Starmer’s chronicles

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Except that you ignore what THEY inherited from Labour, Covid and the Ukraine war. Circumstances beyond their control caused the problems the Conservatives had to put up with. Labour under Starmer and Reeves are creating problems of their own and that is what we are talking about.

Taxes were going to have to go up whoever took power as spending did not match income and borrowing and public services were at their knees.

Labour backed themselves into a corner and hiked employer's NI. They should have increased income tax and been honest that we were living beyond our means but they weren't and we'll all pay the price indirectly through higher prices.

The only positive unintended consequence it might have is to encourage more automation and therefore help Britain's poor productivity.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Talk about throwing the baby out with the bath water. Look at all the small farmers caught up in this.

The Labour lot have let their envy for the rich cloud their judgement.

There are no small farmers affected by this, 75% of farms aren't even eligible for this. You really have let a lack of knowledge of facts cloud your judgement, was it nige turning up in wellies and a stupid grin that swayed you or was it Clarksons column in the sun that made you such an authority

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

There are no small farmers affected by this, 75% of farms aren't even eligible for this. You really have let a lack of knowledge of facts cloud your judgement, was it nige turning up in wellies and a stupid grin that swayed you or was it Clarksons column in the sun that made you such an authority

it hasn't stopped you.

[Itshim]

Those in the City were left aggrieved after Reeves touted herself as a safe pair of hands in the Treasury because of her long history as an ‘economist’, which turned out to be embellishment of her CV as Guido* first revealed. As co-conspirators will know, Reeves was handling complaints at Halifax rather than actual economic policies – helpful experience in hindsight…

Turns out Reeves has never been great with numbers. Back in 2012, two years into her time as an MP, she was featured in a documentary called “Britain’s Trillion Pound Horror Story” about the UK’s ballooning national debt—and how MPs didn’t even know what it was. Reeves was one of those interviewed who didn’t know. Asked for the figure, she confidently answered, “about £156 billion.” Wrong. That was the deficit (the difference between government revenue and spending), not the national debt, which was around £1.43 trillion at the time. A giant red cross helpfully appears on screen to mark her blunder. Liz Truss also answered incorrectly. Not the only thing the two have in common. from favourite web site*

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Itshim

Those in the City were left aggrieved after Reeves touted herself as a safe pair of hands in the Treasury because of her long history as an ‘economist’, which turned out to be embellishment of her CV as Guido* first revealed. As co-conspirators will know, Reeves was handling complaints at Halifax rather than actual economic policies – helpful experience in hindsight…

Turns out Reeves has never been great with numbers. Back in 2012, two years into her time as an MP, she was featured in a documentary called “Britain’s Trillion Pound Horror Story” about the UK’s ballooning national debt—and how MPs didn’t even know what it was. Reeves was one of those interviewed who didn’t know. Asked for the figure, she confidently answered, “about £156 billion.” Wrong. That was the deficit (the difference between government revenue and spending), not the national debt, which was around £1.43 trillion at the time. A giant red cross helpfully appears on screen to mark her blunder. Liz Truss also answered incorrectly. Not the only thing the two have in common. from favourite web site*

Having worked in the City, I know it does its homework on these things and Reeves's background would have been no surprise. Unlike some government decisions, the City makes its decisions on tons of research.

[Itshim]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Having worked in the City, I know it does its homework on these things and Reeves's background would have been no surprise. Unlike some government decisions, the City makes its decisions on tons of research.

Doesn't mean that they were happy

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Itshim

Doesn't mean that they were happy

Equally, it doesn't mean they were unhappy.

[1andrew1]

Not a great reflection on the government. The country and that region in particular can do with the investment.

AstraZeneca cancels £450m Liverpool investment, blaming UK government funding cuts – business live

https://www.theguardian.com/business...ness-live-news

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Real damage to rich people who were advised to buy farm land as a way of avoiding tax and then boasted about doing so in a national newspaper

He says, totally ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the small farmers.

