Scared of what labour will do

@Rummly "Have a look back at the reporting of Starmer’s undeclared use of a penthouse in Covent Garden. Note especially his ‘justification’ for accepting the freebie."

Why don't you just tell me. I thought it was to give the kid somewhere to revise. Which I thought was a bit precious-assuming he has his own bedroom at his own house.

Have a look back at the reporting of Starmer’s undeclared use of a penthouse in Covent Garden. Note especially his ‘justification’ for accepting the freebie.

Oh god. I was referring to going to a school in an excellent catchment. Some need to move some don’t. The common theme is the school in excellent catchment. 🙈🙈

Labour supporters would have much more credibility if they admitted yes the party is full of lying, misogynistic hypocrites (choose applicable). We know that. But we still support them. Instead they insist on tying themselves in knots trying to justify the hypocrisy/ lies and misogyny. Such is politics.

@Kittygolightlyy "You are the one who stated talking about ‘finding a house for sale in your chosen catchment"

Well, unless you're aiming for one of the few super selective schools, then a house in the catchment is the only way to secure a place in the school of your choice. And you said you weren't aiming at a super selective..

@Rummly "Oh yes, that was definitely the reason for Starmer’s using the penthouse. No question"

I genuinely don't understand what you're getting at here? Did one of his children get into a school near the Covent Garden flat? How did that work?

You do twist words. So in the interests of accuracy, I said

‘Nah not so much a competitive entry, we don’t need to do that. Just a school in an excellent catchment area. You know do a Starmer / Blair etc. A state school but not as the vast majority of children in this country know it, sort of thing’

You are the one who stated talking about ‘finding a house for sale in your chosen catchment’.

I didn’t say Blair or Starmer had moved for schools. They simply already lived in affluent areas with good schools. Which the majority of the electorate, do not. And as a PP stated, lil ol Keir had his millionaire mates flat to use too.

And, to be fair, one of his children hasn’t needed to live near the school, at least when revising. There was a lovely Covent Garden penthouse available to him.

Oh yes, that was definitely the reason for Starmer’s using the penthouse. No question.

It is interesting to speculate about Corbyn as PM. I wonder what would have happened.

And in the interests of accuracy-Starmer moved many years before he had children.

Helps though, if parents have the money.

“Sought after” means “people compete to live nearby”.

I don’t live in an affluent area but my kids do go to an outstanding secondary school which is sought after. We never moved house (we didn’t even have kids when we bought it). You don’t have to “do a Starmer” as you put it.

Wading in here because you can go back forever on what ifs. What if Hitler had won the war? What if Putin had had a heart attack three years ago?

None of this happened so all irrelevant to any arguments.

It’s the sort of data Keir, Bridget, Rachel et al would be proud of.

65% YABU and 35% YANBU. You have your answer. Sleep easy.

If you say so!

*it doesn’t need to be for sale

@Kittygolightlyy "Nah not so much a competitive entry, we don’t need to do that"

So the "great start" they got in private school will make no difference at all. All you need to do is find a house for sale in your chosen catchment.

Wasn’t expecting any response really..

Nah not so much a competitive entry, we don’t need to do that. Just a school in an excellent catchment area. You know do a Starmer / Blair etc. A state school but not as the vast majority of children in this country know it, sort of thing.

Nope, i just think the current lack of defence capability lies at the doors of the Tories, they have held the purse strings for the last 14 years and could have easily put right your criticisms of Labour in that time.

Military housing is even worse now than in previous decades, again, the issues in the 2000s could have been rectified...

Moving forward, the decision not to increase spending after 2014 and then again in 2021 is solely on them.... i'm struggling to see what is contentious about this?

Those 2 decisions are why we are so badly prepared today.

But all we get is "but Labour... but Corbyn"

No one will get locked up for criticising their party of choice... there is plenty i will blame Blair for eg Bad PFI deals, no council house building, never sorted out NHS Dental care... things that have real impact today.

@Kittygolightlyy "And the state will pick up the bill eventually when my kids move to a top tier state school (luckily they’ve had a great foundation in private so shouldn’t be an issue). This will mean others will lose a place but never mind hey"

You have a perfect right to state education. And if you're going to be applying to one of the very few state schools with competitive entry I wish your children the best of luck. What response were you expecting?

Back to topic. The selling out of creative industry for AI is depressing

It's worth a lot, we shouldn't give it away.

At least the last Labour gov had a good stint on creativity. Now Starmer / Reeves have put in anti growth measures so they need to go 'faster and further' to make up for it.

That's the creative sector sold out

To go back to the initial question posed for this thread.

Yes I am. We’re already many thousands poorer as a result of labour. And the state will pick up the bill eventually when my kids move to a top tier state school (luckily they’ve had a great foundation in private so shouldn’t be an issue). This will mean others will lose a place but never mind hey. Anyone seen a cost-benefit analysis yet?

I do appreciate that Labour have just committed to defence spending 👏🏻, as others others have said, their hand has been forced somewhat.

There are many other points and references but no point in repeating them all again. Just thought I’d bring the thread back to ‘disappointing Labour’ basics.

@EasternStandard "Your post I have absolutely no problem with mentioning Corbyn.

You don't have a problem but others should stop?"

No- they can mention Corbyn as much as they like. But they can't also say that other people can't mention the last 14 years!

The first line of my post that you have just replied to says 'I'm not blaming labour'.

You have just replied accusing me of an 'attempt to pass the buck to Labour'. How does that make sense?

You are trying to lay all the blame at the tories door. That is simply not true but you will not accept it. I see that I am wasting my time if the facts are of no interest to you.
Just so you know, I was living in military housing under the last labour government.

What did Starmer do to Sunak's pledge when he got in?

Why would you scrap it at that point?

He's on the back foot now. Decreasing foreign aid whilst it sounds good to many in the electorate will bring about more instability, more refugees, it'll cost.

Then there's Chagos.. an easy win to scrap.