people on here would still say things like 'Ah but....' or, 'yeah in-spite of them....' etc.They will never say a bad word about the ones they like and support, and likewise will never say a good word about those they opposed and dislike. It is a childish, narrow minded blinkered outlook and a big reason why the world is in such a mess. 

[Turkish]

22 hours ago, aintforever said:

I think the difference is you can be pretty sure Labour are cutting benefits because there is little choice, not for ideological reasons. They are traditionally the party that tends to hand out too much IMO, it’s really not hard to understand why people react to the two parties differently.

Fucking laughable. Labour have no choice, Tories just do it because theyre cunts. Exactly my point.  I rest my case. Thanks for proving it.

Edited Thursday at 14:02 by Turkish

[whelk]

3 hours ago, east-stand-nic said:

You can never win with left leaning people. It is a derangement syndrome. Like Trump or Musk or Farage. They could clean up world wars, end poverty and cure cancer and people on here would still say things like 'Ah but....' or, 'yeah in-spite of them....' etc.They will never say a bad word about the ones they like and support, and likewise will never say a good word about those they opposed and dislike. It is a childish, narrow minded blinkered outlook and a big reason why the world is in such a mess. 

You sound like a repetitive paranoid old git. Arguing against opinions of a group you have created for convenience. You and SOG are kindred spirits at different ends of spectrum.

[east-stand-nic]

1 hour ago, whelk said:

You sound like a repetitive paranoid old git. Arguing against opinions of a group you have created for convenience. You and SOG are kindred spirits at different ends of spectrum.

So, tell me what I say is incorrect?

[egg]

16 minutes ago, east-stand-nic said:

So, tell me what I say is incorrect?

To begin with:

"You can never win with left leaning people. It is a derangement syndrome. Like Trump or Musk or Farage. They could clean up world wars, end poverty and cure cancer and people on here would still say things like 'Ah but....' or, 'yeah in-spite of them....' etc.They will never say a bad word about the ones they like and support, and likewise will never say a good word about those they opposed and dislike. It is a childish, narrow minded blinkered outlook and a big reason why the world is in such a mess".

[Gloucester Saint]

24 minutes ago, east-stand-nic said:

So, tell me what I say is incorrect?

The inverse would be: You can never win with right-leaning people. Even if left-leaning parties brokered peace in Northern Ireland, funded huge breakthroughs in cancer research, and introduced a national minimum wage lasting 28 years to date, right wingers and their press would never give them any acknowledgement. It is a childish and myopic outlook.

See, easy to write one-eyed crap isn’t it?

[Lord Duckhunter]

[egg]

15 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

That was a daft statement from a woman who did many a daft thing. We, as a nation, are still suffering from her decisions. Great lady, my arse. 

[Gloucester Saint]

25 minutes ago, egg said:

That was a daft statement from a woman who did many a daft thing. We, as a nation, are still suffering from her decisions. Great lady, my arse. 

She did some good things - trade Union reform - and some stupid things eg privatisation of utilities (not trains though, that was Major). Like most PMs. Her and Blair are miles ahead of what we have today in terms of leadership but they didn’t have to deal with Trump, pandemics etc, and both had reliable transatlantic partners. 

[egg]

28 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

She did some good things - trade Union reform - and some stupid things eg privatisation of utilities (not trains though, that was Major). Like most PMs. Her and Blair are miles ahead of what we have today in terms of leadership but they didn’t have to deal with Trump, pandemics etc, and both had reliable transatlantic partners. 

Too many awful things for me - industry, her stance re the ANC, s.28, mines/steel, social housing sell off,  gas/water privatisation, poll tax etc, etc. 

We're all paying the price for a lot of that now. 

[CB Fry]

7 hours ago, east-stand-nic said:

You can never win with left leaning people. It is a derangement syndrome. Like Trump or Musk or Farage. They could clean up world wars, end poverty and cure cancer and people on here would still say things like 'Ah but....' or, 'yeah in-spite of them....' etc.They will never say a bad word about the ones they like and support, and likewise will never say a good word about those they opposed and dislike. It is a childish, narrow minded blinkered outlook and a big reason why the world is in such a mess. 

You're a fucking deranged idiot.

[aintforever]

16 hours ago, Turkish said:

Fucking laughable. Labour have no choice, Tories just do it because theyre cunts. Exactly my point.  I rest my case. Thanks for proving it.

I knew you would miss the point.  

 

[Turkish]

30 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I knew you would miss the point.  

 

Except I didnt, it was just yet another crap one from the court jester of saintsweb

 

[aintforever]

4 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Except I didnt, it was just yet another crap one from the court jester of saintsweb

 

It's only you and mad Nic that don't seem to understand the difference in the fundamental ideologies of the two main parties.