The words babies and at water come to mind, but Labour doesn’t care as long as it takes a few wealth creators down a peg or two.

The class war lives on, it seems. Old habits die hard.

---------- Post added at 23:16 ---------- Previous post was at 23:12 ----------

Originally Posted by Russ

Cool, if you want to ignore the austerity years (which didn’t improve the economy), the £32bn given to their mates, the tax cuts for the millionaires etc to help keep any talk of the Tories out of this, go you. All the power to you.

The austerity years were the means by which we corrected the imbalance in our economy, which was costing a fortune in servicing the rapidly increasing debts that resulted. That imbalance was created by Labour.

You have a very short memory.

---------- Post added at 23:18 ---------- Previous post was at 23:16 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Taxes were going to have to go up whoever took power as spending did not match income and borrowing and public services were at their knees.

Labour backed themselves into a corner and hiked employer's NI. They should have increased income tax and been honest that we were living beyond our means but they weren't and we'll all pay the price indirectly through higher prices.

The only positive unintended consequence it might have is to encourage more automation and therefore help Britain's poor productivity.

Do you really believe that the electorate would have let Labour in if they said they were going to raise taxes?

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Do you really believe that the electorate would have let Labour in if they said they were going to raise taxes?

Generally, they would not, but last year I'm pretty sure they would have.

Labour did not win because people wanted Labour, they won because they didnt want the Conservatives, and didnt fancy any of the other options.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

He says, totally ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the small farmers.

The words babies and at water come to mind, but Labour doesn’t care as long as it takes a few wealth creators down a peg or two.

The class war lives on, it seems. Old habits die hard.

There is no elephant in the room, 72% of farms aren't affected, full stop, wealth creators more like wealth hoarders in this particular case, Clarkson even admitted it in his column that you seem to have got most of your information on this from

[papa smurf]

The UK economy is forecast to improve more slowly than previously predicted after stagnant growth late last year.

The EY ITEM Club expects UK gross domestic product (GDP) to grow by 1% in 2025, down from a previous estimate of 1.5%.

The economic forecaster is the latest influential group to cut its predictions amid continued pressure on businesses, which face further tax and wage rises in April.


The outlook is a mixed picture

https://news.sky.com/story/uk-growth...eeves-13301978

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

He says, totally ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the small farmers.

The words babies and at water come to mind, but Labour doesn’t care as long as it takes a few wealth creators down a peg or two.

The class war lives on, it seems. Old habits die hard.

The elephant in the room is Brexit which has reduced farmer's income.

Whilst you're happy to bleat on and on about an inheritance tax loophole being closed, you weren't there for the majority of hard-working British farmers who are worse off thanks to Brexit.

Your sudden support for farmers is plain cynicism as you don't like the party that closed this tax planning loophole.

---------- Post added at 11:56 ---------- Previous post was at 11:18 ----------

Bit too early to celebrate this as a Brexit benefit so posting it here.

Whisper it, but Starmer's Trump strategy is paying off - for now. Forget the chatter about Mandelson/Chagos/etc, the president is lavishing praise on the PM *and* looks set to exempt UK from tariffs.

https://x.com/HugoGye/status/1886365496871702930

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

The elephant in the room is Brexit which has reduced farmer's income.

Whilst you're happy to bleat on and on about an inheritance tax loophole being closed, you weren't there for the majority of hard-working British farmers who are worse off thanks to Brexit.

Your sudden support for farmers is plain cynicism as you don't like the party that closed this tax planning loophole.

---------- Post added at 11:56 ---------- Previous post was at 11:18 ----------

Bit too early to celebrate this as a Brexit benefit so posting it here.

https://x.com/HugoGye/status/1886365496871702930

Well i suppose there isn't an arse kissing thread to put it in

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Well i suppose there isn't an arse kissing thread to put it in

I've had a look, but I can't see a thread on Zuckerberg yet.