• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

MartyFunkhouser said:
Lots of common sense in Andy Burnham speech. Business rates, hospitality assistance for pubs and Restaurants, English devolution, city-led growth, vocational skills, more affordable housing.......

If he sees it through, its a very strong start
Click to expand...

I dont think thats been a problem with many of the last PMs, the issues have been in actually delivering and funding it. Large changes like devolution, housing and skills etc also take a long time to implement and the benefits aren't really visible to voters in the short term. Don't get me wrong I'd rather sensible long term decisions were being taken but the electorate are restless and if you're going to gamble on changing PM you need to give them something pretty quickly.
 
P.D. said:
I dont think thats been a problem with many of the last PMs, the issues have been in actually delivering and funding it. Large changes like devolution, housing and skills etc also take a long time to implement and the benefits aren't really visible to voters in the short term. Don't get me wrong I'd rather sensible long term decisions were being taken but the electorate are restless and if you're going to gamble on changing PM you need to give them something pretty quickly.
Click to expand...

That’s mainly what what done for Starmer right, he’s been working a 10 year plan but was given only 2.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
I detest Piers Morgan but he was very good this morning in his take down of Farage.

And what a difference it makes to have Victoria Derbyshire hosting compared to Laura Kuenssberg. The former has to be one of the best tv journalists around at the moment.

Edit to say that there is a lot of noise around Farage now and it’s hard to see him getting through this. Which in turn will leave Reform effectively rudderless, with lots of infighting.
I believe Rupert Lowe’s Restore is too hateful for a lot of Reform voters - Farage at least knew there was a line, even if it was far too right for many. Restore is just off the scale.
Click to expand...

Agree. Much prefer Derbyshire. Not really a fan of LK.
 
P.D. said:
I dont think thats been a problem with many of the last PMs, the issues have been in actually delivering and funding it. Large changes like devolution, housing and skills etc also take a long time to implement and the benefits aren't really visible to voters in the short term. Don't get me wrong I'd rather sensible long term decisions were being taken but the electorate are restless and if you're going to gamble on changing PM you need to give them something pretty quickly.
Click to expand...

Hence my final line.

But I like the focus and as per my previous posts, I think he is looking likely to roll back on the RR damage, which hopefully seems to be the case with the business help line.

Lets see
 
MartyFunkhouser said:
Lots of common sense in Andy Burnham speech. Business rates, hospitality assistance for pubs and Restaurants, English devolution, city-led growth, vocational skills, more affordable housing.......

If he sees it through, its a very strong start
Click to expand...

It’s his actions that will define whether he is a success. I’ve lost faith in all politicians in this country given the last 10 years.
 
Baleforce said:
That’s mainly what what done for Starmer right, he’s been working a 10 year plan but was given only 2.
Click to expand...

Pretty much yeah but he did need to communicate better on that vision and what steps had been taken, no idea if it would have worked but you could argue they'd done some of the hard word with the tax rises and got unlucky with Iran just as things were turning a little. I think they overdid tax rises and the harm was self inflicted, they've also front run the spending so that most departments are only increasing it by 1-2% in the last 2 years so there will be real terms cuts and you don't hear much about it. It will be the undoing of Burnham unless he can find some growth elsewhere but devolution sounds like a long term plan.
 
P.D. said:
Pretty much yeah but he did need to communicate better on that vision and what steps had been taken, no idea if it would have worked but you could argue they'd done some of the hard word with the tax rises and got unlucky with Iran just as things were turning a little. I think they overdid tax rises and the harm was self inflicted, they've also front run the spending so that most departments are only increasing it by 1-2% in the last 2 years so there will be real terms cuts and you don't hear much about it. It will be the undoing of Burnham unless he can find some growth elsewhere but devolution sounds like a long term plan.
Click to expand...
Its about rebalancing the tax burden, rather than increasing the total. We've got the highest levels of wealth inequality since the 1880s. And that's what causes the social fracture, even if others try and divert blame elsewhere
 
Gutter Boy said:
Its about rebalancing the tax burden, rather than increasing the total. We've got the highest levels of wealth inequality since the 1880s. And that's what causes the social fracture, even if others try and divert blame elsewhere
Click to expand...

Let's blame people who have been failed for generations by austerity while the billionaires have got money they will never spend just sitting and accumulating exponentially.
 
It insane to cancel road building and green energy to fund defence wastage and rusting toys

Countless more British people will die from the A1, A66 and A9 not being dualled than will ever die in combat

And green energy kills off the causes of war. If we were 100% green energy, we'd never need to fight abroad again. The 19th century was coal wars, the 20th century was oil wars, but you don't need windfarm wars

Lets hope Burnham has some sense and reverses this nonsense
 
Last edited:
Gutter Boy said:
Its about rebalancing the tax burden, rather than increasing the total. We've got the highest levels of wealth inequality since the 1880s. And that's what causes the social fracture, even if others try and divert blame elsewhere
Click to expand...

Countries with larger equality tax everyone more including low earners, yeah there's a few rich people with clever planning who avoid some but low earners in the UK generally pay less tax than those in say the Nordics and other European countries that have higher levels of public spending. What you're saying is you want them to pay even less and transfer it to wealthier people.
 
Gutter Boy said:
It insane to cancel road building and green energy to fund defence wastage and rusting toys

Countless more British people will die from the A1, A66 and A9 not being dualled than will ever die in combat

And green energy kills off the causes of war. If we were 100% green energy, we'd never need to fight abroad again. The 19th century was coal wars, the 20th century was oil wars, but you don't need windfarm wars

Lets hope Burnham has some sense and reverses this nonsense
Click to expand...

There is more to investment in defense than how well you can do in a war.
 
P.D. said:
Countries with larger equality tax everyone more including low earners, yeah there's a few rich people with clever planning who avoid some but low earners in the UK generally pay less tax than those in say the Nordics and other European countries that have higher levels of public spending. What you're saying is you want them to pay even less and transfer it to wealthier people.
Click to expand...
Its not really less, as those countries pay childcare, social care and universities etc out of general taxation, whereas we have to pay them over and above. The totals work out about the same
 
P.D. said:
Countries with larger equality tax everyone more including low earners, yeah there's a few rich people with clever planning who avoid some but low earners in the UK generally pay less tax than those in say the Nordics and other European countries that have higher levels of public spending. What you're saying is you want them to pay even less and transfer it to wealthier people.
Click to expand...

How are you determining tax equality?
 
robp135 said:
There is more to investment in defense than how well you can do in a war.
Click to expand...
I agree.
I think what we have been seeing in the recent conflicts is food for thought.
It'll be worth having a good long hard think about what works and what doesn't work and what's needed and not needed in modern warfare.

Eg I think a new navy destroyer is circa £2bn ...you could sink that fudger with a couple of 50k drones or remote attack boats. It doesn't add up. 80% of all old school war tactics are off the table.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
I agree.
I think what we have been seeing in the recent conflicts is food for thought.
It'll be worth having a good long hard think about what works and what doesn't work and what's needed and not needed in modern warfare.

Eg I think a new navy destroyer is circa £2bn ...you could sink that fudger with a couple of 50k drones or remote attack boats. It doesn't add up. 80% of all old school war tactics are off the table.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But defense spending has pretty much been flat when adjusted for inflation for the past 30 years. As a percentage of GDP and total government spending it’s spiked during the Iraq war.

What that doesn’t take in to account is where the money is going. In more recent times it’s been providing for Ukraine. Not saying we shouldn’t do that. But purely in terms of spending money on the British Armed Forces it’s only gone down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back