news & politics:discussion

[Neil]

We're against cluster bombs but we're not against the usa finding a cheap and easy way of disposing of their obsolete stockpile also because it arms Ukraine at zero cost to the us govt.

[clarkete]

4 hours ago, lost said:

I'm coming to the conclusion you have to be a complete moron to want to be a politician. Same salary as a bog standard middle manager role in tech or finance but with the added bonus of weirdo's turning up at your wedding 6 years after you've left office or in extreme examples getting murdered.

It's certainly not always a bed of roses, but if you think their only benefit is salary look harder.

These days having your London flat paid for, even if your main home is greater London, paying your wife or kids 40 to 75 grand per year to work for you, potential numerous other jobs (even if there's a clear conflict of interest), massive extra payments for cabinet roles, generous pension, fabulous potential after standing down.

https://news.sky.com/story/george-osbornes-evening-standard-role-raises-potential-conflicts-of-interest-10805063

 

https://news.sky.com/story/boris-johnsons-pay-accounts-for-85-of-all-outside-earnings-declared-by-mps-so-far-this-year-12828729

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2420625/MP-Nadine-Dorries-pays-daughters-75k-public-purse-work-office.html

 

https://news.sky.com/story/westminster-accounts-mps-earn-17-1m-on-top-of-their-salaries-since-the-last-election-with-tories-taking-15-4m-12758768

 

Edited July 9, 2023 by clarkete

[lost]

5 hours ago, clarkete said:

 if you think their only benefit is salary look harder.

I don't. Most mid to senior positions have benefits outside of the base salary. Bonus, Share options etc..

[steviewevie]

[steviewevie]

 

[clarkete]

2 hours ago, lost said:

I don't. Most mid to senior positions have benefits outside of the base salary. Bonus, Share options etc..

Did you look at anything I shared?

Those are very far from in the sane league to ten, twenty, thirty percent that a regular job would get. 

You know I don't normally write in here - but there have been some extraordinary abuses of power in the last thirteen years and you started this by sympathising with one of the architects of austerity on the day he married his former mistress - stuff him. 

[Neil]

Anyone got any gossip for who the bbc presenter is who has been paying for nude piccies.

[Neil]

13 hours ago, lost said:

I'm coming to the conclusion you have to be a complete moron to want to be a politician.

It's probably why our politicians are morons

[steviewevie]

35 minutes ago, Neil said:

Anyone got any gossip for who the bbc presenter is who has been paying for nude piccies.

not unless you want to end up in court facing libel.

[Kurosagi]

3 hours ago, steviewevie said:

This is hair pullingly irritating.

Yes, I understand (but don't like) the argument for appealing to the tory voters to make sure they win the election (and this is straight out of the Mandy New Labour playbook). But after 15 years of being in opposition and week after week tearing a hole in the tories for their failed approach of endless austerity, what's their Big Idea once in power? More of the same.

I thought it was a sensible approach in '97 for credibility and so held my nose, but the country is in a much worse position currently. The polls show just how busted and untrusted the tories are to run things amongst their own voters and yet Keir's Big Idea is to do more of what the muppets who busted the country did.

I honestly don't think he gets it. The 'centre' ground just want to be reassured, as always, that Labour won't do anything radical, but those centre ground voters on both sides are all too aware that this term of tory governance has been way too radical and busted the country in the process.

This election campaign is going to be the most bleak and negative I think we'll have ever seen.

<insert endless banging head emojis>

[Ozanne]

2 minutes ago, Kurosagi said:

This is hair pullingly irritating.

Yes, I understand (but don't like) the argument for appealing to the tory voters to make sure they win the election (and this is straight out of the Mandy New Labour playbook). But after 15 years of being in opposition and week after week tearing a hole in the tories for their failed approach of endless austerity, what's their Big Idea once in power? More of the same.

I thought it was a sensible approach in '97 for credibility and so held my nose, but the country is in a much worse position currently. The polls show just how busted and untrusted the tories are to run things amongst their own voters and yet Keir's Big Idea is to do more of what the muppets who busted the country did.

I honestly don't think he gets it. The 'centre' ground just want to be reassured, as always, that Labour won't do anything radical, but those centre ground voters on both sides are all too aware that this term of tory governance has been way too radical and busted the country in the process.

This election campaign is going to be the most bleak and negative I think we'll have ever seen.

<insert endless banging head emojis>

If Labour come out with massive spending plans then the Tories and the media will jump on that to say it’s same old Labour being reckless with public money. The voters will buy it because they always do  and then potentially Labour do worse at the election.

You even say it in your post, in 97 Labour we’re saying the same things and look how it turned out. Judge them for what they do when in power not what they say to try to obtain it. 

[pink_triangle]

17 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

If Labour come out with massive spending plans then the Tories and the media will jump on that to say it’s same old Labour being reckless with public money. The voters will buy it because they always do  and then potentially Labour do worse at the election.

