Join the Labour Party and save your country!

MidlandsGrimpeur2

Re the comments about Starmer's political beliefs. I have had this discussion with a fair few people. Starmer has a long track record of Labour support and activism, he is IMO, a fairly staunch socialist.

I know there is a lot of speculation (some fuelled by Starmer himself) that he will not be making big policy decisions in the first few months in office, should Labour win a GE.

I am not convinced, I think he is going to be far more assertive than people think and start trying to undo a lot of Tory policy and replace it with stuff that is much more Socialist than slightly centre left.

I think he has pitched himself as the 'grey' man to make him more electable and the safe pair of hands choice. Don't get me wrong, he isn't going to do a Corbyn, but he will be much more to the left than many people presume he will be.

briantrumpet

MidlandsGrimpeur2 said:

Re the comments about Starmer's political beliefs. I have had this discussion with a fair few people. Starmer has a long track record of Labour support and activism, he is IMO, a fairly staunch socialist.

I know there is a lot of speculation (some fuelled by Starmer himself) that he will not be making big policy decisions in the first few months in office, should Labour win a GE.

I am not convinced, I think he is going to be far more assertive than people think and start trying to undo a lot of Tory policy and replace it with stuff that is much more Socialist than slightly centre left.

I think he has pitched himself as the 'grey' man to make him more electable and the safe pair of hands choice. Don't get me wrong, he isn't going to do a Corbyn, but he will be much more to the left than many people presume he will be.

Not sure about the last bit, but agree with the rest. At least he's shown himself to be an effective party manager, so would hope the same would apply to the Prime Ministership.

Jezyboy

I think an issue may be that socialist has become a pretty meaningless term.

I don't think he's going to clamour for state ownership of everything, but his potential policies on private schools showed quite a socialist side.

I also think private schools are so far beyond the reach of the average person that you could do what you liked with them with no real impact...but that's another matter.

Stevo_666

MidlandsGrimpeur2 said:

Re the comments about Starmer's political beliefs. I have had this discussion with a fair few people. Starmer has a long track record of Labour support and activism, he is IMO, a fairly staunch socialist.

I know there is a lot of speculation (some fuelled by Starmer himself) that he will not be making big policy decisions in the first few months in office, should Labour win a GE.

I am not convinced, I think he is going to be far more assertive than people think and start trying to undo a lot of Tory policy and replace it with stuff that is much more Socialist than slightly centre left.

I think he has pitched himself as the 'grey' man to make him more electable and the safe pair of hands choice. Don't get me wrong, he isn't going to do a Corbyn, but he will be much more to the left than many people presume he will be.

He was a fairly staunch socialist when Corbyn was his boss. Now apparently he is in the centre ground. Make of that what you will...some may call that a lack of belief and principles.

MidlandsGrimpeur2

@Jezyboy I would agree, I don't think he is going to be re-nationalising any time soon as you say, but I think he will place a huge emphasis on public service spending; schools, NHS etc. and spend at far higher levels than he is suggesting. I think he will tax the wealthy, both businesses/institutions and individuals to pay for it.

@Stevo_666 It is a fair point, and I would tend to agree that Starmer has moved himself to the centre ground as party leader. I also think it is fair to hold the opinion that you can argue it betrays his true principles (if that is what he has done). I would argue though, that as Leader of the opposition, his job is to get his party elected. I would suggest that on both sides of the political spectrum, a shift towards the centre ground is a fairly standard move for party leaders to appeal to a broader base.

Stevo_666

MidlandsGrimpeur2 said:

@Jezyboy I would agree, I don't think he is going to be re-nationalising any time soon as you say, but I think he will place a huge emphasis on public service spending; schools, NHS etc. and spend at far higher levels than he is suggesting. I think he will tax the wealthy, both businesses/institutions and individuals to pay for it.

@Stevo_666 It is a fair point, and I would tend to agree that Starmer has moved himself to the centre ground as party leader. I also think it is fair to hold the opinion that you can argue it betrays his true principles (if that is what he has done). I would argue though, that as Leader of the opposition, his job is to get his party elected. I would suggest that on both sides of the political spectrum, a shift towards the centre ground is a fairly standard move for party leaders to appeal to a broader base.

Fair enough, his main job is to get the party elected.

My concern is that if he is really a socialist at heart, he could get elected on a relatively moderate ticket and then goes all leftie on us.

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

MidlandsGrimpeur2 said:

@Jezyboy I would agree, I don't think he is going to be re-nationalising any time soon as you say, but I think he will place a huge emphasis on public service spending; schools, NHS etc. and spend at far higher levels than he is suggesting. I think he will tax the wealthy, both businesses/institutions and individuals to pay for it.

