Reform UK Surpasses Conservative Party Membership in Landmark Shift

[RayC]

26 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

Off the top of my head, something like the following would do it.  

 

1.  Cut VAT to 7%.

2.  Cut immigration to max 50,000 high skilled individuals per year.

3.  Cancel Net zero

4.  Control the borders.

5.  Cut corporation tax to 15%

6.  Take an Argentinian president approach to pointless government departments.

7.  Sit back and watch as the country prospers beyond all recognition.

 

1. And replace the 'lost' revenue how? Or not bother and run down public services even further?

2. How will the unskilled/ semi-skilled immigrant labour be replaced?

3. At what cost (environmental, financial, health, societal)?

4. Against illegal immigrants presumably? Good idea. How?

5. See 1)

6. Nothing wrong in cutting the public sector so long as you don't throw out the baby with the bath water.

7. Possibly or possibly not.

 

In any event, your solutions have little to do with Brexit. Your two direct fiscal policies (1 & 5) were possible when we were an EU member. #s 4 & 6 are probably goals shared by all EU member states. #7 is a conclusion, not a policy which leaves #s 2 & 3. 

 

#2: Under freedom of movement, many of the low(er) skilled, lower paid jobs e.g. fruit pickers, bar staff, etc were filled by transient EU workers who had no desire to become employees or settle in the UK permanently and the market was, broadly speaking, in equilibrium and self-adjusting. Removal of freedom of movement has led to labour shortages in many areas.

 

#3 would not be allowed under EU regulation. However, as I implied above,is it desirable? I dare say not all Brexit supporters would be in favour of scrapping all environmental targets and regulation.

[James105]

1 hour ago, RayC said:

 

1. And replace the 'lost' revenue how? Or not bother and run down public services even further?

2. How will the unskilled/ semi-skilled immigrant labour be replaced?

3. At what cost (environmental, financial, health, societal)?

4. Against illegal immigrants presumably? Good idea. How?

5. See 1)

6. Nothing wrong in cutting the public sector so long as you don't throw out the baby with the bath water.

7. Possibly or possibly not.

 

In any event, your solutions have little to do with Brexit. Your two direct fiscal policies (1 & 5) were possible when we were an EU member. #s 4 & 6 are probably goals shared by all EU member states. #7 is a conclusion, not a policy which leaves #s 2 & 3. 

 

#2: Under freedom of movement, many of the low(er) skilled, lower paid jobs e.g. fruit pickers, bar staff, etc were filled by transient EU workers who had no desire to become employees or settle in the UK permanently and the market was, broadly speaking, in equilibrium and self-adjusting. Removal of freedom of movement has led to labour shortages in many areas.

 

#3 would not be allowed under EU regulation. However, as I implied above,is it desirable? I dare say not all Brexit supporters would be in favour of scrapping all environmental targets and regulation.

 

1. No, we could not cut VAT below 15% as EU member:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36430504#:~:text=Changes to the VAT rules,household gas and electricity bills.  Cutting VAT will encourage spending in the economy.  Economy then grows.   Less tax more income. Cutting the public sector by 50%.   I'd fire everyone born in the second half of the year and see if anyone noticed and  I doubt anyone would (other than those being fired).   Disband every quango and also ban working from home to improve the lunchtime economy and encourage 25% more wastrels to resign.   Also bring public sector pensions in line with private sector.  

 

2. Companies will go back to innovating rather than relying on cheap labour.  Instead (for example) of taking your car to a slave labour car wash to have several illegal immigrants cleaning it with rags, a machine does it.   Like the good old days.  Former public sector workers (see number 1) and anyone on benefits can fill the gaps or lose benefits.  

 

3. Even if the UK disappeared / vanished overnight it would not make any impact on the cycle of climate change, even if it really was caused by humans and not the giant flaming ball in the sky.   So roughly zero cost to the environment.   Significantly lower energy prices would be a game changer for growth.  Also, drill baby drill.   

