The "terrifying threat from Labour"

[BigWordAtlas]

I know that Tory HQ staff often come on here and post, and will be doing even more so at the moment.

I also know that Kier Starmer has done a terrible job in gender critical thinking, and members like him, Rayner and Lammy are currently an absolute shitshow when it comes to the rights and protections of women and children. I'm not looking forward to the battle we'll face after the election to reverse the damage that's been done and to protect those rights, and fully bring down all the MRA policies that have formally or informally kicked in over the last few years.

But does anyone else feel like the absolute barrage on here in the last few days about the Holy Bloody Handmaid Terror that will be Labour's government is a bit... overblown? A bit Tory HQ-flavoured? They're absolutely panicking at the moment and will do any kind of astroturfing they can to chip away at votes, particularly in swing constituencies like mine.

No party is perfect, and Labour is currently far from perfect for me and my children. But realistically, I have to vote Labour where I am if I want to keep a Tory candidate out. I hate their gender ID policies, but this nail-bitten tone of total and complete apocalypse (and yes, I've heard posters use that word in this context) feels unhelpful and not really equipping anyone to improve things after the GE. They made me feel extremely anxious until I just hit a wall with the frantic language, and now I'm feeling much more pragmatic and ready to fight with Labour on this stuff, rather than against them and allowing another party to get in.

So AIBU to feel that most of these posts are at least seeded by Tory HQ, rather than actual Labour voters like me?

<hard hat donned>

Ear syringing is no longer considered a basic NHS service.

Why are you banging on about ear cleaning?

The country is in an absolute shambles and all you seem to care about is ear wax.

@Yalta I know what the NHS say about this. I have been to the NHS recently about ear wax and I understand the reason why they no longer routinely do this. They will do it exceptionally. But it carries risks.
GP surgeries used to offer manual ear syringing using a hand-held metal syringe. However, this method is no longer considered safe for use as it used high pressure water and could damage your hearing.
NICE doesn't recommend syringing because there is a lack of evidence to show it's safe and effective and – because the water pressure isn't controlled – there's a risk of bursting the ear drum.
You have to use olive oil for weeks to get rid of it. Most people want very quick fixes though and so do not do it.

@cupcaske123 Yalta does not understand that NICE saying a particular treatment is no longer deemed safe is not the same as cuts. The NHS is in a mess. But I would never let a GP private or NHS syringe my ears.

All the more reason why Starmer has done an amazing job against that backdrop.

Do you think that could be because it’s an actual thing?

I think you could make a strong argument that for Labour, social justice lobby groups have replaced unions.

Labour has really largely given up on class based socialism. That's why there are people in this thread who think that reducing trade barriers and free international movement of labour is what the Labour party is about - that was never a left wing position, it's completely a right wing position.

Having given up on class based concerns, the things that unions cared about, they've now hitched their wagon to identity politics concerned, as represented by groups like Stonewall. They now play the kind of role that unions were playing back in the 70s.

Blir funded the NHS by borrowing though. It's still eating into NHS budgets toaday.

So do we blame that missing money on the Tories, or Labour?

The cycle with Labour seems to be they get in, make some service improvements, but overplay their hand and get into some kind of debt, then they get tossed and the Tories have some kind of austerity situation. Thatcher, for all people blamed her, and her decisions weren't perfect, was left with a significant mess and few options.

Blair claimed to have learned the lesson from that, but I'm not sure that is true. Had he been reelected, they were going to have to make real cutbacks.

I don't think Labour will be able to do that now. Between the financial crash and COVID, the pot is truly care, no room to wiggle, no money to borrow. So I suspect what will happen is they won't be able to do much of what people think they will.

They will be reduced to throwing bones to the TRA lobby, and trying to make it as difficult as possible for people to opt out of the state educating their children.

What's an actual thing?

@TempestTost this conservative government have run up an enormous debt. Absolutely enormous. They are fiscally imprudent and we do not even have anything to show for it.