@Stevo_666 It is a fair point, and I would tend to agree that Starmer has moved himself to the centre ground as party leader. I also think it is fair to hold the opinion that you can argue it betrays his true principles (if that is what he has done). I would argue though, that as Leader of the opposition, his job is to get his party elected. I would suggest that on both sides of the political spectrum, a shift towards the centre ground is a fairly standard move for party leaders to appeal to a broader base.

Fair enough, his main job is to get the party elected.

My concern is that if he is really a socialist at heart, he could get elected on a relatively moderate ticket and then goes all leftie on us.

He's obviously a bit socialist otherwise he wouldn't be leader of the Labour Party. The extent to which that is a big departure from the current government is pretty debatable given they have put up taxes, have re-nationalised the railways, etc.

My expectations are pretty low: the private school policy is almost as stupid as the Rwanda policy, for example. But how much is actually going to change in real terms?

TheBigBean

Jezyboy said:

I think an issue may be that socialist has become a pretty meaningless term.

I don't think he's going to clamour for state ownership of everything, but his potential policies on private schools showed quite a socialist side.

I also think private schools are so far beyond the reach of the average person that you could do what you liked with them with no real impact...but that's another matter.

It just shows naivety to me. Hard to implement and puts pressure on state schools.

Stevo_666

Jezyboy said:

I think an issue may be that socialist has become a pretty meaningless term.

I don't think he's going to clamour for state ownership of everything, but his potential policies on private schools showed quite a socialist side.

I also think private schools are so far beyond the reach of the average person that you could do what you liked with them with no real impact...but that's another matter.

What do you think will happen when a lot of parents find that they can no longer afford private school fees?

pangolin

Stevo_666 said:

Jezyboy said:

I think an issue may be that socialist has become a pretty meaningless term.

I don't think he's going to clamour for state ownership of everything, but his potential policies on private schools showed quite a socialist side.

I also think private schools are so far beyond the reach of the average person that you could do what you liked with them with no real impact...but that's another matter.

What do you think will happen when a lot of parents find that they can no longer afford private school fees?

"A lot" is a relative term when under 6% of kids go to private school.

Stevo_666

pangolin said:

Stevo_666 said:

Jezyboy said:

I think an issue may be that socialist has become a pretty meaningless term.

I don't think he's going to clamour for state ownership of everything, but his potential policies on private schools showed quite a socialist side.

I also think private schools are so far beyond the reach of the average person that you could do what you liked with them with no real impact...but that's another matter.

What do you think will happen when a lot of parents find that they can no longer afford private school fees?

"A lot" is a relative term when under 6% of kids go to private school.

OK, whatever number is applicable. Happy now, or just looking to nit pick?

Jezyboy

It's pretty important to know what the number is to work out what the impact is.

If it was say, 50% of parents and 50% went to private school, then it might be more worth worrying about.

TheBigBean

Jezyboy said:

It's pretty important to know what the number is to work out what the impact is.

If it was say, 50% of parents and 50% went to private school, then it might be more worth worrying about.

Regional variations in the numbers attending independent schools are huge: 4% in the whole of Scotland, but 25% in Edinburgh; 10% in the South East but 13% in London. Some 20% of all UK sixth formers are in independent schools.

pblakeney

TheBigBean said:

Regional variations in the numbers attending independent schools are huge: 4% in the whole of Scotland, but 25% in Edinburgh; 10% in the South East but 13% in London. Some 20% of all UK sixth formers are in independent schools.

Still means 80% of the brightest are in state schools.
And none of them have much chance of being PM.

Stevo_666

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

MidlandsGrimpeur2 said:

@Jezyboy I would agree, I don't think he is going to be re-nationalising any time soon as you say, but I think he will place a huge emphasis on public service spending; schools, NHS etc. and spend at far higher levels than he is suggesting. I think he will tax the wealthy, both businesses/institutions and individuals to pay for it.

@Stevo_666 It is a fair point, and I would tend to agree that Starmer has moved himself to the centre ground as party leader. I also think it is fair to hold the opinion that you can argue it betrays his true principles (if that is what he has done). I would argue though, that as Leader of the opposition, his job is to get his party elected. I would suggest that on both sides of the political spectrum, a shift towards the centre ground is a fairly standard move for party leaders to appeal to a broader base.

Fair enough, his main job is to get the party elected.

My concern is that if he is really a socialist at heart, he could get elected on a relatively moderate ticket and then goes all leftie on us.

