Jump to content

Recommended Posts

No Loz, it wasn't. My first post was asking for opinions because I wanted some advice on who those people should vote for.

Like I said, some of us really don't know what to do for the best, so we read your posts and haven't a clue what you are talking about so are none the wiser.


I voted Labour as usual, never made a secret of it, yet some regulars on here say it's the worse thing to do ever.


And you know what? I still have no idea why.


Don't bother explaining. It's irrelevant now anyway. I can wait 5 years.

When the most left wing candidate for Labour leader comes out with agreement further welfare cuts. including the new, lower cap on benefits, you can see the election result is really starting to hit home for Labour.


http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/29/labours-andy-burham-further-welfare-cuts-leader-business

that is a followup to an earlier story, which has probabaly provoked the hateful envious nasty shit I have ever seen on a facebook post. will try to find a link somehow tor FB stuff .


thatcher really has left a legacy that she never really planned or considered as a result

So if you're not a benefit scrounger? What if having 6 kids, not working, living with a man who doesn't work either is not the life for you.


What if you work full-time in a low paid job & struggle to manage on a single wage supporting one child. Alone.


Then what?


Just wondered. There doesn't seem to be a lot in between. There are benefits for the poor, big pay cheques for the rich and nothing for those stuck in the middle.

The irony is that for all their talk of cuts the Tories won't touch pensions, continue to pursue policies with the effect if increasing house prices (and so the housing benefit bill) and further weaken employees rights or ability to organise (driving yet more low pay).
Tory policy is often nothing to do with reducing costs (even where it purports to be), it's about reducing the size of the state regardless of the bill. We've seen it over and over again - public services and assets privatised at either a loss of with increased cost to taxpayers. It's purely ideological and lacks any pragmatism or coherence.

Sadly I watch these cuts have effect on a daily basis. Not sure that many of you do. Homelessness going through the roof at the moment, with all support services cut to ribbons. People dying on the street (2 of mine this year so far). Support budget in my borough now cut from ?17m to under ?3m.


Can the Tory voters tell me how they defend this? I am genuinely interested because I cannot see how they can.


And the social cleansing that is now beginning in earnest in London is quite sinister I think.


I am conscious my opinions are based on what I do for a living, but I guess so are a bankers.

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The irony is that for all their talk of cuts the

> Tories won't touch pensions, continue to pursue

> policies with the effect if increasing house

> prices (and so the housing benefit bill) and

> further weaken employees rights or ability to

> organise (driving yet more low pay).


I tend to agree with protecting pensions.


Most of us will grow old - and there's no coming

back from it.

ratty Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> And the social cleansing that is now beginning in

> earnest in London is quite sinister I think.



Totally agree.



> I am conscious my opinions are based on what I do

> for a living, but I guess so are a bankers.



Me too. When you're trying to implement these cuts on a daily basis it makes you a bit sick seeing sensationalist stories about some layabout benefits scrounger who is not even remotely typical.


And in my area (currently SEN) what you see is the families that have money and resources using said resources to take a council to Court and end up being awarded unbelievable resources for their child who is no more needy than shed loads of other kids from families that don't have the money or knowledge to go that route.


Sick twisted society where money follows money and fuck the rest of them.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> it makes you a bit sick seeing

> sensationalist stories about some layabout

> benefits scrounger who is not even remotely typical.


Was thinking the same thing... bloody tabloid scapegoating nonsense. An extreme case which isn't even vaguely representative of anyone I've ever met.



ratty Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I am conscious my opinions are based on what I do

> for a living, but I guess so are a bankers.


People have to realise that the majority of Tory voters are not bankers - or even particularly wealthy (left wing scapegoating nonsense!) Plenty of working class and lower-middle class Tories out there.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ratty Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > And the social cleansing that is now beginning in

> > earnest in London is quite sinister I think.

>

> Totally agree.


Is it really 'social cleansing' (which implies it is an actual purposeful policy) or is it just the fact that government after government (of all parties involved) have consistently failed to build enough housing to satisfy demand, and now we are seeing the result in that people are being priced out of London?

