To wonder if Labour actually will be any better?

[Baabaagreysheep]

I think like most people I am keen to see the back of the current bunch, but I am not confident that anything will massively change for the better. Maybe that’s a bit pessimistic, but I feel that while some things will improve some will get worse - and some sort of at the same time, so I’m expecting my salary to go up but also my workload to go up!

Thinking back to when Labour were last in power it was another world, really. Interested in views.

They’re not the same. Different policies and approach to gender ID

@Sweetashunni that's a very good post and I'd imagine sums up what a good proportion of people are feeling, particularly the out of touch part. I have very rich friends who are untouched by the mortgage rises and also my sibling who lives on benefits in a council flat with no council tax who does nothing but moan about the government despite having almost no outgoings and no mortgage.

I know the shtick is that Starmer is new Labour but I don't see that at all in his party.

I voted several times for Tony Blair and I would be surprised if he agreed with Starmer on 'women having a penis' but when I realise that he was still Prime Minister when the GRA 2004 was quietly passed under the radar, I begin to doubt myself.
He hasn't really said much that I can see on the Labour Party and its full embrace of 'identity politics'. Why hasn't he defended Rosie Duffield's stance? Why hasn't he spoken out on the dangers of the medicalisation of children who fall under the 'trans' propaganda cloud.
In short he is a disappointment to me and I was his greatest fan in 1997.

No me either. And initially I thought the shift to the centre would be good

Makes me laugh when people talk about the NHS and it will be so much better under labour, it won't be better under any Government until we the public change our attitudes and behaviours and start using it better

@Blossomtoes

Again it was more late 80s dropping down into the 90s and yes Tories were in power.

There is no magic wand for any of this, None.

The real thing Blair understood that Starmer doesn't, is that people usually aspire to better themselves. Especially back then when it was possible to do much better economically than your parents had done.
In practice this meant that if you said you would raise taxes by Xp, it would put off those in the bracket below, as they were aspiring to be in this higher tax bracket eventually.
The current Labour proposal for VAT on private school fees is similar, I think most people say if asked that if they could comfortably afford it, they would privately educate their children. The reality is that even high earning people already cannot easily afford it, as it is eye-wateringly expensive.
The fact that Starmer has swallowed the gender woo and that he did that 'Pink News' hostage video as Nicola Sturgeon also did, means I dread Labour winning the next election. Even though I agree that the Tories do not deserve to win again either.

Blair is 70 and not leader of the Labour Party or an MP. Therefore 1) voting for him is not and won't be an option and 2) he has the luxury of speaking his mind on trans issues, rather than being constrained by party position.

It's similar to John Major and Theresa May bothe becoming more openly critical of (some of) their parties policies since being PM.

I think Blair and Starmer have a similar political opinion and so find it odd you would vote for one and not the other.

The percentage liable keeps increasing owing to property values. The 'aspiration' point applies again.
Personally I am happy to pay my own care home fees but I want anything left to go to my children as it will all be income which tax has already been taken on.

I think most people say if asked that if they could comfortably afford it, they would privately educate their children

I don't agree. I could comfortably afford it, but I don't send my children. I think private education breeds entitlement and is socially damaging because it separates "haves" and "have nots" when they are still children. I also wouldnt send my children to Grammar school fot the same reason. I strongly believe a good comprehensive education is best for all in society and supports social mobility, and so I think we should have policies to provide the best comprehensive education we can. Not policies that enable the children of rich people to get off to a better start than the children of poor people.

I suspect this was supposed to be an intelligent conversation - however you keep hurling personal insults at people and it is ridiculous. You may not like what the opposition stands for, you may personally support the conservatives but calling the leader of the opposition fat and stupid just does not show you in a good light and undermines any intelligent input you may have considered.

