Labour is doing well, but it could still lose the election. Here are the three big hurdles it must overcome [OPINION]

[Cocha]

Just now, winkie said:

Who are you calling a people......speak for yourself and don't be childish and rude.

 

We have enough running the country as it is.

Childish and rude? Have you been on the Brexit thread 😂

So you have 2 parties who want higher house prices, but someone wants lower house prices. How would you define someone who keeps voting for higher house prices when they want lower house prices and then spends years and years crying about higher house prices on a house price crash forum?

[Bruce Banner]

3 minutes ago, Cocha said:

Childish and rude? Have you been on the Brexit thread 😂

So you have 2 parties who want higher house prices, but someone wants lower house prices. How would you define someone who keeps voting for higher house prices when they want lower house prices and then spends years and years crying about higher house prices on a house price crash forum?

So if a snap election is called who should we vote for?

[zugzwang]

22 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

So if a snap election is called who should we vote for?

And answer came there none.

[Cocha]

20 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

So if a snap election is called who should we vote for?

Doesn't matter if it is a snap election or Jan 2025. If you want lower house prices, don't vote for either party which has proven time and again over the last 2 decades that they want higher house prices. And if you do then accept whatever you are voting for, the trade off is higher house prices, so quit whining about high house prices.

[winkie]

21 minutes ago, Cocha said:

Childish and rude? Have you been on the Brexit thread 😂

So you have 2 parties who want higher house prices, but someone wants lower house prices. How would you define someone who keeps voting for higher house prices when they want lower house prices and then spends years and years crying about higher house prices on a house price crash forum?

.......house prices now are becoming the least of our problems...........just give people places they can rent, with a secure tenancy and rent controls....build homes to rent that can never be bought on the cheap and not replaced.

[Bruce Banner]

2 minutes ago, Cocha said:

Doesn't matter if it is a snap election or Jan 2025. If you want lower house prices, don't vote for either party which has proven time and again over the last 2 decades that they want higher house prices. And if you do then accept whatever you are voting for, the trade off is higher house prices, so quit whining about high house prices.

In the absence of an answer to my question I'll stick to voting tactically against the "Tories". 

[zugzwang]

5 minutes ago, Cocha said:

Doesn't matter if it is a snap election or Jan 2025. If you want lower house prices, don't vote for either party which has proven time and again over the last 2 decades that they want higher house prices. And if you do then accept whatever you are voting for, the trade off is higher house prices, so quit whining about high house prices.

In several constituencies it's a straight race between Tory and Labour. Not voting Labour will see the Tories returned to govt by default.

[Bruce Banner]

5 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

In several constituencies it's a straight race between Tory and Labour. Not voting Labour will see the Tories returned to govt by default.

Indeed, and in other constituencies the anti "Tory" choice could be LibDem, SNP, an independent, or whoever is best placed to beat the "Tory".

[Cocha]

3 hours ago, winkie said:

.......house prices now are becoming the least of our problems...........just give people places they can rent, with a secure tenancy and rent controls....build homes to rent that can never be bought on the cheap and not replaced.

I don't disagree with this. Have the tories or labour done anything at all, whatsoever to make you believe this is something they would even think about, let alone enacting. If so, please detail it here for me as I've obviously missed it.

[winkie]

21 minutes ago, Cocha said:

I don't disagree with this. Have the tories or labour done anything at all, whatsoever to make you believe this is something they would even think about, let alone enacting. If so, please detail it here for me as I've obviously missed it.

Much you miss......best not vote for any of them if neither of them are up to building more secure property to rent for key workers to live in the area they are wanted to work.

[Cocha]

Just now, winkie said:

Much you miss......best not vote for any of them if neither of them are up to building more secure property to rent for key workers to live in the area they are wanted to work.

I won't and don't vote for either. I want lower house prices, so I would be exactly what I've accused others of being should I vote for a party which wants higher house prices, whilst moaning about high house prices. My vote will be going to a different party. If more and more people started doing this, then as the vote share of the Westminster Party falls, they would be more likely to change, either voluntarily or via necessity. 

However, neither have any need to change whatsoever currently, because they know enough useful idiots will continue to keep voting for them, wazzing down on us and laughing their heads off, no matter what they do. And those very same people will continue to moan and whine about the exact things they keep voting for more of. 

[dugsbody]

4 hours ago, Bruce Banner said:

So if a snap election is called who should we vote for?

@Cocha has already said he will vote for Reform UK party.

 

[msi]

20 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

@Cocha has already said he will vote for Reform UK party.