 

4. See Australia.  Problem solved within a week.  Detain and deport anyone who gets through.  Zero rights to benefits and blacklisted from UK for life.  Obviously leave ECHR to deport the 1.2 million illegals residing in the UK. 

 

You obviously think the current system is perfect and doesn't need drastic changing.  You are happy with 1.2 illegal immigrants in the country?   The growing £2.8 trillion debt that costs more to service than the education budget?  Those numbers are just going up with the clowns in charge just now.  

[sandyf]

13 hours ago, Red Forever said:

Because he’s a liar, racist and an inciter of riots (source, interview with Tom Swarbrick on LBC). As an MEP he took the money from the EU but didn’t attend any committee meetings. As an MP in UK he hasn’t represented his constituents in Clacton, spending more time in US.

That’s just a fraction of why Farridge is a disgrace.

Exactly. His claims about Turkey were fantasy considering the policy on capital punishment but people believe anything that is said often enough.

 

The Ukip leader claimed Brussels is currently thrashing out a deal with Turkey - which has a population of 77million - which would give ALL Turks the option of living in Britain.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/661387/Migrant-crisis-Nigel-Farage-Turkey-EU-visa-free-travel

[3NUMBAS]

Elon musk backing  them with 100,000 smackers they can’t go wrong

[JonnyF]

I hope the Tories fold. Their betrayal of conservative values led to the current situation with the worst government in living memory under Starmer. 

 

The Tories should collapse. All they do is split the right wing vote. Wimps like Rory Stewart can stop pretending to be conservative and go simp for Starmer and the rest of the sixth form socialists. Real conservatives can grow a pair and join Reform. 

 

A one on one between Labour and Reform. Starmer vs Farage.  Left vs Right. 

 

Let's 'av it.

 

 

[3NUMBAS]

Tory’s have no chance with an ethnic PM ,they’re doomed to exist so reform takes over 

[sandyf]

4 hours ago, RayC said:

 

You suggest that making a success of Brexit was a simple task. Can you explain what different measures could, and should, have been taken.

I was trading with Europe before the single market came about and the paperwork was a nightmare. Only the delusional would think it wasn't going to go back to the same way.

If the UK wanted to have the cake and eat it, they should have remained in the EEC.

Of course that wouldn't have appealed to the English nationalists.

[Chris Daley]

Farage you have German ancestors.  Time to go home.

[superal]

23 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Congratulations, you hat the thread’s Godwin Gong.

Huh ? Are you a relative of Stanley Unwin  .

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

10 hours ago, JonnyF said:

I hope the Tories fold. Their betrayal of conservative values led to the current situation with the worst government in living memory under Starmer. 

 

The Tories should collapse. All they do is split the right wing vote. Wimps like Rory Stewart can stop pretending to be conservative and go simp for Starmer and the rest of the sixth form socialists. Real conservatives can grow a pair and join Reform. 

 

A one on one between Labour and Reform. Starmer vs Farage.  Left vs Right. 

 

Let's 'av it.

 

 

You might recall Jonny, that during the many BREXIT discussions we both enjoyed I frequently made the observation that the whole point of BREXIT was to prevent the Tory Party splitting.

 

Well here we are.

 

But don’t get your hopes up if the Tories folding, they’ll stick around.

 

And it’s Reform, not the Tories splitting the right wing vote.

 

 

[Nick Carter icp]

26 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You might recall Jonny, that during the many BREXIT discussions we both enjoyed I frequently made the observation that the whole point of BREXIT was to prevent the Tory Party splitting.

 

Well here we are.

But don’t get your hopes up if the Tories folding, they’ll stick around.

And it’s Reform, not the Tories splitting the right wing vote.

 

 

   The point of the referendum and Brexit was because the British public wanted it .

[superal]

21 hours ago, simon43 said:

I wasn't aware that Reform were anti-immigration.  They have a policy to control immigration, and they welcome those immigrants who will be of benefit to the UK - similar to the immigration policies of many other countries.