Labour will always get more slack when cutting benefits, just like the Tories do when they have to raise taxes. Sunak had to raise taxes when he was PM, just like Labour have to make cuts now.  

 

[Turkish]

46 minutes ago, aintforever said:

It's only you and mad Nic that don't seem to understand the difference in the fundamental ideologies of the two main parties.

Labour will always get more slack when cutting benefits, just like the Tories do when they have to raise taxes. Sunak had to raise taxes when he was PM, just like Labour have to make cuts now.  

 

Oh i do understand

Labour = lovely guys who care about every single person and only take money away from them when there's no choice, apart from the winter fuel allowance of course. But they were very upset peoples nans died from hypothermia. 

Tories = cunts who take from the poor and give to their rich mates. They would happily let your nan die from hypothermia whilst laughing about it

[SotonianWill]

15 hours ago, egg said:

Too many awful things for me - industry, her stance re the ANC, s.28, mines/steel, social housing sell off,  gas/water privatisation, poll tax etc, etc. 

We're all paying the price for a lot of that now. 

 

Whether we’re paying the price is up and down.

 

Most of these would be good points if only there hadn’t been governments between 1990 and today. To say Thatcher is why this country is in the sh1t is lazy. Council housing, as one of example: why did the Labour govt of Blair build less stock per year than even Thatcher? They kept the right to buy policy intact, despite being less generous with grants. 

 

Regarding the ANC and S. 28, I don’t see the relevance today. More mines were shut under Wilson, at least double that of Thatcher, with many, similar to the 80s, not given redeployment. 

 

British steel has always been uncompetitive. I support nationalisation with a view to a sunset clause but see it through security - but generally, how is continually proving up failing subsidised business a great thing in your eyes? 

 

Water privatisation we’re feeling the force of now. Once again govts since Thatcher should’ve done more. The poll tax is the big one, which, amongst other factors, has certainly made the union weaker. But devolution to a certain extent isn’t a bad thing. 

 

To blame Thatcher solely for all troubles is lazy oversimplification and a wool over the eyes treatment to the previous 40 years. 

[revolution saint]

3 minutes ago, SotonianWill said:

 

Whether we’re paying the price is up and down.

 

Most of these would be good points if only there hadn’t been governments between 1990 and today. To say Thatcher is why this country is in the sh1t is lazy. Council housing, as one of example: why did the Labour govt of Blair build less stock per year than even Thatcher? They kept the right to buy policy intact, despite being less generous with grants. 

 

Regarding the ANC and S. 28, I don’t see the relevance today. More mines were shut under Wilson, at least double that of Thatcher, with many, similar to the 80s, not given redeployment. 

 

British steel has always been uncompetitive. I support nationalisation with a view to a sunset clause but see it through security - but generally, how is continually proving up failing subsidised business a great thing in your eyes? 

 

Water privatisation we’re feeling the force of now. Once again govts since Thatcher should’ve done more. The poll tax is the big one, which, amongst other factors, has certainly made the union weaker. But devolution to a certain extent isn’t a bad thing. 

 

To blame Thatcher solely for all troubles is lazy oversimplification and a wool over the eyes treatment to the previous 40 years. 

Agree that subsequent governments should have done more however just because they haven't doesn't absolve Thatcher from the mistakes she made. 

[egg]

1 hour ago, SotonianWill said:

 

Whether we’re paying the price is up and down.

 

Most of these would be good points if only there hadn’t been governments between 1990 and today. To say Thatcher is why this country is in the sh1t is lazy. Council housing, as one of example: why did the Labour govt of Blair build less stock per year than even Thatcher? They kept the right to buy policy intact, despite being less generous with grants. 

 

Regarding the ANC and S. 28, I don’t see the relevance today. More mines were shut under Wilson, at least double that of Thatcher, with many, similar to the 80s, not given redeployment. 

 

British steel has always been uncompetitive. I support nationalisation with a view to a sunset clause but see it through security - but generally, how is continually proving up failing subsidised business a great thing in your eyes? 

 

Water privatisation we’re feeling the force of now. Once again govts since Thatcher should’ve done more. The poll tax is the big one, which, amongst other factors, has certainly made the union weaker. But devolution to a certain extent isn’t a bad thing. 

 

To blame Thatcher solely for all troubles is lazy oversimplification and a wool over the eyes treatment to the previous 40 years. 

We are paying the price for the sell off of council houses. Thatchers government did not replenish the stock, and seeking to blame subsequent governments for failing to rectify the damage caused, is overly generous to that government for the initial policy. Fast forward all these years, and we have rampant house and rental prices flowing from a lack of affordable and social housing. We wouldn't be in such a mess of it wasn't for that policy. 

