George Galloway MP

[ncRover]

BST, Sydney, NC Rover. You don't like the Tories, you don't like Galloway, you don't like Corbyn, you don't like the right, you don't like the left.

Just what the f*ck do you lot and Starmer stand for? What do you all want?

Please list it all out, because we're all baffled by it.

I’m a centre-right liberal probably:

- I believe free markets are the best way to make everyone better off.

- With that comes pro-EU and pro-immigration

- Civil liberties are important to me so socially liberal

- Pro-NATO / globalist but can recognise the west is a very good place and that sometimes actions need to be taken to protect it.

- Change and progress is good but I can recognise the importance of traditional and family values. Will more often tilt towards progress - fear-mongering against it never really comes to fruition.

- Build more houses / nuclear power

Don’t mind Starmer personally. Not sure who to vote for. Probably closest to Lib Dem’s but what does that achieve?

(BRR probs about to comment “oh dear” )

[scawsby steve]

BST, Sydney, NC Rover. You don't like the Tories, you don't like Galloway, you don't like Corbyn, you don't like the right, you don't like the left.

Just what the f*ck do you lot and Starmer stand for? What do you all want?

Please list it all out, because we're all baffled by it.

My preference would be for a combination of Keynesian economics, with Government being prepared to use fiscal stimulus aggressively when needed, investment in state education, the NHS and green power generation, together with a hard headed approach to the threat that Russia is now posing.

All in all, not a million miles from Attlee's Government approach.

Funny eh? There's loads of space between the extremes that you list.

So I think a Labour Government under Starmer will deliver all those? Frankly, no. But I think they'll get closer than any of the alternatives. And, as a grown up, I choose the least flawed alternative when I vote.

What do YOU do, SS?

Whoa, hold on a minute. Someone came on here the other day and stressed how much better things were for the working class in the 1940s(Atlee's Labour Government) and the 1960s(Wilson's Labour Government), and you and others dissed it, saying things were better now, despite the fact that you've been saying for years how shit everything is under the Tories.

All this going round in circles has got me dizzy. Also, you asked what I would like to see done. That's simple; all the socialist pledges that Starmer deceitfully made just to get the Labour leadership, including the public ownership of the railways and utilities, and the cap on bankers' bonuses, amongst others.

I think the bloke's a fraud and not to be trusted.

[Bristol Red Rover]

Syds, BST, NC and others - I'd be interested to hear how you would see taxation and benefits as being most effective in helping everyone? Some detail including rates and thresholds of income tax, VAT, wealth tax, windfall tazes, ideal benefits system.

[danumdon]

There's not much in this world that anyone can guarantee these days.

But something you can guarantee is that a Labour party headed by that individual will not be enacting anything like its been spouting for the last couple of years. How can anyone vote for a party that has no foundation or solid footing but will sway with the wind and promise you the earth but in reality you will get the negative end of Tory light (if such a thing could ever be envisaged)

Now every man and his dog has been castigating these policies for the last decade, why would we want an even more inferior version of this policy?

We have a really big problem in the country today, we can't have a repeat of the stillborn policies we've had to endure under this government and its predecessor, but the alternative to this screams disaster over the horizon.

As a nation we need far better, but as things stand we won't be getting it. In this instance to vote for the least worst option is not going to recover this country out of this malaise. Its almost like going back to a wartime footing, we need a government of National unity to attempt to correct what will be under Labour many years of alternative policies that will take the country many steps backwards before it can ever attempt to take it forwards.

This is too important to get wrong.

[BillyStubbsTears]

BST, Sydney, NC Rover. You don't like the Tories, you don't like Galloway, you don't like Corbyn, you don't like the right, you don't like the left.

Just what the f*ck do you lot and Starmer stand for? What do you all want?

Please list it all out, because we're all baffled by it.

My preference would be for a combination of Keynesian economics, with Government being prepared to use fiscal stimulus aggressively when needed, investment in state education, the NHS and green power generation, together with a hard headed approach to the threat that Russia is now posing.

