Owen Jones.

[Strontium]

On 23/03/2024 at 19:46, Creator Supreme said:

I'm still hoping it's a rope a dope, and they start reversing austerity once they get power, but I just don't think it is.

 

When you say "reverse austerity", what do you mean, exactly? The deficit in the last financial year was £131 billion, that is to say we spent £131 billion more than we brought in via taxes. With the best will in the world, spending £131 billion that you don't have does not sound very austere to me.

[Arniepie]

2 hours ago, Creator Supreme said:

Starmer humiliated Banks?

 

If so, that's a tick in the positive column as Banks is an absolute weapon.

I'll see if I can dig out the tweet  

Banks was suggesting starmer didn't have to take on cases and was actually man splanning to a legal expert about the law.

He got shown up and had a proper hissy fit

[Jairzinho]

Austerity for the vast majority of the population. 

[lifetime fan]

17 hours ago, Jairzinho said:

Would snap your hand off for centrist economics. Hopefully Labour moves a bit to the left post being voted in to enact centrist economics. 

The difference between this GE and 97 is the economy, at least in 97 Brown was only constrained by his own self imposed fiscal rules (well the Tory ones) for 2 years and could then act with a much greater degree of freedom.

 

Whatever you think of Reeves she’s almost taking on an impossible task. This is going to be off the scale compared to Liam Byrne’s note. The tories have completely fucked the economy, will deliberately offer significant tax cuts before the next GE with no fucking way whatsoever to pay for them and are deliberately delaying paying out compensation claims worth hundreds and hundreds of millions to make labour have to do it after the next GE. 
 

It’s gone be like Carcetti inheriting the schools budget. 

[Rushies tash]

17 minutes ago, lifetime fan said:

The difference between this GE and 97 is the economy, at least in 97 Brown was only constrained by his own self imposed fiscal rules (well the Tory ones) for 2 years and could then act with a much greater degree of freedom.

 

Whatever you think of Reeves she’s almost taking on an impossible task. This is going to be off the scale compared to Liam Byrne’s note. The tories have completely fucked the economy, will deliberately offer significant tax cuts before the next GE with no fucking way whatsoever to pay for them and are deliberately delaying paying out compensation claims worth hundreds and hundreds of millions to make labour have to do it after the next GE. 
 

It’s gone be like Carcetti inheriting the schools budget. 

 

The fact that the Tories have borrowed to the hilt needs to be rammed home over and over again, both in the run up to the election and beyond. The cunts have fooled the hard of thinking into believing they are the party to be trusted with the economy when the reality is, they always fund things on the never never, always leaving an eye watering national debt every time they leave office. It currently stands at £2.25 TRILLION. Just before the banks got bailed out in 2008, it stood at £640 billion.

 

Edit: Not sure how accurate the data is on this site, but it illustrates my point

 

https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2021/06/24/the-tories-have-always-borrowed-more-than-labour-and-always-repaid-less-they-are-the-party-of-big-deficit-spending/

 

[Gnasher]

^ if the above is true (let's not forget what a bankrupt Labour government did in 45) why has Reeves ruled out raising Corperation tax, equating Capital gains tax with income tax (as Thatcher did) and is even  floating the  lowering of tax for top earners?  A wealth tax for extreme wealth has also been ruled out by Reeves (despite the pleas by most economists and organisations such as the patriotic millionaires). A windfall tax on banks (which Thatcher imposed to save her after she crashed the economy) has also been ruled out by Reeves.

 

 

 

We're still a wealthy country with the massive advantage of control of our own currency, thank you Mr Brown,  which gives us the option to borrow off ourselves at historically low interest rates  ( bankers bailout, Covid, PPE) but after 14 years of tory rule the country is in desperate need of a fairer more progressive tax system to quell rampant inequality and revive the NHS and public services. We have choices, we have options. Reeves has all but ruled the obvious ones out.  

[Bjornebye]

Things might ease off when Tory donors etc aren’t skimming off the top. 

[Gnasher]

10 minutes ago, Rushies tash said:

 

The fact that the Tories have borrowed to the hilt needs to be rammed home over and over again, both in the run up to the election and beyond. The cunts have fooled the hard of thinking into believing they are the party to be trusted with the economy when the reality is, they always fund things on the never never, always leaving an eye watering national debt every time they leave office. It currently stands at £2.25 TRILLION. Just before the banks got bailed out in 2008, it stood at £640 billion.

 

Edit: Not sure how accurate the data is on this site, but it illustrates my point

 

https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2021/06/24/the-tories-have-always-borrowed-more-than-labour-and-always-repaid-less-they-are-the-party-of-big-deficit-spending/

 

 

Yes but we owe it to ourselves. We mostly borrow off our own bank or if off the IMF the rates are at a low. The country didn't think twice about borrowing to bail out the banks. Didn't think twice over borrowing for Covid and dodgy PPE. We now need the same, but this time for infrastructure our crumbling public services, poverty, wages and our health services.  As in 45 (when we were bankrupt) it'll pay for itself long term. 

[lifetime fan]

3 hours ago, Gnasher said:

^ if the above is true why has Reeves ruled out…

Do you deny the above? 
 

Because if you do then it’s fucking pointless continuing. 

