THE FOURTH OF JULY

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
No, the continuing decline of the UK unless massive changes happen for the better, nothing is saying this will happen following the election because neither Labour or Conservatives are being open and honest, the greens will have us in darkness due to carbon zero and Lib dems are just there for whatever reason.

Now as for the end of the world we have not been in such a position since Cuba, the old clock is just 90 seconds away but unlike then we have some really bad leaders with no skills in diplomacy and people like cameron are just not helping whilst having a geriatric US president is un believable. His son is in trouble for guns whilst not declaring his drugs issue yet his dad can have a nuclear arsenal and on some days be non compos mentis ! So unfortunately tommorow is not a given until we wake up and start being nice to each other and condem both war and nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.
An attitude of "things aren't great and they're unlikely to magically get better" (for which I'd agree) doesn't really tie in with your previous comment about small businesses shutting up shop because of the predictions of a Labour government. Certainly I read your previous post as a belief that Labour in power would lead to disaster.
 
Without raising taxes or cutting services then it is stalemate, you have no money to spend and this leads to @jacobs question

Do you think there could be another way to deal with current problems?

It looks like if you cannot or do not want to borrow but want to spend then where do you get the income from, raising taxes is one option but you will have to squeeze further up the tree as the ones at the bottom are getting a bit pushed. If any party comes out and says if you want things to get better then we will raise taxes further it is like political suicide and comes back to finding money to spend. Of course streamlining services and making them more efficient would save money at the cost of jobs but it would not be enough on it's own.
There's an awful lot of money slopping around in dodgy offshore accounts, London properties with dubious ownership, and literally billions (https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ts-to-35bn-almost-half-say-campaigners-due-to) lost to tax avoidance. There's plenty of money out there; it's just kept well out of the hands of the state (often by people and organisations that benefit from the state; in running profit-making businesses here). So that'd be one solution to improving services.
 
...... Of course streamlining services and making them more efficient would save money at the cost of jobs but it would not be enough on it's own.
They are supposed to have been making services more efficient since 1979 but have achieved exactly the opposite. Spending less and running services down does not make them more efficient.
 
Certainly I read your previous post as a belief that Labour in power would lead to disaster.
They have some strange ideas with regards to employers like ending the qualifying periods for basic rights which I always thought was a probationary period in which you have to prove yourself and are not actually employed, they want to make flexible working a day one right which is no use to many busineses as they need someone to be there for a known time and not decide to have Mondays off and would make things much harder for the employer as well as expensive by giving them to much at the detrement of the business. I think it is the employee who needs to decide if the job is suitable and then earn the privaledges rather than be given them on a plate as a right. Some others are just a joke like if working from home Labour would quote " the Labour Party, if elected would introduce new rights to protect workers from remote surveillance " . So as an employer you not only become less productive if you have workers at home but also lose the right to ensure they are delivering and not just getting paid! Working from home needs to become the exception and only for certain jobs and working from home should have it's own tax bracket so they pay more, it is after all a perk where they save the cost of commuting and not spending in the local economy.

Spending less and running down services does not make them more efficient.
Fully agree, efficiency is increasing throughput at less cost and in less time which is a key deliverable in manufacturing. I do not think efficiency is a term that can be associated with politic's because a good example of being inefficient is the un elected house of lords that consumes resources and only generates hot air.
 
The problem I have with politics ATM, ignoring the left or the right division is the sheer lack of ideas, drive and courage to do things in this country.

My chaps at the men's shed (a mix of professionals from education, industry and military mainly ) come up with better ideas both on a local level and a national level.

What we need is big ideas and big men to carry them out..

When the government comes up with dropping HS2 at their Tory conference. You know the pantry is empty!
 
They have some strange ideas with regards to employers like ending the qualifying periods for basic rights which I always thought was a probationary period in which you have to prove yourself and are not actually employed, they want to make flexible working a day one right which is no use to many busineses as they need someone to be there for a known time and not decide to have Mondays off and would make things much harder for the employer as well as expensive by giving them to much at the detrement of the business. I think it is the employee who needs to decide if the job is suitable and then earn the privaledges rather than be given them on a plate as a right. Some others are just a joke like if working from home Labour would quote " the Labour Party, if elected would introduce new rights to protect workers from remote surveillance " . So as an employer you not only become less productive if you have workers at home but also lose the right to ensure they are delivering and not just getting paid! Working from home needs to become the exception and only for certain jobs and working from home should have it's own tax bracket so they pay more, it is after all a perk where they save the cost of commuting and not spending in the local economy.
I'd think that more rights for workers would not be a bad thing (given some of the awful zero hours stuff in use now).

As for WFH; I do it, and find I end up working far more hours (because the kit I need is always present, and I'm not having to waste my time commuting) - so my employer gets far more hours out of me than they would if I had to make it into an office every day. The use of remote surveillance tools is a "known" thing in my industry, but is looked upon very poorly (I suspect it's another idea we've imported from the US). Judge people on results, not counting the number of hours they spend sitting at a desk (metrics vary by role, obviously).

