Labour The Rise of the New Nasty Party

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, James105 said:

 

Starmer is a weak man that cannot handle criticism.   He already removed the whip from 6 or 7 MPs who voted against keeping the 2 child benefit cap.  He won't let them.   So they will vote to kill old people this winter and it will forever be on their records.  

He’s weak for enforcing the whip.

 

OK.

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

You think someone on a couple of thousand above that is rolling in money? Have you been to the UK lately? OAP's are going to have to choose between food and heat. An absolute disgrace.

I spent many months (the majority) last year in the UK in the company of OAPs and the whole of February of this year in the UK staying with an OAP.

 

You?

Starmer isn’t proposing scrapping the winter fuel allowance, the proposal is that it should be means tested. 
 

 

 

 

Edited September 6 by Chomper Higgot

[James105]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

He’s weak for enforcing the whip.

 

OK.

 

Correct.   I wonder if he will give up his "tax free" pension or if he will continue to be a massive hypocrite?  

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-65037136

 

What do you think he should do?   Make the "tough choice" to reverse the tax exemption on his pension so he pays tax on it like everyone else or keep it so he cements his reputation as a massive hypocrite?    

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

Correct.   I wonder if he will give up his "tax free" pension or if he will continue to be a massive hypocrite?  

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-65037136

 

What do you think he should do?   Make the "tough choice" to reverse the tax exemption on his pension so he pays tax on it like everyone else or keep it so he cements his reputation as a massive hypocrite?    

You should try to control your envy, it’s an ugly emotion.

[JonnyF]

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I spent many months (the majority) last year in the UK in the company of OAPs and the whole of February of this year in the UK staying with an OAP.

 

You?

 

Flew out of Heathrow on August 4th.

 

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Starmer isn’t proposing scrapping the winter fuel allowance, the proposal is that it should be means tested. 
 

 

 

 

 

Yes and the means testing limit is 12,000 pounds. A pathetically low amount with which to leave pensioners fending for themselves through a long British winter. Many will die and that will be on Starmer if he is stupid enough not to bow to pressure to reverse the cruel policy.

[JonnyF]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You should try to control your envy, it’s an ugly emotion.

 

Pointing out Starmer's rank hypocrisy and nasty treatment of OAP's is a perfectly logical position to take. 

[Chomper Higgot]

10 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Many will die

Crystal ball stuff.

[JonnyF]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Crystal ball stuff.

 

You glib comment indicates you share Starmer's lack of concern. 

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, JonnyF said:

 

You glib comment indicates you share Starmer's lack of concern. 

No, it indicates I don’t fall for baseless predictions.

 

Do you have a link that demonstrates these deaths you predict?

[JonnyF]

42 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

No, it indicates I don’t fall for baseless predictions.

 

Do you have a link that demonstrates these deaths you predict?

 

https://www.endfuelpoverty.org.uk/4950-excess-winter-deaths-caused-by-cold-homes-last-winter/

 

Of course, Starmer removing the OAP fuel allowance that the Tories introduced will add to these deaths. But feel free to continue making your wise cracks about it.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

 

https://www.endfuelpoverty.org.uk/4950-excess-winter-deaths-caused-by-cold-homes-last-winter/

 

Of course, Starmer removing the OAP fuel allowance that the Tories introduced will add to these deaths. But feel free to continue making your wise cracks about it.

Oh so now Starmer is guilty of the excess deaths from winter 22/23 caused  by the Tories protecting energy company windfall profits at cost to consumers.

 

But let’s look at energy prices over the period you want to use to back your baseless claim.

 

Clearly prices over that period where at historical highs and have since reduced significantly.

 

Apples and Oranges Jonny.

 

 

https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/press-release/energy-prices-fall-again-winter

[jayboy]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You perhaps aren’t aware of the range of benefits pensioners receive.

Regardless, there are also large numbers of pensioners in receipt of personal and work place pensions, many with incomes above the average national wage income, taxing workers to give these people extra benefits they don’t need is clearly not tenable. 

