Labour top brass getting down to business

[roverstillidie91]

People saying Labour shouldn't be funded by the unions wondering why Labour isn't

The Labour Party needs a Mick Lynch sat on the front bench.

Even though I'm an RMT member Labour have yet to convince me I would vote  for them, come across as far-right and the same as Tories in my view.

Labour far right??

I can’t get my breath!

Youth of today eh………,

Are you a labour supporter?

When you get the leader of one of the biggest trade unions asking for assurances after that speech from Starmer that we are not to have Austerity Mk2 then you have to ask yourself.

Where are the Labour party going with this?

Nobody knows what he stands for, clearly needs a new leader and direction. Otherwise Tories will end up getting re-elected again

Trade union members would rather vote for the party that is proposing to bring in anti-trade union law than the one that isn't, shock.

no way I'd ever vote Conservatives

[SydneyRover]

I have read a bit of Starmers speech. It's very centrist imo. That appeals to someone like me, it's realistic and what the majority probably want to see.

Most sensible people don't want to see mass public sector pay rises and subsequent tax rises they want to see something proportionate.  Labour are rightly not committing to things they realistically can't produce.

Citation please pud

[danumdon]

The use of the “take back control” phrase is interesting. Savvy politics to win back brexit voters or just pathetic desperation?
He supports further private sector Co operation too. That will please hard left voters. But then, like most politicians, plenty of his mates will be CEOs/MDs etc.

Vote labour.
Same shit.
Different context.

So Starmers "take back control" phrase is in connection with Labour handing out more devolution but in this case he's talking about devolving a great many competencies down to "local councils" is the man right in the head.

Can you imagine your local council being responsible for anything more than the bare minimum they just about manage to provide, even then they always manage to mess that up, its pretty obvious most local councils and councillors are just about competent enough to get there expense sheets submitted.

This to me says we've seen how badly the Tories have managed to run the state into the ground, if we get elected lets have the country "take back control" by giving it all to a bunch of incompetent local councillors to sort out, so when it finally goes tits up they can't blame me.

Comes across as trying to deflect blame before he's even started.

People wondered why he'd been light on policy, i think this tells you the direction of travel.

So yes, vote Labour
Same shit,
Slightly different context.

[SydneyRover]

The use of the “take back control” phrase is interesting. Savvy politics to win back brexit voters or just pathetic desperation?
He supports further private sector Co operation too. That will please hard left voters. But then, like most politicians, plenty of his mates will be CEOs/MDs etc.

Vote labour.
Same shit.
Different context.

So Starmers "take back control" phrase is in connection with Labour handing out more devolution but in this case he's talking about devolving a great many competencies down to "local councils" is the man right in the head.

Can you imagine your local council being responsible for anything more than the bare minimum they just about manage to provide, even then they always manage to mess that up, its pretty obvious most local councils and councillors are just about competent enough to get there expense sheets submitted.

This to me says we've seen how badly the Tories have managed to run the state into the ground, if we get elected lets have the country "take back control" by giving it all to a bunch of incompetent local councillors to sort out, so when it finally goes tits up they can't blame me.

Comes across as trying to deflect blame before he's even started.

People wondered why he'd been light on policy, i think this tells you the direction of travel.

So yes, vote Labour
Same shit,
Slightly different context.

thank you Waldorf and Statler,

Many councils both labour and tory did a far better job in many areas than the government is doing now before the tories starved them of funding.

Vote for Austerity vote tory

And as a footnote:

Labour councils in England hit harder by austerity than Tory areas
This article is more than 2 years old
Exclusive: analysis by Guardian and Sigoma shows poorer, Labour-held areas lost over a third of spending power

levelling up or scorched earth, vote tory

[tyke1962]

The use of the “take back control” phrase is interesting. Savvy politics to win back brexit voters or just pathetic desperation?
He supports further private sector Co operation too. That will please hard left voters. But then, like most politicians, plenty of his mates will be CEOs/MDs etc.

Vote labour.
Same shit.
Different context.

So Starmers "take back control" phrase is in connection with Labour handing out more devolution but in this case he's talking about devolving a great many competencies down to "local councils" is the man right in the head.

Can you imagine your local council being responsible for anything more than the bare minimum they just about manage to provide, even then they always manage to mess that up, its pretty obvious most local councils and councillors are just about competent enough to get there expense sheets submitted.