But regardless, a bunch of people working from home (and a few more rights for workers) isn't exactly going to bring the country to its knees. Certainly not on the scale of the last few years of "Truss budgets" etc.
 
The problem I have with politics ATM, ignoring the left or the right division is the sheer lack of ideas, drive and courage to do things in this country.

My chaps at the men's shed (a mix of professionals from education, industry and military mainly ) come up with better ideas both on a local level and a national level.

What we need is big ideas and big men to carry them out..

When the government comes up with dropping HS2 at their Tory conference. You know the pantry is empty!
The problem is that any "great" idea is going to hugely excite a minority of voters, and horrify a percentage of others (and the negative voices will be loud). Plus anything that might actually make the country better for the majority would be firmly opposed by those with wealth and power; who would then use their influence (newspapers etc) to ward the plebs off from voting for it.
 
The complete absence of ambition from all major parties (bar one) is depressing - the goal is clearly "avoid upsetting anyone", the result wholly unconvincing:
  • Labour - insist the last 14 years have been characterised by "chaos", their slogan is "change", the manifesto an exercise in trivia and spin
  • Tory - insist they have a plan, ignore the past as successes are limited, have run out of ideas, making material changes is an admission failure whilst in power
  • LibDem - more radical than the two above, but not much, at least Brexit and EU gets a mention
Reform have a clear plan. Many will identify with some proposals, conveniently overlooking that as a package it is economically garbage with implausible assumptions, and unconcerned that many would judge them socially unacceptable. Major red meat plans:
  • freeze non-essential immigration, small boat illegal migrants taken back to France
  • increase personal allowances to £20k
  • inheritance tax limit increased to £2m
  • scrap net zero target
  • tax relief on school fees
  • extra £17bn for NHS, tax relief on private health, NHS vouchers to fund private care
  • zero tolerance policing
  • leave ECHR
For those interested the Reform contract is here Reform
 
The complete absence of ambition from all major parties (bar one) is depressing - the goal is clearly "avoid upsetting anyone", the result wholly unconvincing:
I agree. The "one" being the Green party.
  • Labour - insist the last 14 years have been characterised by "chaos", their slogan is "change", the manifesto an exercise in trivia and spin
Chaos is certainly the word for it but Labour don't seem to have any answers.
Major red meat plans:
  • freeze non-essential immigration, small boat illegal migrants taken back to France
An irrelevant minor issue which appeals to a small and tedious sector of the electorate, whilst ignoring the bigger humanitarian issue of the global movement of people from various stressed regions. It could be your turn one day.
  • increase personal allowances to £20k
Yes why not, or higher?
  • inheritance tax limit increased to £2m
Nonsense. Should be much lower and unearned income generally should be taxed higher than earned. Would help deflate the house price bubble.
  • scrap net zero target
Ridiculously stupid idea - there is no alternative to radical action on climate change though nothing much is happening yet. It's almost certainly too late anyway. https://www.theguardian.com/environ...hes-global-record-despite-clean-energy-growth
  • tax relief on school fees
What on earth for?
  • extra £17bn for NHS,
Or much more
  • tax relief on private health, NHS vouchers to fund private care
Private health and care services essentially inefficient and need to be brought into the state sector
  • zero tolerance policing
Nonsense
  • leave ECHR
Appalling suggestion - the bottom of the barrel. People voting against the protection of their own human rights? How gullible can they get? But stupid anyway - the general principles of the ECHR are already incorporated into UK law.
For those interested the Reform contract is here Reform
A very dull, limited, unimaginative and irrelevant program.
They are going nowhere fast.
 
Last edited:
The complete absence of ambition from all major parties (bar one) is depressing - the goal is clearly "avoid upsetting anyone", the result wholly unconvincing:
  • Labour - insist the last 14 years have been characterised by "chaos", their slogan is "change", the manifesto an exercise in trivia and spin
  • Tory - insist they have a plan, ignore the past as successes are limited, have run out of ideas, making material changes is an admission failure whilst in power
  • LibDem - more radical than the two above, but not much, at least Brexit and EU gets a mention
Reform have a clear plan. Many will identify with some proposals, conveniently overlooking that as a package it is economically garbage with implausible assumptions, and unconcerned that many would judge them socially unacceptable. Major red meat plans:
  • freeze non-essential immigration, small boat illegal migrants taken back to France
  • increase personal allowances to £20k
  • inheritance tax limit increased to £2m
  • scrap net zero target
  • tax relief on school fees
  • extra £17bn for NHS, tax relief on private health, NHS vouchers to fund private care
  • zero tolerance policing
  • leave ECHR
For those interested the Reform contract is here Reform
Interestingly Reform don't seem to be able to define what they mean by essential immigration, but then they know they just have to throw out attractive sound bytes to people who think the current Tory part are too warm and cuddly (which sadly does seem to be a fair percentage of the population).

