Two Tier’s days are numbered

I know. Not really worth the effort to reply.

@Fringle

The Conservatives won 4 general elections in a row from 2010 onwards, despite instituting policies such as BREXIT and austerity that damaged economic growth, increased health and income inequality, contributed to a growing housing crisis that's trashed the finances of local authorities, overseen a huge decrease in public satisfaction with the NHS, and actually shortened the lives of vast numbers of vulnerable people via austerity policies under Cameron that according to the Lancet and the BMJ, may have resulted in 300,000 excess deaths between 2011 and 2019.

All while being cheered on by the Conservative media. They never faced a 10th of the criticism that Labour have had over the past year.

If you really want to argue that this Labour government is vastly worse than the Conservative governments that won 4 general elections in a row while living standards fell in the UK and wages stagnated, you're going to have to explain why it's ok when this happens under the Conservatives, but an unending disaster if it happens under Labour.

The first part of that statement is correct at least, just delete everything after the comma.

Labour will lose at the next election, partly as the result of a concerted propaganda effort by the right wing print media, and shadowy international forces working on spreading right wing misinformation on social media…

That’s priceless.

Not under Kemi Badenock they won’t. One wonders who is left to lead or what policies they’d win on. I see neither, just a disastrous history people won’t forget.

4 years is a long time in politics .

Labour will lose at the next election, partly as the result of a concerted propaganda effort by the right wing print media, and shadowy international forces working on spreading right wing misinformation on social media, and partly as a result of 4 years being not nearly enough time to address the fallout of 14 years of Conservative mismanagement of the economy and the public sector. There will be an unusually high level of participation by working class voters in the next election, who will vote Reform in hope of mass deportations and the stripping of all rights, including human rights, for asylum seekers.

We'll end up with a Conservative/Reform coalition, and they'll believe they have a mandate for the sort of cruel immigration and social policies we're now seeing over the pond. There will be a huge push to deregulate pretty much everything and the trashing of all climate change policies.

And the only people who'll emerge from this unscathed will be very wealthy people who don't use the NHS or state schools, or live in the vicinity of those who'll be impacted by austerity cuts.

I live in London. Would love it if London declared itself a separate country and kept all its money for itself. Then all the Reform/Tory voters could sit out in the provinces and continue to blame their shit quality of life on immigrants and benefit claimants.

Given how much this has been relied upon by Labour it really is a farce.

I agree to a degree. I don’t think Starmer will get rid of Reeves. They need each other to stay in. They do have the left of the party chomping at the bit though on spend. And that might force some stuff which destabilises them.

I wasn’t saying they’ll go at the same time.

Starmer will shuffle Reeves out of the Treasury.

The party will turn on Starmer over ideology and because he’s a liability. There are a lot of very nervous Labour MPs who fear rejection at the next General Election. Labour losing one of its safest seats has made its MPs and members very twitchy. Party turbulence will grow and grow. He’ll resign.

The ideology matters more to the members. I suspect that Israel will prove the tipping point issue in that respect. There are an awful lot of Israel-haters in grassroots Labour.

In 18 months we’ll be halfway through the Parliament. Labour MPs will believe a different PM needs the second half to try to rescue their chances.

All sources agree that there was a black hole in the public finances when Labour took over.

The disagreement is around the size of this hole. All sources agree that it was 'at least' 9 billion pounds. Most sources accept it was at least 12.5 to 13.5 billion. Labour claim it was higher than that because as you say - they include the cost of increasing public sector pay rises. Everyone also agrees that over the past 14 years public sector pay has fallen significantly behind pay in the private sector, leaving some public sector workers reliant on food banks, UC and housing allowance during the cost of living crisis. Average teachers' pay in 9% lower in 2023 than it was in 2010.

The right loves to point to the very small number of train drivers as an example of how 'very well paid' public sector workers are - but you know that it's one of the only blue collar jobs in the state sector that does pay a high wage. And by 'high wage' I mean a hugely responsible role where the majority of people are paid what an IT manager might make in the early days of their career. I appreciate your average Tory is disgusted by the idea that a blue collar worker might make what a middle manager in the private sector makes, but hey ho, there are a significant number of plumbers, builders and electricians making 50K + salaries, and this is the sort of talent pool you're drawing from.

