Can Sir Keir Starmer revive the Labour Party? (Vol. 2)

[Ascayman]

isaldiri said:

Ascayman said:

So kids both private and state being disadvantaged are just collateral damage so you can laugh at the ‘pear clutchers’ whatever or whoever they are?

Of course it does and always has been so. The end justifies the means, it sticks 2 fingers up at all the nasty rich posh people so just too bad for everyone else affected…..

Well yes except it won’t effect the Nasty, rich, posh people they’ll be totally unaffected so who are the ‘pearl clutchers’ we are disadvantaging both state and private kids for so that we can laugh at?

[borcy]

Mr Penguin said:

borcy said:

I doubt they'd risk it, there's little upside in talking foreign policy pre election but potential downsides.

Which is part of why we are in a mess - the press would rather comment on the polls and wonder how many seats the Conservatives will lose or who comes up with ideas for Ed Davey's stunts than try to get the likely next government to have a serious conversation about what they plan to do when in office and Labour would rather the electorate put them in government without really knowing what that means (something which will come back to bite them, but that's tomorrow's problem so no need to think about it today).

I agree he should be more in the public eye about what labour propose to do, however i understand why he's been kept away from the public even if i don't agree with it.

I think the press have asked for interviews with lammy but they keep getting turned down.

[hidetheelephants]

Ascayman said:

So kids both private and state being disadvantaged are just collateral damage so you can laugh at the ‘pear clutchers’ whatever or whoever they are?

Nice bit of projection there, I care not at all about the VAT policy I just find the hypocrisy rich in humour.

[Mr Penguin]

borcy said:

I agree he should be more in the public eye about what labour propose to do, however i understand why he's been kept away from the public even if i don't agree with it.

I think the press have asked for interviews with lammy but they keep getting turned down.

I agree that tactically it is best for them to keep him hidden because he's one of those who will put his foot in it.
I haven't heard that the media have asked for interviews with him but if true this is something they should be making public to move the conversation towards getting both parties to be more open.

[borcy]

Mr Penguin said:

I agree that tactically it is best for them to keep him hidden because he's one of those who will put his foot in it.
I haven't heard that the media have asked for interviews with him but if true this is something they should be making public to move the conversation towards getting both parties to be more open.

I heard it on times radio in an interview with wes streeting, asked about where David lammy was. They hadn't been able to have an interview, neither had the press pool. He just dodged the questions.

[Vanden Saab]

hidetheelephants said:

Ascayman said:

S600BSB said:

bhstewie said:

Must say it's weird seeing the people who quite literally didn't give a fk about the Johnson Government acting unlawfully when it suited them going full on "but Labour might have the ECHR on them" about VAT on school fees.

It's actually pathetic.

It’s actually hilarious!

It’s hilarious to use kids as political pawns?

No, it's hilarious that right wing pearl clutchers who were enthusiastic about the potential binning of ECHR because it inconveniently stopped the sending of a very small number of immigrants to a camp in africa are now champions of ECHR.

Not championing the ECHR at all. I will be delighted if Labour tell them to sod off and leave or ignore their ruling. I also find those who spent so much time supporting the ECHR including Starmer himself now doing a screeching u-turn absolutely delightful. No hypocrisy here.

[Ascayman]

hidetheelephants said:

Ascayman said:

So kids both private and state being disadvantaged are just collateral damage so you can laugh at the ‘pear clutchers’ whatever or whoever they are?

Nice bit of projection there, I care not at all about the VAT policy I just find the hypocrisy rich in humour.

Like the hypocrisy of being vehemently anti Brexit but then using the fact that we’ve left as an opportunity to put into effect an envy tax that will disadvantage both state and private children.

That sort of hypocrisy?

[98elise]

Vanden Saab said:

hidetheelephants said:

Ascayman said:

S600BSB said:

bhstewie said:

Must say it's weird seeing the people who quite literally didn't give a fk about the Johnson Government acting unlawfully when it suited them going full on "but Labour might have the ECHR on them" about VAT on school fees.

