|
|
Post by anthropoz on Apr 8, 2024 8:43:03 GMT
Yes, basically. Why should people in their 20s and 30s, who have no hope of ever getting out of renting, pay for the retirement and end-of-life healthcare of the boomers? The boomers have had it all their own way for their whole lives. To be clear: I am not blaming the boomers. They just got lucky, until now. Yes, damn those boomers. I mean, they only built and paid for the NHS. You can't win 'em all. :-) |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Apr 8, 2024 8:44:35 GMT
Labour created the NHS. The tories have always hated it... The Tories designed the NHS, Labour just followed the Tory plan. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Apr 8, 2024 8:45:47 GMT
Yes, damn those boomers. I mean, they only built and paid for the NHS. You can't win 'em all. :-) Now tell us about the milroonies.🙄 |
|
|
|
Post by anthropoz on Apr 8, 2024 9:29:16 GMT
You can't win 'em all. :-) Now tell us about the milroonies.🙄 Never heard of them. Did they used to play for England? |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Apr 8, 2024 9:30:56 GMT
LOL you jest of course. Yes people will vote Labour, but many of them will be holding their nose. Being the best worst option is hardly a resounding endorsement of approval. That doesn't matter. If the polls are right, and nothing much shifts them before the election, then Labour is heading for biggest majority for any normal government in British history. The incoming government isn't going to be bothered about the fact that not many people are particularly enthused by them, because they've got 5, and probably 10, years to attempt to prove what they can actually do. Until now, Starmer has followed a strategy of being as centrist, unscary, conventional and generally vanilla as possible. The strategy has been to look boring and professional and wait for the tories to lose the election, rather than actually trying to win it. That is only beginning to change now, and will have to change completely when the manifestos come out. At that point Starmer must reveal a lot of his hand, and when he takes office he is going to have to reveal the rest of it. Nobody is going to care about how vanilla Labour was before the election. Labour may well end up in trouble quite rapidly, especially if they make the wrong calls in the culture wars or on immigration, though Starmer has looked pretty savvy on that front recently. My point is this: the electorate takes Labour seriously enough to be about to put them in a position where they can do pretty much anything they like. What is going to matter is what they actually do with that power, and right now I don't think many people have a clear idea what to expect. That is one of the reasons why the tories are in so much trouble -- it is quite hard to attack Labour at the minute, because there isn't very much to attack. You would be a fool to put your faith in polls which are little more than a distraction, a bit of fun perhaps. I seem to remember one of the reasons pollsters got it so wrong in 2015 was because the polls had far more Labour voters in their samples than Conservative voters, which obviously, and incorrectly, skewed the results in favour of Labour. I agree, Labour will be unconcerned that Starmer is uncharismatic, boring even. They're confident because the Tories have so effectively destroyed themselves, but that's not much of an endorsement is it. As I said previously, people will vote Labour because they appear to be the best worst option, until they're in office. At which point I think Starmer will show his true pro EU socialist coloures and the majority of people in this country will spend the next five years regretting their stupidity. How on earth has Starmer looked 'savvy' on immigration? As far as I'm aware Labour have no policy. All Starmer or any of his front bench ever say is Labour will smash the gangs. When pressed to give a bit more detail they just repeat ad nauseum 'Labour will smash the gangs'. I do however believe that Labour will stop illegals crossing the channel in dinghies, they will send Border Farce cutters to pick them up from France, or simply allow them to board ferries. The two big issues that in my opinion will define the next Labour government are immigration, illegal or otherwise, and net zero. If they continue to flood the country with the dregs of the world as the conservatives have, and force people into fuel poverty as they kill the economy with net zero, then the Tories who will move back to the centre right, will have a resounding victory in 2029. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Apr 8, 2024 10:14:00 GMT
Labour created the NHS. The tories have always hated it... The Tories designed the NHS, Labour just followed the Tory plan. Nonsense ^^^ --"(Beveridge Liberal) The 1942 Beveridge cross-party report established the principles of the NHS which was implemented by the Labour government in 1948. Labour's Minister for Health Aneurin Bevan is popularly considered the NHS's founder, despite never formally being referred to as such."-- Every Conservative MP voted against the implementation of the NHS. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Apr 8, 2024 10:18:17 GMT