All in all, not a million miles from Attlee's Government approach.

Funny eh? There's loads of space between the extremes that you list.

So I think a Labour Government under Starmer will deliver all those? Frankly, no. But I think they'll get closer than any of the alternatives. And, as a grown up, I choose the least flawed alternative when I vote.

What do YOU do, SS?

Whoa, hold on a minute. Someone came on here the other day and stressed how much better things were for the working class in the 1940s(Atlee's Labour Government) and the 1960s(Wilson's Labour Government), and you and others dissed it, saying things were better now, despite the fact that you've been saying for years how shit everything is under the Tories.

All this going round in circles has got me dizzy. Also, you asked what I would like to see done. That's simple; all the socialist pledges that Starmer deceitfully made just to get the Labour leadership, including the public ownership of the railways and utilities, and the cap on bankers' bonuses, amongst others.

I think the bloke's a fraud and not to be trusted.

SS.

It's not hard really.

1) Things are WAY better now than they were in absolute terms.

2) Things are nowhere near as good now as they should be.

Economic development occurs because of two things. Developments in science and technology that make jobs easier and sensible government management.

Only an idiot would want us to return to the actual level of the economy in 1945-60. Things improve through developments in science and technology. I wouldn't want us to go back to most men earning wages through back breaking manual labour, living in houses without baths or central heating or inside toilets and the air being so full of shit you could cut it.

But the Attlee Govt understood how to set the economy moving in a better direction. They set us off on an unprecedented 30 year program of economic and societal improvements.

Of course generally the standard of life is better today than it was after those 30 years. Because generally things improve over time. But the last 15 years of Tory rule in particular has been a catastrophe. Little if any improvement in living standards. Reduction in life expectancy. An almost total stop in productivity growth.

It's not hard to see. One of the reasons there's so much anger around today is that, for the first time since the War, people's lives aren't getting better. Attlee would have known what to do.

[Bristol Red Rover]

There's not much in this world that anyone can guarantee these days.

But something you can guarantee is that a Labour party headed by that individual will not be enacting anything like its been spouting for the last couple of years. How can anyone vote for a party that has no foundation or solid footing but will sway with the wind and promise you the earth but in reality you will get the negative end of Tory light (if such a thing could ever be envisaged)

Now every man and his dog has been castigating these policies for the last decade, why would we want an even more inferior version of this policy?

We have a really big problem in the country today, we can't have a repeat of the stillborn policies we've had to endure under this government and its predecessor, but the alternative to this screams disaster over the horizon.

As a nation we need far better, but as things stand we won't be getting it. In this instance to vote for the least worst option is not going to recover this country out of this malaise. Its almost like going back to a wartime footing, we need a government of National unity to attempt to correct what will be under Labour many years of alternative policies that will take the country many steps backwards before it can ever attempt to take it forwards.

This is too important to get wrong.

Beyond the vague (it is) sketch above, what exactly are you wanting or is it a case of you waiting until someone presents you with something?

[SydneyRover]

BST, Sydney, NC Rover. You don't like the Tories, you don't like Galloway, you don't like Corbyn, you don't like the right, you don't like the left.

Just what the f*ck do you lot and Starmer stand for? What do you all want?

Please list it all out, because we're all baffled by it.

C'mon Steve you change your mind who you want for leader of labour at the drop of a hat and spend most of yous forum life criticising the same, what the hell!,you haven't even addressed the mick lynch comments telling you to grow up (naive) swallow your pride and vote the tories out.

[SydneyRover]

This may help some know where they sit

https://www.britainschoice.uk/the-quiz/

[danumdon]

Do we have any current or prospective leaders with any sort of semblance of these qualities to take us forward?

Many have said the last "True leader" Labour had was John Smith.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Go on DD. I'll bite.

What were Smith's qualities that put him above every Labour leader since?

[SydneyRover]

NC

It's the swearing filter on here going a bit OTT.

