Why are the Tories allowing this to happen to the country?

Because the Tories want to move to an American style health service, allowing the insurance companies to make grazillions for their pension pots.

How would Labour fund? Raynor said she has no issue with being on the picket line! If they are in government how would that work. Sitting around the table talking - of course Tories are doing that. Are people really saying Labour would resolve by giving people everything they ask for?

I think we should be wary about blanket statements about ‘what women need’.

Oh just fuck if with this line now. It’s not the clever gotcha you think it is. Yes, Labour would be better. Stop shooting your own interests in the foot with this ‘they don’t know what a woman is’. They would boost maternity rights, fund childcare, increase rape convictions and domestic violence convictions. And so far more for the current cost of living crisis than this current shit show. For fucks sake - that’s what women need, not platitudes and semantics while cosying up to the far right.

Well, to an extent. But if Rishi Sunak fell down the stairs of No 10 and broke his leg, how long do you think it will take an ambulance to get there? 18 hours? 20 hours? I don’t think so…

They are just doing what the World Economic Forum wants them to do. Look how many members of WEF are in government on both sides.

In a few years time we'll be on social credits and electrical currency and some people will still keep their head in the sand about all that's going wrong in the world.

@Perfect28 because they are of the mindset that if you personally have cash you can buy your way out most situations- be it poor services or moving overseas - and whilst immoral it's probably accurate to some extent. Many have no ethics at all , as far as they are concerned 'business is business' - even if it involves screwing others over. Mind you there's plenty of the public who think that way too sadly.

Fair enough, I can’t (mainly because I don’t have the knowledge Grin) argue with your figures, I’m just wary of bringing arguments from a decade ago into the mix now. It’s important that it’s not forgotten and properly documented but it is a political tactic to bring up history that isn’t necessarily relevant now to distract from current issues.

Totally agree. Except - even worse - it was TWO decades ago. Doesn't time fly?

I don't get it either. I have never voted Tory but when you look at past Conservative governments, they had many policies I disagreed with but they weren't designed to blatantly screw the poor and enrich themselves in the way that currently seems to be the case.

...because people will scrap the bottom of the barrel to criticise Labour... the latest on here is someone dragging up a decision (made in good faith after years of stagnating gold prices) 20 plus years ago.....

Ignoring the 100s of billions lost in productivity because of Austerity 1.0 and now we have Austerity 2.0 hitting us.

Fair enough, I can’t (mainly because I don’t have the knowledge ) argue with your figures, I’m just wary of bringing arguments from a decade ago into the mix now. It’s important that it’s not forgotten and properly documented but it is a political tactic to bring up history that isn’t necessarily relevant now to distract from current issues.

They just gave pensioners (who overwhelmingly vote, and vote Tory) a 10 % increase.

Truss added £30bn to the fiscal blackhole... in the spring, even summer, no one was talking about Austerity 2.0...

Sunak/Hunt then forced to go far further to quell the markets.

Those saying "We cant afford or fund pay rises" whats your alternative?

12m on NHS waiting lists? 4 days waits at AE? no ambulance service? 80 kids to a classroom?

This country is losing skilled people to other far better paid sectors and to overseas employers.

Referendum on all the major decisions which are impacting us ( British citizens). Change to the constitution, so whoever is in power takes full responsibility for the consequences/damage done to the country as a result of their governing. No idea how it could be achieved, not a politician, just one angry UK citizen.

They haven't allowed it to happen, they've actively made it happen, eroding public services is what they do.
Why people vote for this is what puzzles me.

And yes, I totally agree that his decison to sell gold was driven by an educated position and a genuine belief it was the right thing to do.

Which compared to the latest round of polititicans with their 'if you don't like my principles, I have others' approach now stands out as a beacon

IMO anyway.

For clarity: I personally liked Brown and like him more and more as the years go on.

I'm not dissing him. I wanted to take a stark look at the numbers to make sure I wasn't rose tinting it.

And yes, Truss's little econoexperiment was catastrophically expensive. A total ego-driven eff up.

Yeah but it’s shit in Germany too.
Not only is this untrue but even if it were true it wouldn’t help us here would it?

I used to think The Conservatives were incompetent but now I think they are just self serving grabby scum

Sunak cost us £11 billion this year by failing to insure our debt. £3.5 billion vs £11 billion.

It’s an interesting position how these things are remembered by the public isn’t it?

They’re not allowing this to happen, they are doing everything in their power to ensure it does happen!
It makes them rich, richer in Sunak’s case!
Open your eyes.

@SantasFlaws what are the figures for the Truss/Kwasi experiment?

Theres been a whole lot of history since the selling off of the gold and it’s barely relevant now. I won’t pretend to understand the ins and outs but I have read various articles defending Brown’s decision as he made a decision many others would have based on the markets at the time. It was always a gamble but it wasn’t an uninformed or reckless one. Certainly not to the degree we have seen in recent years.

He did sell $3.5bn of gold. Comparing gold prices at the time with now, suggests gold is worth 7x what it was when he sold. Making this a $21bn loss compared to if we had kept the gold and sold it today instead.

Gordon put the sale money into savings and then we had a shocking 15 years of low interest rates. So that money has only made 60% of the original value back = making it worth $5.6bn today.

Of course, we still have that money and interest rates are rising so it is likely to earn us more in coming years. But if we had the gold and sold it today, we'd be getting the higher interest on $24.5bn rather than $5.6bn. But that's the truth about almost any asset sale. Mostly assets are assets because their value goes up over time, at least in line with inflation if not more than.

I still don't think it compares to the fuck ups of later governments (Brexit, as in your example) but felt the numbers needed spelling out

Where are the private A&Es in the UK. I'd like to know in preperation for the strikes 😬

Private A&E doesn't really exist in the U.K..

So when the Royal Family, for example, need urgent care they turn up at the local A&E? Of course not. There's private urgent care services available 24x7 & there's a good chance that many of the consultants running them also work in the NHS.

At least Labour are not loony left of Corbynites…. But you are right, there’s no real money left and our politicians have been living off the printing machine and zero% interest for too long. That doesn’t exist any more and we are already heavily taxed to our limits.

Labour will probably get in, and find that they are rearranging the deckchairs on the titanic.