 

 

That is a gross distortion of the reality, the usual selective evidence (George Osborne would approve) - concentrating on the better off segment of pensioners rather than those worse off, if not the absolute poor.Many new Labour MPs are indignant and as mentioned the Prime Minister is displeased with the Chancellor's position.It's early days but it's becoming clear that this administration isn't very clever at the politics of governing.

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, jayboy said:

 

That is a gross distortion of the reality, the usual selective evidence (George Osborne would approve) - concentrating on the better off segment of pensioners rather than those worse off, if not the absolute poor.Many new Labour MPs are indignant and as mentioned the Prime Minister is displeased with the Chancellor's position.It's early days but it's becoming clear that this administration isn't very clever at the politics of governing.

As I said earlier, Labour MP’s May well defeat this proposal when it comes to a vote.

 

In the meantime ‘means testing benefits’ for all its faults is a means of ensure resources are directed to those in need and away from those who don’t need.

[Nick Carter icp]

5 hours ago, RichardColeman said:

single tenant council tax discount cancelled

 

   I had my single person council tax discount removed three years ago 

[jayboy]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Maybe they’ll vote otherwise.

 

Some might but most wont and the government will easily win the motion.But it's stupid politics.Contrary to some comments on this thread I think Starmer is genuinely concerned, not only for humanitarian reasons but also because he will have to keep a closer eye on the Chancellor.The policy itself is not foolish - though I don't agree with it - but it should have been packaged as part of the forthcoming budget alongside some goodies.

 

 

[MalcolmB]

1 hour ago, James105 said:

 

Why am I am not in the least surprised that someone with your abhorrent views is a Labour supporter.  

Do you identify as a feminist.

[jayboy]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

As I said earlier, Labour MP’s May well defeat this proposal when it comes to a vote.

 

You don't have much of a handle on British politics, do you? The vast majority of Labour MPs will put their reservations to one side and vote with the government.

 

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

In the meantime ‘means testing benefits’ for all its faults is a means of ensure resources are directed to those in need and away from those who don’t need.

 

Tory philosophy which Mrs Thatcher would enthusiastically endorse.Actually I would support it too and extend the principle in many aspects of British economic policy including the NHS.

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, jayboy said:

 

Some might but most wont and the government will easily win the motion.But it's stupid politics.Contrary to some comments on this thread I think Starmer is genuinely concerned, not only for humanitarian reasons but also because he will have to keep a closer eye on the Chancellor.The policy itself is not foolish - though I don't agree with it - but it should have been packaged as part of the forthcoming budget alongside some goodies.

 

 

In this I agree

[James105]

2 minutes ago, jayboy said:

 

Some might but most wont and the government will easily win the motion.But it's stupid politics.Contrary to some comments on this thread I think Starmer is genuinely concerned, not only for humanitarian reasons but also because he will have to keep a closer eye on the Chancellor.The policy itself is not foolish - though I don't agree with it - but it should have been packaged as part of the forthcoming budget alongside some goodies.

 

They are clowns.  Announcing this at the same time they increase train drivers pay by 15% and then claiming it would cause a run on the pound if they didn't take away the winter fuel allowance is clown behaviour.   

 

All they had to do was add the winter fuel allowance to the pension so those who receive little pension don't pay tax and keep the same amount and those who are "rich" pay 45% tax on it anyway.   Or they could have negotiated a 5-10% deal with the train drivers.  Or they could reduce the "overseas climate fund" by £1.5bn to a mere £10bn of taxpayers money.  

 

Starmer is out of his depth.  He is an over promoted middle manager which is why he jumps on nonsense like the price of Oasis tickets rather than concern himself with the realities of being in government and the real and difficult problems facing the UK.   

[RayC]

3 hours ago, Keep Right said:

There seems to be much remorse among the voters of this great country. The left wing socialist party of Labour is showing its true colors. 

 

The demonstrators in your photo belong to 'The Communist Party of Great Britain' not the 'Labour Party'. 

 

And to preempt an obvious response: No, they are not one and the same.

[jayboy]

38 minutes ago, James105 said:

Starmer is out of his depth.  He is an over promoted middle manager which is why he jumps on nonsense like the price of Oasis tickets rather than concern himself with the realities of being in government and the real and difficult problems facing the UK.   

