To be confused by Keir Starmers speech already .

[pavillion1]

So he’s speaking to people like me talking about his brother and how his sister works in care and how unfairly she is treated .. Yet I’m am a carer and he has done sod all to help me apart from take more money .

They’re more empty words. He’ll sack anyone to get out of a bind.

In Europe - you claim benefits, you do council jobs. You don’t turn up, you don’t get your benefits.

Wouldn’t that be a great idea

I would also stop the DWP paying extra benefits for families with multiple wives

They don't.
No family in the UK can have multiple wives, because it is not legal.
What you have is a husband and wife, then any other woman who lives in their house with them is considered to be a 'lodger', and treated as a separate household.
So the husband and wife receive benefits as a couple (assuming they meet the criteria), with their children as applicable.
Then any other woman makes her own benefit claim as a single person, or single parent if applicable. Her benefit will assume she pays an amount for lodgings (rent and share of bills) in the house.

There is nothing to stop any British couple taking in lodgers who are single parents, and sharing costs.

Lodgers ???? Ok

Let’s just admit that they are not living like lodgers shall we .. It’s just another loop hole in the benefit system that is crippling us even more

That will require council employees to supervise the work (and don't expect any real useful work to happen, it will be tokenistic work).
And more council employees to monitor attendance and send reports to the benefits office.
And more benefits office employees to receive the reports and make stoppages to the benefits.

A great job-creation scheme for office workers and council employees, but nothing useful will get done.

Is there any law against having sex with your lodgers?

What about the young pink-haired "polyamorous" brigade - do you think they are not allowed to set up home together and share costs?

Then you’d agree that employers need to pay a better wage? That’s what will make working the best option not taking money from children to somehow offset things.

Absolutely they need to.,
Taxpayer should not be subsidising the payroll.

It is not a loophole. It is just how the law interprets multiple adults sharing a home, because the law does not and cannot recognise multiple "wives".
There are laws against polygamy and polyandry in the UK.

I repeat, there is nothing to stop any bunch of adults living together. But the law will only recognise two people as a couple, the rest are either in more couples, or singles.

I get it, 66% of the electorate in the GE didn't vote Labour, so I would expect a level of hostility towards KS and Labour.

But we now have a fresh indicator of sentiment from the local elections, and the results clearly show a swing away from the left, including a huge percentage of former Labour voters.

Yet the Captain of the Titanic, thinks the answer is to go more left.

Incase anyone has forgotten, we owe £3,000,000,000,000 to the markets and they can see there's an iceberg on the Port side...!

These are really genuine questions -
What would make working people feel better off?
What would the government need to do to make that happen?

What benefits do you think there are for having multiple wives?

Polygamous marriages aren’t legally recognised here, so support is based on household and children, not number of spouses. So in a hypothetical “two wives” scenario (even though it’s not legally recognised as such), it would not create multiple partner entitlements. At most, any additional adult would either be ignored for entitlement purposes or treated as a non dependent, which can reduce support rather than increase it.

There are over 30 countries in Europe. You're not telling me they all have the same benefits system/regime. What's your source for your post please?

And while I'm asking, Europe is continent which the UK is part of. Where exactly do you mean when you state "Europe"?

Exactly this! People don't know what they want.

When the government increase NMW everyone is up in arms. If people can't earn enough to support themselves independently, of course there's going to be an overreliance on benefits. So what's the answer?

Well obviously a very orchestrated event. The clapping and whooping was almost canned. They bought in rent-a-crowd.

I think the focus on Europe is maybe a bit questionable. Not sure what mandate they have for bringing Britain that much closer to the EU. Putting Britain at the heart of Europe is a bit of a joke since we voted to come out of it. I think though that it is interesting that during the election Labour very much walked the tightrope between leave an remain, not wanting to alienate either side. I have a sneaking suspicion that they are now going to support remain/rejoin from this point onwards in a calculated gamble. Myabe they will even campaign on a rejoin ticket at the next election.

For me the speech there was not enough about the real problems people face in the UK at the moment. This is largely because Labour tied their own hands at the last election. It's not possible for them to make big changes to taxation because they promised not to. And they can't borrow more money. So pork barrel politics towards the preferred demographics is not really possible. A lot of the cost increases of course are out of their control, but energy policy is something they could actually change, but currently are refusing to. They may have won a landslide against a very unpopular government, but they did it by tying their own hands when they didn't need to and crippling their ability find ways of raising money.

I doubt whether this speech will be enough to head off the leadership challenge.

https://www.express.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/2203443/dwp-increases-benefits-husbands-2

The fact that I am not proudly stating that I am "fully right wing" is a pretty solid start.....

The point is that nothing has been addressed on what working people get sick of.

your car gets stolen - no one does anything about it.
your house gets broken into - not enough police to look at it.

both insurance premiums go up.

transport systems are expensive and are quite frankly, shocking service.

it’s so expensive to live. Parents can’t afford to take their children to a caravan on a school holiday.

we can’t fuel our car or buy food without hoping there’s enough money in the bank. That’s if you can afford a car.

energy bills mean we question whether we should keep our houses warm.

we don’t care about the EU, we care about living a decent life without having to continually having to struggle.

As to my link .. Yes is it against our laws to have second Third wives in this country but if they married them in a country where it is legal and they now live here they get the benefit.
it’s a loop hole .

Great news about British Steel but heck, he isn’t listening, is he?
The country voted to leave the EU yet he’s headed back to closer EU relations.
The country is moving to the right and he’s swinging left. Bonkers.

He wants to go back to Europe because it gets career politicians off the hook from being responsible for decisions made in Westminster. Oh we would like to do this or that but the EU means….. etc.
With the exception of defence that is.
Since we left the EU many are terrified of making decisions. They cannot throw the blame if it goes wrong over to the EU. It will be on them. OMG what will they do !
Too many are in Westminster without convictions or real beliefs. They could say anything so long as it keeps them in a job. Swop sides even.
What do they stand for ? Labour. He needs to address that.

The Express is a exemplar of balanced reporting, however @pavillion1 have you actually read the article beyond glancing at the very misleading photo which accompanies it?

Lemon….. again is this the best you can do ? Throwing insults says more about you than me .