It's actually pathetic.

It’s actually hilarious!

It’s hilarious to use kids as political pawns?

No, it's hilarious that right wing pearl clutchers who were enthusiastic about the potential binning of ECHR because it inconveniently stopped the sending of a very small number of immigrants to a camp in africa are now champions of ECHR.

Not championing the ECHR at all. I will be delighted if Labour tell them to sod off and leave or ignore their ruling. I also find those who spent so much time supporting the ECHR including Starmer himself now doing a screeching u-turn absolutely delightful. No hypocrisy here.

Same with Labour's plans for expropriating assets in their last manifesto...

Article 17 - EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

"No one may be deprived of his or her possessions, except in the public interest and in the cases and under the conditions provided for by law, subject to fair compensation being paid in good time for their loss."

Human rights don't apply to people with assets apparently!

[hidetheelephants]

Ascayman said:

Like the hypocrisy of being vehemently anti Brexit but then using the fact that we’ve left as an opportunity to put into effect an envy tax that will disadvantage both state and private children.

That sort of hypocrisy?

Who are these vehement anti brexiteers of which you speak? VAT has been called many things, I focus on regressive, but I've never heard it called an envy tax.

[turbobloke]

hidetheelephants said:

Ascayman said:

Like the hypocrisy of being vehemently anti Brexit but then using the fact that we’ve left as an opportunity to put into effect an envy tax that will disadvantage both state and private children.

That sort of hypocrisy?

Who are these vehement anti brexiteers of which you speak?

How long have you got? Pop over to the brexit threads. It won't be necessary, for now, to go back further than about 7.5 years.

hidetheelephants said:

VAT has been called many things, I focus on regressive, but I've never heard it called an envy tax.

Not even subtle.

VAT on education and VAT on an education sector which isn't free at the point of use, therefore used by families with enough disposable income to be in Starmer's sights. That inevitably includes families in the hardworking class. There's your envy (and spite) tax, known all along.

[hidetheelephants]

I give no sts about whatever interminable disagreements may be continuing on the most tedious thread on the forum. If VAT on the fees is legal now it would have been legal prior to 2019, or vice versa.

[isaldiri]

Ascayman said:

Well yes except it won’t effect the Nasty, rich, posh people they’ll be totally unaffected so who are the ‘pearl clutchers’ we are disadvantaging both state and private kids for so that we can laugh at?

It’s a matter of perception. As red meat thrown out to appease part of the party, as long as they think it’s sticking it to the nasty poshos that’s all that Starmer needs. Never mind that as you say, it won’t actually affect the really rich posh ones and probably will simply even further entrench the advantage of private schools in churning out % in top jobs. There will be plenty lining up to support said red meat policy simply because it comes from the ‘right’ side.

[CoolHands]

When they get their hooks into pensions I believe they will do irreparable long term harm. Most of the country already don’t trust politicians, have difficulty planning for the future as don’t trust what politicians will do to pensions and pension ages etc. They will make it worse.

[FiF]

CoolHands said:

When they get their hooks into pensions I believe they will do irreparable long term harm. Most of the country already don’t trust politicians, have difficulty planning for the future as don’t trust what politicians will do to pensions and pension ages etc. They will make it worse.

Don't forget they hid Gordon Brown's intentions in 1997, actions which largely led to the end of private sector DB pensions. Except public sector. Quelle surprise.

Will they go for Starmer's special pension arrangement? No.

And what about inheritance tax exemption for agricultural land and farms? We know Labour hate us rural folk.

[turbobloke]

FiF said:

CoolHands said:

When they get their hooks into pensions I believe they will do irreparable long term harm. Most of the country already don’t trust politicians, have difficulty planning for the future as don’t trust what politicians will do to pensions and pension ages etc. They will make it worse.