 

A bit different from the open-door policy of Labour.... perhaps Starmer has shares in RIB manufacturers....

UK is a soft touch concerning immigration - both legal and illegal . Temporary working visas are being abused because the immigrant often disappears when the visa expires . Starmer scrapped the Rwanda scheme and is set to give asylum status to 60,000 in the new year . No actions being taken to stop the daily arrival of 400 plus illegals . When will it all end ? The situation is unsustainable , costing the tax payers billions of pounds per year for immigrants hotel accommodation and then comes the benefits to add on . 

Starmer Reeves and Raynor are happy to cut the paltry winter fuel payment to those pensioners not entitled to benefits  which will result in many deaths of the elderly who are struggling on the equivalent of  half of the national minimum wage . This action will result in manslaughter . Starmer is hell bent at attempting to build 1.5 million new houses , without concern for the  English countryside . Most of these new homes will be to house immigrants , who will be at the front of the queue . 

The worm is turning with political reform as seen throughout Europe and the U.S.A. Orthodox political parties are calling them 

Far Right extremists . How wrong they are . Decent people have seen enough of the effects of uncontrolled immigration and the dilution of their countries identity . Labour robbed the pensioners and gave it to the already well paid train drivers . This Labour government still has 4 years plus to run which is concerning .  Anyone got a crystal ball ?

[The Cyclist]

Reform are splitting the right wing vote claim the lunatics.

 

Here are the facts, The Tories have never been a right wing Party, they were a party that sat on the centre right. In those days they had a membership of some 1.5 million people.

 

Over the years, as they drifted towards the Centre left, their membership has has fallen to a disputed 130k

 

The Tories have never been Right of centre since 1990. When that Centrist, One Nationer, EU Sycophant took over as Leader. It has only went downhill since. Most notable achievements

 

1. Black Wedneday

 

2. Edwina Currie

 

Impossible for Reform to split the right wing vote, as there are no right wing Parties, and Reform have merely stepped into the void that the Tories created in 1990 by vacating the space known as the Centre Right.

 

A Mega poll has been carried out by the Times which predicts that if a GE was to be held today, Labour would lose 200 seats, including many cabinet members.

 

Its only a poll, but 6 months into Labours tenure, when the carnage hasn't even started yet, suggests that the historic wipeout achieved by the tories in the 2024 GE will be surpassed by Labour at the next GE. 

 

I doubt that the Tories can drag themselves out the gutter for at least a generation, Labour are heading in the same direction, which suggests at this very early stage, Reform will probably take the next GE in a landslide.

[Yagoda]

If the Conservatives are the Tories, and the Leftist haters are Labour, what is Reform called?

[The Cyclist]

1 minute ago, Yagoda said:

If the Conservatives are the Tories, and the Leftist haters are Labour, what is Reform called?

 

Call them what ever you like. But if they can spank the 2 cheeks of the same **** known as labour and Tories and drag the UK on an upward trajectory.

 

I would call them winners.

[Yagoda]

1 minute ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Call them what ever you like. But if they can spank the 2 cheeks of the same **** known as labour and Tories and drag the UK on an upward trajectory.

 

I would call them winners.

Well they must have a catchy nickname?

[superal]

16 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:

Reform are splitting the right wing vote claim the lunatics.

 

Here are the facts, The Tories have never been a right wing Party, they were a party that sat on the centre right. In those days they had a membership of some 1.5 million people.

 

Over the years, as they drifted towards the Centre left, their membership has has fallen to a disputed 130k

 

The Tories have never been Right of centre since 1990. When that Centrist, One Nationer, EU Sycophant took over as Leader. It has only went downhill since. Most notable achievements

 

1. Black Wedneday

 

2. Edwina Currie

 

Impossible for Reform to split the right wing vote, as there are no right wing Parties, and Reform have merely stepped into the void that the Tories created in 1990 by vacating the space known as the Centre Right.

