I regret voting Labour - they've let women down

Very little of this was in the manifesto, but then the manifesto was deliberately short on detail. I think most voters understood that there wasn't much money and things would suck for a while. I wish Labour had treated the voters like adults.

Instead we got this vibes-based thing about how brilliant economist Rachel Reeves was going to unlock growth, and this would allow Labour to do lots of nice things. In a clever bit of salesmanship (had McSweeney been reading The Art of the Deal?) there were few promises of nice things, they just allowed voters to imagine the nice things Labour would do.

We're now at the point of the cycle where Reeves, instead of treating us like adults, is moaning about sexist men talking her down. Well, yeah, but that would be less of a problem if she hadn't been massively oversold in the first place.

Pre GE Labour pledged to make changes due to high growth not cuts.

So it’s not in the manifesto? It’ll be harder to get through HoL

In fact I'd say any real improvements in the Welfare State can only be done not just by taxing the super-rich, but requiring middle-class families (like Telegraph readers, say) to take a bigger share of the burden.

They should have taxed the richest people more,

But it's too easy to say that (and parade your caring qualities at the same time) there's always someone richer than us who ought to pay more in taxes. SM is full of people saying, don't hurt the most vulnerable, tax the super-rich. It seems like such a pain-free option, doesn't it? Make Elon Musk pay! But in the real world, it doesn't work, and if the Left is ever to be taken seriously again, it has to think smarter about taxation and how governments raise money.

Am I right in thinking that Labour are making massive welfare cuts because it had to be done and they have a huge majority so are safe to make such measures?

So the Tories would've wanted to do similar but they knew it would've been the end of them.

I actually voted Tory even though I've always voted for left wing governments because I didn't trust Starmer and thought our Conservative government seemed pretty left of centre anyway - I way preferred Sunak to him.

I checked the Labour pre-election manifesto. A bit of word salad about benefits, but nothing that would signpost what was to come.
Except previous statements like the one in this image.

I had doubts about their policies mostly because the economic basics looked like they would land on cuts. We haven’t had a Gov with this rhetoric for a while, even Blair didn’t he got you needed the private sector thriving.

It hasn’t taken long, only 7/8 months and we’re at welfare cuts already.

Pre GE no chance this point landing though, just the usual backlash and name calling.

They were meant to rely on growth, they’ve halved projections, and in wiping out headroom have now gone for welfare cuts as well as others.

I posted a bit before the election about Labour's planned attack on the most vulnerable in society. People hoped without any evidence that Labour would be better than the Tories but sadly it's the people I care for who will pay the price. I'm an unpaid carer on CA for 2 profoundly disabled housebound people - when their PIP goes I can get a good job but it won't balance out the probable £40k each their social care will cost. There's always assisted dying I suppose. It's nightmarish.

(I never expected the rampant scabbing freeloading freebie grabbing though)

Although I don’t have a problem with proper assessment of need in the welfare system, and they should be doing that anyway.

I’m very disillusioned with them but what’s the alternative? Tories were worse and I wouldn’t vote Reform for a million pounds, the rats.

They should have taxed the richest people more, rather than gone for disabled people. It’s cowardly. They are supposed to be not the Tories, not Tories on steroids.

The repeated inability of 2 decades of opposing politicians to tax the people making millions and billions is probably linked to people not wanting to work. I know when I worked for a multi-national I felt dirty. I knew the company wasn't doing good things for the planet, that the people at the top were psychopathic and greedy. Who wants to spend a lifetime working for people like that?

Lots of the problems with politics now is that people are being divided by age, and not class.

Does anyone seriously think that even if you forcibley moved older people out of their family homes this would solve the housing crisis.

Who has said, anyone should be forcibley removed from their home?

If you are going to lecture people on not understanding the situation, you should at least stop making accusations up.

This. It’s been clear for a long time Labour is not the party of women. The progressive left / left in the general is not interested in working class people or women. Their attention has shifted to the interests of middle class university educated people.