I am so tired of so many lies being told. It is like the Brexit bus all over again.
Starmer is a centrist with strong economic policies. We need a strong economy to have good public services.

I know that Tory HQ staff often come on here and post, and will be doing even more so at the moment.

Yeah course they do..

@SnowFrogJelly I do not know who is posting on here. I do know we get the same posters who keep repeating the same lies. Lies that they are shown are untrue. But they are not interested in the truth. They simply hope if they keep repeating lies about Starmer and Labour that some people will believe them.

I'm not quite sure what you are responding to in my comment? I'm certainly not saying they haven't run up a debt.

To what extent that is due to world events, I'm not sure. It seems the same in many countries at the moment.

My point however was that when people talk about things being better under Blair, they need to remember that a) he financed that by debt, and b) had he remained in power, it would not have been sustainable.

Debt was climbing well before the pandemic, though @TempestTost

@TempestTost I have said elsewhere I have voted both Labour and Conservative. I think it is a waste of time looking at governments that were voted out 14 years ago. We need to look at the people we have now and their manifesto. Starmer is not Blair mark 2. That is very clear.
Starmer's Labour party have credible economic policies, a decent manifesto and people with the track record to enact it.
I am voting for Starmer's labour party.
I tend to like centrists. I liked John Major, a Conservative Prime Minister who reminds me of Starmer. Both highly intelligent with a decent grasp of economics, highly competent, and both were bad at TV appearances.
Unlike many people on here it seems I look at facts. Not the equivalent of word memes trying to boil down this election to simplistic slogans that sound meaningful, but really are not. I am aware that is unusual these days.
It is stupid to talk about past Labour governments, just as it is stupid to talk about past Conservative governments. We have had some very good Conservative governments in the past, but this lot are economically illiterate and incompetent.

Don't let facts get in the way of political sloganeering.

Yup.

The question is why, I guess. Costs have gone up. The big financial crash seemed to take ages to begin to come out of. nOt just in the UK.

But my point was about this constant refrain that things were better under Labour, or Blair. People talk about that as if it would have continued had Blair remained.

What do you think Starmer is going to do to improve the economy?

Gender identity.

hamstersarse · 02/07/2024 14:29
It is quite terrifying that Starmer refuses to work "pretty much come what may" past 6 o'clock
**
Sounds totes committed”

Don't be silly. One meal with family, once every week. As you well know.

It exists as a theory. Like flat earthism. But the idea we all have an internal sense of gender that is mismatched in a handful of people and those people need to be treated as their identified sex not their physical sex is of course nonsense.

Melisha, I agree past gov doesn't mean the same going forward. But what concerns me is people looking back at the Blair era with wistful eyes as if everything went well.

Maternity services were not on their knees they were "decimated" by the end.
Schools were absolutely failing in many areas unable to cope with the volume of pupils. Many schools had to build on play grounds to get new classrooms in.
There was the cc so they can't be completely blamed for leaving the country penniless.
What concerns me is the door they opened which was made worse under the tories.
They tinkered with legal aid, they brought in uni fees, started strange privitiasion of NHS etc.

When they introduced uni fees the cap was a very reasonable 3500. Did they think it would stay at that??

Re debt I heard an interesting person :eccomics from one of the unis putting that into perspective, he said UK is a wealthy country and it's not unusual to borrow, he whipped out what other countries have eg France, Germany, US and said there was no reason not too.
Like a well off person using a credit card very different to someone who can't afford to paying it back putting it on a card.

Ah yes, back to the private school debate. What about the 93% of the population who cant afford to 'opt out' of state education? Frankly, if that's the worst of what Labour has planned, I'll take it.

I do agree with you though, that Labour won't have money to splash. That's why they're focusing on a strong economy in the first instance. Only a strong economy can fund the public service improvements they want to make. They're eyeing up a two-term government.