... but my main issue is the failure to see the bigger picture. You can't talk about reducing dependency on state intervention and at the same time pursue policies which increase house prices, depress wages and see public services delivered through more complex, less accountable and more expensive mechanisms.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Doesn’t seem that simple   according to fullfact that’s a net figure   ” The £21.9 billion was a net figure. Gross additional pressures totalling £35.3 billion were identified by the Treasury, and approximately £13.4 billion of these pressures were then offset by a combination of reserve funds and other allowances. The additional pressures identified were as follows: 2024-25 public sector pay awards (£9.4bn) ”   I don’t think Labour have set expectation that changing government cures all the ills. In fact some people on here criticise them for saying exactly opposite “vote for us we’re not them but nothing will change because global issues”   I think they are too cautious across many areas. They could have been more explicit before election but such is the countries media and electorate that if they were we would now be stuck with sunak/badenoch/someone else with the 14 years of baggage of their government and infighting  the broad strokes of this government are essentially along right lines  also loving ckarkson today “ Clarkson: Your claim that I bought a farm to avoid taxes is false and irresponsible.  BBC: It’s your own claim.  Clarkson: What’s that got to do with anything?” and by loving I mean “loathing as much as I ever have”    
    • BBC and the IFS https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2e12j4gz0o From BBC Verify:   Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank said Reeves "may be overegging the £22bn black hole". What about the rest of the £22bn? The government published a breakdown, external of how it had got from the Treasury's £9.5bn shortfall in February to the £22bn "black hole". It said that there was another £7bn between February and the actual Budget in March, as departments found out about new spending pressures and the government spent more on the NHS and the Household Support Fund There was a final £5.6bn between then and late July, which includes almost a month when Labour was in power. That was largely caused by increases in public sector pay. It was the Labour government that accepted the recommendations of the Pay Review Bodies (PRBs), but they said that the previous government should have budgeted for more than a 2% increase in public sector pay. Prof Stephen Millard from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research think tank told BBC Verify: "The 'political' question is whether you would count this as part of the fiscal black hole or not. If you do, then you get to the £22bn figure; if not, then you’re left with around £12.5bn to £13.5bn." It isn't this at all. When you run on an agenda of change and cleaning up politics and you put all of the eggs of despair in a basket at the door of the previous government you better hope you have a long honeymoon period to give you time to deliver the change you have promised. Look at the NHS, before the election it was all...it's broken because of 14 years of Tory incompetence and the implication was that Labour could fix is quickly. Then Wes Streeting (who is one of the smarter political cabinet members and is clearly able to play the long game) started talking about the need to change the NHS before the election - he talked about privatising parts of it (much to the annoyance of the left). He was being pragmatic because the only magic wand that is going to fix the NHS is massive reform - it's broken and has been for decades and throwing money at it has just papered over the cracks. Now Labour talk about the NHS needing 10 years of healing for there to be real difference and people are saying....what..... Words in opposition are easy; actions in government are a lot harder and I fear that given the structural issues caused by Covid, the energy crisis, the war in Ukraine (and now maybe a massive US/China trade war if Trump isn't bluffing) that we are heading to constant one-term governments. I don't think there was a government (and correct me if I am wrong) that survived Covid and in a lot of countries since Covid they have had regular government change (I think what is playing out in the US with them voting Trump in is reflective of the challenges all countries face). Labour massively over-egged the 14 years of hurt (who could blame them) but it is going to make things a lot tougher for them as they have set the expectation that changing government cures all the ills and as we have seen in the first 90 days of their tenure that is very much not the case. Completely agree but the big risk if Farage. If Labour don't deliver what they promised or hit "working people" then the populists win - it's happening everywhere. Dangerous, dangerous times ahead and Labour have to get it right - for all our sakes - no matter what party we support. P.S. Lammy is also one of the better Labour front-bench folks - he just is suffering from Labour's inability to think far enough ahead to realise that some posts might come back to haunt you...but in his defence did anyone really think Americans would be daft enough to vote him in again....;-)
    • My cat has been missing since Sunday evening 17th November he is British short hair male cat colour black with grey stripes. medium to large in size. He is easily identified by a large tooth missing on the top left of his mouth.  He lives in Upland Road just near the roundabout at Underhill Road. His name is Jack but he  only answers to Puss Puss please call me on 0208 299 2275 if you see him.   thank you Linda  
    • I think this could go on endlessly, so I suggest we finish it here!  But why don't you  track down the makers of the sign? Which hopefully has amused a lot of people, as well as brightening my bus journey. Tell  them that their directions to Dulwich are not only wrong, but they do not seem to know where the "real" Dulwich is 🤣 I'm sure they will be delighted 🤣  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...