"Labour represents people who work for the state represented by unions, people who are on benefits, immigrants and asylum seekers. All worthy in their own right but a big change from who Labour originally spoke for (the working person)."

Labour represents anyone who uses the NHS. They represent anyone who relies on the NHS - presumably that's you and the people who work for you. Does anyone who works for you claim UC, housing allowance, child benefit, support with their council tax? Do your employees use the NHS or do you pay for all of them to have private healthcare? Were any of your employees educated in the state sector?

Re: 'Labour represents immigrants' - you appreciate that the vast majority of immigrants are also working people?

You appreciate the majority of those who claim benefits are also working people?

You appreciate the unions exist to represent the interests of working people? Including the people who work for you?

"As there have been more conservative governments than Labour, the country generally agrees with the latter approach"

We have a 'first past the post' voting system. This means that most governments are elected by a minority of voters. The majority of voters in the UK have traditionally voted for parties that are to the left of the Conservatives, therefore suggesting that 'most people prefer the Conservative approach' is factually incorrect.

How on earth will a 'panicky reshuffle and party unrest' get rid of Starmer and Reeves?

Did you read it??

Of course Starmer’s - or another Labour PM’s - government isn’t going to fall before a General Election. The whole idea’s ridiculous.

What will happen is that this utterly useless nasal-voiced twat PM and his utterly useless Chancellor will both be gone in 18 months, from panicky re-shuffle and party unrest.

Then we’ll have Rayner and McFadden until the next General Election. When Labour will lose catastrophically.

FWIW, I don’t think Reform will do very well. The Tories will be back in.

Oh don't be so weedy. I've replied to each of your points as asked by you. To me. The fact you then strop off accusing me of being a "troll" just because I disagree with you seems a little unfair.

Poor old insulted me....

Well this is all supposition isn’t it?
And a criticism of nastiness from a Tory is just laughable.

This post has confirmed my suspicion that you’re just trolling so I’ll leave it there.

Ok, pick another source, though I’m sure you think you know better than all of them.

https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/

https://www.bevanfoundation.org/views/the-economy-is-not-like-a-household-budget/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2018/04/30/governments-are-nothing-like-households/

https://berl.co.nz/economic-insights/governments-and-households-budgets-same-or-different

https://scholarship.miami.edu/esploro/outputs/blog/The-Government-Is-Not-a-Household/991031801621002976

https://iea.org.uk/the-household-fallacy-fallacy/

Well it does imply a certain lack of sanity and self-preservation. But we are talking about Labour MPs here. Or former Labour MPs that join Jezza's Gaza-party

Well I admire your confidence. It's not as if Labour has form about going to the IMF for a bail out.

And it's not looking like Sir Keir has his party 100% under control....So possibly can't predict what these feisty MPs might think of doing next.

Yes agreed. The Conservatives lost and I did vote for them but in a fairly grumpy way. So I wasn't that devastated at the time, and also because at the time Keir Starmer told everyone he knew what he was doing so I was hopeful things may not go too badly. Hindsight you see...

A vote of no confidence would be turkeys voting for Christmas.

Do you have any idea how a vote of no confidence works? Looks like no.
Governments with huge majorities don’t lose them.
Only a tiny number of MPs will be interested in another party .
Run on the pound/IMF talk is nonsense.
You lost. Get over it.

Governments do fall. There could be a vote of no confidence. Is the government looking confident? Do people feel confidence the government know what they are doing (ahem). Could there be a run on the pound some time? Are the IMF getting the kneelers out for the UK begging bowl people?

Or Labour could lose their majority as too many of their lunatic MPs follow the Great Leader Jeremy. In order to follow the Muslim/Glasto vote.

Anything could happen!

I’m not denying the poll ratings. I’m saying he’s going nowhere and neither is the Labour government. A huge majority means not having to care too much about polls. Yet anyway.

The poll ratings now are about as relevant as a four year weather forecast. Completely meaningless.