VOTE Labour and

[DistinguishedSocialCommentator]

AIBU to feel this will happen un a Labour government???

From what I see and IMO, the Labour lot on the whole believe in aspirations but only for themselves

Older people will vividly recall the the hideous tax rates under labour - between 1974 and 1979 the paye tax rate was up to 80%. Then there was a tax on top of that for so-called higher earners of 18%. This equated to 98%

I don't trust Labour, nor do I trust the Torties. Liberals, IMO they will sell your soul down the river to get a sniff at number 10

As I said I don't trust any of them. But if you are working, worked hard, been prudent with your money and have savings, decent private pensions in the pipeline and possibly a property or two that you have worked for, for your retirement and not wasting your money and want to leave some behind for your kids, GC etc rather than throw it away on the hand to mouth life - then if Labour comes into power, you are totally and truly F'd

Labour rants they will do this and the other - the last time they almost bankrupted England,

If you are working hard being prudent with your money and made sacrifices to send your kids to a private school as many Labour MP's do on pay at almost 100k - they are eager to put VAT on this part of education. The MPS whose pay is a couple of times above average pay will be able to afford it - will you??

Me, my family, relatives have all worked hard, not on benefits, never lived in social housing and not thrown our money away but been prudent to be self-sufficient and pay our taxes to support our country. If you are like us, then trust me, under Labour, you will be shafted hard.

I'm not sure if I will vote tory or an independent but this circus of Tories and Labour taking turns to lie to the nation is not on and yes, most politicians lie and will lie and say anything to get into number 10 and if your feel that is not true, then you must be on another planet

Zonder
No idea why you can't read it

That's obvious - have you subscribed to the New Statesman? Can you read the whole article yourself?

If you did read it you would see that there is some discrepancy over whether it was a note or a verbal message left by Maudling

Why?

I cite the autobiography of my noble autobiography of my noble friend Lord Callaghan of Cardiff. Writing about the first day that he was in office as Chancellor, he says:

"I was sitting at what had been Reggie Maudling's desk in the ground-floor study at 11 Downing Street. While I was reading the briefs which Treasury officials had prepared against the possibility of a Labour victory, he was in the upstairs flat with his wife, packing their belongings. On his way out, he put his head round the door, carrying a pile of suits over his arm. His comment was typical..."

Zonder
However if that's your main take home then you're missing the point.

Surely, the main take is this;

March 2010

Alistair Darling admitted that Labour's planned cuts in public spending will be "deeper and tougher" than Margaret Thatcher's in the 1980s, as the country's leading experts on tax and spending warned that Britain faces "two parliaments of pain" to repair the black hole in the state's finances.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies said hefty tax rises and Whitehall spending cuts of 25% were in prospect during the six-year squeeze lasting until 2017

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/mar/25/alistair-darling-cut-deeper-margaret-thatcher

Obviously I didn't mean to quote autobiography of my noble friend twice.

I don't subscribe and can read it.

"But the most infuriating thing about the fact we’re still talking about the letter 13 years later is the fact that it’s 13 years later, and there’s no bloody money now either. Taxes are on course to hit their highest level as a percentage of GDP since the Second World War, yet public services are on the floor and the country is visibly falling apart, in large part because wage rises and improving living standards are as much a thing of the past as the Spitfire. If the Tories lose the next election, and a Treasury minister were to leave a note for their successor apologising for the mess they’ve left behind, it would have to be a lot longer than a single sentence long. Yet they’re still trying to blame the last lot.

Why are they doing this – not just talking about the letter, but repeating the attack line at every opportunity, like George Osborne banging on about his mythical long-term economic plan? Best guess is that, with local elections around the corner, it’s a sort of core vote strategy. There are voters – especially (but not exclusively) those old enough to remember not just 2010 but 1979 – who still associate Labour with economic chaos. The note is a way of reminding these voters they can’t take the risk, of nudging angry “don’t knows” and apathetic non-voters back towards the Tory column.
In that limited way, it may work. But I’m not sure how many of those voters, more concerned with the worries of 2010 than those of 2023, there really are. For everyone else, a strategy focused not on the future but on one bad decision one mediocre minister made 13 years ago offers them nothing. Worse: in her 49 days in office, Liz Truss did something austerity and Brexithad failed to do, and showed the middle classes that you can’t trust the Tories with the economy.
So, like so much this government does – banging on about small boats they can’t possibly stop; blaming woke academics and TV presenters for national decline, rather than our actual leaders – the obsession with Liam Byrne’s note serves mainly to highlight the fact it has no real answers to the problems of today. It’s meant to shift the focus to the threat of a Labour government. But all it does is remind people of Tory failure."