Don't forget they hid Gordon Brown's intentions in 1997, actions which largely led to the end of private sector DB pensions. Except public sector. Quelle surprise.

Will they go for Starmer's special pension arrangement? No.

And what about inheritance tax exemption for agricultural land and farms? We know Labour hate us rural folk.

[Wombat3]

FiF said:

CoolHands said:

When they get their hooks into pensions I believe they will do irreparable long term harm. Most of the country already don’t trust politicians, have difficulty planning for the future as don’t trust what politicians will do to pensions and pension ages etc. They will make it worse.

Don't forget they hid Gordon Brown's intentions in 1997, actions which largely led to the end of private sector DB pensions. Except public sector. Quelle surprise.

Will they go for Starmer's special pension arrangement? No.

And what about inheritance tax exemption for agricultural land and farms? We know Labour hate us rural folk.

They don't need you, they get their food at the local vegan deli.

[Riff Raff]

turbobloke said:

FiF said:

CoolHands said:

When they get their hooks into pensions I believe they will do irreparable long term harm. Most of the country already don’t trust politicians, have difficulty planning for the future as don’t trust what politicians will do to pensions and pension ages etc. They will make it worse.

Don't forget they hid Gordon Brown's intentions in 1997, actions which largely led to the end of private sector DB pensions. Except public sector. Quelle surprise.

Will they go for Starmer's special pension arrangement? No.

And what about inheritance tax exemption for agricultural land and farms? We know Labour hate us rural folk.

It was basically changes in accounting standards for pension scheme deficits and the costs of providing defined benefit schemes as opposed to defined contribution schemes that killed private sector DB plans off. Gordon just gave them a wee shove.

[FiF]

Riff Raff said:

turbobloke said:

FiF said:

CoolHands said:

When they get their hooks into pensions I believe they will do irreparable long term harm. Most of the country already don’t trust politicians, have difficulty planning for the future as don’t trust what politicians will do to pensions and pension ages etc. They will make it worse.

Don't forget they hid Gordon Brown's intentions in 1997, actions which largely led to the end of private sector DB pensions. Except public sector. Quelle surprise.

Will they go for Starmer's special pension arrangement? No.

And what about inheritance tax exemption for agricultural land and farms? We know Labour hate us rural folk.

It was basically changes in accounting standards for pension scheme deficits and the costs of providing defined benefit schemes as opposed to defined contribution schemes that killed private sector DB plans off. Gordon just gave them a wee shove.

A 5 billion pound a year wee shove on dividend tax credits, estimated to be around 250 billion over the following 20 years. One of the most idiotic decisions over the years, the bd. Today that measure earns almost nothing.

Of course as above Labour completely bottled out in dealing with civil service and public sector pensions. That was Prescott.

And the point was that time has revealed they intended on this tax raid all along and hid it from their manifesto. More reason to suspect what they're not saying this time.

[Wombat3]

FiF said:

And the point was that time has revealed they intended on this tax raid all along and hid it from their manifesto. More reason to suspect what they're not saying this time.

This has always been the blindingly obvious issue with Starmer & co.

Nonetheless the turkeys will be lining up to vote for Christmas on Thursday morning.

[FiF]

Wombat3 said:

FiF said:

And the point was that time has revealed they intended on this tax raid all along and hid it from their manifesto. More reason to suspect what they're not saying this time.

This has always been the blindingly obvious issue with Starmer & co.

Nonetheless the turkeys will be lining up to vote for Christmas on Thursday morning.

Plus certain of them are already leaking that there will be an emergency budget in the autumn with Rachel Reeves taking a "and the kitchen sink" type approach that will go far beyond what is being declared in the manifesto, ref Wes Streeting and other shadow cabinet members.

There's an attempt to play in advance the "well once we've seen the books" card, but even Reeves admits that's false as the OBR lays out all the details to make a proper assessment and costing. We know Labour is not telling the truth and extremely surprisingly they're starting to admit it.