 

That's their choice

In reality, it's trying to replace the Tories with Ultra-Right Tories and in reality just handing victory to

...the Tories

 

 

Makes you wonder

[DarkHorseWaits-NoMore]

On 30/03/2023 at 22:26, Unmoderated said:

Even if he did write it, every word of it, it doesn't mean we're dismantling the NHS. 

Look what they do, not what they say. Now it is impossible to deny, (simplistically) that since 2010 the gov't are clearly handicapping the ability to train and maintain staffing levels, lowering pay and conditions over time. Come on, 130,000 vacancies! Why? To make the NHS dysfunctional, primed for deconstruction.

 

On 30/03/2023 at 22:26, Unmoderated said:

Out of interest why wouldn't you be ok with having the option of topping up your healthcare allowance for better healthcare? I'd gladly pay extra for a private room and en-suite than be sat on a ward trying to get better? As long as there is a base level of healthcare for all (which I'm not sure I'm totally fine with but I wrestle with it) then what's the issue? In my mind it's no different to having a car accident, getting your pay-out and instead of replacing it with the exact old car you had previously you can chuck in money of your own and get something nicer. 

End of the day it's an insurance scheme right? My particular bug bear is that the outcomes are not contribution based. 

Yeah, we could apply that reasoning to the firemen who turn up to put out the fire at my house. I could add funds for a quicker response and 2 hoses instead of one... just because I have the privilege of money, I could argue for that better fire cover.

One could argue that a state managed motor insurance could actually be a more efficient way to deliver such a service. Eliminating the tiers of middle men and shareholders skimming off illegitimate profits, from what is a gov't law enforced racket to have motor insurance. In the same way that the US style insurance based healthcare system costs 3x with worse outcomes for many of the poorest.

Why should a persons wealth effect how they are treated by the NHS. Buying into a privileged experience goes against the principles of the NHS, instead of an "I'm alright Jack" approach. If you can afford to 'top up' for better health care, why not push for those that can afford to pay a bit more nationally, for the benefit of all citizens, in a fair way. Agreed that the distortions and failings of the so called progressive tax system is another story.

The difference is that my mindset is to try to build a more equal fairer society, for all of the people. The foundation of which starts with the education and principles for the country to better strive towards.

 

 

[nightowl]

On 31/03/2023 at 10:15, Bruce Banner said:

So if a snap election is called who should we vote for?

Unless you have any approved ID the answer is nobody! 

I wouldn't bet against the Tories sneaking back in though in a 1992 kind of way.

Edited April 1, 2023 by nightowl

[Unmoderated]

1 hour ago, DarkHorseWaits-NoMore said:

Look what they do, not what they say. Now it is impossible to deny, (simplistically) that since 2010 the gov't are clearly handicapping the ability to train and maintain staffing levels, lowering pay and conditions over time. Come on, 130,000 vacancies! Why? To make the NHS dysfunctional, primed for deconstruction.

 

Yeah, we could apply that reasoning to the firemen who turn up to put out the fire at my house. I could add funds for a quicker response and 2 hoses instead of one... just because I have the privilege of money, I could argue for that better fire cover.

One could argue that a state managed motor insurance could actually be a more efficient way to deliver such a service. Eliminating the tiers of middle men and shareholders skimming off illegitimate profits, from what is a gov't law enforced racket to have motor insurance. In the same way that the US style insurance based healthcare system costs 3x with worse outcomes for many of the poorest.

Why should a persons wealth effect how they are treated by the NHS. Buying into a privileged experience goes against the principles of the NHS, instead of an "I'm alright Jack" approach. If you can afford to 'top up' for better health care, why not push for those that can afford to pay a bit more nationally, for the benefit of all citizens, in a fair way. Agreed that the distortions and failings of the so called progressive tax system is another story.

The difference is that my mindset is to try to build a more equal fairer society, for all of the people. The foundation of which starts with the education and principles for the country to better strive towards.

Reading a good book atm. working age benefits, education, police, social care all been cut since 2010. NHS and retiree benefits all up since 2010. Real terms! Relating to my point further down NI was originally introduced as a form of contribution based insurance policy (hence its name) after the war. Today the relationship between how much NI you pay and your entitlements are almost totally severed. 

Despite this we fail to give nurses anything approaching an inflationary wage yet increase state pension by a triple lock each year. Huge element of politics at work here. 

Fire service is not comparable imho, they turn up to put out something that's on fire or cut you out of a car. That said, flawing an analogy doesn't prove a point so regarding the NHS, why shouldn't the NHS be able to charge people more for private rooms? Even better, why not allow the NHS to make a profit on it and use that to subsidise care to people who don't want to/can't pay.

Furthermore, what is wrong with the government providing the health insurance scheme and allowing that allotment to be used either in NHS or private hospitals? After all, pre NHS it was all private and government basically killed that entirely to build an NHS. I think the NHS is a great thing but I also think it needs to be modernised and offer patients more choice. 