That doesn't matter. If the polls are right, and nothing much shifts them before the election, then Labour is heading for biggest majority for any normal government in British history. The incoming government isn't going to be bothered about the fact that not many people are particularly enthused by them, because they've got 5, and probably 10, years to attempt to prove what they can actually do. Until now, Starmer has followed a strategy of being as centrist, unscary, conventional and generally vanilla as possible. The strategy has been to look boring and professional and wait for the tories to lose the election, rather than actually trying to win it. That is only beginning to change now, and will have to change completely when the manifestos come out. At that point Starmer must reveal a lot of his hand, and when he takes office he is going to have to reveal the rest of it. Nobody is going to care about how vanilla Labour was before the election. Labour may well end up in trouble quite rapidly, especially if they make the wrong calls in the culture wars or on immigration, though Starmer has looked pretty savvy on that front recently. My point is this: the electorate takes Labour seriously enough to be about to put them in a position where they can do pretty much anything they like. What is going to matter is what they actually do with that power, and right now I don't think many people have a clear idea what to expect. That is one of the reasons why the tories are in so much trouble -- it is quite hard to attack Labour at the minute, because there isn't very much to attack. You would be a fool to put your faith in polls which are little more than a distraction, a bit of fun perhaps. I seem to remember one of the reasons pollsters got it so wrong in 2015 was because the polls had far more Labour voters in their samples than Conservative voters, which obviously, and incorrectly, skewed the results in favour of Labour. I agree, Labour will be unconcerned that Starmer is uncharismatic, boring even. They're confident because the Tories have so effectively destroyed themselves, but that's not much of an endorsement is it. As I said previously, people will vote Labour because they appear to be the best worst option, until they're in office. At which point I think Starmer will show his true pro EU socialist coloures and the majority of people in this country will spend the next five years regretting their stupidity. How on earth has Starmer looked 'savvy' on immigration? As far as I'm aware Labour have no policy. All Starmer or any of his front bench ever say is Labour will smash the gangs. When pressed to give a bit more detail they just repeat ad nauseum 'Labour will smash the gangs'. I do however believe that Labour will stop illegals crossing the channel in dinghies, they will send Border Farce cutters to pick them up from France, or simply allow them to board ferries. The two big issues that in my opinion will define the next Labour government are immigration, illegal or otherwise, and net zero. If they continue to flood the country with the dregs of the world as the conservatives have, and force people into fuel poverty as they kill the economy with net zero, then the Tories who will move back to the centre right, will have a resounding victory in 2029. We are all entitled to our dreams  |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Apr 8, 2024 11:03:58 GMT
The Tories designed the NHS, Labour just followed the Tory plan. Nonsense ^^^ --"(Beveridge Liberal) The 1942 Beveridge cross-party report established the principles of the NHS which was implemented by the Labour government in 1948. Labour's Minister for Health Aneurin Bevan is popularly considered the NHS's founder, despite never formally being referred to as such."-- Every Conservative MP voted against the implementation of the NHS. No they didn't they just objected to Bevans model - they wanted a NHS based on local accountability rather than Bevans Stalinist central control. |
|
|
|
Post by anthropoz on Apr 8, 2024 11:26:27 GMT
You would be a fool to put your faith in polls which are little more than a distraction, a bit of fun perhaps. I seem to remember one of the reasons pollsters got it so wrong in 2015 was because the polls had far more Labour voters in their samples than Conservative voters, which obviously, and incorrectly, skewed the results in favour of Labour. I am aware that pollsters often get things wrong, and for that reason I don't put much faith in the results of any particular poll, though the Yougov MRP polls have turned out to be pretty good so far and the general trend is abundantly clear. The tories themselves certainly believe them. I have no idea what Starmer personally believes, and I am making no pre-judgements about what they will do. I don't see any point. Not enough information. I don't think he has, sorry if that was unclear. He has been savvy on the culture wars. He's said "common sense must prevail" regarding the transgender situation, and he spoke out against Nike's nauseating and totally inappropriate redesign of the English flag. He appears to be trying to take a middle view on the culture wars, and that is not going to be an easy thing to pull off. I don't know whether he will be able to continue doing so -- again, I will wait and see. I agree. It is one of the many unanswered questions. I agree with you about immigration. But that is because I think the UK is overpopulated and unsustainable. We can talk about climate change and the long-term future if you like, but I think we'd need another thread for that. It's a very big and very important topic. I think civilisation as we know it is well and truly fucked, and that "killing the economy with net zero" is a statement from what I call "pre-collapse politics". In other words, I don't agree with you, but I don't agree with the mainstream "net zero" supporters either. None of that is enough. What is coming is going to sweep all of that away, and replace it with a struggle for national survival which will play out differently in different countries all over the world. However, in order to understand my point of view, we'd need to "zoom out" a long way from the scope of mainstream pre-collapse politics and ask much more fundamental questions about why the world is in the state it currently is, what possible futures are still available to us, and how we can increase the probability of avoiding the worst ones. And the worst ones are pretty bad. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Apr 8, 2024 15:33:15 GMT
