Ha



If there are groups of white men with dangerously high blood pressure yelling in the street, broccers will be alongside them.Jobbo wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 9:07 pm I genuinely think he is on the side of the rioters. And he’s not quite able to say it publicly.
I think you understood my point, Broccers. No denials, I notice.
I don't know what you're eating/drinking/smoking Gav but I'd love some of itGavster wrote: Wed Aug 28, 2024 11:06 am Glad that Starmer has the balls in his speech yesterday to admit that we need to focus on long-term change and that things could get worse before they get better. The last government was endlessly obsessed with short-term pandering to voters, which inevitably led to bad choices. They were leaders who were, somewhat ironically, afraid of leading.
Also, the removal of the winter fuel cap makes a lot of sense in the context of the newly launched Great British Energy. There's no point handing out free money to pay corporations for energy for when you can simply make energy more affordable in the first place.
I'm expecting a continuation of the shitshow of the last decade or more. I'd love lots of things to happen, but they won't as long as we have an entrenched civil service, public sector and political sector, and a general populous that largely seems to just keep on keeping on with it all regardless.Gavster wrote: Wed Aug 28, 2024 12:36 pm I'm not sure what you're all expecting? A release from austerity and pay rises for public sector works? To fix the NHS while not raising any taxes? To re-organise major infrastructure without spending cash?
Creating policy around major change is inherently messy. There will always be losers in any policy change. The aim is to create the greatest benefits and mitigate the trade-offs. In fact, the concept of trade-offs is the reason why governments often fail to make change, because the public don't understand that there is no such thing as a perfect policy with no losers, and therefore politicians fail to act because they're petrified of voters. As far as I can see we have a bucketload of problems in the UK and fixing them requires either a magic money tree, or accepting some major trade-offs.
I'm inherently hopeful about this country and always have been, and I am putting those hopes onto this new government as they're presenting a genuinely convincing pragmatism about change. Besides, I trust them with the country far more than the I did the tories.
In what way did Starmer's speech sound like the burden was going to be borne by those least able?ZedLeg wrote: Wed Aug 28, 2024 12:45 pm Like I say, the people who have been suffering most under austerity were hoping for some respite. Not another turn of the screws.
If only there was a way for us to raise money without passing the burden onto the people least able to hold it.