Yes, they're getting away with things that the Tories would never have without people being really opposed and angry and it's just because they're Labour. It's very upsetting

I am one of the chronically disabled people.
Former Labour voter.
I have spoken to a few friends over the last few days who have said as old age approaches (we are all near to 60) they would consider assisted dying rather than trying to live. It sounds dramatic, but you want to try living in it.
Another lady I know is very, very poorly and was a victim of DV and coercive control. Through a range of miracles, she’s been able to move. But on her own she’s struggling in a different way.
When I think back to my young self with my ideals I want to cry - off to Uni, great career ahead of me. Bought my first home in the 90’s. Good pension already paid into. I worked so, so hard.
I never, ever thought I would be in this position.
And I never thought I’d say this but I was treated very kindly accessing PIP under the last government. I know many people didn’t, and I know the awful stories about people dying, but I was assessed at home three times. I did have to go to a tribunal once which was awful, but overall I was treated well.
But I do know during lockdown lots of people were claiming for the first time and assessments were done over Zoom. It’s not the same. When I got assessed they could see me and what state I was in.
I have lived like this since I was 31. And I have tried every solution offered. I don’t drink, some of take drugs. My other half makes sure I eat well.
I have been able to work during some periods. But the skill I have - writing - has been taken over by AI.
I have been treated really badly at times by employers. If they know or sense you are vulnerable then believe me they will underpay you or not pay you at all.
Last year I was on hospital ward trolley for 14 hours in A and E and while there as well as being so ill I just broke down.
I was able to tell the doctor that I had been doing 5 hours work a week for 6 months but hadn’t been paid for 5 months. I was so ashamed and hadn’t told anyone I hadn’t been paid, nor even my partner.
I am housebound, mostly bedbound, the person I was working for knew this. In fact they had once been a friend.
So I do try and have tried. But there is no way any conventional employer can give me a structured job now. And while being self employed was something I tried, it was awful. And people I approached now use chatGPT. The one person who said ‘yes’ then didn’t pay me.
If you have read until here, thank you.
And please know as you go about a very ordinary but stressful day, I would love to have one. Stuck in a traffic jam, a supermarket queue, anything, I would welcome it all back to be well.

Yep. It would have been the same shit show whoever got voted in. That’s something people don’t understand about Brexit, the government would have created a shambles whether we voted in or out. No one voted for any of this mess and yet we keep being encouraging to blame each other

Of course Starmer won, as did Trump.

They are in power right now.

Pretending it didn't happen is as useless as those that did not turn up to vote.

Pensioners aren't being asked to take up all the burden though are they. Pensioner poverty remains lower than working-age poverty and considerably lower than child poverty. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN07096/SN07096.pdf

Unlike workers they are also guaranteed at least an inflation proof pay rise each year too, on their state pension anyway.

Which is fine if that's what they want- it's their house after all. I don't see why everyone should contribute to their heating bills if that's the case though.

It's a wrench when younger people can no longer afford their family home, have to move to a different area, move their DC from their friends. No-one suggests a special benefit to pay for their heating though.

The only party whose actual policies were going to help women was LD (social care plans, giving unpaid carers help and noticing them at all, disability rights, etc) but a lot of people ignored those huge policies because they had their trans stance at the same time. I decided to go with policies over politicking but I also understand it was a touchy point for many and why. It came down to choice between a party who mentioned things I cared about and one that promised what everyone wanted to hear but I couldn't see the benefits - social care wasn't even mentioned by Labour despite us knowing it was a game changer for NHS for nearly a decade.

I think it has been explored, and has often come up against old people who, not unreasonably, don't want to be shunted out their own homes at their time of life.

The government should be a bit more creative. Lots of old people are living in homes that are too large and expensive to heat and look after. Its daunting and stressful to move though, so perhaps the government could help with the process? It will give the elderly more cash and free up larger homes for families.

I think that is a reasonable idea, something that would be worth exploring.

Boomers are anything from 61 to 79. The reason why lots of them pay a lot of tax is because many are working and at the top of their careers.

Once someone has been a pensioner for a while - say in their 80s, their private pension probably hadn't kept up with inflation, they have health problems, and are more likely to be house bound.

Lots of wealth in the elderly isnt necessarily spare cash - its tied up in pensions, savings when they are dependent on interest as income or houses. Just because a quarter of retired people are paper millionaires doesnt mean the majority of have much money on a month by month basis. There will be rich pensioners, just like there'll be rich twenty year olds, but the average working class women in her 80s?

For some WFA might well be the difference between staying in their home or moving into care. Thats why i think the way labour tackled this tòo bluntly.

Having said that, it didnt make sense that someone who has just retired, who is reasonable fit recieved WFA when a few months earlier they didnt. It would have made more sense to increase the age.

The government should be a bit more creative. Lots of old people are living in homes that are too large and expensive to heat and look after. Its daunting and stressful to move though, so perhaps the government could help with the process? It will give the elderly more cash and free up larger homes for families.