He's obviously a bit socialist otherwise he wouldn't be leader of the Labour Party. The extent to which that is a big departure from the current government is pretty debatable given they have put up taxes, have re-nationalised the railways, etc.

My expectations are pretty low: the private school policy is almost as stupid as the Rwanda policy, for example. But how much is actually going to change in real terms?

My guess is not a lot. Overall they have announced no major tax raising policies of the scale that would raise enough to fix what they claim needs fixing (which if you listen to the Labour rhetoric is most things).

kingstongraham

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

MidlandsGrimpeur2 said:

@Jezyboy I would agree, I don't think he is going to be re-nationalising any time soon as you say, but I think he will place a huge emphasis on public service spending; schools, NHS etc. and spend at far higher levels than he is suggesting. I think he will tax the wealthy, both businesses/institutions and individuals to pay for it.

@Stevo_666 It is a fair point, and I would tend to agree that Starmer has moved himself to the centre ground as party leader. I also think it is fair to hold the opinion that you can argue it betrays his true principles (if that is what he has done). I would argue though, that as Leader of the opposition, his job is to get his party elected. I would suggest that on both sides of the political spectrum, a shift towards the centre ground is a fairly standard move for party leaders to appeal to a broader base.

Fair enough, his main job is to get the party elected.

My concern is that if he is really a socialist at heart, he could get elected on a relatively moderate ticket and then goes all leftie on us.

He's obviously a bit socialist otherwise he wouldn't be leader of the Labour Party. The extent to which that is a big departure from the current government is pretty debatable given they have put up taxes, have re-nationalised the railways, etc.

My expectations are pretty low: the private school policy is almost as stupid as the Rwanda policy, for example. But how much is actually going to change in real terms?

My guess is not a lot. Overall they have announced no major tax raising policies of the scale that would raise enough to fix what they claim needs fixing (which if you listen to the Labour rhetoric is most things).

How much would tax have to go up for you to consider leaving?

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

MidlandsGrimpeur2 said:

@Jezyboy I would agree, I don't think he is going to be re-nationalising any time soon as you say, but I think he will place a huge emphasis on public service spending; schools, NHS etc. and spend at far higher levels than he is suggesting. I think he will tax the wealthy, both businesses/institutions and individuals to pay for it.

@Stevo_666 It is a fair point, and I would tend to agree that Starmer has moved himself to the centre ground as party leader. I also think it is fair to hold the opinion that you can argue it betrays his true principles (if that is what he has done). I would argue though, that as Leader of the opposition, his job is to get his party elected. I would suggest that on both sides of the political spectrum, a shift towards the centre ground is a fairly standard move for party leaders to appeal to a broader base.

Fair enough, his main job is to get the party elected.

My concern is that if he is really a socialist at heart, he could get elected on a relatively moderate ticket and then goes all leftie on us.

He's obviously a bit socialist otherwise he wouldn't be leader of the Labour Party. The extent to which that is a big departure from the current government is pretty debatable given they have put up taxes, have re-nationalised the railways, etc.

My expectations are pretty low: the private school policy is almost as stupid as the Rwanda policy, for example. But how much is actually going to change in real terms?

My guess is not a lot. Overall they have announced no major tax raising policies of the scale that would raise enough to fix what they claim needs fixing (which if you listen to the Labour rhetoric is most things).

How much would tax have to go up for you to consider leaving?

Leaving the country? Depends what taxes as well as how much, but have not considered in any detail as I am banking on them not going full leftie on us.

TheBigBean

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

MidlandsGrimpeur2 said:

@Jezyboy I would agree, I don't think he is going to be re-nationalising any time soon as you say, but I think he will place a huge emphasis on public service spending; schools, NHS etc. and spend at far higher levels than he is suggesting. I think he will tax the wealthy, both businesses/institutions and individuals to pay for it.

@Stevo_666 It is a fair point, and I would tend to agree that Starmer has moved himself to the centre ground as party leader. I also think it is fair to hold the opinion that you can argue it betrays his true principles (if that is what he has done). I would argue though, that as Leader of the opposition, his job is to get his party elected. I would suggest that on both sides of the political spectrum, a shift towards the centre ground is a fairly standard move for party leaders to appeal to a broader base.

Fair enough, his main job is to get the party elected.

My concern is that if he is really a socialist at heart, he could get elected on a relatively moderate ticket and then goes all leftie on us.

He's obviously a bit socialist otherwise he wouldn't be leader of the Labour Party. The extent to which that is a big departure from the current government is pretty debatable given they have put up taxes, have re-nationalised the railways, etc.

