Is there anyone on here who voted Labour who is genuinely happy with how things are going

So did the tories, they taxed people too, they pledged not to tax the richest, sigh.

Unfortunately tax is a dirty word in the UK, it's madness when the same people moan about nothing working.

Reform won’t get in because of the scale of tactical voting.

I’m a Labour voter in a Labour constituency where Reform aren’t challenging. However, if I lived in a constituency where it was a toss up between Reform and Conservatives for winner, I’d hold my nose and vote Conservative.

The press is holding the government to account, as it should.

Yes, we need people to have kids who are positive role models... so working, or working where possible, striving, educating yourself, learning skills, being contributors to society. What we don't want are more children from parents who are bringing up children to believe sitting on your backside and screwing the benefits system for all it's worth is the way to go.
What we are actually doing is discouraging the former and encouraging the latter.

Labour are dropping behind conservatives and greens in some polls. So the wilderness thing could be them.

This is actually really interesting.

i think we are in a time of (potential) realignment.

the tories are in the wilderness. Nobody went to their conference. It’s going to take the electorate a long time to forget Boris and Truss/Kwarteng. Many people who had relatives die during covid hold Boris and the tories pretty personally responsible (see: let the bodies pile high).

some people are voting for them anyway.

reform are taking a lot of what was the working class Tory vote. The anti-immigration, things are shit let’s roll the dice type people. That’s a pretty big vote segment but it’s not enough on its own to gain power in parliament (fine for running referendums though).

a lot of the more left leaning people are looking at Zack Polanski and the greens.

starmer is not stupid. The unpleasant stuff is being front loaded into this parliament so that as it gets closer to the next election he can have successes. It’s stupid to do it the other way round - have your successes in the first couple of years and then look shit just before the election.

for what it’s worth my prediction is that the next parliament will be more fractured. Some reform, some green, some Lib Dem and less Tory and Labour. It’ll then be a question of coalition.

Agree - we need less people into the future with the development of technology not more.

But they've given him a ministerial post so that he's got more powers to carry on his good work. How is that not a labour thing?

The vast majority of children who are born into poverty are done so at the parent choice. Don't use edge cases to obfuscate the core problem.

The pp said incentivise in that post. Plus things will look different in twenty odd years with the workforce.

"I remember the utter disgust over Kier's wife's free clothes, and yet all quiet on the billions worth of money and corruption under the tories"

That is so utterly not true - the papers and media properly went after Boris. And I say that despite thinking he was a useless nobhead!

So anyone who finds they are expecting a third child should be expected to kill it (accidents happen particularly as contraceptive services have been cut right back), what about twins, triplets?
What about if you are a two parent family with three children and an accident, illness, redundancy or death happens.
Yes the feckless will always be with us but I would hope they are few and far between.
And don't forget the 30 free hours for childcare - I know of families where both parents are working and are subsidised by £4000 per month as government pays a big chunk of their nursery fees.

Well yes, except that then the British public will need to accept that a drop in birthdates does mean that immigration is needed.

I don't get this 'two tier justice' thing - it's quite usual to hand out severe sentences/punishments during riots, because it's in everyone's interests for them to stop. I'm also not sure what you mean by 'curtailing free speech' - if anything we can say more now than under the Tories, because let's remember it was on their watch, not Labour's, that we could only reiterate a particular ideological view of what a woman was, for example.....

Did you miss the word more?

We do actually need people to have children.

I’m not talking about those families. I don’t begrudge anyone claiming support when they are out working. But even still no one needs 3/4/5 children if they can’t afford it. Shouldn’t be the tax payer responsibility.

They did not pledge not to tax people 😂

I don't think that explains his immediate introduction of 2 tier justice, the curtailing of free speech and the blatant double standards on almost every topic.

Quite we need to find ways to incentivise whose who have the resources and disincentivise those who don't. That is in the best of interest of children.

Absolutely this. But we can't mention this elephant in the room as it was what Britain wanted

Sorry .... wrong post quoted ...

Nobody "needs" any children....

On this I agree. Not enough spotlight is put upon timsons work - the man absolutely deserves a knighthood. I don't know any other millionaires entrepreneurs who does as much for ex offenders him.not a Labour achievement though, he's been doing his work for decades unrecognised and undervalued.

A couple with 2 kids would be defined as being ‘in poverty’ if their income after housing was less than £407 a week (£1,763 a month. Full time minimum wage is £20,200 each net a month. So that’s £3,360 a month household income. You’ve got to have VERY high housing costs if you’re in poverty with 2 parents working full time.