Page 1 of 1

Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Mon 04 Dec, 2023 6:44 am
by refitman
Morning all.

Re: Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Mon 04 Dec, 2023 9:20 am
by frog222
Morning refit

From The Times --


Re: Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Mon 04 Dec, 2023 9:26 am
by frog222
One detail -- in all the photos I've seen his nose points to the Right ...

Re: Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Mon 04 Dec, 2023 9:41 am
by gilsey
McFadden insisted that Starmer was paying tribute to her effectiveness, not her policies.
Sure he was.

Re: Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Mon 04 Dec, 2023 10:00 am
by gilsey
McTernan's got out of the right (left) side of the bed today though.

James Meadway
@meadwaj

Starting the week agreeing with ex Blair adviser
@johnmcternan
: “Keir Starmer’s praise of Margaret Thatcher in the Sunday Telegraph… wins over no wavering voters but risks losing the goodwill of a wide range of his supporters, old and new.”

Re: Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Mon 04 Dec, 2023 10:06 am
by frog222
God that Balls is so fucking smug !

Up there in the Punchability League with Jenrick.



Thatcher "Britain isn't working --"

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... 1-2017.png

Re: Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Mon 04 Dec, 2023 10:38 am
by gilsey
'the voice of a handful of cranks'


Re: Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Mon 04 Dec, 2023 12:33 pm
by AnatolyKasparov
The problem is, however, that our press still has a massively disproportionate role in dictating how the broadcasters cover politics.

Change that, and even a risk averse Labour party can safely ignore them.

Re: Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Mon 04 Dec, 2023 1:06 pm
by refitman
Austerity forever! Wooo!

Re: Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Mon 04 Dec, 2023 2:17 pm
by frog222
Britain has moved from being a relatively high-tax country when I was born in the 1960s to, by western European standards, a low-tax one now. That is a perfectly reasonable choice, of lower taxes on the one hand, worse infrastructure and a less comprehensive welfare state on the other.
But unless we are prepared to make some very big choices on the spending side, the day of reckoning was always bound to arrive. By big choices, I don’t mean another review of public sector efficiency, important though that is; I mean rationing access to health services, means-testing the state pension, halving defence spending, ending support for childcare, absolutely slashing benefits for the poor. That sort of big choice.

It took a decade of austerity to get spending back to its pre-financial crisis level. It will take nothing short of a repeat to wrestle it down again. In one sense, this government was simply unfortunate that the day of reckoning arrived on its watch. It was hurried on by the extra borrowing that occurred during Covid, by those higher interest rates and by poor growth (which is not just a British phenomenon). But it was always going to arrive.

Both main parties will be in denial at the next election. The chancellor “met” his fiscal rules only because his spending plans imply another sharp cut in public investment spending and another severe dose of austerity for most public services. Under his “tax cuts”, taxes will still rise to record levels. Labour will face the same nasty trade-offs if it takes office. The party has indicated that it wants debt to fall. If it prioritises an additional £20 billion of spending on green investment projects, its room for manoeuvre on other spending priorities will be even more constrained.

In light of the present elevated tax burden, Labour’s reluctance to announce further significant tax increases is as understandable, as is that of the existing government. Yet wishful thinking will not keep us out of a debt-interest-fuelled doom loop. Only hard choices will do that.

We need either a serious re-evaluation of our welfare state or we need to contemplate getting used to taxes remaining higher than they have been at any point in the past 70 years. Or possibly rising further still. "

Paul Johnson is director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Follow him on @PJTheEconomist

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/talk ... -xp67lbkjm

Alternatives will be suggested by James Meadway, Richard Murphy and Grace Blakely , ET AL !

Re: Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Mon 04 Dec, 2023 2:27 pm
by AnatolyKasparov
Only one of those is actually any use (the first one)

Re: Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Mon 04 Dec, 2023 6:49 pm
by Sky'sGoneOut
So already exorbitant social care costs are going to go through the roof just so the Tories can appease the racists in their own party and the right wing press.

Outstanding. This is definitely how you run a country.

Re: Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Mon 04 Dec, 2023 10:21 pm
by AnatolyKasparov
Its not even actually about how wealthy the immigrant is either, but their native would be spouse. WTF??

Re: Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Mon 04 Dec, 2023 11:18 pm
by refitman

Re: Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Mon 04 Dec, 2023 11:33 pm
by gilsey
We are not amazed.

Re: Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Mon 04 Dec, 2023 11:34 pm
by AnatolyKasparov
Government lost a whipped vote in the Commons tonight, the first under Sunak. Might not be the last though.

Re: Monday 4th Decemeber 2023

Posted: Tue 05 Dec, 2023 12:20 am
by Sky'sGoneOut
Labour really are beginning to look utterly repellent.

When even John McTernan is saying they're swinging too far to the right you know something's gone seriously wrong.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... our-tories