Starmer & Rayner

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Starmer & Rayner

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 10 of 20 < 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 >

Forest Hillbilly in a hidey-hole 21 May 22 7.40am
Seemingly, a bit of an odd pairing. Like fire and ice. Or stir-fried chilli ginger and slightly tepid water. Starmer has had plenty to get his teeth into, but seemed to wave the white flag over Covid and Ukraine, in order to let the Government "get on with the job". Starmer's legal background appears to be a hinderance to be an effective critic of anything Government does. Rayner seems a mis-match because she wants to call things out with language that is so borderline as to take attention from the subject at hand , to focus on the ferocity of her linguistics. I disengage, I turn the page.
Alert a moderator to this post

Forest Hillbilly

in a hidey-hole 21 May 22 7.40am

Send a Private Message to Forest Hillbilly

Seemingly, a bit of an odd pairing. Like fire and ice. Or stir-fried chilli ginger and slightly tepid water.
Starmer has had plenty to get his teeth into, but seemed to wave the white flag over Covid and Ukraine, in order to let the Government "get on with the job".
Starmer's legal background appears to be a hinderance to be an effective critic of anything Government does. Rayner seems a mis-match because she wants to call things out with language that is so borderline as to take attention from the subject at hand , to focus on the ferocity of her linguistics.

I disengage, I turn the page.

Alert a moderator to this post

Matov 21 May 22 9.02am
Originally posted by Forest Hillbilly Seemingly, a bit of an odd pairing. Like fire and ice. Or stir-fried chilli ginger and slightly tepid water. Starmer has had plenty to get his teeth into, but seemed to wave the white flag over Covid and Ukraine, in order to let the Government "get on with the job". Starmer's legal background appears to be a hinderance to be an effective critic of anything Government does. Rayner seems a mis-match because she wants to call things out with language that is so borderline as to take attention from the subject at hand , to focus on the ferocity of her linguistics. Starmer and Rayner are not a 'partnership'. There is no sense of synergy about them. Think of it as a marriage of convenience in which they don't even live in the same house, let alone share a bed. She is there to placate the left of the party. That's it. Meant to be their 'voice' in the senior leadership. And whilst I think Starmer is everything you probably do, let's not forget that Covid has been the great disrupter. History changing. Even defining the next 20 years or so, just like the September 11th attacks in 2001 did for the next couple of decades. There was no correct way of handling it on any political level, merely just trying to ensure that as little s*** as possible landed on you and trying to survive the fallout. Plus Ukraine. The people who Starmer answers too are the ones most vocal in backing it. With Johnson on the same side as them. What can more can he do to 'oppose' it? Ironically, Corbyn's economic policies are probably more popular than ever. 2017. 40% of the vote. Never forget that. Then Starmer decided to get himself a standing ovation at the 2018 Labour party conference and the rest is history. We do not live in a time in which any conventional political metric seems to matter anymore. The game is now played by different rules. We just have to play catch up. "The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.
Alert a moderator to this post

Matov

21 May 22 9.02am

Originally posted by Forest Hillbilly

Starmer and Rayner are not a 'partnership'. There is no sense of synergy about them. Think of it as a marriage of convenience in which they don't even live in the same house, let alone share a bed.

She is there to placate the left of the party. That's it. Meant to be their 'voice' in the senior leadership.

And whilst I think Starmer is everything you probably do, let's not forget that Covid has been the great disrupter. History changing. Even defining the next 20 years or so, just like the September 11th attacks in 2001 did for the next couple of decades. There was no correct way of handling it on any political level, merely just trying to ensure that as little s*** as possible landed on you and trying to survive the fallout.

Plus Ukraine. The people who Starmer answers too are the ones most vocal in backing it. With Johnson on the same side as them. What can more can he do to 'oppose' it?

Ironically, Corbyn's economic policies are probably more popular than ever. 2017. 40% of the vote. Never forget that. Then Starmer decided to get himself a standing ovation at the 2018 Labour party conference and the rest is history.

We do not live in a time in which any conventional political metric seems to matter anymore. The game is now played by different rules. We just have to play catch up.