Copy and paste this whole link.

https://x.com/PostLeft**tch/status/1763757000012554545?s=20

Then, replace "**" with 'Wa"

I've read the same comments almost word for word on this forum

[ncRover]

BST, Sydney, NC Rover. You don't like the Tories, you don't like Galloway, you don't like Corbyn, you don't like the right, you don't like the left.

Just what the f*ck do you lot and Starmer stand for? What do you all want?

Please list it all out, because we're all baffled by it.

My preference would be for a combination of Keynesian economics, with Government being prepared to use fiscal stimulus aggressively when needed, investment in state education, the NHS and green power generation, together with a hard headed approach to the threat that Russia is now posing.

All in all, not a million miles from Attlee's Government approach.

Funny eh? There's loads of space between the extremes that you list.

So I think a Labour Government under Starmer will deliver all those? Frankly, no. But I think they'll get closer than any of the alternatives. And, as a grown up, I choose the least flawed alternative when I vote.

What do YOU do, SS?

Whoa, hold on a minute. Someone came on here the other day and stressed how much better things were for the working class in the 1940s(Atlee's Labour Government) and the 1960s(Wilson's Labour Government), and you and others dissed it, saying things were better now, despite the fact that you've been saying for years how shit everything is under the Tories.

All this going round in circles has got me dizzy. Also, you asked what I would like to see done. That's simple; all the socialist pledges that Starmer deceitfully made just to get the Labour leadership, including the public ownership of the railways and utilities, and the cap on bankers' bonuses, amongst others.

I think the bloke's a fraud and not to be trusted.

SS.

It's not hard really.

1) Things are WAY better now than they were in absolute terms.

2) Things are nowhere near as good now as they should be.

Economic development occurs because of two things. Developments in science and technology that make jobs easier and sensible government management.

Only an idiot would want us to return to the actual level of the economy in 1945-60. Things improve through developments in science and technology. I wouldn't want us to go back to most men earning wages through back breaking manual labour, living in houses without baths or central heating or inside toilets and the air being so full of shit you could cut it.

But the Attlee Govt understood how to set the economy moving in a better direction. They set us off on an unprecedented 30 year program of economic and societal improvements.

Of course generally the standard of life is better today than it was after those 30 years. Because generally things improve over time. But the last 15 years of Tory rule in particular has been a catastrophe. Little if any improvement in living standards. Reduction in life expectancy. An almost total stop in productivity growth.

It's not hard to see. One of the reasons there's so much anger around today is that, for the first time since the War, people's lives aren't getting better. Attlee would have known what to do.

Developments in science and technology are driven by free market capitalism. Socialism doesn’t create any incentives.

Companies compete for profit which drives the search for that cutting edge - innovation. Of which in turn makes our lives easier.

Entrepreneurs are incentivised to take risks to create new products and services.

All those things have made our lives better.

SS your post nearly gets to this point in asking how things have got better since then despite no “true” Labour leaders.

[drfchound]

BST, Sydney, NC Rover. You don't like the Tories, you don't like Galloway, you don't like Corbyn, you don't like the right, you don't like the left.

Just what the f*ck do you lot and Starmer stand for? What do you all want?

Please list it all out, because we're all baffled by it.

My preference would be for a combination of Keynesian economics, with Government being prepared to use fiscal stimulus aggressively when needed, investment in state education, the NHS and green power generation, together with a hard headed approach to the threat that Russia is now posing.

All in all, not a million miles from Attlee's Government approach.

Funny eh? There's loads of space between the extremes that you list.

So I think a Labour Government under Starmer will deliver all those? Frankly, no. But I think they'll get closer than any of the alternatives. And, as a grown up, I choose the least flawed alternative when I vote.

What do YOU do, SS?

Whoa, hold on a minute. Someone came on here the other day and stressed how much better things were for the working class in the 1940s(Atlee's Labour Government) and the 1960s(Wilson's Labour Government), and you and others dissed it, saying things were better now, despite the fact that you've been saying for years how shit everything is under the Tories.

