Scared of what labour will do

It just didn't feel affordable at the time Mespher because 16% interest rates on the maximum I could borrow on £18k pa was about 2/3rds of my after tax income. And I was relatively well paid for the the UK, but earing only half what I had earned for a similar job in the USA six weeks before. The UK is very badly paid by international Anglophone standards.

According to most on here, the times of 16% interest rates were the good times when 'boomers' bought houses with one low salary and the high interest rates were just a minor thing, loads of threads stating this crop up all the while.

You clearly haven't lived through as many Tory governments as me then. They're not called the "nasty party" for nothing. I saw people's lives literally ripped apart, in every possible sense, because of Thatcher's poll tax. I saw 16% interest rates on mortgages and swathes of ordinary people's homes repossessed - the very people the Tories proclaim so vociferously to stand for. I saw whole communities die and people taking their own lives. I've seen the disabled hounded to the grave by Tory Government inquisitors. The Tories stock answer to everything, whether it's necessary or not, is to cut essential services to the bone and to terrorise the disabled, amongst other nefarious policies. If the last 14 years hasn't proved this to you then you must be very rich or living under a fucking rock. I and many others have spent half their lives being "terrified" because of Tory Government policies.

There is absolutely no suggestion that welfare will be "abolished" for people with long term health conditions. Reform, yes. Cuts, maybe. Abolition, no.

I agree that it is shameful to see Labour targeting the most vulnerable, but let's wait and see what green paper sets out.

No i didn't...... i said "would it have made any difference?" & that i acknowledge your point on hypocrisy.
I then went on to say he still may resign... & that he and others have been flamed in the media, which started the moment Labour got in, with their expenses debacle.

If you want engagement, which has been a problem for you in the past...then at least take on board what is written?

So I pointed out that I was commenting on the spate of extreme, apocalyptic thread titles and suggesting that they become a bit irksome.

All part of the mix

A PP commented that I was criticising Labour but against Labour-critical threads. So I pointed out that I was commenting on the spate of extreme, apocalyptic thread titles and suggesting that they become a bit irksome. But that I see topical threads criticising Labour for dodgy behaviour or particular failures as different.

You tried to minimise Reynolds’s fibbing. That’s an example of why those sorts of subjects deserve a good outing.

I responded to point out that this imbalance in the UK tax system, which is very top heavy and precarious, is far more imbalanced and top-heavy than it used to be. Your comment said there have always been low earners, which is true, but didn't acknowledge that low and middle earners pay proportionately much less of the overall tax bill than they ever have, so things are not the same as they have always been. It is a relatively new phenomenon that such a small proportion of working-age people even pay sufficient tax to cover their own costs to the state over their lifetime let alone make a net contribution. This leaves an ever-smaller proportion of people to pay for the majority of the population and yet receiving appalling services in return for their very high tax contributions so they are understandably fed up of it.

The lack of recognition of the fact that the UK tax system is now very unbalanced and that it is not sustainable because higher earners are now penalised so heavily that many are retiring early/ cutting their hours/ emigrating, is a big problem, as it is completely reliant on these people propping it up. Everybody needs to understand that in order to have the level of public services that the UK population seems to desire everyone will have to start paying their fair share i.e. lower and middle earners will have to pay a much higher percentage of tax on their earnings, as they do in other European countries, and no politicians having the courage to speak up about this despite it being an indisputable mathematical fact.

This is why the can gets kicked down the road with unsustainable borrowing, failing services and also insufficient investment in skills and infrastructure and technology that would actually raise productivity and therefore living standards, creating the current doom loop. Unless politicians level with the general public about the mathematical impossibility of them having the services they desire without them paying more tax themselves rather than expecting "the rich" to pay for everything for them then the doom loop of falling living standards will continue.

Reynolds and others have been heavily criticised, did you miss the fact Labour have lost 2 ministers already?
Reynold may still go too.

Reeves has been torn apart as well, the target of some very misogynistic abuse, Jess Phillips too.... imho worse than any Tory got, Truss aside.

I'm not really getting what you re on about.....

@Rummly it's all part of the mix. And for some it might feel like the case anyway

I find it hard to believe that any Tory caught lying about professional qualifications wouldn’t have attracted endless attacks on here, on Twitter, in the Guardian etc etc. And it does look like the excuses wheeled out for Reynolds have blamed others - ‘little’ people. Which is very unpleasant.