[VladimirIlyich]

On 24/03/2024 at 16:18, Jack the Sipper said:

 

I think you're doing Starmer a disservice by laying Labour's lead solely at the Tories failings. Sure, they've fucked up big, but, whether it's covid, 'magic money trees' or Israel/Gaza, Starmer has avoided pretty much every elephant trap laid for him, either by the Tories or their friends in the media. At every turn he's got them on the back foot, taking the centre ground when they hoped he would be another leftie they could paint as the enemy of the country.

 

He's occupied the centre so successfully that the Tories have gone further to the right for votes, but even the right aren't interested anymore, not when they've flopped on things like immigration and law and order. His whole strategy is about winning the election, not appeasing the likes of Owen Jones. From a proposals and policies POV I can't argue with anyone who doesn't agree with him, but he's been a pretty good strategist  to my mind.

 

Ever noticed how the Tories biggest attack lines towards Starmer are his previous record as a 'leftie human rights lawyer' and the fact he served under Corbyn? They've got fuck all on him, because he's given them fuck all. 

 

 

This is a fair and salient point whether you like him or not. From an election standpoint not engaging or even agreeing with the Tories gives them nowhere to go. We just have to hope there is a bit of a shift to the left IF elected. I still don't trust this country to oust the Tories regardless of opinion polls.

[Gnasher]

Some strange people on the internet. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Lee909]

Britain should just go into administration and take the 9pts deduction. 

[Section_31]

That lad's got more flags than the UN.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

On 24/03/2024 at 22:44, Strontium said:

 

When you say "reverse austerity", what do you mean, exactly? The deficit in the last financial year was £131 billion, that is to say we spent £131 billion more than we brought in via taxes. With the best will in the world, spending £131 billion that you don't have does not sound very austere to me.

The country does have that money and more (as I'm pretty sure you know).  

Austerity is all about hammering public services to fund the tiny minority who are already hugely wealthy; reversing it would mean fair, progressive taxation, which falls most heavily on those who can easily afford it, in order to fund investment in the essential services that tens of millions of people depend on.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Crafty making a tit of himself.

 

[Section_31]

To be fair to Grimes he was the first person to notice Italy looks like a boot.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

9 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

To be fair to Grimes he was the first person to notice Italy looks like a boot.

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

On 25/03/2024 at 12:26, lifetime fan said:

The difference between this GE and 97 is the economy, at least in 97 Brown was only constrained by his own self imposed fiscal rules (well the Tory ones) for 2 years and could then act with a much greater degree of freedom.

 

Whatever you think of Reeves she’s almost taking on an impossible task. This is going to be off the scale compared to Liam Byrne’s note. The tories have completely fucked the economy, will deliberately offer significant tax cuts before the next GE with no fucking way whatsoever to pay for them and are deliberately delaying paying out compensation claims worth hundreds and hundreds of millions to make labour have to do it after the next GE. 
 

It’s gone be like Carcetti inheriting the schools budget. 

The Tories have truly fucked the economy, which is why Labour will have to carefully prioritise what they do: they won't be able to afford a tenth of what they need to do.

 

There is scope to take more tax from those who can afford it and to stop huge amounts of dogma-driven waste: e.g. by kicking the worst of the profiteers out of public services; by scrapping the Rwanda & prison hulk obscenities and creating a humane and efficient asylum system; by introducing rent controls and raising the minimum wage to a real living wage (and removing restrictions placed on unions to hamper their campaigns for fair pay), to reduce the benefits bill; by restoring funding to councils, to allow them to provide the kind of services that prevent crises; etc.  That would put more money in the Treasury, which would allow greater investment in whatever Labour's priorities are.  Trouble is, we're in an election year and we still don't know what those priorities are.

[Section_31]

He's set his crosshairs on that Olly Alexander now, the lad representing Britain in Eurovision, saying he should boycott it and he's said no, sparking an online gay civil war.

[Jack the Sipper]

Looking at his tweets, the snivelling twat keeps on referring to this is what 'the Palestinians want'. What? All of them? Or just the ones calling for a boycott? 

 

He really is a reprehensible cunt. Starting yet another Twitter pile-on, this time against a young gay man who's achieving what I'd imagine must be a big ambition by performing at Eurovision. 

[Section_31]

Jones should stop taking money from the Guardian as it supports starmer snd labour.

[Bjornebye]

The last girl got hammered by the right for being a Corbyn supporter didn’t she? Or hating Tories or something. 

[Jack the Sipper]

31 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

Jones should stop taking money from the Guardian as it supports starmer snd labour.

He's no hypocrite, our Owen, so I'd fully expect him to step down if a letter from 'the Palestinians' asking him to do so found its way onto Twitter.

 

Now we've just got to wait for 'the Palestinians' to find out who the fuck Owen Jones is. I suspect it's even less than the number of Palestinians who know, or give a fuck, that Olly Alexander's competing in the Eurovision.

[Babb'sBurstNad]

1 hour ago, Section_31 said:

He's set his crosshairs on that Olly Alexander now, the lad representing Britain in Eurovision, saying he should boycott it and he's said no, sparking an online gay civil war.

 

To be fair, that sounds great fun.

[Dicko]

Owen Jones is right about Israel and Starmer.

Problem is him and his Guardian cohorts helped fuck up the chances of someone who could have made a difference.

 

He and the Guardian are grifters who make money from left wing outrage.

Guido Fawkes & the Mail are grifters who make money from right wing outrage.

 

Neither the Guardian or Mail have an interest in social justice they just want to preserve the status quo.

 

A plague on both their houses.