Cutting spending is not a binary choice. Governments should always be reviewing how they spend the publics money, and making savings where saving can be found is always a good idea. Where you target those cuts is the important thing.
The Tories unleashed indiscriminate spending cuts targeted at the most vulnerable people in the country, while reducing the tax burden on the more wealthy. It was ideological.
(Incidentally the IMF study that claimed that 50% of all Government spending is wasted and gave the Tories the justification to launch indiscriminate cuts was demonstrated to be be flawed and they revised their advise, on the basis that it depends what youâre cutting - policies that direct money towards poorer people tend to act as economic stimulus and action return money in the long run. The Tories chose to ignore this and press on)
If the Tories cuts were needed, why did the economy not improve? Why did wages continue to stagnate? Why did the Tories continually miss their own targets on debt?
Why were there about 20 billionaires in 2010 and more that 200 when we finally kicked them out? Does that suggest good governance?
No.
Stop being such a condescending prick. This is why people fall out with you.
I donât vote just Labour because Iâm a Labour Supporter. I support Labour because I think that they are the best option to govern the country. Not perfect and always compromised. But within the system we have they are the best.
This isnât football, and Iâm not a child.
Not compared to previous leaders, but he is the best on offer at the minute, and some of the options (Iâm thinking of Farage) are properly terrifying.
No. I think we are too conditioned as a nation to expect instant results. That Labour are coming under criticism for not fixing an economy that was on its knees after nine months of power is fucking absurd. I fully expect Reform to win the next election, because the Great British public really is that thick.
There is plenty that Labour can do in their first term, but not a lot that will be felt downstream. The damage to the economy from austerity, Brexit, the mis-management of covid, Liz Truss, and the widening gap between rich and poor, is going to take a generation to recover from.
Just been Googling historic income tax rates. Worth noting that the highest rate if income tax was at tomes in excess of 90% in the US and UK.
In the 1950âs and 60âs it was still in excess of 75% i the UK. This era in the US and I would probably say the UK coincided with sognificant periods of growth and low weslth inequality.
That tax level has been declining ever since while the wealth gap has been increasing.
Well it might be a sign of my growing detachment from politics altogether , but donât they have the grand total of five seats atm , and wouldnât that require them to win about another three hundred to get that piece of shit into Downing St. ?
They had about 14% of the vote in the general election. Tories about 24% and Labour 34%.
There is already a lot of concern amongst Labour MPs in red wall seats in particular about growing support for Reform in their areas (hence why we started seeing those stories about local labour teams pushing narratives on being tougher on immigration and using leaflets with similar colour/ style to those of Reform).
Given the conservatives have shown nothing under Badenoch, it is questionable whether any support that would usually return to the tories will do next election. Some of that may go to Reform instead if they appear more credible.
Meanwhile Labour may also continue bleeding off support to Greens and independents.
Huh, i suggest both parties are to blame and you make excuses for Labour.
Okay, no, it wasnât Labourâs fault for a sub prime housing market collapse in the UK. Was it the Tories fault for a global pandemic which hit the whole world economically.
I am as bored as you in terms of making excuses. The thing is I am not making excuses but you are.
The country is where it is because of combined failures. You will refer to 14 years of austerity from the Tories but fail to understand that the Tories were given 14 years to implement austerity because Labour were a weak opposition during that period. It took 14 years of Tory austerity for the Country to elect Labour and even then it was because Reform took a proportion of the Tory voters.
If it was an accepted protocol then he has no need to justify himself or apologise. I accept that using this point in my argument was ill informed and acknowledge the tongue in cheek humour, but by his own words Liam Byrne was tasked with cutting spending.
I donât agree with your view that the Economy was on course to return to previous prosperity.
I do agree with your point about party politics not acknowledging previous governments success or at least its difficulties.
This is my problem with Politics, it is no longer about being a strong Government, itâs about not being as bad as the other party.
As acknowledged in my response to @RedWhippet my use of this point as a reason in my argument was ill informed in terms of context.
However, the article and his comments highlight that he was given the task of implementing spending cuts.
Nb it was a Lib-dem MP who brought the note to media attention.
Read the article, it wasnât a review on how the Government could be more efficient. It was a review on how to cut spending due to a ÂŁ40bn defect as a result of the recession.
Can you please provide factual evidence for your statements.
In terms of cuts aimed at the poor, are Labour not continuing this trend? I mean the Winter allowance was removed just in time for winter and I am sure there was an announcement on Saturday about cuts to disability welfare.
How am I being a condescending prick? The funny thing is you then follow it up by saying you are not a child? Calling me a prick amongst other insults is not very adult like is it?
If people fall out with me, is it my fault that I offer a different opinion? I mean thatâs petty. I am very rarely rude, unlike yourself. I donât label people, unlike yourself, I donât proclaim to be right, unlike yourself, I respect other peopleâs opinions, unlike yourself. I have also stepped back on a number of occasions because the debate was getting heated.
Yawn.
Your trusted Guardian.
Note, in 2010 the wealth of the richest 1000 people increased by 30% on the back of the Financial crisis. The biggest annual increase in 22 years. Remind me who oversaw the Financial crisisâŚâŚ
The Sunday Times also states there were 53 billionaires in the UK in 2010.
In May 2024 there were 165 down from 177 in 2022.
And I suppose the UK is the only Country to see an increase in billionairesâŚ.
Sorry, I had to repeat a quote.
You state, âwhen we finally kicked them outâ. Can I ask who is âweâ and who is âthemâ? I mean, to me it sounds like âweâ represents Labour and âthemâ refers to the Tories.
The use of âfinallyâ suggests an historical agenda, but as you say you only vote Labour because they are the best optionâŚ.
You are right, I mean the more vocal of us have definitely judged Brexit over a short period of time and expected instant results.
Jesus thereâs a world of difference between being blamed for something that happened in the US triggering a global meltdown (where tge governments management was praised) to a pandemic that also hit everyone hard but seriously mismanaging it.
I suppose youre supportive of PPE procurement via Michelle Moane and equipment from your pub landlord? Eat out to spread your virus is also great idea I suppose. Let me guess, its only a cold.
Just Thatcher actually. Her philosophy of so called âgreater personal libertyâ directly benefitted the already wealthy.
After that its been a mix of either managing things within that framework or just steal a bit more from the state, double down on Thatcherism basically
People like Rishi Sunak were one of those. He was a hedge fund manager and short traded the fall.
The rich always benefit from stuff like this. Normal people donât. Youâve just highlighted one area where it is broken where extreme events increase the transition of wealth.