 

A Mega poll has been carried out by the Times which predicts that if a GE was to be held today, Labour would lose 200 seats, including many cabinet members.

 

Its only a poll, but 6 months into Labours tenure, when the carnage hasn't even started yet, suggests that the historic wipeout achieved by the tories in the 2024 GE will be surpassed by Labour at the next GE. 

 

I doubt that the Tories can drag themselves out the gutter for at least a generation, Labour are heading in the same direction, which suggests at this very early stage, Reform will probably take the next GE in a landslide.

Can the country wait another 4 years for a GE , knowing the incompetence of this muppet government ?  There has to be a way to stop the impending damage but with a Labour Commons majority of 174 , it would take a revolt by the Labour MPs . It has been suggested that constituents lobby their MP to raise a vote of no confidence . Either that or a national strike but that would probably exclude the wealthy train drivers . On the cards to take action are NHS workers .

[The Cyclist]

1 minute ago, superal said:

Can the country wait another 4 years for a GE , knowing the incompetence of this muppet government ?  There has to be a way to stop the impending damage but with a Labour Commons majority of 174 , it would take a revolt by the Labour MPs . It has been suggested that constituents lobby their MP to raise a vote of no confidence . Either that or a national strike but that would probably exclude the wealthy train drivers . On the cards to take action are NHS workers .

 

An interesting question and one that I really do not have an answer for.

 

Regardless of the carnage caused, Labour will cling until the next GE or a vote on no confidence is successful.

 

But there is interesting things happening.

 

Red wall Labour MP's are starting to turn on Starmer.

 

TUC are now backing farmers over the Inheritence tax raid.

 

Civil Servants are apparently going to strike over being made to return to the office.

 

And I think as you highlight. They are just waiting for an announcement by Streeting and the NHS will be in full strike mode.

 

So, all in all, a very successful 6 months in power for Labour. Successfully uniting the majority of the Country in hating them.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, The Cyclist said:

Reform are splitting the right wing vote claim the lunatics.

 

Here are the facts, The Tories have never been a right wing Party, they were a party that sat on the centre right. In those days they had a membership of some 1.5 million people.

 

Over the years, as they drifted towards the Centre left, their membership has has fallen to a disputed 130k

 

The Tories have never been Right of centre since 1990. When that Centrist, One Nationer, EU Sycophant took over as Leader. It has only went downhill since. Most notable achievements

 

1. Black Wedneday

 

2. Edwina Currie

 

Impossible for Reform to split the right wing vote, as there are no right wing Parties, and Reform have merely stepped into the void that the Tories created in 1990 by vacating the space known as the Centre Right.

 

A Mega poll has been carried out by the Times which predicts that if a GE was to be held today, Labour would lose 200 seats, including many cabinet members.

 

Its only a poll, but 6 months into Labours tenure, when the carnage hasn't even started yet, suggests that the historic wipeout achieved by the tories in the 2024 GE will be surpassed by Labour at the next GE. 

 

I doubt that the Tories can drag themselves out the gutter for at least a generation, Labour are heading in the same direction, which suggests at this very early stage, Reform will probably take the next GE in a landslide.

You obviously missed the years of austerity visited upon the poor while handing out tax cuts for the rich, neo-liberalism, anti-union legislation and pro-capital legislation.

[RayC]

12 hours ago, James105 said:

 

1. No, we could not cut VAT below 15% as EU member:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36430504#:~:text=Changes to the VAT rules,household gas and electricity bills. 

 

I stand corrected. However, the EU is moving towards allowing member states greater flexibility in setting VAT rates, so applying a 7% VAT rate as you suggest while being an EU member might not be as difficult as it first appears 

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/aleksandrabal/2024/12/08/vat-in-europe-key-reforms-and-changes-coming-in-2025/

 

12 hours ago, James105 said:

Cutting VAT will encourage spending in the economy.  Economy then grows.   Less tax more income.