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11 Beckenham 21 May 22 10.52am
Chatting to my Danish neighbour about life over there and came to this conclusion. Socialism in this country is all about helping the poor whilst taxing the better off. (I am trying to be fair). Socialism in Scandinavia has the same aim however in order to make it more acceptable to the people who will be paying for it everybody is entitled to the same level of benefits. I do not understand how Labour have not accepted this. If you want the tax paying middle classes to vote for you offer them a carrot. After 30 years of paying the higher rate of tax I was briefly unemployed for 6 weeks. The oik at the job centre told me I was not entitled to anything. You can imagine how I felt that others who have never paid anything get "theirs" whilst I was told to go whistle. If I was a Labour supporter I would be arguing for universal benefits. Edited by Badger11 (21 May 2022 10.53am) One more point
Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11

Beckenham 21 May 22 10.52am

Chatting to my Danish neighbour about life over there and came to this conclusion.

Socialism in this country is all about helping the poor whilst taxing the better off. (I am trying to be fair).

Socialism in Scandinavia has the same aim however in order to make it more acceptable to the people who will be paying for it everybody is entitled to the same level of benefits.

I do not understand how Labour have not accepted this. If you want the tax paying middle classes to vote for you offer them a carrot.

After 30 years of paying the higher rate of tax I was briefly unemployed for 6 weeks. The oik at the job centre told me I was not entitled to anything. You can imagine how I felt that others who have never paid anything get "theirs" whilst I was told to go whistle.

If I was a Labour supporter I would be arguing for universal benefits.

Edited by Badger11 (21 May 2022 10.53am)

One more point

Alert a moderator to this post

Matov 21 May 22 11.00am
Originally posted by Badger11 Chatting to my Danish neighbour about life over there and came to this conclusion. Socialism in this country is all about helping the poor whilst taxing the better off. (I am trying to be fair). Socialism in Scandinavia has the same aim however in order to make it more acceptable to the people who will be paying for it everybody is entitled to the same level of benefits. I do not understand how Labour have not accepted this. If you want the tax paying middle classes to vote for you offer them a carrot. After 30 years of paying the higher rate of tax I was briefly unemployed for 6 weeks. The oik at the job centre told me I was not entitled to anything. You can imagine how I felt that others who have never paid anything get "theirs" whilst I was told to go whistle. If I was a Labour supporter I would be arguing for universal benefits. Edited by Badger11 (21 May 2022 10.53am) Universal benefits, a simplified tax system which is applied across the board on all income, ideas that have validity. But we have a political class who are not interested in making things simple. To many vested interests in the complexity. This is the ultimate failure of our modern democracy. "The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.
Alert a moderator to this post

Matov

21 May 22 11.00am

Originally posted by Badger11

Chatting to my Danish neighbour about life over there and came to this conclusion.

Socialism in this country is all about helping the poor whilst taxing the better off. (I am trying to be fair).

Socialism in Scandinavia has the same aim however in order to make it more acceptable to the people who will be paying for it everybody is entitled to the same level of benefits.

I do not understand how Labour have not accepted this. If you want the tax paying middle classes to vote for you offer them a carrot.

If I was a Labour supporter I would be arguing for universal benefits.

Edited by Badger11 (21 May 2022 10.53am)

Universal benefits, a simplified tax system which is applied across the board on all income, ideas that have validity. But we have a political class who are not interested in making things simple. To many vested interests in the complexity. This is the ultimate failure of our modern democracy.

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

Alert a moderator to this post

Jacey 01 Jun 22 10.15am
A pitiful Government and an even worse Opposition. Is it any wonder that many are leaving the UK to find pastures new with a rather weak,ineffective Starmer likely to become our PM in the next couple of years?? [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Jacey

01 Jun 22 10.15am

A pitiful Government and an even worse Opposition.
Is it any wonder that many are leaving the UK to find pastures new with a rather weak,ineffective Starmer likely to become our PM in the next couple of years??

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

EverybodyDannsNow SE19 01 Jun 22 10.33am
Originally posted by Badger11 Chatting to my Danish neighbour about life over there and came to this conclusion. Socialism in this country is all about helping the poor whilst taxing the better off. (I am trying to be fair). Socialism in Scandinavia has the same aim however in order to make it more acceptable to the people who will be paying for it everybody is entitled to the same level of benefits. I do not understand how Labour have not accepted this. If you want the tax paying middle classes to vote for you offer them a carrot. After 30 years of paying the higher rate of tax I was briefly unemployed for 6 weeks. The oik at the job centre told me I was not entitled to anything. You can imagine how I felt that others who have never paid anything get "theirs" whilst I was told to go whistle. If I was a Labour supporter I would be arguing for universal benefits. Edited by Badger11 (21 May 2022 10.53am) I don't get this - Labour are not a socialist party and are not suggesting a socialist government. They have done everything they can to distance themselves from the Corbyn left of the party and economically they are basically centre-right under Starmer. Starmer's Labour seem more wedded to austerity politics than the Tories.
Alert a moderator to this post

EverybodyDannsNow

SE19 01 Jun 22 10.33am

Send a Private Message to EverybodyDannsNow

Originally posted by Badger11

Chatting to my Danish neighbour about life over there and came to this conclusion.