My expectations are pretty low: the private school policy is almost as stupid as the Rwanda policy, for example. But how much is actually going to change in real terms?

My guess is not a lot. Overall they have announced no major tax raising policies of the scale that would raise enough to fix what they claim needs fixing (which if you listen to the Labour rhetoric is most things).

How much would tax have to go up for you to consider leaving?

I think I'd be more likely to leave the country due to crime than tax, but other votes are available.

Jezyboy

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

MidlandsGrimpeur2 said:

@Jezyboy I would agree, I don't think he is going to be re-nationalising any time soon as you say, but I think he will place a huge emphasis on public service spending; schools, NHS etc. and spend at far higher levels than he is suggesting. I think he will tax the wealthy, both businesses/institutions and individuals to pay for it.

@Stevo_666 It is a fair point, and I would tend to agree that Starmer has moved himself to the centre ground as party leader. I also think it is fair to hold the opinion that you can argue it betrays his true principles (if that is what he has done). I would argue though, that as Leader of the opposition, his job is to get his party elected. I would suggest that on both sides of the political spectrum, a shift towards the centre ground is a fairly standard move for party leaders to appeal to a broader base.

Fair enough, his main job is to get the party elected.

My concern is that if he is really a socialist at heart, he could get elected on a relatively moderate ticket and then goes all leftie on us.

He's obviously a bit socialist otherwise he wouldn't be leader of the Labour Party. The extent to which that is a big departure from the current government is pretty debatable given they have put up taxes, have re-nationalised the railways, etc.

My expectations are pretty low: the private school policy is almost as stupid as the Rwanda policy, for example. But how much is actually going to change in real terms?

My guess is not a lot. Overall they have announced no major tax raising policies of the scale that would raise enough to fix what they claim needs fixing (which if you listen to the Labour rhetoric is most things).

How much would tax have to go up for you to consider leaving?

I think I'd be more likely to leave the country due to crime than tax, but other votes are available.

Your own or someone else's!

Stevo_666

Some interesting reading on the holes in Labour party policy - as far as it is known to date...

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/the-four-big-holes-in-labour-s-policies-ahead-of-general-election/ar-AA1mtg4l?cvid=28186766aee34c08c587c10446ef8754&ocid=winp2fptaskbarent&ei=6

Stevo_666

Nobody worried about these on here I guess 🤔

rick_chasey

https://forum.bikeradar.com/discussion/comment/21045483#Comment_21045483

If you were actually worried about costing up tax cuts, subsidies and govt spending you’d be tearing your hair out at the promises of the current govt too.

It’s even harder to take this criticism seriously when this current govt is reported to be finding ways to lay “fiscal traps” for labour.

Lastly, we’ve had a govt which has promised lower taxes for 13 years and we now have the highest burden in 80 years so you ought to forgive people for not taking promises about taxes and spending seriously.

briantrumpet

https://forum.bikeradar.com/discussion/comment/21045504#Comment_21045504

Especially given that they've even got the Treasury lying, pretending that the tax burden has fallen.

rjsterry

https://forum.bikeradar.com/discussion/comment/21045483#Comment_21045483

What are 'these'?

Stevo_666

https://forum.bikeradar.com/discussion/comment/21045550#Comment_21045550

See the link in my post above.

Stevo_666

https://forum.bikeradar.com/discussion/comment/21045504#Comment_21045504

I'm focusing on the gaps in Labour policy as this is the thread for it so less of your whataboutery...

Any comments on the gaps in Labour policy?

rjsterry

https://forum.bikeradar.com/discussion/comment/21045568#Comment_21045568

I wondered if you could summarise rather than just doing an RC-style no-context repost.

Edit: Actually, if you can make head or tail of that rambling stream of consciousness do let me know. I got about half way through before giving up and wasn't sure whether they'd identified more than one 'gap' - i.e. whether Labour will borrow for the £28bn green investment or open it up to private investment.

briantrumpet

https://forum.bikeradar.com/discussion/comment/21045594#Comment_21045594

I read it, and it seemed to me like fairly mild cases of "We can't be sure yet about...", which is hardly surprising given Sunak hasn't called an election yet. It's not an article that's going to persuade anyone to vote Tory who's not already one of the true believers.

Stevo_666

https://forum.bikeradar.com/discussion/comment/21045594#Comment_21045594

There were only 4 issues covered and none that difficult to understand so I figured it wasn't necessary...

rjsterry

If it's just a general 'policies not fully detailed ' then that's pretty standard for an opposition party before an election has been called. Was there any point you particularly wanted to discuss?