 

That's the theory. But the propensity to consume decreases as income rises, so to what extent would a simple cut to VAT across the board stimulate growth? And what about the inflationary risk? Moreover, an increase in capital spending in large public sector infrastructure projects e.g. housebuilding, transport can also stimulate growth.

 

12 hours ago, James105 said:

 

Cutting the public sector by 50%.   I'd fire everyone born in the second half of the year and see if anyone noticed and  I doubt anyone would (other than those being fired).   Disband every quango and also ban working from home to improve the lunchtime economy and encourage 25% more wastrels to resign.   Also bring public sector pensions in line with private sector.  

 

I assume that most of that is tongue-in-cheek?

 

Taking your first point about cutting the public sector by 50% at face value and assuming that the cuts were made across the board, do you really think that the NHS, social housing, transport, defence, policing, education, etc, etc could continue to function under those conditions?

 

12 hours ago, James105 said:

2. Companies will go back to innovating rather than relying on cheap labour.  Instead (for example) of taking your car to a slave labour car wash to have several illegal immigrants cleaning it with rags, a machine does it.   Like the good old days.  Former public sector workers (see number 1) and anyone on benefits can fill the gaps or lose benefits.  

 

Innovation is generally good for an economy.

 

I'll assume that the rest of your paragraph is just flippancy.

 

12 hours ago, James105 said:

3. Even if the UK disappeared / vanished overnight it would not make any impact on the cycle of climate change, even if it really was caused by humans and not the giant flaming ball in the sky.   So roughly zero cost to the environment.   Significantly lower energy prices would be a game changer for growth.  Also, drill baby drill.   

 

On a global scale, UK emissions are insignificant, however, climate change can hardly be tackled worldwide if each and every country adopts a 'Not my fault, not my problem' attitude.

 

I dare say opponents of Clean Water Acts and Clean Air Acts in the past used the unproven link argument.

 

12 hours ago, James105 said:

4. See Australia.  Problem solved within a week.  Detain and deport anyone who gets through.  Zero rights to benefits and blacklisted from UK for life.  Obviously leave ECHR to deport the 1.2 million illegals residing in the UK. 

 

Of course this simple solution hasn't occurred to any UK or European government over the past 20 years.

 

Only a limited comparison can be made between Australia and the UK wrt illegal immigration. Attempting to enter Australia illegally is a lot more logistically and geographically challenging than entering the UK.

 

12 hours ago, James105 said:

 

You obviously think the current system is perfect and doesn't need drastic changing. 

 

No, I don't think that the current situation is perfect by any stretch of the imagination. Why would you think that I did? I've stated on numerous occasions that serious problems need to be addressed.

 

12 hours ago, James105 said:

 

You are happy with 1.2 illegal immigrants in the country? 

 

No. Again, I've stated on many occasions that it's a problem. However, I don't buy the 'simple solution' theory.

 

12 hours ago, James105 said:

 

 The growing £2.8 trillion debt that costs more to service than the education budget?  Those numbers are just going up with the clowns in charge just now.  

 

Perhaps if the last administration had not attempted to bribe the electorate with a financially unjustified cut in employee NI contributions in its' last months in office - which the OBR estimates will cost an average of £10.3bn annually for the next 5 years - then we might be in a better position to finance our debt.

 

We have exchanged a lot of words but, in essence, things are simple: One either believes that currently public sector services are underfunded and require investment or one doesn't. Can productivity in the public sector be improved? Almost certainly. However, imo productivity increases are not enough; more investment is also necessary.

 

Imo what we can't have simultaneously is state-of-the-art public services and rock-bottom tax rates. 

[The Cyclist]

2 minutes ago, RayC said:

Taking your first point about cutting the public sector by 50% at face value and assuming that the cuts were made across the board, do you really think that the NHS, social housing, transport, defence, policing, education, etc, etc could continue to function under those conditions?

