The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[Sir Ralph]

4 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Where have I supported them? Stupid, and a liar. Great combo.

So what’s your opinion? As I’m stupid and you’re really clever you tell me how the government should have run the previous and upcoming budget from a tax and spending cut perspective? 

[egg]

9 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

You just don’t like my responses and you still haven’t responded to my question. This is circular…

 

you: provide me an awnser

me: here’s the response

you: I don’t agree

me: ok answer my question

you: ignore

You all want to ask questions but never answer them yourselves

It's you that is calling for cuts. It's you that can't say what you want to see cut. It's not for me to answer for you, it doesn't work like that. Although you haven't actually asked me anything, but I'm out of here so don't bother asking me anything now. 

[Farmer Saint]

4 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

So what’s your opinion? As I’m stupid and you’re really clever you tell me how the government should have run the previous and upcoming budget from a tax and spending cut perspective? 

Just show me where I was supporting them first or are you lying, again?

Edited Tuesday at 21:44 by Farmer Saint

[Sir Ralph]

9 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Just show me where I was supporting them first or are you lying, again.

In these latest posts I don’t think you said you explicitly supported them. Whilst not explicit, your suggestion is that the governments approach to not reducing spending is justifiable. Your previous posts said you supported their pro tax position actually, maybe you don’t remember that. Please respond to my question then. Don’t dodge it again

Edited Tuesday at 21:54 by Sir Ralph

[Sir Ralph]

10 hours ago, egg said:

It's you that is calling for cuts. It's you that can't say what you want to see cut. It's not for me to answer for you, it doesn't work like that. Although you haven't actually asked me anything, but I'm out of here so don't bother asking me anything now. 

I just asked your mate anyway. Feel free or dodge it. Again easy to ask but to concede a position is always more difficult. So far I’ve replied to your questions, you haven’t liked my replies and then neither of you have responded to my questions just the “I’m not the government”. Don’t hide behind that give an opinion

All you are doing is proving my point that there is no plan to reduce spending only an aspiration to increase taxes which was the point I made originally so thanks

Edited Wednesday at 08:02 by Sir Ralph

[Farmer Saint]

11 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

I don’t think you said you supported them. Whilst not explicit, your suggestion is that the governments approach to not reducing spending is justifiable. Please respond to my question then. Don’t dodge it again

You want my genuine thoughts? Get the benefits bill through, cancel the triple lock, put the higher rate of tax up to 47%, 2% wealth tax over £10m (if workable), re-establish the NI cuts, postpone electric car mandate for a further 10 years, create a national care service for nursing homes to clear NHS beds, 5 years systems and process improvement analysis of the NHS, look at what we can do to get back into the single market.

Country before party.

By the way, respond if you want, but I couldn't give two shiny fucks on your opinion of the above as you've proven yourself too far out of your depth. You're going back on ignore because again you've lied to try to prove a point.

Edited Tuesday at 21:58 by Farmer Saint

[Sir Ralph]

3 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

You want my genuine thoughts? Get the benefits bill through, cancel the triple lock, put the higher rate of tax up to 47%, 2% wealth tax over £10m (if workable), re-establish the NI cuts, postpone electric car mandate for a further 10 years, create a national care service for nursing homes to clear NHS beds, 5 years systems and process improvement analysis of the NHS, look at what we can do to get back into the single market.

Country before party.

I agree with some of this but disagree with other parts such as higher rate of tax, wealth tax and the single market would be subject to what deal we could strike (but agree in principle). I think there are government savings before those things I’ve mentioned above (or in addition) that should be considered.
 

Notice I haven’t asked you full blown details or dossier on any of this just understood the principle of it because, like me, you don’t have full access to government figures in the first instance. You can if you want to but I’m respectfully pointing out that your stance is just as qualified as mine.

The question posed to me was about cuts which is what I responded to.
 

You’re overall view more balanced than I thought you were.