All this going round in circles has got me dizzy. Also, you asked what I would like to see done. That's simple; all the socialist pledges that Starmer deceitfully made just to get the Labour leadership, including the public ownership of the railways and utilities, and the cap on bankers' bonuses, amongst others.

I think the bloke's a fraud and not to be trusted.

SS.

It's not hard really.

1) Things are WAY better now than they were in absolute terms.

2) Things are nowhere near as good now as they should be.

Economic development occurs because of two things. Developments in science and technology that make jobs easier and sensible government management.

Only an idiot would want us to return to the actual level of the economy in 1945-60. Things improve through developments in science and technology. I wouldn't want us to go back to most men earning wages through back breaking manual labour, living in houses without baths or central heating or inside toilets and the air being so full of shit you could cut it.

But the Attlee Govt understood how to set the economy moving in a better direction. They set us off on an unprecedented 30 year program of economic and societal improvements.

Of course generally the standard of life is better today than it was after those 30 years. Because generally things improve over time. But the last 15 years of Tory rule in particular has been a catastrophe. Little if any improvement in living standards. Reduction in life expectancy. An almost total stop in productivity growth.

It's not hard to see. One of the reasons there's so much anger around today is that, for the first time since the War, people's lives aren't getting better. Attlee would have known what to do.

Amazing that you say that when the majority of that time was under a Conservative government.
I even ticked a like on your post which is nice.

[danumdon]

Go on DD. I'll bite.

What were Smith's qualities that put him above every Labour leader since?

"What were Smith's qualities that put him above every Labour leader since?"

The fact that he was the Labour leader in a time very much like now with Labour about to take over from a frayed and dysfunctional Tory party, had he lived we would have never had the conundrum that was Blair.

He would have never considered the disaster for this country and the whole world that was Iraq and the WMD farce. The fact we suffer to this day from that disaster is something that still reverberates in our society. Can you imagine a Labour party coming to power in 97 without Blair? im thinking the whole last twenty years would of been massively different for this country.

We will never know for sure but everything was in place for a successful centre left government that would have taken the thinking in this country away from a Cameron led government and all the ramifications that have become of it.

[scawsby steve]

BST, Sydney, NC Rover. You don't like the Tories, you don't like Galloway, you don't like Corbyn, you don't like the right, you don't like the left.

Just what the f*ck do you lot and Starmer stand for? What do you all want?

Please list it all out, because we're all baffled by it.

My preference would be for a combination of Keynesian economics, with Government being prepared to use fiscal stimulus aggressively when needed, investment in state education, the NHS and green power generation, together with a hard headed approach to the threat that Russia is now posing.

All in all, not a million miles from Attlee's Government approach.

Funny eh? There's loads of space between the extremes that you list.

So I think a Labour Government under Starmer will deliver all those? Frankly, no. But I think they'll get closer than any of the alternatives. And, as a grown up, I choose the least flawed alternative when I vote.

What do YOU do, SS?

Whoa, hold on a minute. Someone came on here the other day and stressed how much better things were for the working class in the 1940s(Atlee's Labour Government) and the 1960s(Wilson's Labour Government), and you and others dissed it, saying things were better now, despite the fact that you've been saying for years how shit everything is under the Tories.

All this going round in circles has got me dizzy. Also, you asked what I would like to see done. That's simple; all the socialist pledges that Starmer deceitfully made just to get the Labour leadership, including the public ownership of the railways and utilities, and the cap on bankers' bonuses, amongst others.

I think the bloke's a fraud and not to be trusted.

SS.

It's not hard really.

1) Things are WAY better now than they were in absolute terms.

2) Things are nowhere near as good now as they should be.

Economic development occurs because of two things. Developments in science and technology that make jobs easier and sensible government management.

Only an idiot would want us to return to the actual level of the economy in 1945-60. Things improve through developments in science and technology. I wouldn't want us to go back to most men earning wages through back breaking manual labour, living in houses without baths or central heating or inside toilets and the air being so full of shit you could cut it.

But the Attlee Govt understood how to set the economy moving in a better direction. They set us off on an unprecedented 30 year program of economic and societal improvements.

Of course generally the standard of life is better today than it was after those 30 years. Because generally things improve over time. But the last 15 years of Tory rule in particular has been a catastrophe. Little if any improvement in living standards. Reduction in life expectancy. An almost total stop in productivity growth.

It's not hard to see. One of the reasons there's so much anger around today is that, for the first time since the War, people's lives aren't getting better. Attlee would have known what to do.

Developments in science and technology are driven by free market capitalism. Socialism doesn’t create any incentives.

Companies compete for profit which drives the search for that cutting edge - innovation. Of which in turn makes our lives easier.

Entrepreneurs are incentivised to take risks to create new products and services.

All those things have made our lives better.

SS your post nearly gets to this point in asking how things have got better since then despite no “true” Labour leaders.

That's a brilliant advert for the Tory Party, NC.

[scawsby steve]

BST, Sydney, NC Rover. You don't like the Tories, you don't like Galloway, you don't like Corbyn, you don't like the right, you don't like the left.

Just what the f*ck do you lot and Starmer stand for? What do you all want?

Please list it all out, because we're all baffled by it.

C'mon Steve you change your mind who you want for leader of labour at the drop of a hat and spend most of yous forum life criticising the same, what the hell!,you haven't even addressed the mick lynch comments telling you to grow up (naive) swallow your pride and vote the tories out.

Utter gobbledegook as usual.

[tyke1962]

Tyke.

I'll have whatever sized bet you want that a) The Tories won't be back in in 5 years, and
b) The Tories will never win an election under Braverman.

You're a strange one. Total and utter insistence that Labour will not do any good. Total refusal to even look at all the positive things that Labour did last time. I really don't get it.

But it isn't 1997 Billy , it's not even 2010 , at least your a bit nearer to 2024 I'll give you that , the Tories still think it's 1988 .

Unless the two major parties dump this market led economic model and replace it with something better then no bugga can fix it .

I wouldn't underestimate Braverman if I was you Billy , that's not an endorsement either for her .

Yep, that's just what the UK needs to branch out with a new version of economics ........... different to everywhere else in the world.

Any ideas what this new model looks like tyke?

It's main focus has to be solving inequality , inequality is the root cause of the majority of our problems .

You solve that and all the tentacles that inequality provides such as , addiction , mental health , crime , the far right , family breakdown , family debt will lower considerably .

Nobody in politics is talking about inequality , in fact they are doing the opposite .

Even Labour won't cap bankers bonuses for instance .

That says to me neither party know what the real issue is .

So therefore how on earth can they solve it .

[SydneyRover]

Tyke.

I'll have whatever sized bet you want that a) The Tories won't be back in in 5 years, and
b) The Tories will never win an election under Braverman.

You're a strange one. Total and utter insistence that Labour will not do any good. Total refusal to even look at all the positive things that Labour did last time. I really don't get it.

But it isn't 1997 Billy , it's not even 2010 , at least your a bit nearer to 2024 I'll give you that , the Tories still think it's 1988 .

Unless the two major parties dump this market led economic model and replace it with something better then no bugga can fix it .

I wouldn't underestimate Braverman if I was you Billy , that's not an endorsement either for her .

Yep, that's just what the UK needs to branch out with a new version of economics ........... different to everywhere else in the world.

Any ideas what this new model looks like tyke?

It's main focus has to be solving inequality , inequality is the root cause of the majority of our problems .

You solve that and all the tentacles that inequality provides such as , addiction , mental health , crime , the far right , family breakdown , family debt will lower considerably .

Nobody in politics is talking about inequality , in fact they are doing the opposite .

Even Labour won't cap bankers bonuses for instance .