 

Are any of those functioning now ?

[RayC]

13 hours ago, 3NUMBAS said:

Tory’s have no chance with an ethnic PM ,they’re doomed to exist so reform takes over 

 

It's a tautology to state that only a racist would rule out voting for Badenoch because of the colour of her skin. Fortunately, imo the overwhelming majority of UK voters are not racist.

[Chomper Higgot]

13 hours ago, James105 said:

 

1. No, we could not cut VAT below 15% as EU member:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36430504#:~:text=Changes to the VAT rules,household gas and electricity bills.  Cutting VAT will encourage spending in the economy.  Economy then grows.   Less tax more income. Cutting the public sector by 50%.   I'd fire everyone born in the second half of the year and see if anyone noticed and  I doubt anyone would (other than those being fired).   Disband every quango and also ban working from home to improve the lunchtime economy and encourage 25% more wastrels to resign.   Also bring public sector pensions in line with private sector.  

 

2. Companies will go back to innovating rather than relying on cheap labour.  Instead (for example) of taking your car to a slave labour car wash to have several illegal immigrants cleaning it with rags, a machine does it.   Like the good old days.  Former public sector workers (see number 1) and anyone on benefits can fill the gaps or lose benefits.  

 

3. Even if the UK disappeared / vanished overnight it would not make any impact on the cycle of climate change, even if it really was caused by humans and not the giant flaming ball in the sky.   So roughly zero cost to the environment.   Significantly lower energy prices would be a game changer for growth.  Also, drill baby drill.   

 

4. See Australia.  Problem solved within a week.  Detain and deport anyone who gets through.  Zero rights to benefits and blacklisted from UK for life.  Obviously leave ECHR to deport the 1.2 million illegals residing in the UK. 

 

You obviously think the current system is perfect and doesn't need drastic changing.  You are happy with 1.2 illegal immigrants in the country?   The growing £2.8 trillion debt that costs more to service than the education budget?  Those numbers are just going up with the clowns in charge just now.  

You’re about to be presented with an object lesson in the consequences of applying simplistic solutions to complex problems.

 

Observe the outcome before deciding to import the practice.

[Chomper Higgot]

9 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

It's a tautology to state that only a racist would rule out voting for Badenoch because of the colour of her skin. Fortunately, imo the overwhelming majority of UK voters are not racist.

Nor, in my opinion, are the majority of Tory voters.

 

Those that do exist are being corralled by Farage.

[Bday Prang]

On 12/28/2024 at 9:05 AM, bkk_mike said:

By the time you're posting here, you'll be living in Thailand. Think how you'd be feeling if Thai people were proclaiming their support for a political party that blamed immigrants for all their problems...

What are you talking about?  All the political parties here have a healthy disdain for foreigners , have you not yet noticed that nationalism and patriotism mixed in with a bit of xenophobia is pretty much written into the constitution here

     Immigrants here get their fair share of flack , are regularly criticised in the media and often held responsible for Thailand's problems, who could forget the "dirty farang" comments made by Anutin during covid ? Plus they can ever own land and are subject to countless often pointless regulations.

     This is actually how things should be done, a good example of a country not tainted by wokeness......yet 

[RayC]

2 hours ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Are any of those functioning now ?

 

Yes, to varying degrees but do our public services need to be improved? Again, imo yes.

 

The question is how can we do so? Can productivity be improved? Almost certainly, yes but will that be enough? Imo almost certainly, no. For example, Leeds is a major commercial centre but it lacks a mass transit system - it's the largest city in Europe without one - there is a limit to the amount of productivity gains that can be ekked out of the existing system; capital spending is required. Similar examples where capital spend is necessary can be found in other sectors. 

 

Apart from the NHS, public sector spending has decreased in real terms since 2014 and this lack of investment shows.