No, it won’t. Our house is allegedly “worth” more than four times what we paid for it. That’s hundreds of thousands of £ of unearned, untaxed money. If the inheritors of our estate are unhappy with paying tax on the portion of their unearned windfall inheritance that exceeds £1 million (IHT allowance x 2), we’ve gone badly wrong in the way we’ve brought them up.

In 1997 it was apparent for a long time that Labour would win (although I didn't dare believe it myself until it happened) and the markets had already 'discounted' and built in any adjustment for that. Blair was in any event very reassuring to the markets and sought to work with business. Clause 4 (nationalisation policy) had been ditched etc that is what New Labour was about, making Labour electable.
The Tories were mired in various sleaze stories which now seem quite mild. One being John Major's ill-fated 'condemn a little more' campaign. Hilarious that it eventually came out that Mr 'Boring' had had a secret affair while in No 10 with Edwina 'eggs all have salmonella' Currie.
I think a Corbyn win would have spooked the markets, Starmer probably not so much.

I dread Labour winning the next election. Even though I agree that the Tories do not deserve to win again either

So what do you want to see?

• current government cling on as long as possible?
• GE ASAP, with a majority result? Who in?
• GE ASAP with minority or coalition government? Who in?
• GE ASAP, hung parliament?
• conservative dictatorship and no GE?

I don't think there are other options. Talk about what you do want, not what you don't

I want a majority Labour government and make no bones about it. I used to be a paid up lib dem for years and said I would never vote Labour but I find Starmer a lot more credible as a leader than any of the others. He's unified the party after Corbyn. He has a broad representation of left and centre left in his shadow cabinet so I think he cam bring together a lot of different views and find a way through that works for the common good. And unlike most politicians he did a lot for women when he was DPP by changing the way rapes are charged and prosecuted (which the Tories immediately undid when he left his post). I'd take actual tangible track record of protecting womens rights over whether they parrot "women can/can't have a penis" as the measure.

Good post @AdamRyan, it’s like a vegan sitting in a restaurant and choosing to go hungry rather than sustain themselves with the less desirable but adequate meal.

It doesn’t even have to be a choice between red and blue, there are other parties that could do with a rise in votes to strengthen their position although they come with the understanding that the power in those votes is investing in much longer plan rather than the immediate task of running the country.

Abstaining from voting at all just means that no political party is interested in representing you because you’re politically inert and have no effect either way.

'If the inheritors of our estate are unhappy with paying tax on the portion of their unearned windfall inheritance that exceeds £1 million (IHT allowance x 2), we’ve gone badly wrong in the way we’ve brought them up.'
You see this amuses me as an ex-Labour party member. Implying I am immoral for being willing to fully fund my care home fees and yet wanting anything left to be free of inheritance tax so it can go to my children who frankly will find it harder to get on in life than I did, as 'final salary' pensions are no longer available to them.
My generation who have 'final salary' pensions are the 'lucky ones' who even on current rules (anything over a £1m pays 40% tax) will have to offload our cash to our kids early (7 year rule) as if we don't and we leave it in the bank until we die, they will lose 40% of it when they didn't need to.

Blair - whatever you think of him and taking Iraq out the equation - had pretty radical and transformative policies, despite being a centrist. I don't see the same from Starmer unfortunately.

Just putting it out there, I have never voted Labour or Tory. They don't stand in my constituency. So please do not think my criticism of the Tories means I support Labour.

And also because many people wanted to buy their council houses which Labour wouldn't allow. This especially applied to the new towns were there was lots of housing up for grabs. Shirley Williams lost her Labour seat over this issue primarily.

It’s hard to know what Starmer thinks about anything.

He’s going to win based on ‘not being the tories’. Once the dust settles, what is he going to actually do? His MP’s on the morning tv rounds are already back-pedalling on subjects like paying doctors and train staff what they want to stop strikes, as they’re realising they might be in power soon, and it’s apparently dawning on them that it might be a lot harder to actually do things, rather than shout large promises from the opposition benches.

I doubt I’ll vote at all, for the first time ever.