Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Keir Starmer's time is up

Definitely would fuck me
yeh it would fuck a vast number of people. it's a really shit move.

i don't understand the reasoning behind what the lp is doing, where they are really fucking off people who are at the core of labour support. they don't seem to be considering the weakness of their electoral position, nor that attacking pensioners is attacking pensioners' families too (who might be tapped in many cases to make up the shortfall in winter fuel costs), and attacking in this way single people is in a great number of cases going to be attacking young people. although the financial implications are in the hundreds of pounds, a couple of pounds a week, these are the very pounds which people who're already stretched can least afford to lose.
 
Definitely would fuck me
Having just lost my Dad, I've been going through the sadmin with the council to get this reduction for my old Mum. At at time when she's lost Dad's pension and DLA from her weekly budget, it is a modest, yet necessary reduction in her outgoings.

What a stupidly cuntish thing for the 'left' party of capital to consider.
 
Having just lost my Dad, I've been going through the sadmin with the council to get this reduction for my old Mum. At at time when she's lost Dad's pension and DLA from her weekly budget, it is a modest, yet necessary reduction in her outgoings.

What a stupidly cuntish thing for the 'left' party of capital to consider.
very sorry to hear that. i reckon they're just warming up and will be nastier than the nasty party
 
Tax for the many not the few

I don't think they're crazy enough to touch the basic income tax rate, but the tax free allowance probably won't move with inflation for a while. Which is just stealth tax on lower earners.

Someone at the LSE had an interesting idea of a "minimum tax" on income over £100k, which would specifically target the people who shuffle their money around to avoid taxes. (eg: It wouldn't affect at all someone paying the actual 45% rate, but someone shuffling things around to abuse capital gains would start paying a lot more. It would nab things other than just capital gains, too.)
 
Another poll, this one from YouGov, showing that whatever the honeymoon was for Starmer it’s emphatically over.

I’ve said before, Starmer and his government are going to be very very unpopular, very quickly.

The meaning of the reassertion of the primacy of centrism and the value of having ‘the adults back in the room’ is already clear.

Piss poor managerialism, spending cuts, attacks on the vulnerable and restrictions on personal freedom. Managed decline, growth as a concept that can be willed into existence and Starmer and Reeves miserable and lifeless vision of the future is the exact opposite of the change that people are crying out for.

Like France, like Germany, like much of the EU we know where voters will turn to next

Where have all the posters gone who can explain to us why voting Labour was the only option?IMG_1864.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Another poll, this one from YouGov, showing that whatever the honeymoon was for Starmer it’s emphatically over.

I’ve said before, Starmer and his government are going to be very very unpopular, very quickly.

The meaning of the reassertion of the primacy of centrism and the value of having ‘the adults back in the room’ is already clear.

Piss poor managerialism, spending cuts, attacks on the vulnerable and restrictions on personal freedom. Managed decline, growth as a concept that can be willed into existence and Starmer and Reeves miserable and lifeless vision of the future is the exact opposite of the change that people are crying out for.

Like France, like Germany, like much of the EU we know where voters will turn to next

Where have all the posters gone who can explain to us why voting Labour was the only option?View attachment 440999
Sadly none of this surprises me and I've argued that it would be what happened for quite some time (prior to joining here). I take no delight in being correct as I can see what it'll ultimately lead to.
 
Which would have meant another 4-5 years of the tories with them assuming a pretty well far right mandate?

I wouldn't really agree that it's the fault of people who voted Labour in July (although I didn't) because at that point your options are fairly limited tbh. It seems pretty obvious though even at this stage (and pre-election tbf) that there's a strong possibility of the next election producing a government way to the right of the previous one. The gleeful Starmer cheerleaders do have a case to answer there imo.
 
Could be worse, we could have had a tory/reform coalition. :eek:

One problem is that we actually need taxes on the rich & clamping down on tax evasion/avoidance to finance investment in the infrastructure and alleviating poverty. That's what Corbyn and the left were advocating though, so Starmer's hatred of the left will see that as a defeat and I can't see him doing it.
 
in the interests of moving things along

'Refuses to rule out' doesn't really mean anything. Ministers will have all been told not to rule things out so that the papers can't piece together where the tax hikes are going to be by a process of elimination.

They'll just have to wait for the official leak 7-10 days prior to the budget.
 
This is the same person who was warned by the Child Poverty Action Group, as well as disability-focused charities, that implementing planned changes to the benefits system would have a devastating impact on people, but she chose to ignore them and oversaw the horrendous Welfare Reform Act 2009. It was her and the Labour Party that started all that shit, not the Tories, smoothing the path for their successors to roll with it.

The same year she was busy plunging people further into poverty, she and her husband, that nice Ed Balls off the telly, bought a four-bedroom house in North London and registered it as their second home (rather than their home in West Yorkshire); this qualified them for up to £44,000 a year to subsidise a reported £438,000 mortgage, of which they claimed £24,400. An investigation in MPs' expenses found they had both received overpayments of £1,363. They were ordered to repay the money.

That's Yvette Cooper. She'll shit on anyone she can.
 
Last edited:
Did they have to block raising the two-child limit and the winter fuel payments? Seem specific ideologically driven choices rather than raising money from people who have loads of it.
Worth mentioning that, from what I've seen, the freezing pensioners thing seems to be a big attack line from the far right (and one that, unlike many of their other talking points, isn't based on easily-debunkable bollocks). Borne out in the fash video Boris got suggested, which seems to be relatively typical from what I've seen:
The video starts with a TikTok British man’s voice over a collage of pictures of Keir Starmer. The man’s voice is not unlike Keir Starmer’s own voice.
“Well Britons have had their say,
But Starmer’s been stunned into silence,
And is only focused on what Starmer wants to do,
Banning fun
Taking fuel allowances away from pensioners,
And taxing you to allow illegal immigrants into the country..."
 
Back
Top Bottom