To be worried about what the Labour government will do next?

[Scenicgirl]

Let's be honest, Labour has been a massive disappointment for this country, pissing off the pensioners with taking away the WFA, the farmers, NI changes which impact employers, immigration etc and today refusing compensation to the WASPI women after they ridiculed the Conservatives when they didn't commit to a solution. Don't we deserve better than this constant shit show of lies and deceptions which were clearly spouted out purely to gain power?
For the 1st time in my life, I worry about where we are heading.

Current data, you re making things up now.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/282841/debt-as-gdp-uk/

I certainly can 'get my head around it...'

You're missing the point where I said it isn't our problem.

Because the current debt didn’t suddenly spring up overnight. It’s been building steadily for the last 20 years. It’s called context which, along with nuance, seems to be an alien concept on this thread.

Still complaining I see, moan to ONS about their Google top response

You were rubbishing ONS data yesterday.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/dec/20/lift-for-rachel-reeves-as-uk-borrowing-hits-three-year-low
For those saying that this government is just borrowing and borrowing...
Well, less than forecast.
Now, if all these economists are so much better than Reeves, how is that they get it wrong? One wonders.
Even The Guardian had to admit to that.
Though still the slowing down of the economy and a difficult 2025 are in the forecast. Don't they get tired of forecasting wrongly?
What we really really need is companies that manufacture in the UK, not on the other side of the world. That is where growth will come from. And re-entering the Common Market, to get rid of the extra import/ export taxes.

You were rubbishing ONS data yesterday.

Oh dear still got that wrong. You couldn't google S&P for some reason or PMI

You were looking at the wrong source

But no you're incorrect with that line too.

Not really. The level of delusion coming specifically from Conservative voters on this thread has been high. As has the lack of rigorous debate. You quote a lot of (the same) figures, over and over again but you never offer analysis for the layperson as to what they signify or how you are applying them to your argument. Therefore your posts are pretty pointless because most people, frankly, don’t have a clue what you’re on about.

Still at it. So are you looking at “the wrong source” today or has the ONS magically become reliable overnight?

And your figures are.... where....?

@blossomtoes no you're still at it. Bizarrely

You need to look at the right report for S&P figures. Obviously

Hence giving you what to look up, S&P and PMI figures

What are you talking about?

So when is the ONS right? When you quote the figures? And it’s wrong when I do?

@ChallahPlaiter didn't you respond to a fair amount of posts with 'not my area of expertise' eg for how to fund extra teachers

Yes there's economic info but if you don't want to read or listen to analysis that's your decision. It's all there.

As for 'delusion' etc it's easy to access basic economics, Labour supporters seem more comfortable resorting to insults and only reading pro Labour stuff

If you want more insight go for it, it's not hard

You quote a lot of (the same) figures, over and over again

So where are your figures?

If people want to understand stuff the BBC WS is useful and R4 at times

All the links and quotes in pp are being talked about in detail

I find it interesting and have economics foundation so I pick up on it. It's easily accessible though for anyone

Exactly my point. Economics is not my area of knowledge and your posts haven’t enlightened me at all. I assume you don’t know how to contextualise the figures you post as you just tell people to look it up themselves rather than offer clarification.

Polly Toynbee referenced Theresa May in this 2019 article as well;

The plan is attacked on the grounds that Theresa May herself would be due £22,000. But well-off women will be paying higher tax rates – and as Lambert says: “It’s an entitlement we paid for that was stolen, not a benefit.” Labour could have means tested this, but cutting out relatively few high earners is unlikely to save much.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/28/labour-policies-benefit-millions-waspi-women-pensions

@ChallahPlaiter see below for a good place to start

I've been listening for a while, I can't impart all that to you in a thread

But if you want to ask anything specifically I can try to answer

It's far easier to call people 'delusional' than actually do some research. Seems to be the leftist way.

It’s the way across the board as far as I can see.

It's far easier to call people 'delusional' than actually do some research. Seems to be the leftist way.

True. Or the 'braincell' insult

Give me links, then insult

Bizarre

I agree with all the policies you refer to. Labour's 'comms' are poor and Starmer / Reeves aren't very exciting politicians, but I can live with that.

I think its goog they have stuck with these policies despite being criticised for them. I want a government who does the right thing, not just what the Daily Fail or The Guardian say.

I hope they become more radical, e.g reducing the amount of unemployment. Its what we need.

Difference between a First and 2:1 could be splitting hairs

Or it could easily be a 10% - 20% difference in marks - not to mention Sunak's prestigious international scholarship.

Not sure what your point is really

In part I was answering your question about the credentials of previous chancellors and in my opinion, you were rather dismissive of Hunt and Sunak in your earlier posts.

Or it could easily be a 10% - 20% difference in marks

Not any more, it’s 10% maximum.