To think Labour is not the party of the working people.

[pinkpalmleaves]

I voted for Labour as I believed their election pledge of being a party for the working people but genuinely I can’t think of one thing, since they’ve been in power, that they’ve done to help me (a single working mother on around £42k a year)! I get zero help from UC, these mystical breakfast clubs don’t exist, people aren’t employing people due to their ridiculous NI implications, they aren’t building affordable housing, energy prices are insanely high and all they talk about is grants (which won’t affect me as I live in a flat)! Genuinely I can’t think of one thing that they’ve done to help working people in the middle. Why are Labour sticking their heads in the sand? Why do they refuse to help the squeezed working class? They are stopping this economy from thriving - as
nobody can afford to spend anything extra (treats, holidays, meals out etc etc)!

@HeBeaverandSheBeaverthis is the crap that pisses me off haha! Him bleating on about helping working families with breakfast clubs when it simply isn’t true!

You see I think that’s labours big issue. People are skint, frustrated and when Labour do things like only help people who are on benefits with the rise is utilities, the ‘just scraping by with no benefits other than CB’ working people look at the pay slip and think that they don’t approve of what it’s being spent on at all. And these people are increasing in numbers.

It looks like Labour have either given up on attracting the votes of workers, or take them for granted so are focusing on pensioners and benefits recipients instead.

They are so going to regret abandoning “working people “.

Would it also apply to those who cannot be in employment because they are providing full time care to someone else?

Life is tough (or more accurately perhaps, tougher) for everyone thanks to a decade and a half of inflation outstripping stagnant wages, so I do have sympathy OP.

Things like affordable housing, new reservoirs, upgrades to the National Grid etc. are all slow projects- they've been started but they will take several years to complete. NHS waiting lists are slowly falling, albeit from high levels. The economy was growing better than expected before the war in Iran broke out, it's very possible that will all have been knocked back by higher energy prices and disruption to global trade. Again, growth was not at the levels we experienced in the 90s/00s, those levels haven't been seen for years.

I do think things are getting incrementally better, and long neglected issues (like our aging water infrastructure) are finally getting some consideration. I don't expect miracles or the country to turnaround overnight though.

That is my opinion.

It really feels as though it is a two tier benefit system - insanely generous to some and piteous to others - mainly those who have paid in.
In Germany people who lose their jobs get a significant proportion of their salary for a time but the benefits are less lavish for life style claimants @runningpram

I agree with this model and it would assist and incentivise people into work . I was shocked to find out that even Americans get a higher rate of unemployment benefit than I would be entitled to here in the UK - at least as a single woman with no kids. Over there it would only be paid for a time limited period as well.

I’d prefer that though. 6 months of a decent monthly payment rather than paying people a pittance that will barely cover rent and council tax over a longer period.

They can’t magic out growth for the country that voted for Brexit

they are doing really well with large businesses by the way who wanted stability over Tory shitshow

Just imagine if they actually did something to promote the growth of those companies.

I work for a large employer in our area in hospitality. I work in their head office. They are an optimistic bunch but in reality they are reliant upon folks spending their disposable income, which has diminished under Labour.

If government were to change taxes to encourage growth, they could invest more money into their businesses and employ more people. It’s family run, so not a corporate.

Sadly their profits have taken a battering in 2025 as a direct consequence of Labour’s choices. They were fine before.

This is not party politics. I’m just looking at their numbers.

or take them for granted so are focusing on pensioners

which party doesn’t focus on pensioners?!

It really annoys me too because its right there in the party name.

A "working person" is someone who's primary source of income is their labour.

As opposed to people who derive income from assets they own (eg property, dividends,shares, a business or farm they own but don't work in, inheritance), or people who don't work & depend on benefits or state pensions etc.

It's all very well saying we need the 'working class' and the 'salt of the earth' types to run the country but we also need people who understand economics. It's not enough to be nice and 'with the people' if you don't understand how to grow an economy.

You could have stayed. This government has been in power for a year so I doubt it was that that sent you abroad.

Or instead of increasing taxes for people who are working, more people should be working to contribute.

It’s actually a pittance here for just six months

No they’re not and SMEs make up a large proportion of the economy. Most business owners who bizarrely bought into their ridiculous lives pre GE regret it.

Why still back them to this extent? Growth is zero, 2024 it was up and then bam your Labour party in.

Labour is the party for public sector NMW workers. At 42k I'm afraid you are already falling into their broader shoulders definition,

if you don't understand how to grow an economy

Do you really believe not one person in this government or the previous Tory ones had any legitimate ideas for growth? Seriously?

The problem is these ideas will not be palatable for the majority of the public.

Reform have become popular as they are perpetuating the myth that we can have the utopia of low tax, great public services & low immigration.

But the problem is that we are incentivising the wrong people to have children. As a general rule, the “hard working families” who have jobs and pay tax, but also make time to read to their children, take them on educational outings, support with homework, help out in school raising money for the PTA etc. are limiting their family size because they can’t afford to give more than 2/3 children that life. These are the children who, statistically speaking, are more likely to grow up to become net contributors.

Those who feed their kids crisps for breakfast, never read to them and are constantly in school arguing about why their violent child should not be punished are able to have multiple kids because they get more money (and more time exempted from obligations to look for work) for each one. Their kids are, again statistically speaking, more likely to cost the state money when they are adults. Of course we all know of examples of children born in poverty who have become huge success stories but they are exceptions.

’Taxes are too low except for higher earners on PAYE’

Who should pay more?

You were probably already planning to leave. Give over. Otherwise I would query the decision to leave based on a government who has been in power for less than two years.

Yes and the much spun out Timms review is just a convenient way of shelving/avoiding the whole welfare issue.