You even say it in your post, in 97 Labour we’re saying the same things and look how it turned out. Judge them for what they do when in power not what they say to try to obtain it. 

Agreed, labour did a lot of good in power. Let’s get as many labour MPs as possible and start doing some good.

[Kurosagi]

5 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

If Labour come out with massive spending plans then the Tories and the media will jump on that to say it’s same old Labour being reckless with public money.

Nope, not expecting that and agree it would be reckless. Would argue that categorically refusing to tweak a tax situation when the top earners have been creaming it for years isn't necessarily the 'sensible' vote winner that they think it is.

8 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

in 97 Labour we’re saying the same things and look how it turned out.

The 'stability' trick and the 'we'll earn your trust on the economy' message in '97 wasn't the sole reason for the landslide, it was also because, at the time, Blair was fresh, young, charismatic, knew how to talk convincingly to a diverse voter base and...probably most importantly...was riding a feel good campaign selling a 'come with me to the sunny uplands' message with a big warm Britpop smile after years of tory grind.

I know you're a deep fan of Starmer, but I hope you can see that the circumstances are different to '97: Starmer does not have Blair's easy charisma and there is little chance this campaign (on either side) will lead to any 'sunny uplands' messaging because of the obvious state of things.

Yes, the polls will narrow come the election run-in, yes, Labour have to be cautious not to relive Kinnock's over confidence, yes, they have to continually tickle the tory swing voters, but I'd argue you can do that without boxing yourself into a corner so early on. I want these tory f**kers gone but is it too much to ask for that we don't get red tories in their place?

[steviewevie]

55 minutes ago, Kurosagi said:

This is hair pullingly irritating.

Yes, I understand (but don't like) the argument for appealing to the tory voters to make sure they win the election (and this is straight out of the Mandy New Labour playbook). But after 15 years of being in opposition and week after week tearing a hole in the tories for their failed approach of endless austerity, what's their Big Idea once in power? More of the same.

I thought it was a sensible approach in '97 for credibility and so held my nose, but the country is in a much worse position currently. The polls show just how busted and untrusted the tories are to run things amongst their own voters and yet Keir's Big Idea is to do more of what the muppets who busted the country did.

I honestly don't think he gets it. The 'centre' ground just want to be reassured, as always, that Labour won't do anything radical, but those centre ground voters on both sides are all too aware that this term of tory governance has been way too radical and busted the country in the process.

This election campaign is going to be the most bleak and negative I think we'll have ever seen.

<insert endless banging head emojis>

it also isn't realistic. Eventually someone is going to say...ok...we need to spend more on public services, and we're going to have to put up taxes to pay for it.

[Kurosagi]

...but actually maybe I'm getting my knickers in a twist here. I keep forgetting how the old school approach of <taxing the rich = more govt income> doesn't work anymore due to the way that high earners structure their finances to effectively avoid tax in the first place.

My mistake. So maybe I'm just in a bad mood because I can't get used to the transition in my life time from Labour -> New Labour -> Red Tories.

[Kurosagi]

Just now, steviewevie said:

it also isn't realistic. Eventually someone is going to say...ok...we need to spend more on public services, and we're going to have to put up taxes to pay for it.

And that's the nub of it, that's how they're boxing themselves into a corner where the only way out when reality bites is to be seen to break their promises, accused of being liars and then we're straight back into knockabout politics played out in the media. Tedious.

[steviewevie]

Just now, Kurosagi said:

...but actually maybe I'm getting my knickers in a twist here. I keep forgetting how the old school approach of <taxing the rich = more govt income> doesn't work anymore due to the way that high earners structure their finances to effectively avoid tax in the first place.

My mistake. So maybe I'm just in a bad mood because I can't get used to the transition in my life time from Labour -> New Labour -> Red Tories.

No, I feel your frustration. I understand why Labour do it...they've been hit before with tax bombshell headlines that end up winning it for the tories. But, surely they now have the space to be more progressive with their tax and spend policies. I think the country is ready for it too.

[lost]

2 hours ago, clarkete said:

You know I don't normally write in here - but there have been some extraordinary abuses of power in the last thirteen years and you started this by sympathising with one of the architects of austerity on the day he married his former mistress - stuff him. 

Did you ever read the Alistair Darling deficit reduction plan? That was sort of my point that there is a set of people who expect politicians to have unlimited resources to work with hence your always going to get the abuse for things you can do very little about. 

Edited July 9, 2023 by lost

[Kurosagi]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

No, I feel your frustration. I understand why Labour do it...they've been hit before with tax bombshell headlines that end up winning it for the tories. But, surely they now have the space to be more progressive with their tax and spend policies. I think the country is ready for it too.

Maybe that's it. Maybe I'm riled because Starmer is beginning the campaign with an overriding sense of over cautious defensiveness, whereas Blair never felt he had a chip on his shoulder in that first campaign.