This to me says we've seen how badly the Tories have managed to run the state into the ground, if we get elected lets have the country "take back control" by giving it all to a bunch of incompetent local councillors to sort out, so when it finally goes tits up they can't blame me.

Comes across as trying to deflect blame before he's even started.

People wondered why he'd been light on policy, i think this tells you the direction of travel.

So yes, vote Labour
Same shit,
Slightly different context.

Unfortunately it's a case of voting Labour at the next election for me personally because of the potential consequences if you don't .

That's pretty much all that's on offer really .

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

I have read a bit of Starmers speech. It's very centrist imo. That appeals to someone like me, it's realistic and what the majority probably want to see.

Most sensible people don't want to see mass public sector pay rises and subsequent tax rises they want to see something proportionate.  Labour are rightly not committing to things they realistically can't produce.

Citation please pud

It's an opinion (these matter too).  Let's see if a party proposing tax increases and mass pay rises (inflation....) could win an election, I doubt it.

[SydneyRover]

I have read a bit of Starmers speech. It's very centrist imo. That appeals to someone like me, it's realistic and what the majority probably want to see.

Most sensible people don't want to see mass public sector pay rises and subsequent tax rises they want to see something proportionate.  Labour are rightly not committing to things they realistically can't produce.

Citation please pud

It's an opinion (these matter too).  Let's see if a party proposing tax increases and mass pay rises (inflation....) could win an election, I doubt it.

An opinion from a person that is in an earnings bracket way above the what the majority earns says that he doesn't want tax rises. I guess it's how you frame the question pud.

Would you like to see those all those who earn far more than what you are earning or will ever earn pay a bit more so you can have a fully functioning NHS, Police service, Schools, child care, councils etc and enjoy a more equal cohesive community?

[danumdon]

I have read a bit of Starmers speech. It's very centrist imo. That appeals to someone like me, it's realistic and what the majority probably want to see.

Most sensible people don't want to see mass public sector pay rises and subsequent tax rises they want to see something proportionate.  Labour are rightly not committing to things they realistically can't produce.

Citation please pud

It's an opinion (these matter too).  Let's see if a party proposing tax increases and mass pay rises (inflation....) could win an election, I doubt it.

An opinion from a person that is in an earnings bracket way above the what the majority earns says that he doesn't want tax rises. I guess it's how you frame the question pud.

Would you like to see those all those who earn far more than what you are earning or will ever earn pay a bit more so you can have a fully functioning NHS, Police service, Schools, child care, councils etc and enjoy a more equal cohesive community?

An “equal cohesive community” requires the participation of all from either end of the financial spectrum.

So I see you berating someone who will be paying a large amount into the states coffers to facilitate that requirement, I don’t see you pointing out people from the other end of the spectrum who for whatever reason are not attempting to play their part.

Everyone’s aware that a social security fallback needs to be in place but it should not be a lifestyle choice.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

I have read a bit of Starmers speech. It's very centrist imo. That appeals to someone like me, it's realistic and what the majority probably want to see.

Most sensible people don't want to see mass public sector pay rises and subsequent tax rises they want to see something proportionate.  Labour are rightly not committing to things they realistically can't produce.

Citation please pud

It's an opinion (these matter too).  Let's see if a party proposing tax increases and mass pay rises (inflation....) could win an election, I doubt it.

An opinion from a person that is in an earnings bracket way above the what the majority earns says that he doesn't want tax rises. I guess it's how you frame the question pud.

Would you like to see those all those who earn far more than what you are earning or will ever earn pay a bit more so you can have a fully functioning NHS, Police service, Schools, child care, councils etc and enjoy a more equal cohesive community?

To be fair, you've no idea what I earn or how, it's not relevant either.

I think it's important to assess the merits of each and every element.  Is losing half your earnings enough of a contribution from those at the top or should it be more?

Where would you set the tax brackets and what percentages would you apply? It's a tricky topic.

[wilts rover]

I have read a bit of Starmers speech. It's very centrist imo. That appeals to someone like me, it's realistic and what the majority probably want to see.

Most sensible people don't want to see mass public sector pay rises and subsequent tax rises they want to see something proportionate.  Labour are rightly not committing to things they realistically can't produce.

Citation please pud

It's an opinion (these matter too).  Let's see if a party proposing tax increases and mass pay rises (inflation....) could win an election, I doubt it.

An opinion from a person that is in an earnings bracket way above the what the majority earns says that he doesn't want tax rises. I guess it's how you frame the question pud.

Would you like to see those all those who earn far more than what you are earning or will ever earn pay a bit more so you can have a fully functioning NHS, Police service, Schools, child care, councils etc and enjoy a more equal cohesive community?

To be fair, you've no idea what I earn or how, it's not relevant either.

I think it's important to assess the merits of each and every element.  Is losing half your earnings enough of a contribution from those at the top or should it be more?

Where would you set the tax brackets and what percentages would you apply? It's a tricky topic.

Or to puit it another way. Should we pay for public services, health, education, transport, roads, leisure, for everyone through tax - or should only rich people have access to these things - like Victorian Britain?

Tricky one.

[ncRover]

Striking train drivers have had their demands met. An offered pay rise from £60k p/a to £65k p/a. The Labour left must be torn between solidarity and wanting to tax them more.

[SydneyRover]

I have read a bit of Starmers speech. It's very centrist imo. That appeals to someone like me, it's realistic and what the majority probably want to see.

Most sensible people don't want to see mass public sector pay rises and subsequent tax rises they want to see something proportionate.  Labour are rightly not committing to things they realistically can't produce.

Citation please pud

It's an opinion (these matter too).  Let's see if a party proposing tax increases and mass pay rises (inflation....) could win an election, I doubt it.

An opinion from a person that is in an earnings bracket way above the what the majority earns says that he doesn't want tax rises. I guess it's how you frame the question pud.

Would you like to see those all those who earn far more than what you are earning or will ever earn pay a bit more so you can have a fully functioning NHS, Police service, Schools, child care, councils etc and enjoy a more equal cohesive community?

To be fair, you've no idea what I earn or how, it's not relevant either.

I think it's important to assess the merits of each and every element.  Is losing half your earnings enough of a contribution from those at the top or should it be more?

Where would you set the tax brackets and what percentages would you apply? It's a tricky topic.

tell me I got it wrong then pud.

[SydneyRover]

I have read a bit of Starmers speech. It's very centrist imo. That appeals to someone like me, it's realistic and what the majority probably want to see.

Most sensible people don't want to see mass public sector pay rises and subsequent tax rises they want to see something proportionate.  Labour are rightly not committing to things they realistically can't produce.

Citation please pud

It's an opinion (these matter too).  Let's see if a party proposing tax increases and mass pay rises (inflation....) could win an election, I doubt it.

An opinion from a person that is in an earnings bracket way above the what the majority earns says that he doesn't want tax rises. I guess it's how you frame the question pud.

Would you like to see those all those who earn far more than what you are earning or will ever earn pay a bit more so you can have a fully functioning NHS, Police service, Schools, child care, councils etc and enjoy a more equal cohesive community?

An “equal cohesive community” requires the participation of all from either end of the financial spectrum.

So I see you berating someone who will be paying a large amount into the states coffers to facilitate that requirement, I don’t see you pointing out people from the other end of the spectrum who for whatever reason are not attempting to play their part.

Everyone’s aware that a social security fallback needs to be in place but it should not be a lifestyle choice.

not berating challenging DD, you'll have to supply more detail as to what you mean and support it too.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Here's an odd thing

Denmark, Sweden and Finland all have much higher taxes than we do, and higher public sector salaries.

They also have far stronger economic growth.

Their people are, like for like, significantly richer than us.

And they come way above us in quality of life surveys.

Yet we still cling to the idea that screwing down the public sector and reducing taxes is the way to economic success and happiness.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Striking train drivers have had their demands met. An offered pay rise from £60k p/a to £65k p/a. The Labour left must be torn between solidarity and wanting to tax them more.

When did ASLEF go on strike? I've missed that one.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

I have read a bit of Starmers speech. It's very centrist imo. That appeals to someone like me, it's realistic and what the majority probably want to see.

Most sensible people don't want to see mass public sector pay rises and subsequent tax rises they want to see something proportionate.  Labour are rightly not committing to things they realistically can't produce.

Citation please pud

It's an opinion (these matter too).  Let's see if a party proposing tax increases and mass pay rises (inflation....) could win an election, I doubt it.