Given that Reform is just the latest "make Farage money" vehicle they really shouldn't be anywhere near the house of commons. I assume (should he get in) he'll do what he did when he was an MEP - namely absolutely nothing except appear occasionally in order to talk b*ll*cks for videos for his social media feed, get his expenses, then pipper off again.

I can only hope that he's not successful in Clacton, and has to grift off to his next scam; but the polls do indicate he's going to win it, sadly.

EDIT: Love how the naughty word filter turns "b*gg*r" into "pipper". Makes me sound much more British. What ho.
 
Comments dismissing Reform as extremists lead by an egotistical Farage intent on column inches over substance are dangerous. They have rapidly gained support and need to be seen as a serious threat - complacency may allow them to thrive, and ridicule not deter support of their policies.

In my original post I suggested Reform were the only major party with a clear plan. Jacob is right that the Greens also have a clear vision - but they are not a major electoral player. Although well intentioned, IMHO their plan is bonkers with little chance of success.
 
You did not, I said that in a previous post because many are keen to know where Starmer is looking to get money from and in the last three I voted Labour, Labour and my one and only Conservative . If it was not Starmer I would vote Labour again but he is just to Tory.
so in response to starmer being to centrist you are voting reform? you are all over the place, im no fan of blair but they had a much better performing economy and health service up until the financial crash of 2008, tories exist to sell of the national assets and transfwer money to themselves and their rich friends, economists have looked at reforms laughable figures and concluded they dont add up, they are tories on steroids. the way you raise money is taxing wealth where all the money has gonme to over the last decade, starmer is far too timid in my opinion, while the greens are far too reckless, the answer lies somewhere in the middle. cutting services and privatising the NHS isnt the answer
 
Comments dismissing Reform as extremists lead by an egotistical Farage intent on column inches over substance are dangerous. They have rapidly gained support and need to be seen as a serious threat - complacency may allow them to thrive, and ridicule not deter support of their policies.

In my original post I suggested Reform were the only major party with a clear plan. Jacob is right that the Greens also have a clear vision - but they are not a major electoral player. Although well intentioned, IMHO their plan is bonkers with little chance of success.
reform are fantasists, their plan doesnt add up unless you gut the welfare state ,and you really think they can save 50 billion from "efficiencies?"
 
There's an awful lot of money slopping around in dodgy offshore accounts, London properties with dubious ownership, and literally billions (https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ts-to-35bn-almost-half-say-campaigners-due-to) lost to tax avoidance. There's plenty of money out there; it's just kept well out of the hands of the state (often by people and organisations that benefit from the state; in running profit-making businesses here). So that'd be one solution to improving services.
this..
 
Comments dismissing Reform as extremists lead by an egotistical Farage intent on column inches over substance are dangerous. They have rapidly gained support and need to be seen as a serious threat - complacency may allow them to thrive, and ridicule not deter support of their policies.

In my original post I suggested Reform were the only major party with a clear plan. Jacob is right that the Greens also have a clear vision - but they are not a major electoral player. Although well intentioned, IMHO their plan is bonkers with little chance of success.
Reform are definitely extremists led by an egotistical Farage intent on column inches, but sadly they very much cannot be dismissed. Current polls show they may get 5 seats (sadly).

reform are fantasists, their plan doesnt add up unless you gut the welfare state ,and you really think they can save 50 billion from "efficiencies?"
Absolutely, but that's the problem with populists and con artists; they can present you catchy soundbites and claims that are easy to ingest. The substance behind the claims is irrelevant, as people who like the message won't ask questions.

Certainly at this time (where they're not going to be in power) they know they can promise anything and blame everyone else for the lack of results. That said, the Brexiteers were in power, and they did exactly the same.
 
you really think they can save 50 billion from "efficiencies
I would say that it is not hard to make huge savings in our political system, our local MP's expenses were over £200,000 and you get something like £300 a day for turning up at the house of lords so our politicians need to start leading by example. Take a very simple view on the election, we have got Conservative and have had Labour but look at the state we are in, it is a game of tennis between the two parties with no real forward momentum so to get change you need to do something different otherwise you just continue down the same old path.
 
but the people who have not experienced the chaos of labours inability to manage the economy need there eyes opened
May I politely point out that the evidence shows Labour has managed the economy as well (or as badly) as the Conservatives.

It is simply not true that Labour a can’t manage the economy.

Here is some research supporting my point:

https://www.channel4.com/news/factc...arty-has-a-better-track-record-on-the-economy

https://theconversation.com/labour-...economy-than-voters-think-new-research-162368

“Our main finding is that the UK economy has grown with a similar pace under both parties, however Labour governments seem to do better in tackling recessions and achieve a more consistent performance. ”
https://reunido.uniovi.es/index.php/EBL/article/view/15231
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top