Socialism in this country is all about helping the poor whilst taxing the better off. (I am trying to be fair).

Socialism in Scandinavia has the same aim however in order to make it more acceptable to the people who will be paying for it everybody is entitled to the same level of benefits.

I do not understand how Labour have not accepted this. If you want the tax paying middle classes to vote for you offer them a carrot.

If I was a Labour supporter I would be arguing for universal benefits.

Edited by Badger11 (21 May 2022 10.53am)

I don't get this - Labour are not a socialist party and are not suggesting a socialist government. They have done everything they can to distance themselves from the Corbyn left of the party and economically they are basically centre-right under Starmer.

Starmer's Labour seem more wedded to austerity politics than the Tories.

Alert a moderator to this post

BlueJay UK 01 Jun 22 11.35am
Dick Dastardly & Muttley?
Alert a moderator to this post

BlueJay

UK 01 Jun 22 11.35am

Dick Dastardly & Muttley?

Alert a moderator to this post

ASCPFC Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 01 Jun 22 11.52am
Originally posted by BlueJay Dick Dastardly & Muttley? Not quite Penelope Pitstop anyway. Red and Blue Army!
Alert a moderator to this post

ASCPFC

Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 01 Jun 22 11.52am

Originally posted by BlueJay

Dick Dastardly & Muttley?

Not quite Penelope Pitstop anyway.

Red and Blue Army!

Alert a moderator to this post

Fatherken 01 Jun 22 12.02pm
I think with these two in charge Labour will not get elected , even if Boris is in charge for the Tories .
Alert a moderator to this post

Fatherken

01 Jun 22 12.02pm

I think with these two in charge Labour will not get elected , even if Boris is in charge for the Tories .

Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11 Beckenham 01 Jun 22 12.15pm
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow I don't get this - Labour are not a socialist party and are not suggesting a socialist government. They have done everything they can to distance themselves from the Corbyn left of the party and economically they are basically centre-right under Starmer. Starmer's Labour seem more wedded to austerity politics than the Tories. Exactly. During the pandemic all we got from Labour is "we'd do the same only better." I think this is a missed opportunity in the past Labour have talked about Scandinavian socialism but they have never been serious about it. It means higher taxes but also universal benefits. One more point
Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11

Beckenham 01 Jun 22 12.15pm

Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow

Starmer's Labour seem more wedded to austerity politics than the Tories.

Exactly. During the pandemic all we got from Labour is "we'd do the same only better."

I think this is a missed opportunity in the past Labour have talked about Scandinavian socialism but they have never been serious about it. It means higher taxes but also universal benefits.

One more point

Alert a moderator to this post

croydon proud Any european country i fancy! 01 Jun 22 3.48pm
Originally posted by Jacey A pitiful Government and an even worse Opposition. Is it any wonder that many are leaving the UK to find pastures new with a rather weak,ineffective Starmer likely to become our PM in the next couple of years?? [Link] Perhaps , or perhaps they are leaving britain now because of a weak, ineffective Boris as actual pm now?
Alert a moderator to this post

croydon proud

Any european country i fancy! 01 Jun 22 3.48pm

Originally posted by Jacey

[Link]

Perhaps , or perhaps they are leaving britain now because of a weak, ineffective Boris as actual pm now?

Alert a moderator to this post

EverybodyDannsNow SE19 01 Jun 22 4.43pm
Originally posted by croydon proud Perhaps , or perhaps they are leaving britain now because of a weak, ineffective Boris as actual pm now? No, no - it must be the hypothetical Starmer government in 3 years.
Alert a moderator to this post

EverybodyDannsNow

SE19 01 Jun 22 4.43pm

Originally posted by croydon proud

Perhaps , or perhaps they are leaving britain now because of a weak, ineffective Boris as actual pm now?

No, no - it must be the hypothetical Starmer government in 3 years.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 10 of 20 < 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Starmer & Rayner

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors