news & politics:discussion

[Guest]

1 minute ago, squirrelarmy said:

For public sector stuff yes. 
 

Then possibly the talent may actually want to stay there instead of heading into the private sector to earn more. 

Yeah that would solve quite a lot of the issues and would mean that working people get the same treatment as the elderly. 

[steviewevie]

[steviewevie]

still, at least there's the world cup.

[Guest]

If I was PM, I would look at making it law that pay has rise in-line with inflation.

Vote Oz!

[squirrelarmy]

9 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

We’ve had the fastest growth in the G7 forever apparently. Has to come down at some point. We’ve just outgrown everything. 

[steviewevie]

20 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

We’ve had the fastest growth in the G7 forever apparently. Has to come down at some point. We’ve just outgrown everything. 

Have we? I thought it was a few weeks and Johnson milked it forever.

[lost]

42 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

Pensioners vote in elections, that’s basically the core reason they’re looked after so well 

Yep biggest generation in history and can easily out vote the rest of us. It's looking like the retirement age could go to 70 in the review next year for younger people.

[steviewevie]

 

[squirrelarmy]

13 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Have we? I thought it was a few weeks and Johnson milked it forever.

Spaffer surely wouldn’t repeat the same thing repeatedly just to try and spread a false message. Think you’ve got him mixed up with the wrong bloke. 

[Guest]

The economist here sums things up quite nicely and explains Labours stance at the end. 

[steviewevie]

[steviewevie]

[Punksnotdead]

15 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

LOL - So who are the biggest c**ts - the current government, or the Daily Mail? - vote now! 😃

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Wow that’s a damning set of front pages.

What does ‘soak the strivers’ mean?

[Ryan1984]

18 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Wow that’s a damning set of front pages.

What does ‘soak the strivers’ mean?

I couldn’t work out if that was a negative or positive headline. Think it’s the former?

[charlierc]

5 minutes ago, Ryan1984 said:

I couldn’t work out if that was a negative or positive headline. Think it’s the former?

Given the first page of the article says "hammered with a stealth tax squeeze", I don't think it's the kind of thing the Mail would be putting if they were making this appear positive.

[kaosmark2]

10 hours ago, Barry Fish said:

This budget works for me... The only public service I really need is the Education system for the kids and that has had an increase.  Think I can handle the rest.  Happy days.

"I'm alright Jack, pull that ladder up now I'm done with it".

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Ryan1984 said:

I couldn’t work out if that was a negative or positive headline. Think it’s the former?

I assumed it was a negative one, but had no idea what that phrase meant. I thought I was being dumb. 

[kaosmark2]

9 minutes ago, Ryan1984 said:

I couldn’t work out if that was a negative or positive headline. Think it’s the former?

It's saying it hurts the aspirational population. Those that are trying to get more senior jobs etc. 

The biggest swing voters are the lower middle class, that work around and just above the median wage, but are aiming for promotions (and some get them). 

A big thing about New Labour's early dominance is that they convinced those voters that they were the party that supported them. The fact that the right-wing rags (who actively want to influence these people), are continuing to attack the Tories for it, suggests that they believe the Tories are done, and they want to claim credit for a pending Starmer victory.

[kaosmark2]

I don't hate this budget btw. It's more progressive and better balanced than Gideon's were in general. Defence not being ring-fenced is great, tax rises are good. UC rising with inflation is excellent. Minimum wage rise is higher than I feared.

I mean, I still don't trust rhyming slang not to be ferreting half of it off to his aunty, but the headline impacts of things that weren't expected are more positive than not.

Best budget in 13 years by my reckoning.

[Guest]

40 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

It's saying it hurts the aspirational population. Those that are trying to get more senior jobs etc. 

The biggest swing voters are the lower middle class, that work around and just above the median wage, but are aiming for promotions (and some get them). 

A big thing about New Labour's early dominance is that they convinced those voters that they were the party that supported them. The fact that the right-wing rags (who actively want to influence these people), are continuing to attack the Tories for it, suggests that they believe the Tories are done, and they want to claim credit for a pending Starmer victory.

Whatever one might think of the budget itself, they’ve kinda gone for the worst of both worlds as it doesn’t looks like they’ll win over a massive portion of their side (apart from the Express). Then for people that don’t generally go Tory you still won’t support them either way. I guess it’s a sign of what happens when a party changes course so often, they end up alienating a lot of people.

I wanted to apologise to people for ranting earlier on, I hope I didn’t offend anyone. 

[kaosmark2]

1 hour ago, Barry Fish said:

Not really - more like - keep calm and carry on...

Funny how you jump on my post and not Neil lording how he is going to get an extra £60 a week and can give taxi drivers bigger tips 😛 lol

PiP uplift isn't "pull the ladder up".

[kaosmark2]

1 hour ago, Ozanne said:

Whatever one might think of the budget itself, they’ve kinda gone for the worst of both worlds as it doesn’t looks like they’ll win over a massive portion of their side (apart from the Express). Then for people that don’t generally go Tory you still won’t support them either way. I guess it’s a sign of what happens when a party changes course so often, they end up alienating a lot of people.

I wanted to apologise to people for ranting earlier on, I hope I didn’t offend anyone. 

I think it's easy to attack politically, while it's actually quite good overall.

[steviewevie]

5 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

I think it's easy to attack politically, while it's actually quite good overall.

Yeah, I guess quite good that education got more cash, and NHS, not sure if enough but still...and benefits stay inline with inflation. But outlook is grim, and a lot of austerity has been delayed, I guess to flatten the pain curve maybe...Politically it's has potential to be tough for both the govt and the opposition, Labour might get in and then continue with spending cuts, or at least not borrowing loads to fund some of their big plans...

[steviewevie]

Article in New Statesman about one of the main people behind Labour under Starmer's strategy, he's like Blair's Mandelson without the ambition for front line politics, someone called Morgan McSweeney. He's behind the direction that Starmer has been taking over the last few years, including the selections keeping out left wingers thing. It's probably behind a paywall but I can copy in here if anyone interested.

Morgan McSweeney – Labour’s power broker - New Statesman