 

The next question is how to finance it. There are a myriad of combinations but at the two extremes, it boils down to 'unfunded' short-term borrowing with the hope that private sector growth kicks in quickly, or 'fully funded' spending through - hopefully, short-term - tax increases.

 

The alternative is to do nothing and watch public service provision deteriorate further

[James105]

2 hours ago, RayC said:

Taking your first point about cutting the public sector by 50% at face value and assuming that the cuts were made across the board, do you really think that the NHS, social housing, transport, defence, policing, education, etc, etc could continue to function under those conditions?

 

Why is it when it comes to cuts leftists assume the only cuts that can be made are to the useful public services like police, NHS etc?  You realize there are 542,840 civil servants... right?  When I say fire half of them I am talking about those work from home wastrels.  At the very height of the British empire there were 40,000 civil servants employed globally, and that was before the age of productivity tools such as computers and mobile phones. 

 

Actually, now I am reminded of the numbers firing just 50% seems way too small a number to get rid of and 80% would be more appropriate.   Think of the savings that could be made with zero impact (nobody would notice) and many less gold plated pensions to pay for.  

[James105]

2 hours ago, RayC said:

 

It's a tautology to state that only a racist would rule out voting for Badenoch because of the colour of her skin. Fortunately, imo the overwhelming majority of UK voters are not racist.

 

She will lose voters due to incompetence, but since she is a black woman no doubt the usual suspects will cry racism.  Only leftists care about peoples race over their competence.  She has embarrassed herself twice in the last few days, once to falsely accuse and defame Nigel Farage and again to complain to a TV network that he gets too much airtime whilst no doubt declining every single invite she gets to appear from that same channel.  

 

That she seems to spend more time and energy holding Reform (with their 5 MPs) to account than the horror show that is the government suggests that she is just another "conservative" who would be more at home on the Labour side of the benches.   

[RayC]

5 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

She will lose voters due to incompetence, but since she is a black woman no doubt the usual suspects will cry racism.  Only leftists care about peoples race over their competence.  She has embarrassed herself twice in the last few days, once to falsely accuse and defame Nigel Farage and again to complain to a TV network that he gets too much airtime whilst no doubt declining every single invite she gets to appear from that same channel.  

 

That she seems to spend more time and energy holding Reform (with their 5 MPs) to account than the horror show that is the government suggests that she is just another "conservative" who would be more at home on the Labour side of the benches.   

 

I don't think that Badenoch is much good either.

 

As I said earlier, the vast majority of voters - left or right - are not racist.  However, unfortunately, racists do exist and they are far more likely to be right-wing than left.

[The Cyclist]

25 minutes ago, RayC said:

The next question is how to finance it. There are a myriad of combinations but at the two extremes, it boils down to 'unfunded' short-term borrowing with the hope that private sector growth kicks in quickly

 

So, as of today, I think we can rule out any private sector growth that will have any impact. We are on a downward trajectory, a growth killing Budget was just delivered in October and the effects of that will not really impact until April.

 

Hope is not a plan, nor is any basis for assumption.

 

25 minutes ago, RayC said:

or 'fully funded' spending through - hopefully, short-term - tax increases.

 

The Fully funded mantra can be kicked right into touch. It was nonsense before the budget, just as it is nonsense today.

 

Which brings us onto tax increase.

 

How long in general did Labour in general, and Starmer in particular, howl about the biggest tax burden in 70 years under the Tories ?
 

Only to increase the tax burden in October..

 

A 1st year student economist could tell you that to create growth, you need to cut taxes, not increase taxes.

 

Which is why I keep saying, that the carnage hasn't started yet, and the full effects will not be felt until the delayed tax rises take effect from April.

 

So with no growth since July. Q4 will be a negative, Q1 2025 will be flat or negative, another tax raising budget will be required in April....... And on the doomloop will continue.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy0n14ywzqpo

 

Regulatory bodies are not the people to be asking for help in producing growth. But at least it shows that they possibly recognise the depth of the doo-doo, but do not know how to deal with it.