That says to me neither party know what the real issue is .

So therefore how on earth can they solve it .

bloody typical

Add a gazillion more points into the topic without answering the very question your comment poses, what will replace a market economy?

[Sprotyrover]

Tyke.

I'll have whatever sized bet you want that a) The Tories won't be back in in 5 years, and
b) The Tories will never win an election under Braverman.

You're a strange one. Total and utter insistence that Labour will not do any good. Total refusal to even look at all the positive things that Labour did last time. I really don't get it.

But it isn't 1997 Billy , it's not even 2010 , at least your a bit nearer to 2024 I'll give you that , the Tories still think it's 1988 .

Unless the two major parties dump this market led economic model and replace it with something better then no bugga can fix it .

I wouldn't underestimate Braverman if I was you Billy , that's not an endorsement either for her .

Yep, that's just what the UK needs to branch out with a new version of economics ........... different to everywhere else in the world.

Any ideas what this new model looks like tyke?

It's main focus has to be solving inequality , inequality is the root cause of the majority of our problems .

You solve that and all the tentacles that inequality provides such as , addiction , mental health , crime , the far right , family breakdown , family debt will lower considerably .

Nobody in politics is talking about inequality , in fact they are doing the opposite .

Even Labour won't cap bankers bonuses for instance .

That says to me neither party know what the real issue is .

So therefore how on earth can they solve it .

bloody typical

Add a gazillion more points into the topic without answering the very question your comment poses, what will replace a market economy?

Can you answer my question on the Putin thread Syd?

[Ldr]

Tyke.

I'll have whatever sized bet you want that a) The Tories won't be back in in 5 years, and
b) The Tories will never win an election under Braverman.

You're a strange one. Total and utter insistence that Labour will not do any good. Total refusal to even look at all the positive things that Labour did last time. I really don't get it.

But it isn't 1997 Billy , it's not even 2010 , at least your a bit nearer to 2024 I'll give you that , the Tories still think it's 1988 .

Unless the two major parties dump this market led economic model and replace it with something better then no bugga can fix it .

I wouldn't underestimate Braverman if I was you Billy , that's not an endorsement either for her .

Yep, that's just what the UK needs to branch out with a new version of economics ........... different to everywhere else in the world.

Any ideas what this new model looks like tyke?

It's main focus has to be solving inequality , inequality is the root cause of the majority of our problems .

You solve that and all the tentacles that inequality provides such as , addiction , mental health , crime , the far right , family breakdown , family debt will lower considerably .

Nobody in politics is talking about inequality , in fact they are doing the opposite .

Even Labour won't cap bankers bonuses for instance .

That says to me neither party know what the real issue is .

So therefore how on earth can they solve it .

bloody typical

Add a gazillion more points into the topic without answering the very question your comment poses, what will replace a market economy?

Can you answer my question on the Putin thread Syd?

Don’t feed the troll Sprot

[MachoMadness]

That AI, eh?

https://twitter.com/PostLeft**tch/status/1763757000012554545

Galloway's face with a Farage rant coming out of his mouth.

But yeah, the horseshoe theory is b*llocks.

If you're having to use the words of Galloway to back up anything, then yeah, it probably is b*llocks. He's a populist, and as many in this country are politically muddled, so too is he. He'll say what he needs to to get elected.

His party is anti-trans rights and anti-Net Zero, for example. Two positions that are anathema to the left and hard left. His party slogan is "for the workers, not the wokers." Almost as if he's pitching himself to voters in an economically left wing, socially conservative seat!

[ncRover]

New Ipsos poll for the Evening Standard post-Rochdale:

Lab 47%
Con 20%
LD 9%
Green 8%
Reform 8%

It seems this forum is the only place where Starmer is in trouble!

[TommyC]

BST, Sydney, NC Rover. You don't like the Tories, you don't like Galloway, you don't like Corbyn, you don't like the right, you don't like the left.

Just what the f*ck do you lot and Starmer stand for? What do you all want?

Please list it all out, because we're all baffled by it.

My preference would be for a combination of Keynesian economics, with Government being prepared to use fiscal stimulus aggressively when needed, investment in state education, the NHS and green power generation, together with a hard headed approach to the threat that Russia is now posing.

All in all, not a million miles from Attlee's Government approach.

Funny eh? There's loads of space between the extremes that you list.

So I think a Labour Government under Starmer will deliver all those? Frankly, no. But I think they'll get closer than any of the alternatives. And, as a grown up, I choose the least flawed alternative when I vote.

What do YOU do, SS?

Whoa, hold on a minute. Someone came on here the other day and stressed how much better things were for the working class in the 1940s(Atlee's Labour Government) and the 1960s(Wilson's Labour Government), and you and others dissed it, saying things were better now, despite the fact that you've been saying for years how shit everything is under the Tories.

All this going round in circles has got me dizzy. Also, you asked what I would like to see done. That's simple; all the socialist pledges that Starmer deceitfully made just to get the Labour leadership, including the public ownership of the railways and utilities, and the cap on bankers' bonuses, amongst others.

I think the bloke's a fraud and not to be trusted.

SS.

It's not hard really.

1) Things are WAY better now than they were in absolute terms.

2) Things are nowhere near as good now as they should be.

Economic development occurs because of two things. Developments in science and technology that make jobs easier and sensible government management.

Only an idiot would want us to return to the actual level of the economy in 1945-60. Things improve through developments in science and technology. I wouldn't want us to go back to most men earning wages through back breaking manual labour, living in houses without baths or central heating or inside toilets and the air being so full of shit you could cut it.

But the Attlee Govt understood how to set the economy moving in a better direction. They set us off on an unprecedented 30 year program of economic and societal improvements.

Of course generally the standard of life is better today than it was after those 30 years. Because generally things improve over time. But the last 15 years of Tory rule in particular has been a catastrophe. Little if any improvement in living standards. Reduction in life expectancy. An almost total stop in productivity growth.

It's not hard to see. One of the reasons there's so much anger around today is that, for the first time since the War, people's lives aren't getting better. Attlee would have known what to do.

I properly began my working life in the professional services sector in 2008 after Uni and post grad stuff. The general feeling amongst those of a similar age to me is that our generation havent really experienced any economic good times. We joined our profession slap bang at the start of the banking crisis and recession and it feels like the global economic picture has been gloomy throughout our working lives.  Banking crisis and recession dominated the early 2010s and it seems like we still hadnt got over that by the time COVID came along. I do struggle therefore to accept there was a great deal any Government could have done to isolate us from what were essentially global problems, not domestic. Yes there were/are certain levers than could be pulled domesticaly that could have affected it to a realtively minor degree but ultimately we were in the same boat as everyone else. IMF data comparing UK growth with that of Germany and the US for the period 2010 to 2020 was 1.5% for the UK compared with 2.1% for the US and 1.6% for Germany. So yes, we did perform slightly worse but ultimately that needs to be looked at in the context of the entire world struggling as well. The Tories may very well have made a mess of certain things and austerity may very well not have been the correct way, however it seems something of an exaggeration to lay it all at the door of the Tories. I dont really believe it would have made a huge difference either way if we'd had a Labour government or a Tory government for the last 15 years, it would still have been a rough 15 years with a stagnant economy. Saying the Tories are primarily responsible for the last 15 years of economic malaise is just as inaccurate as saying that New Labour were the primary reason for the economic boom years that preceeded it. Yes they were/are in a position to make adjustments that can make a difference to economic performance, but I the global economic picture plays a far bigger part surely?

[SydneyRover]

TC, try reading this, I guess you may disagree and it is from the guardian but the information is there.

If you disagree with what is in the article and as like me you're not an economist, find a reputable economist that support another pov.

