To feel utterly miserable about a future with Andy Burnham as PM?

[OneWarmHazelQuail]

I feel like I'm being stung in every possible way at the moment- £15 a day on tube to work, high mortgage costs, high energy costs, private schooling for SEN child (I was told state wouldn't be unlikely to assist him as he isn't mute or violent). My parents have had to help fund schooling it felt like my only hope as son has behavioural issues.

I also have an unsold old home that I have to rent out as it wouldn't sell. Buy-to-let mortgage costs, agent fees, maintenance and tax put me in a loss position.

I can't bear what the future holds with Andy Burnham. I have no doubt that he will find new and imaginative ways to keep me in this financial nightmare. I'm literally struggling from food poverty but regarded as rich by policy.

YABU- Andy Burnham is actually going to make things better

YANBU- I'm screwed

Also needs to look at how to generate money without just taxing people/companies more. Bring more cash into the country which will result in more tax and people earning more.

Was there a General Election after Liz Truss won the leadership contest and became Prime Minister? Was there a General Election after Rishi Sunak won the leadership contest and became Prime Minister? Obviously we all know the answer to that but why didn't you make a fuss about that?

Right wing and far right voters and activists are the most hypocritical people on the planet. 'Do as I say not do as I do' is their motto.

What data did you use to opine on behalf of the 'majority of the electorate'? The only data I can find is that only 19% of people surveyed opposed the change, with 44% across all shades believing Burnham should challenge Starmer. Which suggests 81% of the electorate are either in favour or don't mind either way.

There's plenty of appetite for tax raids on the tax avoiders around, whether they are big companies or individuals. And I'm not sure that anyone really objects to a penny on income tax if it means we can improve social care, education, health and justice.

And of course @Bullandbear et al won't address the hypocrisy of the complaints about Burnham's succession. Rules for thee, not for me.

What kind of numbers are you modelling for tax avoidance, please?

And you otherwise assume that a penny on income tax would be well administered by this government.

This government desperately needs growth - you cannot tax your way.

I don’t give a fig that Burnham has replaced Starmer, quite frankly. I am just glad that Starmer has gone. I am confident that Burnham will not last, and then who are Labour going to play in next?

Would you like to put some money on that?

He is going to turn the whole country into Manchester and it will be a horrible thing.

It feels as though the UK economy is increasingly a form of rentier capitalism. With offshoring occurring over past decades, this country no longer manufactures. It did earn revenue off the financial industry until Brexit shot a hole in that sector (financial sector conveniently ignored by Johnson).

However, now the surest form of profit seeking is off govt coffers. HS2 is a great example of a taxpayer funded £100b make work project and one that will not run until 2039 and possibly not fully until 2042.

Burnham has spoken of evoking the Emergency Powers act to have house built at scale. And re-nationalisation might be a good idea but it is an expensive one. Those utilities have to be bought off their current owners. Where is this money meant to come from?

Ultimately, if private companies are to continue to make money off govt projects, then the govt needs to be bring in more revenue. Primarily it does this through taxation. DH and I feel relatively comfortable but we still live pretty simply. Yet we are still concerned about where the unelected Burnham plans to raise money for his big spending plans. The super rich pay clever accountants and lawyers, the poorer get govt subsidies, the middle class can’t escape. I’ve always been happy to pay taxes, but do fear a Burnham govt.

If people didn’t care Labour would have run on it at the GE. The tax burden is already high.

Amusing when someone, who lacks liquidity, challenges me to a bet.

Were I to take them up - in size - they would probably run away, or go silent.

Double standards again!

Excellent stealth boast there ☺️

I think there are some posters who frequently conflate their own opinion and 'the views of the public'. See also 'the public are turning to Farage' 'the people want Farage for PM' when only 16% of people actually think this and fewer than 11% voted Reform in their finest hour to date.
There is very little point expecting reasonable and consistent views from people who have no issues with ignoring or misrepresenting facts to support their arguments. This is after all the whole foundation on which Reform stands.

Tbf not many could see Starmer’s ousting on here. For most of his tenure they were adamant he’d stay and the public liked him as much as they did.

Try me. You have no concept of my finances, by the way.

In reality, Bull would probably have to take a hammer to his piggybank. His mum would be very cross.

Equally amusing when someone feels the need to convince a bunch of strangers on an anonymous forum that they're rich and successful. You do realise that any of us can claim to be anything on here, that we all know this to be the case, so bragging is entirely pointless?
All you are here is words on a page. You're judged by the level of insight you show and how well you articulate it, that's the only measure of success on here.
And if you're going up against that poster my theoretical currency is on her. No offence.

Manchester is part of your country is it not?

You think? I seem to recall much negativity about Starmer on here and a general feeling amongst Labour supporting posters that even if they personally liked Starner, the change was for the best given his widespread unpopularity. I think people don't have to think the latter deserved, to recognise it exists and wasn't helpful to the Labour Party.
Much of the hoo hah about the leadership change seems to have come from those who hoped Starmer would remain, damaging Labour's chances of re election.

He’s elected.

Yep. I could see the strain and I’m not surprised he’s out but most posters replying were adamant he’d stay.

As for that last line Labour ousting a leader when apparently they didn’t do that is a big deal. I’m glad he’s gone obviously but he clung on for a while.

Anyone who brags about their wealth probably has none. It's like the assumption that if you don't bash benefit claimants, you must be on benefits and probably fraudulently too. The concept of just being a half decent compassionate human being doesn't occur. The 'I'm alright Jack' mindset is actually not universal.

I think this hits the nail on the head. I wonder whether the furore surrounding Andy Burnham becoming PM is actually borne out of anxiety that he might just succeed in improving Labour’s poll ratings. He did after all win a stomping victory in Makerfield.

Either way, time will tell whether this change of leadership was a success.