Reform wants women barefoot and pregnant

[Sweetiedarling7]

Reform candidate Matt Goodwin wants women to have children early in life and introduce extra taxes as punishment for anyone who chooses not to have children.

Misogyny in plain sight.

How long till they ban abortion too?

Women voting Reform may want to consider if they are turkeys voting for christmas.

People are ridiculously naive if they think a moderately far right party will not repeal women's rights. If you don't women to be in the position that women in the US are in, don't vote this fucking terrible party.

What I notice is that, despite Reform leading in the polls, you rarely hear people openly claiming support. It seems that people who have concerns about immigration etc have realised that there's no point engaging with those that won't listen and will just shout them down/call them fascists or racists. Instead they're voting with their feet.

It's going to take a lot to stop that runaway minecart now and the left instead seem to be doubling down on more of the behaviour and rhetoric that got us here in the first place. It's like a repeat of Brexit/Trump getting into power where the left seemed shocked it could ever happen. Then it happened again and now we're in this shitshow.

Not a Reform supporter btw and not really interested in debating the above. I think it's clear that if people aren't listened to they'll vote with their feet. And at that point good luck getting them to listen to your own views!

The questions to ask yourselves are: are you willing to cast aside all morals by voting for a party associated with this extreme level of misogyny, to stop a few immigrants? Even though most immigration is economically positive as migrants pay tax and often work in the NHS? There is no evidence that immigration increases crime (other than the obvious, more young men = more crime) and there is no evidence that immigration has a negative impact on jobs and wages. Of course there needs to be a level of control but it doesn’t appear to be the answer to all your problems and will have very little personal impact.
Are you prepared to risk the rights of women and minorities and vote for a party who voted against measures to prevent violence against women and girls? What about workers rights?

They just said they would get rid of the Equality Act.

Why bother with incentives when you can just get rid of the legislation that protects women from sex based discrimination?

They just said they would get rid of the Equality Act.

Why bother with incentives when you can just get rid of the legislation that protects women from sex based discrimination?

Have they explained how they will fix the problem?

In your analogy they haven't found the stopcock. They are just threatening the water.

Jenrick has confirmed that Reform will restore the 2 child benefit cap in full.

But they promise cheaper pints.

They also said yesterday they were going to scrap the UK Equality Act

Restoring the 2 child benefit cap is very popular with the public.

Encourage women to have more children but reimpose the two-child cap in favour of cutting beer duty.

But completely illogical.

More worryingly, is Jenrick's promise to get rid of benefits for those with Anxiety, Depression, even joint injuries, like Tennis elbow, which can mean you lose the effective use of your arm or arms.

Surgical interventions can take many months even years on the NHS.

But at least Reform can honestly say "We told you what you were voting for"

It's always worth asking why millionaires like Nigel Farage and his pals want people to have fewer rights. Because 'people'includes you and your loved ones. As much as the media likes to put about that human rights are these wacky things only demanded by non-people like criminals, terrorists , benefit claimants, minority ethnic groups, LGBTQ+, disabled people etc, and not 'real people' (like rich, white, able bodied, heterosexual men) - we all need rights and its never in your own interest for people in general to have fewer of them.

Most people with tennis elbow just go and see a physio. I just had to lower the weight on pulling exercises for a bit. It's extremely rare to lose the use of a limb.

These extreme cases don't serve anyone well.

But the bottom line is that there are currently a lot of people who receive some level of PIP and also work. My DS is one of them - he uses a wheelchair and has a range of physical disabilities. He also has depression, so the Reformites would count him as 'gets PIP for depression'.

Because he gets PIP, he is able to work a 0.6 WTE. If he did not get PIP and had to work full time, he would last a few months, after which his physical health would collapse and he would then have to have benefits. He would be worse off, the taxpayer would be worse off, his employer would be worse off.

The Reform fans on here and Reform itself don't see the nuance and the complexity. Everything is black and white zero sum thinking. Simple soundbites presented as solutions for highly complex problems. I have seen nothing from Reform to suggest they would handle these things with any degree of competence.

I fear for my DS. Fortunately he also has EU citizenship so has somewhere to go.

It sounds like he genuinely qualifies for assistance. I can't imagine that they'd just focus on his depression and ignore something as significant as him being a wheelchair user.

Your faith in them is touching.

Their current record in council sadly does not inspire me with the same confidence.

It is. I wonder how the public will feel about tax breaks for people with more than two children then.

Quite. If they don't see the utter internal inconsistency of this idea then why should I trust them to do right by workers, women or anyone with disabilities?

I would definitely not encourage you to! I’m genuinely surprised anyone is, they seem to paper thin to me. Nakedly ambitious, will say anything and then change their mind, zero integrity and no thought out policies at all. Farage has done an incredible job of capturing the public imagination, but I just don’t see what people see at all. I wouldn’t buy a second hand car from the man let alone trust him with the country.

An ageing population leaves TWO options: more babies or more working‑age people. Babies take 20+ years to contribute. The economy doesn’t have 20 years. Pretending otherwise is economic fantasy.

That’s why immigration is supported by most MPs in the real world: it works now. Migrants pay tax now, staff NHS and other services now, reduce the dependency ratio now.

You cannot have low immigration, low taxes, decent public services and an ageing population. Anyone claiming you can is lying. Pick your trade‑offs, but stop pretending there’s a free option.

Our current low birth rate is not sustainable.

Neither sadly are natural resources/the planet. Although obv we all want our parents to be well cared for and ourselves too when we reach that age.

But looking at the population increase over the last 100 years is insane. Check out the graph below.

We defo need more workers in key sectors. Just not more Deliveroo drivers and people working in hand car washes for cash in hand.

The thread is about declining birth rates and this graph doesn’t show that at all.

Low birth rate is not what is causing the imbalance of old retired to young workers paying tax to support them.

That is being created by lack of jobs and predominantly by longer lifespans with costs made even worse by longer unhealthy periods towards the end of life.

The number of 100 year olds in the country has doubled since 2004.