Gas. It's madness that we see our gas go into private hands then rely on shipping or piping it in at commercial prices. That situation should never have come about. 

We plainly need steel for industry and more importantly, security. That we've had to steal a plant back from Chinese ownership says it all. Then coal. We need it to operate the steelworks. We don't have enough, so again are a hostage to fortune. That's all ignoring that we need to be energy self sufficient, and coal plays a part on that. 

Losing those industries to private ownership has left us horribly exposed. We're an island nation, and cannot rely on external sources for vitals in times of strife.

Water we kind of agree on, but again you blame others for not being able (or willing, granted) to row back from another stupid Thatcher concept. Simply, the privatisation should never have happened. 

I don't care if those basic and essential services were loss making. They're vital. 

S.28 and ANC of course aren't relevant today, ditto poll tax,  but they were awful policies that were indicative of the woman. 

 

[east-stand-nic]

22 hours ago, Turkish said:

Oh i do understand

Labour = lovely guys who care about every single person and only take money away from them when there's no choice, apart from the winter fuel allowance of course. But they were very upset peoples nans died from hypothermia. 

Tories = cunts who take from the poor and give to their rich mates. They would happily let your nan die from hypothermia whilst laughing about it

I recall the old sayings on here and in pubs etc...it went something like this. I see the Tory scum are taking money from the poor again. Why the hell don't they just tax their rick pals so the pensioners don't freeze in winter.

I wonder, why doesn't Labour Tax their rich pals and reinstate the winter fuel allowance? 

Edited yesterday at 06:51 by east-stand-nic
spelling

[aintforever]

2 hours ago, east-stand-nic said:

I recall the old sayings on here and in pubs etc...it went something like this. I see the Tory scum are taking money from the poor again. Why the hell don't they just tax their rick pals so the pensioners don't freeze in winter.

I wonder, why doesn't Labour Tax their rich pals and reinstate the winter fuel allowance? 

They have already raised the income threshold to 35K - do pensioners on more than that really need state handouts?

I agree they should tax the rich more, problem is when Labour do it they are cunts for stealing our hard earned cash and handing it out to lazy scroungers, if the Tories do it it’s because they have no choice.

[tdmickey3]

4 hours ago, east-stand-nic said:

I recall the old sayings on here and in pubs etc...it went something like this. I see the Tory scum are taking money from the poor again. Why the hell don't they just tax their rick pals so the pensioners don't freeze in winter.

I wonder, why doesn't Labour Tax their rich pals and reinstate the winter fuel allowance? 

Who is rick

[Lord Duckhunter]

In opposition, Reeves kept quoting the IFS & Paul Johnson in particular, especially when it came to Kwasi Kwarteng. I wonder what she’ll make of his assessment of her spending review. He’s called it; “the most incomprehensible speech I’ve ever heard from a chancellor’… 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

2 hours ago, tdmickey3 said:

Who is rick

It was supposed to read "Rik"

[hypochondriac]

Oh dear. Look like Labour will have difficulty continuing to stall this. There could be some uncomfortable findings quite close to home:

https://www.thetimes.com/article/654cb11b-da3c-48d2-9ddf-31ac6d2c5c81?shareToken=e3d2d3a88e68a880a8779df7d0102ffe

[Gloucester Saint]

7 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

In opposition, Reeves kept quoting the IFS & Paul Johnson in particular, especially when it came to Kwasi Kwarteng. I wonder what she’ll make of his assessment of her spending review. He’s called it; “the most incomprehensible speech I’ve ever heard from a chancellor’… 

I’m not a fan of Reeves at all and she’s not using her abacus very well. But at least she’s got one, let’s hear your views on the following from Reform  https://ifs.org.uk/news/response-mornings-reform-uk-policy-announcements

Do you agree with Farage or is he even more economically incompetent than Truss? (Whom he praised last week). Do clarify for us how Reform make any economic sense, if you can.

To most people, they look like they haven’t got a clue economically beyond hating on immigrants. And putting 19 year old racists in charge of Leicestershire adult social care.

I’ve seen enough of MAGA US to know it’s a total disaster economically and pledging to delete to diversity officers which don’t exist in councils they now lead copying the flop that is DOGE isn’t going to cut the mustard I’m afraid.

Let’s see your party step up to the plate now. The government are crap, let’s hear the alternative then, But judging on the resignations and back-tracks so far, I’m not confident. You want power, pressure is on to prove yourselves. Let’s see how you lot perform in local government. We are watching. Signs are not encouraging so far. 