Notonthestairs
I don't subscribe and can read it

I asked Zonder.

Did you register for the two free articles a month?

Pointless article if it doesn't mention Covid, Ukraine War/energy crisis or Corbyn's manifesto which Starmer signed up to.

"Pointless article if it doesn't mention Covid, Ukraine War/energy crisis or Corbyn's manifesto which Starmer signed up to."

This would imply austerity had reduced debt and it only increased as a result of Ukraine and Covid. That would be incorrect. Instead we have high debt and poor public services.

Seen to remember that Conservative MPs assured us that Truss was a solid choice.

But returning to the article the reason that the Conservatives endlessly regurgitate a note from 2010 is because they've got nothing positive to show for the last 14 years - the obsession with a one line note underlines that. I'm sure you hope that note will do enough to persuade a few Don't Knows, maybe it will - but it won't be nearly enough.

The note won’t convince anyone with half a brain. That chart might though.

But isn't this the point? Spending has skyrocketed, as has our public debt. The many on here who wanted longer lockdowns and more public support in the pandemic seem to conveniently forget how much those lockdowns cost the U.K.

Quite genuinely there isn't any money left. Before we descend into the usual arguments about the Tories spaffing money up the wall to their mates, what does that mean? Pretty much that we either hike taxation significantly or there isn't a material increase in public spending and by extension, the quality of services.

I don't think there's enough net contributors to support the public spending hike that people want. Personally, I think some of Labour's policies will chase out some of the ultra HNW individuals and end up losing tax revenue, but that's more about the politics than the macroeconomic issues at play.

What it means is two things. The economy has to grow and the money we do have has to be spent differently.

Not subscribed and yes I could read it otherwise I wouldn't know what it was all saying would I?

So not that obvious!

You can repeat that citation but it doesn't mean it's correct. See the article I posted. Go on, give it another go.

Nope not the main point. Did you read the article yet?

Thanks @Notonthestairs

@Clavinova nope didn't subscribe for anything.

How come it's a pointless article if it doesn't mention your pet topics? Anyway hopefully you've read what Not posted from it and got the gist now. And can drop your pointless repetition.

TLDR:
But returning to the article the reason that the Conservatives endlessly regurgitate a note from 2010 is because they've got nothing positive to show for the last 14 years - the obsession with a one line note underlines that.

Well, I couldn't read much of your link earlier - the options were subscribe (with a fee) or register for 2 free articles a month. I'm not sure why you don't believe me.

You can repeat that citation but it doesn't mean it's correct

It's likely correct if the citation is from Callaghan's autobiography. An article in the Guardian describes Maudling 'bumping into' Callaghan as well so I'm going to stick with that rather than a note.

Zonder
But returning to the article the reason that the Conservatives endlessly regurgitate a note from 2010 is because they've got nothing positive to show for the last 14 years

How odd then that Labour didn't romp home in 2015, 2017 or 2019.

Not odd in the slightest Clav - there was a lot of BS being spread about as fact in those days in the MSM.

VOTE Labour and

In answer to the OP's question - gain a hypocrite;

‘Hypocrite’ Keir Starmer took private jet to Scotland for green energy speech.

Labour leader defends mode of transport after his party had criticised Rishi Sunak for using a helicopter on the campaign trail.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/scotland/article/hypocrite-keir-starmer-took-private-jet-to-scotland-for-green-energy-speech-vc500c80l

The Tories didn’t have a majority in 2017. May paid the DUP £1 million to support her. After telling us for the previous six weeks that there was no magic money tree.

And as we all know Sunak loves a train (one way).

But maybe not HS2.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/mar/31/sunak-private-jet-trips-cabinet-office-flight-costs

Excellent point @Blossomtoes

A brilliant response.
I honestly fear them again but sadly have no faith in the Tories now unless someone as Good as Margaret Thatcher was to lead the Tories

unless someone as Good as Margaret Thatcher was to lead the Tories

Good?! Say that round here you'd get laughed out of town

BIossomtoes
The Tories didn’t have a majority in 2017.

That's why I worded my response;

Labour didn't romp home in 2015, 2017 or 2019.

So?
Starmer is still a hypocrite.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-expenses-chauffeur-driven-car-b2319779.html

And here;
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/01/12/sir-keir-starmer-accused-of-hypocrisy-over-taking-25000-pri0/