Nonsense ^^^ --"(Beveridge Liberal) The 1942 Beveridge cross-party report established the principles of the NHS which was implemented by the Labour government in 1948. Labour's Minister for Health Aneurin Bevan is popularly considered the NHS's founder, despite never formally being referred to as such."-- Every Conservative MP voted against the implementation of the NHS. No they didn't they just objected to Bevans model - they wanted a NHS based on local accountability rather than Bevans Stalinist central control. So they did vote against the introduction of the NHS. IIRC the Tories wanted an NHS that would have led to a two tier system, with much more power in the hands of local Doctors. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Apr 8, 2024 16:16:35 GMT
Identity politics is not virtue signaling. the though was that pandering to the concept and giving tacit approval to it makes them complicit in it....they have been very happy to let it thrive; an expression of correctness and avoided stamping on it. They've been in power since 2010, how long have people been moaning about identity politics? Hmmmm for about a decade now isn't, but sure, the conservatives don't actually govern so it's not really on their watch that we've seen the rise of the woke...it just happened.... I don’t think you can legislate identity politics out. It’s a concept and although you could say the Tories have their own brands of identity politics, it’s not a cornerstone of thier political doctrine ( such as it is ). |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Apr 8, 2024 17:04:43 GMT
No they didn't they just objected to Bevans model - they wanted a NHS based on local accountability rather than Bevans Stalinist central control. So they did vote against the introduction of the NHS. IIRC the Tories wanted an NHS that would have led to a two tier system, with much more power in the hands of local Doctors. No - they wanted what was in the White Paper agreed by the coalition Government in 1944. A fully comprehensive, universal healthcare system, free of charge and available to all citizens irrespective of means. |
|
|
|
Post by anthropoz on Apr 8, 2024 17:07:13 GMT
the though was that pandering to the concept and giving tacit approval to it makes them complicit in it....they have been very happy to let it thrive; an expression of correctness and avoided stamping on it. They've been in power since 2010, how long have people been moaning about identity politics? Hmmmm for about a decade now isn't, but sure, the conservatives don't actually govern so it's not really on their watch that we've seen the rise of the woke...it just happened.... I don’t think you can legislate identity politics out. It’s a concept and although you could say the Tories have their own brands of identity politics, it’s not a cornerstone of thier political doctrine ( such as it is ). It shouldn't be a cornerstone for Labour either. Certainly a lot of people who have voted Labour traditionally have got no time for it. I think a small minority of academics and activists are making a lot of noise, and there's a lot of people being drowned out or intimidated into silence. Starmer will win/keep more votes by keeping the hard social left under control than he would by caving in to them. I think he's aware of that. |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Apr 8, 2024 19:40:05 GMT
Isn’t the general feeling among voters interviewed for opinion polls becoming clear that we need a change? Whatever the current government tries gets overshadowed by the everyday realities of a crumbling health service and rising costs. Failing football teams get a new manager. Failing countries need a new government… Who is going to supply this change? - I'd quite like some change but swapping one centre-left government for another centre-left government is not the change I'm looking for. I guess right wing and left wing might be appropriate in football terminology — but replacing managers isn’t generally so clear. It’s a new boss with different communication and personnel skills that brings the changes. Changing the faces at the top and removing the tired approaches often does the trick. That’s what I’d vote for when Rishi (if he’s still PM) calls the election… |
|
|
|
Post by thescotsman on Apr 8, 2024 20:32:27 GMT
the though was that pandering to the concept and giving tacit approval to it makes them complicit in it....they have been very happy to let it thrive; an expression of correctness and avoided stamping on it. They've been in power since 2010, how long have people been moaning about identity politics? Hmmmm for about a decade now isn't, but sure, the conservatives don't actually govern so it's not really on their watch that we've seen the rise of the woke...it just happened.... I don’t think you can legislate identity politics out. It’s a concept and although you could say the Tories have their own brands of identity politics, it’s not a cornerstone of thier political doctrine ( such as it is ). ...perhaps...but you can make it difficult for it to exist...who funds schools and universities and the corresponding inspectorates of establishments - OFSTED gives practically all schools a good report which is odd since most are awful. Likewise the police and the armed forces are beyond salvation. Border security and the governments cunning plans for day trips to Rwanda...had the Rwanda holiday scheme been a real thing then someone would have had to take a shit load of liberal flak and change the law to allow parliamentary/democratic will to have supremacy rather then a few well paid fellas at the inns of court having the last say over parliamentary democracy. It was all a sop at the taxpayers expense...management of expectations....hey look everyone we had a cunning wheeze but it's not our fault it didn't work!! And shall we get into the net zero mallarchy....nah....best not eh.... |
|