Edited 18 hours ago by Gloucester Saint

[swannymere]

On 12/06/2025 at 14:55, east-stand-nic said:

You can never win with left leaning people. It is a derangement syndrome. Like Trump or Musk or Farage. They could clean up world wars, end poverty and cure cancer and people on here would still say things like 'Ah but....' or, 'yeah in-spite of them....' etc.They will never say a bad word about the ones they like and support, and likewise will never say a good word about those they opposed and dislike. It is a childish, narrow minded blinkered outlook and a big reason why the world is in such a mess. 

I'm fairly centrist but blaming the Labour for 14 years of Tory rule is fantastical. Throwing in words like derangement syndrome doesn't help your argument, it just shows who you watch, read and listen to, which isn't a flex; it the other side of the far left coin.

[east-stand-nic]

1 hour ago, swannymere said:

I'm fairly centrist but blaming the Labour for 14 years of Tory rule is fantastical. Throwing in words like derangement syndrome doesn't help your argument, it just shows who you watch, read and listen to, which isn't a flex; it the other side of the far left coin.

You have completely missed my point. Further more you seem to have somehow decided I am not in anyway blaming the Tories. If you have a read you will see I have stated countless times on this forum that I believe there are both the same. Neither party does anything for the average working person. They look after the rich people and corporations. Now read my post again and you will see I am 100% correct.

 

 

[Gloucester Saint]

54 minutes ago, east-stand-nic said:

You have completely missed my point. Further more you seem to have somehow decided I am not in anyway blaming the Tories. If you have a read you will see I have stated countless times on this forum that I believe there are both the same. Neither party does anything for the average working person. They look after the rich people and corporations. Now read my post again and you will see I am 100% correct.

 

 

The donations largely from tax havens hardly suggests Reform is interests in the working man (or woman) either https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/dark-money-investigations/reform-uk-funders-nigel-farage-5-million-donations-fossil-fuels-tax-havens/

A bit too reliant on David Sainsbury but otherwise rather cleaner https://donation.watch/en/unitedkingdom/party/LIBDEMS/donors

[swannymere]

1 hour ago, east-stand-nic said:

You have completely missed my point. Further more you seem to have somehow decided I am not in anyway blaming the Tories. If you have a read you will see I have stated countless times on this forum that I believe there are both the same. Neither party does anything for the average working person. They look after the rich people and corporations. Now read my post again and you will see I am 100% correct.

 

 

Are you advocating for reform? 

[AlexLaw76]

17 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

In opposition, Reeves kept quoting the IFS & Paul Johnson in particular, especially when it came to Kwasi Kwarteng. I wonder what she’ll make of his assessment of her spending review. He’s called it; “the most incomprehensible speech I’ve ever heard from a chancellor’… 

He must be far right these days 

[Gloucester Saint]

36 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

He must be far right these days 

IFS is equally critical of all parties when they go into fantasy/denial, just like Private Eye are in exposing corruption.

https://ifs.org.uk/news/response-mornings-reform-uk-policy-announcements

https://ifs.org.uk/articles/spring-budget-2024-initial-ifs-response

https://ifs.org.uk/articles/liberal-democrat-manifesto-reaction

[AlexLaw76]

17 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Oh dear. Look like Labour will have difficulty continuing to stall this. There could be some uncomfortable findings quite close to home:

https://www.thetimes.com/article/654cb11b-da3c-48d2-9ddf-31ac6d2c5c81?shareToken=e3d2d3a88e68a880a8779df7d0102ffe

another Far Right activity about to take place.

Im sure the scope of any inquiry will be significantly 'limited'

[east-stand-nic]

14 hours ago, swannymere said:

Are you advocating for reform? 

I am stating very very clearly on the Reform thread that it is MADNESS to continue to vote for labour or Tory as neither of them cares a shit about the average person, and serve only their rich masters. If it is thick to vote for change in the face of two others who have a totally 100% proven track record of not giving a shit, then it is also utter madness to carry on with Lab and Con and expect anything different. We must have REAL change or things will remain as they are and I expect, get much worse. 

[Wiggles31]

2 hours ago, east-stand-nic said:

I am stating very very clearly on the Reform thread that it is MADNESS to continue to vote for labour or Tory as neither of them cares a shit about the average person, and serve only their rich masters. If it is thick to vote for change in the face of two others who have a totally 100% proven track record of not giving a shit, then it is also utter madness to carry on with Lab and Con and expect anything different. We must have REAL change or things will remain as they are and I expect, get much worse. 

So your voting for the Greens then?

[Holmes_and_Watson]

25 minutes ago, Wiggles31 said:

So your voting for the Greens then?

Trent as PM and Bellingham as chancellor. REAL change.