A willingness to lie about that sort of thing says a lot.

I'm concerned Reeves could abolish welfare for those with long term health conditions. Why she thinks punishing those who have limited capacity for work angers me.

TBH i'm more concerned about the present day and the decisions made by Labour than i am by what someone did or didn't write on their CV many years ago.
I think the relevant question should be "Did Reynolds become business secretary because he said "Solicitor" instead of "Trainee Solicitor?"

I doubt very much it would have made any difference at all.

However, i do take your point about hypocrisy.

Everyone will always find out fault with the current government. Whoever they are. It was ever thus.

We just had a 14 year farce. Let's wait and see how things shake out in a couple of years of Labour.

Got to remember most media in this country is right wing so they were never going to be fans of the current lot. Got to wade through the hyperbole.

Not quite. I think threads about, say, Reynolds’s dodgy CV are reasonable: topical story, says a lot about the man, is one of a string of dubious CV claims by Labour ministers. Or threads about Reeves busting her own fiscal rules.

But “AIBU to be terrified that Labour will destroy the country?” or “Will Starmer take away my child’s education?”, not so much.

Yes shit LLs should be weeded out, no one is saying otherwise.

BUT the measures already exist, there is just zero enforcement and the new renters bill will only pile costs onto LLs who will pass these on to the tenants, just as Tesco pass on their increased costs to all of us...

The waiting list for social housing in Plymouth has 12000 families on it, the list is forever increasing, up 4000 in just 18months...as LLs sell up, some people in need will never get off that list.

What do you think is driving this sell off by LLs ?

If you want better standards, then provide an alternative to private rent first.... because at the end of the day a house with thread bare carpets is far better than a cardbox in a doorway or a hostel with drug abusers and sex workers living there.
My friend bitterly regrets complaining about the carpets and wishes she'd just bought some new ones herself.

@Katypp completely agree. Had a similar experience with horrendous tenants. Sold up and won’t ever do it again.

@4C0rners it's clear that you will not engage with any other rhetoric than all landlords are shitty, get rid of the lot of them.
Donning my hard hat here, I was a landlord of three BTL. My houses were well maintained, damp and mould free and all legal requirements were met. I was also a member of the council's voluntary registration scheme.
One tenant was fabulous, no problems.
The other two houses were taken by families who didn't pay their rent, trashed the houses and didn't tell me of any problems and refused inspection visits.
Always managed to keep their arrears below the amount when I could evict ( at my cost) and repair the houses (at my cost)
I got out, thankfully before rent arrears were legally ignored over the pandemic.
The rent I received didn't even cover the mortgages without taking into account the repairs.
The good tenant bought his house at a discount.
All landlords are not 'shitty' I'm afraid.
Unfortunately, a lot of the good ones - who pay for what they should and follow every rule - are getting out because of experiences like mine, leaving the ones who don't repair with a lot of the housing stock.
Renters' rights are all well and good if both parties follow the rules. If they don't, the law comes down massively on the side if the renter.
But you won't see that, just that all landlords are shitty, get rid of them all.

Your post seems a mix of saying how bad they are but you don't want threads saying how bad they are

This Labour government is laughably bad. And it seems that dishonesty, nepotism, hypocrisy and greed run through it like words through a stick of rock.

But these threads are a bit tiresome. It’s as if Tory or other non-Labour voters have become as bad as Labour supporters. If a Tory sneezed it was wailed about by Labour as an act of deceit or corruption.

I wish opposition comment could be a bit better and more thoughtful than the endless alarmism and falsehoods that Labour fans went in for.

Very little of what any government does is morally or politically ‘wrong’. For the most part all politicians are just making choices.

What a thoroughly nasty post. You think laughing at vulnerable people in poverty is funny? You should be ashamed of yourself.

You missed the word reasonable and again if LL can’t afford to do it “ reasonably” the tax payer or renter shouldn’t be facilitating them.

I was commenting on Sorry but the mortgage of shit landlords is not the responsibility of renters.
Of course landlords should be regulated and expected to keep properties well maintained and safe. However, rents increasing because of higher mortgage interests and new maintenance regulations is to be expected - it is as any business would do.

You mean the ones like the Labour minister had

Of course you haven’t. But that’s how the left defend. They attack. It’s the only way they know how, bless them.