I'm rubbish at analogies but there's got to be a good footballing one here, perhaps Blair was like Klopp when Liverpool won the league after so long, whereas Starmer is like watching Mourinho or Conte on a cold wet winter's day parking the bus for 85 minutes after an early goal.

[Ozanne]

12 minutes ago, Kurosagi said:

Nope, not expecting that and agree it would be reckless. Would argue that categorically refusing to tweak a tax situation when the top earners have been creaming it for years isn't necessarily the 'sensible' vote winner that they think it is.

The 'stability' trick and the 'we'll earn your trust on the economy' message in '97 wasn't the sole reason for the landslide, it was also because, at the time, Blair was fresh, young, charismatic, knew how to talk convincingly to a diverse voter base and...probably most importantly...was riding a feel good campaign selling a 'come with me to the sunny uplands' message with a big warm Britpop smile after years of tory grind.

I know you're a deep fan of Starmer, but I hope you can see that the circumstances are different to '97: Starmer does not have Blair's easy charisma and there is little chance this campaign (on either side) will lead to any 'sunny uplands' messaging because of the obvious state of things.

Yes, the polls will narrow come the election run-in, yes, Labour have to be cautious not to relive Kinnock's over confidence, yes, they have to continually tickle the tory swing voters, but I'd argue you can do that without boxing yourself into a corner so early on. I want these tory f**kers gone but is it too much to ask for that we don't get red tories in their place?

Yes I can see the difference between now and 97; the economy is in a much worse state. Take a step back a minute, as the economy is in the bin just imagine what it would like to the average person that doesn’t follow politics much if Labour came out now with massive spending the plans. Those people would surely question if it’s the right time and if Labour are being responsible.

It’s precisely because things are so different to 97 in many ways that Labour have to be like this but regardless they have announced policies that will involve spending such as the green policies. 

[pink_triangle]

11 minutes ago, Kurosagi said:

And that's the nub of it, that's how they're boxing themselves into a corner where the only way out when reality bites is to be seen to break their promises, accused of being liars and then we're straight back into knockabout politics played out in the media. Tedious.

Politicians always campaign one way and pivot when in power. Most voters are not paying attention the majority of the time anyway. It’s a case of knowing what promises you need to keep and where the wiggle room exists.

Starmer made several pledges that I knew he wouldn’t keep to be labour leader and I still voted for him. The alternative was complete honesty, RLB as leader and a party still fighting about Israel while the public vote in the torys again.

This purity that is expected of labour is never expected of the Tory’s. Priority number 1 is get in power and then use that power to make things better. Don’t obsess about election manifestos that most people won’t read.

[Ozanne]

5 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

This purity that is expected of labour is never expected of the Tory’s. Priority number 1 is get in power and then use that power to make things better. Don’t obsess about election manifestos that most people won’t read.

Absolutely. It’s possibly one of the reasons the Tories win so much, they play politics on easy mode.

[steviewevie]

9 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Politicians always campaign one way and pivot when in power. Most voters are not paying attention the majority of the time anyway. It’s a case of knowing what promises you need to keep and where the wiggle room exists.

Starmer made several pledges that I knew he wouldn’t keep to be labour leader and I still voted for him. The alternative was complete honesty, RLB as leader and a party still fighting about Israel while the public vote in the torys again.

This purity that is expected of labour is never expected of the Tory’s. Priority number 1 is get in power and then use that power to make things better. Don’t obsess about election manifestos that most people won’t read.

not so easy to break manifesto pledges in a general election...more people notice. If they suddenly say they have to put up taxes when they said they wouldn't...that would piss a lot of people off.

So, are they saying that things are sh*t but we don't have the money so things will remain sh*t. Is there a catchy song for that?

Or they going to just say reform.

[Kurosagi]

5 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Politicians always campaign one way and pivot when in power.

I'm an idealist I suppose, someone who believes it's possible to change, progress, evolve. It's a red flag to me to tell me that because something has 'always' been done that way means it 'always' has to.

7 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Priority number 1 is get in power and then use that power to make things better.

I've also become bitterly cynical and as such see that whilst the first priority is paramount, the second priority rarely materialises, such that it's difficult to not see a gravy train in action. Especially given that the majority of the MPs failing at the second are untouched by the results of their failure and are instead rewarded disproportionately for 'trying'.

11 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

This purity that is expected of labour is never expected of the Tory’s.

We've literally seen our country torn apart by tory 'purity' over brexit. The purity factions of the tory party have been a constant psychodrama over the last couple of years laid bare for all to see. Historically, it was a stick to beat Labour with, but there is no difference between Labour and Tories on members demanding their own brand of perfection.

[Ozanne]

Wes Streeting commenting on this topic. 

Some people also seem to ignore that Labour have announced some pretty ambitious spending policies such as their green policies including GB Energy.