So What Is In His Mini-Budget?

[Chekhov]

16 hours ago, Mister M said:

The Doubling of the National Debt: The Conservatives Have ‘Spent All the Money’ – Byline Times

The Tories are the biggest government borrowers, and have been since 1946 (taxresearch.org.uk)

I absolutely agree with you :

1 - They should never have spent money like it was literally going out of fashion during the Covid pandemic. It was literally cost is no object, furlough, test and trace, industry support etc etc

 

2 - They are now like a gambler, double or quits, spending even more money.

[El Cid]

1 hour ago, crookesey said:

Funny that, during a very quiet time at work I took out a second mortgage in order to buy an investment property, it was hard at first but I soon discovered that money makes money

 

Some economists do says it's a gamble. That may be ok for you, but I think countries should not be gambling.

They are propping up the housing market, when young people cannot afford to get on the ladder.

Pumping money into the economy will push interest rates up.

Edited September 24, 2022 by El Cid

[Anna B]

51 minutes ago, Dromedary said:

I agree but it simply won't happen, instead they do this:

 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/chaos-rocks-labour-as-party-forced-to-deny-angela-rayners-claims-they-would-scrap-income-tax-cuts/ar-AA12bGaN

What did she say that you object to? 

Income tax cuts to the hard up, lower paid make very little difference.

Income tax cuts for the highly paid, wealthy make a big difference.

Income tax cuts to the super wealthy make an obscene difference.

 

The tax system can be organised to reverse this, and incentivise the lower paid for a change. They then spend it all to pay bills, buy food and goods so it comes back to the government, via trickledown. Where it can be spent on essential services so everyone benefits. And while we're at it make a better arrangement for small British businesses so they can grow bigger.

 

The rich still have so much money they cannot spend it and it simply sits in their swollen bank accounts or is invested in stocks and shares, anywhere in the world where it gets the best return. 

And what big British companies are there to invest in that don't have the parent company overseas?

 

Giving the rich even more money is no guarantee they will spend it in Britain.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 24, 2022 by Anna B

[Dromedary]

10 minutes ago, Anna B said:

What did she say that you object to? 

Once again you are twisting the context of a post with a straw man argument, just for the sake of an argument. So, read it again and tell me where I was objecting to anything.

 

 I was actually pointing out that it was her very own Labour party that was objecting and retracting on what she allegedly said, as quoted in the article.

 

She is a liability for Labour and I think Starmer knows that. Unfortunately for him he is powerless and just can't get rid of her. 

 

 

 

Edited September 24, 2022 by Dromedary

[Anna B]

16 minutes ago, Dromedary said:

Once again you are twisting the context of a post with a straw man argument, just for the sake of an argument. So, read it again and tell me where I was objecting to anything.

 

 I was actually pointing out that it was her very own Labour party that was objecting and retracting on what she allegedly said, as quoted in the article.

 

She is a liability for Labour and I think Starmer knows that. Unfortunately for him he is powerless and just can't get rid of her. 

 

 

 

Sorry if I got hold of the wrong end of the stick.

It's no secret that Starmer wants rid of Rayner, the last Socialist in the Labour party.

But at least she has stood up and said something for fellow Socialists.

 

Where's Starmer? What's his take on events? 

It's time to get rid of Starmer, and get a decent leader that can defend the rights of the ordinary people and fight their corner. 

Edited September 24, 2022 by Anna B

[harvey19]

5 minutes ago, Anna B said:

Sorry if I got hold of the wrong end of the stick.

It's no secret that Starmer wants rid of Rayner, the last Socialist in the Labour party.

But at least she has stood up and said something for fellow Socialists.

 

Where's Starmer? What's his take on events? 

It's time to get rid of Starmer, and get a decent leader that can defend the rights of the ordinary people and fight their corner. 

I posted on the Conservative thread how I think Labour could increase their support, you may care to have a look.

2 hours ago, crookesey said:

Many folk with wealth can recall not having any, conversely most folk without wealth cannot recall ever having any. The morale to this is that more folk need to create wealth, rather than being envious of those that have. Not punishing those with wealth is the only sensible action to take, after all nothing can trickle from an empty pot can it?
 

 

 

The class war warriors won't agree with you !

[Mister Gee]

4 minutes ago, harvey19 said:

I posted on the Conservative thread how I think Labour could increase their support, you may care to have a look.

The class war warriors won't agree with you !

There’re in government.

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, Dromedary said:

... She is a liability for Labour and I think Starmer knows that. Unfortunately for him he is powerless and just can't get rid of her.

She is.  The only way for Labour to win is to try to pick off the potentially winnable centre, and those who still fantasise about shouting 'Socialist Worker!' outside the Castle Market on a Saturday morning are dangerously deluded if they fail to bend a little and see the broader and perhaps less palatable  picture.  I have a great deal of sympathy for Rayner et al and what they stand for, but having them lead the way would be like having AOC stand for governor of Texas, and I'd prefer to have a chance of kicking out this clutch of dead-eyed grifters than hanker after policy purity.

[harvey19]

8 minutes ago, Mister Gee said:

There’re in government.

The post referred to how Labour could increase their support if they want to get into government.

 

[Anna B]

28 minutes ago, harvey19 said:

The post referred to how Labour could increase their support if they want to get into government.

 

I think Mr Gee was referring to the Conservative government being the real 'class warriors.' Their class quite clearly being the Upper Class which they will defend to the death...

They really don't care about anyone else, and certainly not the struggling, whatever class they consider themselves to be. 

Edited September 24, 2022 by Anna B