-
https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1746127194911322175?t=937n-yc6xJkvVK8P3oaCQw&s=19
25 year fixed rate mortgages
Vat on private schools in first budget
No tax increases including wealth taxes
Scaling back 28bn Green investment -
Times interview above (Reeves, not Starmer)
I see being pro-worker and pro-business as two sides of the same coin.
Which funnily enough, you generally have to land on one side or the other of the coin ...
-
Labour are apparently into edging....
I quite like the idea of 25 year mortgages if they are fully portable without penalty or limits and have sufficiently low interest rates.
-
Problem is it doesn't fix supply, just keeps driving demand
-
True, but it would still be a good thing to have even if supply is sorted. Which I think will always be something of a challenge - we'll never want to build absolutely everywhere so supply will always be to some extent constrained
-
I would much rather rental price control, which should also be much more impactful because of the supply issues as mentioned and will generally help people who are actually struggling.
But obviously that isn't a winner with the voters he's trying to appeal to so I guess it's more Tory 2.0 policies for the foreseeable
-
i think the tail end of that piece is quite enlightening to where labour economic fiscal policy is at,
Reeves suggested that she had no choice but to accept the assumption that public spending will rise by just 1 per cent overall from 2025, meaning significant cuts to unprotected departments. Asked if she would increase public spending, she said: “An incoming government doesn’t choose its inheritance. I have been really clear we are going to stick to our fiscal rules.”
She said that public spending could only rise if the economy grew. “I don’t want to see a return to austerity, but to be able to generate the money to sustainably invest in our public services, you’ve got to grow the economy.”
just seems an untennable position to address any of the increasingly large problems which face the under 40's today (elderly care, child care, housing, falling real terms wages, generational wealth evaporating etc), paired with this insistance of not addressing wealth inequality driven by austerity budgets of the last 15 years with the refusal to address capital gains or top rate taxes it's hard to see anything inspiring even if one focuses on the area of policy labour is rallying behind while making sacrificial lambs to ideals elsewhere.
They of course, in all these areas, offer schemes along the lines of the 25 year mortgage in other areas, nice ideas that help those argubly, least affected by the issues, relatively speaking. even judged in context of their objective (siezing centre right ground to topple tories by a large margin), this shows a distinct lack of vision or strategy for anything, feels like one is reading an economics text book from the 90's.
-
who cares if he's morally bankrupt eh?
-
It's amazing to me that Starmer's being slagged for giving our allies the benefit of the doubt, when Corbyn did exactly the same, but from the other side.
If the west or its allies had done something that looked bad, Corbyn would be fire and brimstone, no hesitation. But in the exact same situation where Russia or China or Iran had done the same thing, it'd all be 'let's wait for the judgement from the court' and 'why don't we send samples' and 'let the enquiry do their work'.
You could argue there's an equivalent moral hypocrisy between Corbyn and Starmer on these points, but I don't think you level a charge of moral bankruptcy at Starmer without levelling the exact same charge at Corbyn.
I don't say this as someone who supports Israel btw. They're engaging in ethnic cleansing and murder on an industrial scale. But the principle here is identical. The only difference is that Starmer is playing realpolitik with our erstwhile democratic allies; Corbyn played realpolitik with our ideological enemies.
-
😄
-
Absolutely, I'm just making the point that for some people Israel ARE the bad guys and for others they're a strategic ally in an unstable region. The extent to which the benefit of the doubt gets extended is directly related to the extent to which they're seen as ideological allies.
It wasn't quite what I was trying to do but looking at that last sentence, it's as elegant an expression of party politics as I've ever come up with.
-
who on earth could have predicted this.
1 Attachment
-
On the wrong side of history but I suppose it won't matter once we are all dead.
greentricky
branwen
Grumpy_Git
andyfallsoff
Maj
Big_Ted
chickenbones
frankenbike
ReekBlefs
hugo7
moocher
Eejit
slippers
mashton
Prole.
greytyke-
Post a reply
About
That Starmer fella...
Posted by
Just in case you were forgetting that he’s a Tory cunt:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/jan/12/flagship-labour-plan-scrap-non-dom-tax-breaks