Current Affairs The Labour Party

[Thomasc]

The generalisations and stink of superiority from this post is nauseating.

Only two things in the whole thread I’d describe as “nauseating” are you and the Boris Johnson fanboy.

 

[Eidean]

In his heart Boris was more socialist than Starmer ever will be, he got dealt a crap hand of cards with both Brexit and Covid, but tried to do the right things for everyone at the time. Starmer had years to dream up this [Poor language removed] show with Rachel from Customer Complaints, and apart from a few union backhanders to train drivers etc has turned his back towards some of the weakest in society…..

Hahahahaahaha

Close down the forum. Immediately

 

[Xizor]

Don’t belittle working at a supermarket. Anyone who gets up, goes to work and pays their taxes should be respected.

If it wasn't clear, that was from the interview, not a point I was making. I don't remember things word for word but she was dismissive of the idea of "stacking shelves".

 

[trueblue84]

Paying compensation to the WASPI women could result in additional debt if financed through borrowing or higher taxes, potentially placing a financial burden on future generations. I think the boomers have it better than younger generations regarding what they've enjoyed through their lives. House affordability, the cost of living etc., makes it feel a bit selfish. I get that maybe there's an argument for those that are on the bread line, no assets or the like but it's a much wider consideration than just saying "pay them" - at least to my mind, it is.
There's clearly not enough money in the government coffers, so if it was borrowed who'd pay it back. If it was taken from another area of spending, who'd lose out?

I think the gripe is with the rats in labour campaigning for them when in opposition but then dropping them as soon as they got into power.

The Tories shafted the country for 15 years but it appears labour have hoodwinked their voters and are carrying on the grift at the expense of normal people.

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

I think the gripe is with the rats in labour campaigning for them when in opposition but then dropping them as soon as they got into power.

The Tories shafted the country for 15 years but it appears labour have hoodwinked their voters and are carrying on the grift at the expense of normal people.

I believe that there is an element of that, but seemingly from those who are not happy that this labour government got in, such as conservatives and Corbyn loyalists.

I'll judge labour at the end of this term. If they mess up they'll pay the price, if they don't they might get another term, assuming the Reform/Farage/Musk show doesn't convince people that we need to make Britain great again.

 

[trueblue84]

I believe that there is an element of that, but seemingly from those who are not happy that this labour government got in, such as conservatives and Corbyn loyalists.

I'll judge labour at the end of this term. If they mess up they'll pay the price, if they don't they might get another term, assuming the Reform/Farage/Musk show doesn't convince people that we need to make Britain great again.

Fair doos, but they're not off to a great start.

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

Fair doos, but they're not off to a great start.

Aye, they're in a storm, that's for sure.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I wish I could remember the full details but there was a radio interview with one of the WASPI women a while ago, maybe around the time we were waiting for the Ombudsman decision. She was making the point that most women of her age had never had a chance to gain an amazing pension because they'd gone into work in the 70s likely in some minor secretarial role, and then dropped out for 5-10 years to have children before coming back into part time employment as their family grew up. They never really cared about their pensions because the financial side of the family was their working husband's area to deal with.

Some of these women spent decades planning to retire at 60, relying on their husbands' pensions, likely in final salary schemes, and for any of them that lost 'access' to that (I guess a divorce, maybe widowed etc) it was now unfair that they found themselves not just poorer, but having to work an extra 5 years in some crap job at a supermarket or whatever just to tide them over until they could start drawing on what they'd been able to put away themselves.

I don't really have a summing up point here. I can see how women of this age have been a bit shafted by the world changing around them. My partner for example went into a medical career from Uni, has never not worked and is now the senior member of her team, earning well above the average salary, a life a woman 30 years her senior would have struggled to have, even with all the requisite skills.

At the same time, I think it's kind of crazy to just subcontract a huge part of your life's journey to someone else and assume they'll always be there, although I suppose again, divorce rates will have shot up since they were young. When they married, there was a good expectation that would be for life.

But regardless, people looking to make political hay out of this that voted Tory in 2019 can just pipe down as this is what they voted for (amongst other financial hits to people they apparently care about).

I thought the central point of their campaign was not that the change was happening but that they weren't sufficiently informed about it. That doesn't sound like a narrative that fits with the "they spent decades planning for something".

Pension reform is a major bugbear as it's something that governments around the world neglect even in the face of huge demographic changes just because its politically expedient to kick the can down the road for the next lot to face. It's a prime example of the infantilisation of the electorate as they want everything and don't think (or care) how it will be paid for (hopefully by someone else).

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

Pete's played a blinder in here. Reeled everyone in.

Thing is, this Govt aren't exactly covering themselves in glory are they?

I don't think we need Pete and Dave's relentless exaggerated assaults to see that.

 

[davek]

A 'Labour' leader standing up in the Commons for 30 minutes defending economic injustices to a Tory leader.

Is this really what you thought you were voting for?

If not, what does it feel like to have been utterly conned. It must feel .

 

[Xizor]

The generalisations and stink of superiority from this post is nauseating.

Yes, that's what I thought when I was listening to her too. Came across as quite entitled.

 

[Xizor]

A 'Labour' leader standing up in the Commons for 30 minutes defending economic injustices

Which injustices? Real ones or just the things you froth and foam about in your endless Starmer tantrums?

 

[davek]

Yes, that's what I thought when I was listening to her too. Came across as quite entitled.

Which injustices? Real ones or just the things you froth and foam about in your endless Starmer tantrums?

I can just imagine you looking down your nose at a supermarket cashier.

 

[Xizor]

Pension reform is a major bugbear as it's something that governments around the world neglect even in the face of huge demographic changes just because its politically expedient to kick the can down the road for the next lot to face. It's a prime example of the infantilisation of the electorate as they want everything and don't think (or care) how it will be paid for (hopefully by someone else).

This is exactly it Bruce. Labour's trouble at the moment is being willing tackle a problem head on and say to people "This isn't going to happen" or "You have to lose out". And of course given the modern age any resultant grumbling is amplified to an unprecedented degree because people, naturally don't want to be the ones losing out.

There's criticism of Labour's communications team for not being able to sell the message, but I'm not sure how you'd attempt it when some of what they've had to do has been so blunt.

Weaker politicians would do as you say, just keep on deferring things and kicking things down the road hoping that (as is happening) an opposing party has to bear the brunt of finally doing something about it and potentially suffering the electoral consequences. Labour might be lucky as a lot can happen between now and 2029. I don't think anyone will go the booths then with the WFA, Farmer's inheritance or the WASPIs on their minds, so in one sense getting it all done early is sensible, even if it makes it look like the leadership is just stumbling between various crises.

 

[Jebus_lives]

A 'Labour' leader standing up in the Commons for 30 minutes defending economic injustices to a Tory leader.

Is this really what you thought you were voting for?

If not, what does it feel like to have been utterly conned. It must feel .

Have they argued anymore about what food constitutes lunch?