Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Keir Starmer's time is up

Elpenor said:
He has to save money for aspirational tax cuts don’t you know
Click to expand...

Why are we only ever interested in selfish aspirations? I aspire to living in a country where you can get an ambulance in less than a fortnight. I don't need an ambulance right now, but someone does and I would like it if they could get one quite quickly. Maybe that doesn't count as aspiration though, maybe it's only aspiration if it's only for you and yours.
 
For me Corbyn's biggest achievement was that he made it clear that austerity was a political choice, not a necessity. Starmer's biggest failing is that he has completely ignored that and gone back to saying there's no money for anything. This is political choice, you can always adjust how you raise and collect taxes, or allocate spending. And, at the risk of sounding like it's 2009 again, you are not running a house - you're running a country with its own currency and various monetary levers you can pull.

What he's actually saying is "we value the happiness of this section of society or the worth of this sector of spending over this other part" not "there's no money". There's always money.
 
tommers said:
For me Corbyn's biggest achievement was that he made it clear that austerity was a political choice, not a necessity. Starmer's biggest failing is that he has completely ignored that and gone back to saying there's no money for anything. This is political choice, you can always adjust how you raise and collect taxes, or allocate spending. And, at the risk of sounding like it's 2009 again, you are not running a house - you're running a country with its own currency and various monetary levers you can pull.

What he's actually saying is "we value the happiness of this section of society or the worth of this sector of spending over this other part" not "there's no money". There's always money.
Click to expand...
Spot on; the gas-lighting myth of casting the national economy as that of a household is central to the neoliberal, consolidator state.
 
SpookyFrank said:
Why are we only ever interested in selfish aspirations? I aspire to living in a country where you can get an ambulance in less than a fortnight. I don't need an ambulance right now, but someone does and I would like it if they could get one quite quickly. Maybe that doesn't count as aspiration though, maybe it's only aspiration if it's only for you and yours.
Click to expand...
You should call one now as by the time it arrives you or someone nearby might need it
 
tommers said:
you are not running a house - you're running a country with its own currency and various monetary levers you can pull.
Click to expand...

Whilst that’s true, there is also a market and there is also the reality of government debt (close to 100% of GDP).

Any incoming government that wanted to invest in infrastructure, rebuild public services and begin to repair the social fabric would need to therefore a) have a plan to deal with the inevitable capital flight and b) have a plan to deal with a wholly predictable run on the pound by the markets.

McDonnell thought about and wrote about it extensively in the run up to 2017.

Could we expect a similar approach or a plan from Starmer and Reeves? Absolutely not.

That’s not because they misunderstand the difference between the economy of a country and that of a house. It’s because they genuinely believe in the primacy and superiority of the market. Sure, they’d like the private sector to ‘invest in Britain’ a bit more, but the idea that the state could and should make decisions on the basis of the national interest rather than those of the market? No.
 
SpookyFrank said:
In criticising the government's response to recent flooding and their failure to invest in or even maintain flood defences, Starmer was clear to point out that solving the problem is 'not about spending more money'. Which is pretty clearly him saying that there's no more money on the way for flood defences despite the ever-increasing frequency of 'once in a generation' floods.
Click to expand...
Saw on the news the money that is earmarked will know only 60% of the houses it was originally intended to due to inflation. (Shows how much the £ has devalued).
 
Smokeandsteam said:
Whilst that’s true, there is also a market and there is also the reality of government debt (close to 100% of GDP).

Any incoming government that wanted to invest in infrastructure, rebuild public services and begin to repair the social fabric would need to therefore a) have a plan to deal with the inevitable capital flight and b) have a plan to deal with a wholly predictable run on the pound by the markets.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's how the global investment management and asset management corporations would react to a UK government seeking to invest in infrastructure. They would jump at the opportunity to fund and manage major infrastructural projects with the guaranteed returns underwritten by taxpayers. Now that pretty much everything has been sold off, it's only new infrastructure that allows further privatisation and regressive wealth transfer from tax on labour to corporate profits.
 
tommers said:
For me Corbyn's biggest achievement was that he made it clear that austerity was a political choice, not a necessity. Starmer's biggest failing is that he has completely ignored that and gone back to saying there's no money for anything. This is political choice, you can always adjust how you raise and collect taxes, or allocate spending. And, at the risk of sounding like it's 2009 again, you are not running a house - you're running a country with its own currency and various monetary levers you can pull.

What he's actually saying is "we value the happiness of this section of society or the worth of this sector of spending over this other part" not "there's no money". There's always money.
Click to expand...

I agree with all this except the part about how Starmer has failed. Starmer has done exactly the job he was brought in to do, namely bury all traces of that alternative to perpetual austerity.
 
SpookyFrank said:
In criticising the government's response to recent flooding and their failure to invest in or even maintain flood defences, Starmer was clear to point out that solving the problem is 'not about spending more money'. Which is pretty clearly him saying that there's no more money on the way for flood defences despite the ever-increasing frequency of 'once in a generation' floods.
Click to expand...
There's not some magic 'public service reform ' button you can press that makes it cheaper and quicker to build flood defences, reforest the uplands or relocate communities. This is really quite insulting to those people who work for the EA dealing with flood planning and response. How can it possibly be not about spending more money? There may be some changes to the planning system that could speed projects up a bit but hardly going to be game changing.
 
teqniq said:
Great idea but how long before he walks back on this?

www.theguardian.com

Keir Starmer pledges to clean up politics and crack down on cronyism

Exclusive: Party considering new offence of fraud against the public purse that would see jail terms of more than 10 years
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
How many things on a manifesto actually make it beyond a pledge.
Another thing troubling me is that it should be easier in opposition. It should be a chance to shine and make a name for yourself. He doesn't appear to be suceeding in this.
 
two sheds said:
He's gone back on so many promises he'll be stuck if he gets in, not able to remember what he's promised and what he's gone back on.
Click to expand...
I’m secretly hoping that, just like he fooled/misled party members that he would retain some of the moderately left stuff that Corbyn proposed, that he’s similarly pulling a fast one on the British electorate too, who think they’re getting some kind of centrist technocrat but after assuming power he brings in luxury communism with a few good hangings.

A man’s gotta have hope…
 
tommers said:
For me Corbyn's biggest achievement was that he made it clear that austerity was a political choice, not a necessity. Starmer's biggest failing is that he has completely ignored that and gone back to saying there's no money for anything. This is political choice, you can always adjust how you raise and collect taxes, or allocate spending. And, at the risk of sounding like it's 2009 again, you are not running a house - you're running a country with its own currency and various monetary levers you can pull.

What he's actually saying is "we value the happiness of this section of society or the worth of this sector of spending over this other part" not "there's no money". There's always money.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is exactly it. How come neighbouring capitalist states can have better public services than the UK? It's a decision. A decision to run down public services, the result of which is a worse society for everyone, apart from the very rich.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Kemi Badenoch’s time is up!
2 3 4 5
Replies
143
Views
4K
Petcha
P
krtek a houby
King William’s time is up
Replies
7
Views
597
PR1Berske
PR1Berske
tim
Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby's time is up.
2 3 4
Replies
96
Views
3K
tim
tim
Kid_Eternity
David Lammy’s time is up
Replies
11
Views
692
Whagwan
Whagwan
Larry O'Hara
Chancellor Rachel Reeves: Her Time Is Up!
8 9 10 11 12
Replies
330
Views
12K
Artaxerxes
Artaxerxes
Back
Top Bottom