The Conservatives’ economic record since 2010 in 10 charts
Richard Partington
Economics correspondent

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/mar/02/conservatives-economic-record-budget-deficit-gdp-tax-tory-budget

[TommyC]

I'm not really disagreeing with you or the article though Syd. Economic performance for the last 15 years has been terrible. How could anyone argue otherwise?!

What I'm saying is that the extent to which it can be blamed on the party that has been in Government for the last 15 years is being somewhat overstated, including by that Article. Do you really think things would be massively different if we'd had a Labour government for the last 15 years? I mean the stuff you see and experience in every day life, the cost of living, how much money you get in your pay packet, NHS waiting lists etc. A different Government may indeed have been better at tinkering around the edges and we may indeed be in a better position now had Labour been in power. I'm absolutely happy to acknoweldge that. However, the effect of hat positive impact they may have had, is still a drop in the ocean when placed in the context of a global economic picture that has been terrible for everyone.

[drfchound]

TC, you make some excellent observations in your two above posts which many people will see and understand to be correct.
Others will try to dissuade you and lecture you on why you are wrong, which is their right of course.
It will be interesting to read what will inevitably follow.
I’m just wondering though why you are talking about 15 years of Tory government when it is actually coming up to 14 years.
I spotted that another poster had said 15 years a day or two ago but I thought it was just to back up his dislike of the Tory’s.

[TommyC]

TC, you make some excellent observations in your two above posts which many people will see and understand to be correct.
Others will try to dissuade you and lecture you on why you are wrong, which is their right of course.
It will be interesting to read what will inevitably follow.
I’m just wondering though why you are talking about 15 years of Tory government when it is actually coming up to 14 years.
I spotted that another poster had said 15 years a day or two ago but I thought it was just to back up his dislike of the Tory’s.

Good point regarding the 15/14 years. I hadnt actually counted but just took it from what another poster said.

Yes I think it will be very interesting to see what happens over the next few years of Labour rule. I look forward to seing whether they do indeed have the magic wand required to fix our broken economy.

I'm reminded of the rather tasteless letter left by Labour Chief Secretary to the Treasury Liam Byrne when the Tories got in back in 2010. He left a note on his desk for his Conservative successor that simply said "I'm afraid there is no money left....signed Liam Byrne." 

 

[danumdon]

New Ipsos poll for the Evening Standard post-Rochdale:

Lab 47%
Con 20%
LD 9%
Green 8%
Reform 8%

It seems this forum is the only place where Starmer is in trouble!

A bit disingenuous to say he's in trouble with a 4th division football teams off topic forum!

What will happen in the future though is s different matter, if some on here are to be believed, if Starmer has the dubious task of becoming the Prim Minister then he is inheriting the back streets to hell, when you analyse the state of the economy he's going to have to be  either a magician, genius or just Mr Lucky, take your pick.

I'm thinking along the lines that his real grief starts if he does succeed to power then his road will be very long, very hard and with more than the odd pitfall or twenty to negotiate .

But then again we can spend the next 5 years blaming the previous administrations, that always helps.

[albie]

Galloway is a cynical exploiter of the main chance, who happens to be in the right place at the right time on Gaza.

The Blue/Red Uniparty has gifted him the seat by supporting Israel throughout the conflict, and trying to water down any action to prevent their land grab.
The big takeaway is how far from public opinion the main parties are on this.

Labour are heavily compromised with Israeli funding, and the Starmer declaration that he is a "Zionist without qualification".
Basically that means that they have disowned Muslim voters, for whom this is a red line issue.

There is also the issue of trustworthyness.
Keith is a fraudster, who won the Labour leadership on a raft of pledges he has then cynically set aside.

So not only does he have no valid democratic mandate to lead Labour, but his word is known to be worthless beyond the short term expedient.
Into this void will come any savvy operator pushing the "not Rishi or Keith" sales pitch.

[Sprotyrover]

Let’s we how bad things are on Wednesday, sounds like there will be no major Tax giveaway and if that’s the case the next Government won’t have much leeway for any spending increases either!