 

I think you are being a little unfair.Starmer is more than an over promoted middle manager since afte all he was Director of Public Prosecution which has Permanent Secretary rank.He has the necessary intellect, capacity for hard work and human decency for the PM post.The trouble is he doesn't really have anything else, specifically any kind of charisma or the "vision thing". Everything is blamed on the Tories who certainly left the country in a mess, but the "black hole" he constantly talks about is somewhat economical with the truth.Labour knew pretty well what was the country's financial position before the election and the black hole spiel is essentially cover for inevitable tax increases.The British public is not thick and Starmer's terrible personal ratings reflect dislike of his slippery language.Still it's early days.

 

I think a lot of Labour supporters (the James O'Brien/Alistair Campbell syndrome) are going to be caught out if they are totally uncritical of the government.Much better to indicate support -if that's their position - but to comment critically where appropriate.

[James105]

22 minutes ago, jayboy said:

 

I think you are being a little unfair.Starmer is more than an over promoted middle manager since afte all he was Director of Public Prosecution which has Permanent Secretary rank.He has the necessary intellect, capacity for hard work and human decency for the PM post.The trouble is he doesn't really have anything else, specifically any kind of charisma or the "vision thing". Everything is blamed on the Tories who certainly left the country in a mess, but the "black hole" he constantly talks about is somewhat economical with the truth.Labour knew pretty well what was the country's financial position before the election and the black hole spiel is essentially cover for inevitable tax increases.The British public is not thick and Starmer's terrible personal ratings reflect dislike of his slippery language.Still it's early days.

 

I think a lot of Labour supporters (the James O'Brien/Alistair Campbell syndrome) are going to be caught out if they are totally uncritical of the government.Much better to indicate support -if that's their position - but to comment critically where appropriate.

 

Maybe I am being a little presumptuous on his expected performance but I have worked with his type of character before so I doubt I am wrong.  He is a manager and not a leader.   He is petty minded, spiteful, divisive, thin skinned, a genuine hypocrite and the type to pull up a ladder after he has made use of it to get to the top.   If he is still PM in 6 months I'll be surprised.  If he is PM this time next year I will be genuinely shocked.  Never has a new governments ratings tanked so quickly after taking over from a detested previous government and they haven't even hit people with their punitive tax rises and austerity cuts yet. 

[RayC]

17 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

Maybe I am being a little presumptuous on his expected performance but I have worked with his type of character before so I doubt I am wrong.  He is a manager and not a leader.   He is petty minded, spiteful, divisive, thin skinned, a genuine hypocrite and the type to pull up a ladder after he has made use of it to get to the top.   If he is still PM in 6 months I'll be surprised.  If he is PM this time next year I will be genuinely shocked.  Never has a new governments ratings tanked so quickly after taking over from a detested previous government and they haven't even hit people with their punitive tax rises and austerity cuts yet. 

 

How on earth can you be so confident about Starmer's character unless you know him?

 

To state the blindingly obvious, unforeseen events can change things. In December 2019, no one thought that Johnson would serve less than a full term as PM, so Starmer might not last the course. However, having delivered Labour a massive parliamentary majority, as of now there is no chance of him not being PM in 6 months time. 

 

It is no more than wishful thinking on your part to see him gone.

Edited September 6 by RayC
Rephrasing

[James105]

12 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

How on earth can you be so confident about Starmer's character unless you know him?

 

To state the blindingly obvious, unforeseen events can change things. In December 2019, no one thought that Johnson would serve less than a full term as PM, so Starmer might not last the course. However, having delivered Labour a massive parliamentary majority, as of now there is no chance of him not being PM in 6 months time. 

 

It is no more than wishful thinking on your part to see him gone.

 

Maybe you are lucky enough to never have worked with his type before.   The world is full of his type and they serve their calling as middle managers.  They never create anything new, they never run a business that has to make money to survive, they lack any kind of vision.   It's people like him that inspired me to start my own business to prevent myself from ever being in a position to work under the likes of him again.   You give him credit for "delivering a massive parliamentary majority" but what did he do to achieve that other than getting less votes than Jeremy Corbyn in 2019?   Diane Abbot, Corbyn, even a tub of lard in wearing a Labour rosette would have "delivered" the same results after the Tories failures.   