I'm not advocating that we should lower the standard of care for the others but I really don't see an argument for preventing people from paying to improve their experience (let's call it that) if they're prepared to. Don't forget that most people in a position to make those payments likely are already shouldering far more of the tax burden anyway. 

 

education and principles for the country to better strive towards.

Broadly agree with these. Obviously it's light on defining exactly what 'fair' and 'better' mean (they're subjective of course) but makes sense and I think when people are arguing over politics they're really arguing about fairness? The rich guy argues it's not fair he pays all this tax and gets nothing back, the poor guy argues it's not fair he gets paid so little for working so hard etc etc. 

However, at the risk of labouring one of my own bug bears, the fully representative democracy is already here but people (notably certain demographics) choose not to vote. Make everyone vote and you'll find a big improvement in fairness imho. 

The tax system could be massively simplified, removing loopholes and unfairness. As a tax lawyer once remarked.... a sufficiently well detailed VAT rule is indistinguishable from satire.

[clarkey]

On 3/31/2023 at 10:40 AM, winkie said:

.......house prices now are becoming the least of our problems...........just give people places they can rent, with a secure tenancy and rent controls....build homes to rent that can never be bought on the cheap and not replaced.

Would you want to live in one of these places then or are they just for the little people?

[msi]

12 hours ago, nightowl said:

Unless you have any approved ID the answer is nobody! 

I wouldn't bet against the Tories sneaking back in though in a 1992 kind of way.

The price for sneaking back in 92 was absolute carnage in 1997, 2001, 2005 to the point the Conservatives were almost destroyed - only saved by the drooling for Br*xit.

If they win 2025, there will be no Conservative party in 2029

[Ballyk]

1 minute ago, msi said:

The price for sneaking back in 92 was absolute carnage in 1997, 2001, 2005 to the point the Conservatives were almost destroyed - only saved by the drooling for Br*xit.

If they win 2025, there will be no Conservative party in 2029

If the Conservatives were competent, I think they would have a chance of getting back in.  But they are terrible at achieving things they claim to be good at - 

1.  Immigration - has only got 'worse' under the Tories.  Complete inability to tackle any of the issues they have ramped up rhetoric about.  Higher net immigration overall, more 'small boats' coming over, seemingly useless Home Office;

2.  Low taxes - tax burden is approaching its highest since WW2.  More people dragged into high tax bracket = less incentive for hard work (supposed core Conservative values);

3.  Business - completely screwed by Brexit (or at least those which trade with the EU);

4.  Brexit - complete mess made of it, not that there was any 'good' way of delivering it.  But worth seeing if Labour can salvage something from it?

As someone who has voted Labour, Conservative, Lib Dem and Green in the past, I cannot see the Tories getting back in.  Those who (stupidly but undertandably) voted Conservative last time to 'Get Brexit Done', largely because the whole thing just made their heads hurt, I suspect will not vote for them again.

 

[14stFlyer]

On 3/29/2023 at 11:28 PM, Huggy said:

https://www.allaboutvision.com/en-gb/conditions/color-blindness/red-green-color-blindness/

https://www.vet.cornell.edu/departments-centers-and-institutes/riney-canine-health-center/health-info/blue-green-algae-poisoning-cyanobacteria-toxicosis

[Bob8]

8 hours ago, Ballyk said:

If the Conservatives were competent, I think they would have a chance of getting back in.  But they are terrible at achieving things they claim to be good at - 

1.  Immigration - has only got 'worse' under the Tories.  Complete inability to tackle any of the issues they have ramped up rhetoric about.  Higher net immigration overall, more 'small boats' coming over, seemingly useless Home Office;

2.  Low taxes - tax burden is approaching its highest since WW2.  More people dragged into high tax bracket = less incentive for hard work (supposed core Conservative values);

3.  Business - completely screwed by Brexit (or at least those which trade with the EU);

4.  Brexit - complete mess made of it, not that there was any 'good' way of delivering it.  But worth seeing if Labour can salvage something from it?

As someone who has voted Labour, Conservative, Lib Dem and Green in the past, I cannot see the Tories getting back in.  Those who (stupidly but undertandably) voted Conservative last time to 'Get Brexit Done', largely because the whole thing just made their heads hurt, I suspect will not vote for them again.

Point (4) is actually straight forward. Most of the hardcore brexiters cannot be satisfied as what they want cannot exist in reality. We see on this thread;

...the most basic clarification within the realms of reality has them falling on thier faces.

Frankly, rejoining the single market and customs union would be within th ereferendum result and deliver a huge economic boost. Trying to satisfy lunatics will never lead anywhere.