An opinion from a person that is in an earnings bracket way above the what the majority earns says that he doesn't want tax rises. I guess it's how you frame the question pud.

Would you like to see those all those who earn far more than what you are earning or will ever earn pay a bit more so you can have a fully functioning NHS, Police service, Schools, child care, councils etc and enjoy a more equal cohesive community?

To be fair, you've no idea what I earn or how, it's not relevant either.

I think it's important to assess the merits of each and every element.  Is losing half your earnings enough of a contribution from those at the top or should it be more?

Where would you set the tax brackets and what percentages would you apply? It's a tricky topic.

tell me I got it wrong then pud.

I don't necessarily think that the biggest issues facing the country financially are resolved by taxing a small minority who could easily hide or switch that wealth elsewhere no.

So what would you suggest a tax system should look like?

[SydneyRover]

Well you would say that wouldn't you? I'll take that as an admission I was correct then pud.

[ncRover]

Striking train drivers have had their demands met. An offered pay rise from £60k p/a to £65k p/a. The Labour left must be torn between solidarity and wanting to tax them more.

When did ASLEF go on strike? I've missed that one.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64191654

[ncRover]

So what if pud earns above average? Good for him.

[SydneyRover]

you appear to have a problem following the gist of a debate nc

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Well you would say that wouldn't you? I'll take that as an admission I was correct then pud.

I don't even know what you're trying to claim to be fair. Perhaps if you actually tried to offer some substance rather than pick petty points on individual posters we'd have more interesting debate.

[SydneyRover]

I have read a bit of Starmers speech. It's very centrist imo. That appeals to someone like me, it's realistic and what the majority probably want to see.

Most sensible people don't want to see mass public sector pay rises and subsequent tax rises they want to see something proportionate.  Labour are rightly not committing to things they realistically can't produce.

Citation please pud

It's an opinion (these matter too).  Let's see if a party proposing tax increases and mass pay rises (inflation....) could win an election, I doubt it.

How about we start again from here, surely you must have some reason for posting this, no hint of 'in my opinion' or anything else.

[drfchound]

Striking train drivers have had their demands met. An offered pay rise from £60k p/a to £65k p/a. The Labour left must be torn between solidarity and wanting to tax them more.

When did ASLEF go on strike? I've missed that one.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64191654

Yep, that looks ok.

[ncRover]

you appear to have a problem following the gist of a debate nc

You mentioned it, not me.

[wilts rover]

Well you would say that wouldn't you? I'll take that as an admission I was correct then pud.

I don't even know what you're trying to claim to be fair. Perhaps if you actually tried to offer some substance rather than pick petty points on individual posters we'd have more interesting debate.

Agreed

[SydneyRover]

It's quite straight forward wilts, pud made a pompous statement that 'sensible' people don't want a pay rise ............

''Most sensible people don't want to see mass public sector pay rises and subsequent tax rises they want to see something proportionate.  Labour are rightly not committing to things they realistically can't produce''

[wilts rover]

As for future taxes, currently people who live off their work pay a far greater rate of tax than those who live off their wealth. We tax work - but not wealth.

It's estimated we can raise £45 billion from the richest 10% of the population by:

an annual 1% wealth tax on all net weath over £10 million

Raise capital gains tax and tax share dividends

Extend National Insurance to investment income

Scrap non-dom status

https://labourlist.org/2022/11/wealth-taxes-are-the-alternative-to-conservative-austerity-2-0/

[wilts rover]

It's quite straight forward wilts, pud made a pompous statement that 'sensible' people don't want a pay rise ............

''Most sensible people don't want to see mass public sector pay rises and subsequent tax rises they want to see something proportionate.  Labour are rightly not committing to things they realistically can't produce''

Did he? Well if you say so but I don't read that as pompous. Even if you do then there are ways of replying without being personally offensive. I don't always agree with him but I know from previous posts pud is a decent poster.

What I would have done would be to go out and get a recent graph that shows most people do support the strikes and public sector workers getting a decent pay rise. What that says about people who don't support them not being sensible, well that's for them to say:

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2022/12/20/nurses-and-ambulance-workers-have-most-public-supp

[Bentley Bullet]

Do most people support the rail strikes?

[ravenrover]

Dunno, do they?