 

If he doesn't last then he will be replaced by another talentless clown so its not really wishful thinking.  

[RayC]

7 hours ago, James105 said:

 

Maybe you are lucky enough to never have worked with his type before.   The world is full of his type and they serve their calling as middle managers.  They never create anything new, they never run a business that has to make money to survive, they lack any kind of vision.   It's people like him that inspired me to start my own business to prevent myself from ever being in a position to work under the likes of him again.   You give him credit for "delivering a massive parliamentary majority" but what did he do to achieve that other than getting less votes than Jeremy Corbyn in 2019?   Diane Abbot, Corbyn, even a tub of lard in wearing a Labour rosette would have "delivered" the same results after the Tories failures.   

 

If he doesn't last then he will be replaced by another talentless clown so its not really wishful thinking.  

 

As you are no doubt aware, Starmer was a barrister and head of the CPS before entering politics. While I don't think that all middle manager have the same character traits, neither of those jobs are middle management.

 

Whether Starmer has changed Labour for the better is debatable, but he has changed it and Labour has a thumping majority in parliament as a result. Do you really believe that Labour would have won under Corbyn or Abbott?

 

As I said previously, you can 'never say never' but I think that the chances of Starmer being replaced as PM in this parliament are extremely slim; however, assuming that he is, do you really think that there is not, at least, one talented individual amongst the 404 current Labour MPs who could replace him? 

 

I think that you are letting your bias colour your judgement.

[James105]

10 hours ago, RayC said:

 

As you are no doubt aware, Starmer was a barrister and head of the CPS before entering politics. While I don't think that all middle manager have the same character traits, neither of those jobs are middle management.

 

Whether Starmer has changed Labour for the better is debatable, but he has changed it and Labour has a thumping majority in parliament as a result. Do you really believe that Labour would have won under Corbyn or Abbott?

 

As I said previously, you can 'never say never' but I think that the chances of Starmer being replaced as PM in this parliament are extremely slim; however, assuming that he is, do you really think that there is not, at least, one talented individual amongst the 404 current Labour MPs who could replace him? 

 

I think that you are letting your bias colour your judgement.

 

Yes he was the incompetent fool at the head of the CPS that decided not to prosecute Jimmy Saville.   The public sector has a long history of letting the dross get to the top and he would not have succeeded in the private sector where results matter or would have lost his job for such a catastrophic failure.  

 

I can't think of anyone amongst the 404 Labour MPs who isn't a talentless clown.   You didn't name one so I presume you are struggling with this too?  

[RayC]

6 hours ago, James105 said:

 

Yes he was the incompetent fool at the head of the CPS that decided not to prosecute Jimmy Saville.   The public sector has a long history of letting the dross get to the top and he would not have succeeded in the private sector where results matter or would have lost his job for such a catastrophic failure.  

 

I can't think of anyone amongst the 404 Labour MPs who isn't a talentless clown.   You didn't name one so I presume you are struggling with this too?  

 

Still too early in this parliament to know which of the backbenchers or lesser-known ministers will make a name for themselves.

 

To repeat, I don't see Starmer going anytime soon: The bookies have Reeves, Burnham and Streeting as the favourites to succeed Starmer. Personally - based only on hearing them in interviews, etc - I like Reeves but don't rate Streeting very highly. Of course, Burnham is not a MP but he seems competent. As a Londoner, he is too much of a 'professional Northerner' for my taste although I guess that is part of his job. John Healey keeps a low profile but impresses me whenever he talks. 

 

By no means an exhaustive list and, no doubt, I will change my mind as this parliament progresses but there's a few suggestions for you.

[James105]

Oops.  Labour carried out research in 2017 that told them that 3850 extra pensioners will die if winter fuel payments were removed.   

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/winter-fuel-payment-cut-labour-deaths-b2609340.html

 

So Starmer has made this decision with the full knowledge he will be killing 3850 old people before their time.   For comparison, Harold Shipman only managed to kill 284.