Edited Wednesday at 01:22 by Sir Ralph

[Sir Ralph]

2 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

You want my genuine thoughts? Get the benefits bill through, cancel the triple lock, put the higher rate of tax up to 47%, 2% wealth tax over £10m (if workable), re-establish the NI cuts, postpone electric car mandate for a further 10 years, create a national care service for nursing homes to clear NHS beds, 5 years systems and process improvement analysis of the NHS, look at what we can do to get back into the single market.

Country before party.

By the way, respond if you want, but I couldn't give two shiny fucks on your opinion of the above as you've proven yourself too far out of your depth. You're going back on ignore because again you've lied to try to prove a point.

Oh dear you then added the last para. after I replied. For a moment (the only moment so far in any of our interactions) I respected your balance. I didn’t ask for dossier on the points I disagreed with which was frankly ludicrous (unlike you) but I should have done in hindsight. My responses to a specific question are much more specific than your replies to  more general questions. 

Edited Wednesday at 00:30 by Sir Ralph

[trousers]

If people keep respecting others' opinions as much as this then this thread could well reach 100 pages before Christmas...

[Sir Ralph]

7 hours ago, trousers said:

If people keep respecting others' opinions as much as this then this thread could well reach 100 pages before Christmas...

😂

Edited Wednesday at 06:32 by Sir Ralph

[Sir Ralph]

.

Edited Tuesday at 23:34 by Sir Ralph

[rallyboy]

Starmer has made mistakes and failed to address some key issues, he hasn't made the sweeping changes the country needed and has done some things that have managed to annoy everyone....

But, and I'm reluctant to chuck in positivity because no forum needs that especially this one - around my way there have been noticeable improvements in policing, I have managed to get a GP appointment after trying and giving up over seven years, and now we hear plans to include some sensible life skills as topics in schools.

It might be modest change and there's much to do in other areas so don't tell anyone, but it feels a little bit like progress...

[sadoldgit]

There have been a number of positives since Labour were elected, not enough mind you, but some all the same. Labour’s problem is that they have been drowned out by the right wing media who jump on every misstep, perceived or otherwise, and they also haven’t been very good so far at selling their good news.

As with Brexit, Farage is grabbing the headlines and setting the agenda. The whole small boats/immigration debacle, whilst an issue, isn’t one of the biggest issues that this country faces. Starmer and his cabinet have been too cautious and too wary of Farage so far. The promises to build 1.5 million homes and not to raise taxes were also mistakes and never likely to be kept. 
Taxes will need to be raised to pay for the damage caused by Brexit. It is a shame that they have only just realised that they need to be talking about that.

[Lord Duckhunter]

3 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

The promises to build 1.5 million homes and not to raise taxes were also mistakes and never likely to be kept. 

In other words, lies.

New broom. 😂😂

[AlexLaw76]

4 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

There have been a number of positives since Labour were elected, not enough mind you, but some all the same. Labour’s problem is that they have been drowned out by the right wing media who jump on every misstep, perceived or otherwise, and they also haven’t been very good so far at selling their good news.

As with Brexit, Farage is grabbing the headlines and setting the agenda. The whole small boats/immigration debacle, whilst an issue, isn’t one of the biggest issues that this country faces. Starmer and his cabinet have been too cautious and too wary of Farage so far. The promises to build 1.5 million homes and not to raise taxes were also mistakes and never likely to be kept. 
Taxes will need to be raised to pay for the damage caused by Brexit. It is a shame that they have only just realised that they need to be talking about that.

This government are habitual liars.

They just cannot help it. I bet if they were Tory's with the exact same record, your tone would be unrecognisable in comparison.

Edited Wednesday at 12:47 by AlexLaw76

[tdmickey3]

44 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

This government are habitual liars.

They just cannot help it. I bet if they were Tory's with the exact same record, your tone would be unrecognisable in comparison.

In fairness so were the Tories

[AlexLaw76]

1 hour ago, tdmickey3 said:

In fairness so were the Tories

Yep, and partly why they will be out of overall control for a generation. This lot were supposed to be so much better, government in waiting, the adults in the room and all that.

I mean, the PM and the Chancellor were on record less than a month ago claiming there would be no more tax rises. 

Edited Wednesday at 15:09 by AlexLaw76

[egg]

1 hour ago, tdmickey3 said:

In fairness so were the Tories

I wouldn't necessarily tar them with the same brush. There's a difference between pledges that can't be honoured and blatant dishonesty. 

[iansums]

9 hours ago, sadoldgit said:
Taxes will need to be raised to pay for the damage caused by Brexit. It is a shame that they have only just realised that they need to be talking about that.

No, Covid and more specifically furlough and then the cost of living crisis caused by Covid and then the Ukraine war have caused far more economic damage than Brexit IMO. Here’s some ideas:

Stop free prescriptions at the age of 60 and bring it in line with retirement age.

Charge at least £10 for a GP appointment.

Get rid of all DEI positions in the public sector.

Cut back where possible all non essential management roles in the NHS. Streeting is already doing this so fair play to him.

I’d like to see a complete overhaul and simplification of the tax system but I very much doubt it will happen in my lifetime 

[Lord Duckhunter]

3 hours ago, egg said:

There's a difference between pledges that can't be honoured and blatant dishonesty. 

It was blatantly dishonest to claim they wouldn’t raise taxes, apart from the ones mapped out in the manifesto . Sunak banged on about it over and over, and they denied it over and over. They also lied when they said they wouldn’t be back for more, only 1 year go. Blatant dishonesty,  and you’re embarrassing yourself by trying to claim it’s  “pledges that can’t be honoured”. 

[whelk]

31 minutes ago, iansums said:

Get rid of all DEI positions in the public sector

With that saving we could surely knock 5p off income tax and build some extra hospitals 

[Farmer Saint]

1 hour ago, iansums said:

No, Covid and more specifically furlough and then the cost of living crisis caused by Covid and then the Ukraine war have caused far more economic damage than Brexit IMO. Here’s some ideas:

Stop free prescriptions at the age of 60 and bring it in line with retirement age.

Charge at least £10 for a GP appointment.

Get rid of all DEI positions in the public sector.

Cut back where possible all non essential management roles in the NHS. Streeting is already doing this so fair play to him.

I’d like to see a complete overhaul and simplification of the tax system but I very much doubt it will happen in my lifetime 

Charge £10 for a missed appointment maybe, but you can't charge for doctors appointments - people will die unnecessarily.

[iansums]

1 hour ago, Farmer Saint said:

Charge £10 for a missed appointment maybe, but you can't charge for doctors appointments - people will die unnecessarily.

Must be loads dying in Ireland then, they charge 50 Euros.

[Farmer Saint]

14 minutes ago, iansums said:

Must be loads dying in Ireland then, they charge 50 Euros.

Very possibly.

[Sir Ralph]

1 hour ago, iansums said:

Must be loads dying in Ireland then, they charge 50 Euros.

The band of brothers will shit over anyone’s idea to reduce tax. Ask them why the government isn’t reviewing or hasn’t cut tax and they can’t answer. Don’t waste your time

[whelk]

19 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

The band of brothers will shit over anyone’s idea to reduce tax. Ask them why the government isn’t reviewing or hasn’t cut tax and they can’t answer. Don’t waste your time

It’s not a band of brothers, you are just a bit of a simpleton. Too dim to understand the complexities. Cut spending and cut tax yeah man so easy. 

[Sir Ralph]

8 minutes ago, whelk said:

It’s not a band of brothers, you are just a bit of a simpleton. Too dim to understand the complexities. Cut spending and cut tax yeah man so easy. 

Course it’s not.
Nobody responded to my question of yesterday as to why the government hasn’t undertaken any spending cuts. You will do the same

Edited Wednesday at 22:23 by Sir Ralph

[whelk]

1 minute ago, Sir Ralph said:

Course it’s not. The way you work together is very sweet.

You’ve always got your Nic

[Sir Ralph]

5 minutes ago, whelk said:

You’ve always got your Nic

Yep question ignored well done. You continue to prove me right which I’m grateful for. Nothing, nada. Blind partisan support for the shitest government in my lifetime 

Edited Wednesday at 22:29 by Sir Ralph

[tdmickey3]

2 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

Charge £10 for a missed appointment maybe, but you can't charge for doctors appointments - people will die unnecessarily.

Vote Farage for insurance based health care that will sort it

[whelk]

1 minute ago, Sir Ralph said:

Yep question ignored well done. You continue to prove me right which I’m grateful for

You edited and put a question in afterwards, well done. You are clueless and haven’t paid attention to anything, just keep spouting your own simplistic ideology which is comically naive. You missed 12 years of austerity. Maybe cut the police? Get rid of more probation officers. Any comments about the wisdom of outsourcing probation? Must have saved the tax payers loads? 

[Sir Ralph]

7 minutes ago, whelk said:

You edited and put a question in afterwards, well done. You are clueless and haven’t paid attention to anything, just keep spouting your own simplistic ideology which is comically naive. You missed 12 years of austerity. Maybe cut the police? Get rid of more probation officers. Any comments about the wisdom of outsourcing probation? Must have saved the tax payers loads? 

You haven’t responded to the question as to why the government only wants to tax people and there has been no consideration to reducing spending. WHY? Don’t digress. You and none of your mates can answer this. 
 

let me answer it for you….they are scared and can’t reduce spending because there are too many socialist MPs who won’t allow them to. They would prefer to maintain the current level of government wastage in some quarters rather than being “unpopular” to those on the gravy train and propose a balanced budget. I also have evidence in the inability to cut welfare. Happy to be wrong but you need to explain why no spending cuts are being considered.

Edited Wednesday at 22:38 by Sir Ralph

[whelk]

4 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

maintain state interference in people’s lives

lol, now you sound a little deranged. What interference worries you? Run to the hills and take your beans and guns with you

[Sir Ralph]

8 hours ago, whelk said:

lol, now you sound a little deranged. What interference worries you? Run to the hills and take your beans and guns with you

I actually edited that but socialist governments do increase state intervention by their very nature. I can explain that to you if you want but only after the below
 

Don’t focus on that comment - please answer my key point. Again digressing from the point in hand. I’ve given you the answer that you can agree to or instead give me an alternative justification. It’s disappointing that nobody can explain it

Edited 18 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[Sir Ralph]

21 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

Vote Farage for insurance based health care that will sort it

So what’s your plan for saving the NHS in the long run? So far all government plans are to countinue blindly ploughing billions in - do you think that’s sustainable in the long run? What did reform actually say about insurance based health care by the way?

Edited Wednesday at 22:51 by Sir Ralph

[tdmickey3]

9 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

So what’s your plan for saving the NHS in the long run? So far all government plans are to countinue blindly ploughing billions in - do you think that’s sustainable in the long run? What did reform actually say about insurance based health care by the way?

I don't have a plan, its not my job but if you and the other reform voting nutters think the answer is insurance based, I guess you have little regard for those who will never be able to afford it

[Sir Ralph]

8 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

I don't have a plan, its not my job but if you and the other reform voting nutters think the answer is insurance based, I guess you have little regard for those who will never be able to afford it

Easy to criticise if you have no alternative isn’t it. Keep ploughing in the billions then

[whelk]

10 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Easy to criticise if you have no alternative isn’t it. Keep ploughing in the billions then

Just to be clear as you seem to flip flop. You think Streeting is not trying to reform or make the NHS more efficient just ‘blindly ploughing’ in billions?

[badgerx16]

17 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Easy to criticise if you have no alternative isn’t it. Keep ploughing in the billions then

The US health care system costs twice as much per capita thsn the NHS.

[whelk]

I would have thought that Thai laughing boy would want more money for the NHS given he was whining like a bitch about his food condition - so many come back to take advantage of free health care. Or maybe his bloated charity wage allows the lazy parasite Thai health care?

[Sir Ralph]

6 minutes ago, whelk said:

Just to be clear as you seem to flip flop. You think Streeting is not trying to reform or make the NHS more efficient just ‘blindly ploughing’ in billions?

Incorrect. @tdmickey3 criticised reform policy and I asked him what his alternative would be. He couldn’t respond so the point was don’t criticise if you don’t have an alternative to put forward. I actually think streeting comes across as one of the few competent ministers.

you haven’t responded to my question about spending cuts though

[badgerx16]

The people who are most vociferous about insurance based health care are those with a vested financial interest in large insurance companies.

[whelk]

2 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

you haven’t responded to my question about spending cuts though

I think we drastically need to cut the number of customs and immigration officers. Also massively reduce our police force and reduce the size of the army and how much we give MoD. While we are at it, councils should stop putting street lights on - that electric bill is costing council tax payers. Maybe prison officers too. I have heard far too many and they don’t know what to do with themselves

[badgerx16]

Nic is on overdrive this morning.

Caffeine overdose ? Meds run out ?

Edited 16 hours ago by badgerx16

[whelk]

2 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Nic is on overdrive this morning.

Caffeine overdose ? Meds run out ?

So much enthusiasm and no ability to post. Must be hard for him

[Sir Ralph]

18 minutes ago, whelk said:

I think we drastically need to cut the number of customs and immigration officers. Also massively reduce our police force and reduce the size of the army and how much we give MoD. While we are at it, councils should stop putting street lights on - that electric bill is costing council tax payers. Maybe prison officers too. I have heard far too many and they don’t know what to do with themselves

So you can’t answer it still. My reason remains the only reasonable explanation on the table in relation to this clinically useless government and why they won’t consider spending cuts. Thanks

Edited 16 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[AlexLaw76]

Talking of waste, the MoD is ridiculous.

Spending is going up, yet capability and numbers continue to spiral. Unbelievable wasteful, raft of terrible decisions, and focus in the wrong areas at times.

[whelk]

1 minute ago, Sir Ralph said:

So you can’t answer it still

What is it with you? My views are littered over a number of threads and not going to endlessly repeat myself to your beck and call. You obviously delight in thinking you have some sort of gotcha that has stumped everyone. You have no solutions to social care, the huge demand on health and so many other issues that western society has to tackle. Oh hang on, cut taxes, cut spending. Eureka!

[whelk]

Just now, AlexLaw76 said:

Talking of waste, the MoD is ridiculous.

Spending is going up, yet capability and numbers continue to spiral. Unbelievable wasteful, raft of terrible decisions, and focus in the wrong areas at times.

Actually totally agree given my limited experience of some lazy wasters stealing a living from the public purse

[Sir Ralph]

8 minutes ago, whelk said:

What is it with you? My views are littered over a number of threads and not going to endlessly repeat myself to your beck and call. You obviously delight in thinking you have some sort of gotcha that has stumped everyone. You have no solutions to social care, the huge demand on health and so many other issues that western society has to tackle. Oh hang on, cut taxes, cut spending. Eureka!

Don’t pretend you have answered my question and that fob off. My question is why have spending cuts being seriously considered? This point is being debated regularly in the mainstream media….its not as if this is some wacky left field idea

The only thing from you is a sarcastic response that suggests no spending cuts are possible. Let me make it simple for you:

a. No spending cuts are possible at all moving forward

b. Spending cuts are possible but the government won’t do it.

It’s a really easy question to respond to. If you were unclear my answer is b). Maybe I am wrong and maybe I’m right but I’m clear on my opinion.

Edited 16 hours ago by Sir Ralph