Do you want to discuss boring politics? (236 Viewers)

[StrettoBoy]

Diane Abbot has been reinstated back into the Labour Party.

I don't like her as a politician because her views are too extreme for my tastes but I do have sympathy for the way she has been treated.

The disciplinary process was - no doubt deliberately - dragged out for a very long time. She is then offered a token gesture of having the Labour whip restored to her.

What does that mean? It means she can sit in the Commons as a Labour MP again. Oh, Parliament has been prorogued and won't sit again until 9th July. She can't sit as a Labour MP then because they have barred her from standing as a Labour candidate.

Starmer described himself as "ruthless" the other day, no doubt thinking this would be regarded as an attractive trait which in my opinion it certainly isn't. I suspect the Abbott process is intended to prove this.

I think Abbott deserves more dignity and respect than she has been shown.

 

---

[OffenhamSkyBlue]

I do think one area that Liz Truss was fundamentally right on is the need to ‘go for growth’, her execution however, tragic.

People feel poorer because the tax burden is the highest it’s been since World War Two. Governments are spending too much and it’s us that foot the bill. The Tories talk about wanting to cut taxes yet have frozen the tax thresholds and when inflation is running close to 10% last year, that’s a massive tax hike in reality.

The housing market too has become dysfunctional on the Tories watch. Record low interest rates, a dysfunctional planning system, record highs of immigration coupled with failed house building targets has made the cost of a mortgage barely affordable.


In my unqualified view, people are just fed after 14 years of one party rule and just want an alternative. Compared to previous (post-war) Labour election winners; Atlee, Wilson and Blair, Starmer is a pretty weak politician and uninspiring. There is no real policy programme (yet) and in public it seems like he speaks in platitudes wishing to offend no one. Sunak does something v similar, regularly labels himself as a ‘Thatcherite’ to appeal to true blue Tories whilst in government hasn’t been Thatcherite at all - for better or worse.

Back to polling, there are some general rules and recent assumptions that may or may not be wrong:
1) Typical Tory voters have stayed away from local / by-elections and expect to come back for the GE
2) there’s an incumbency ‘benefit’ to the government/office holder come polling day
3) voters tend to ‘punish’ a party that is miles ahead in polls on election day. Would-be voters either stay at home or they vote for smaller parties (Lib Dem / Green / Reform)
4) the ‘shy Tory’ phenomenon
5) Higher turnout apparently tends to favour the Conservatives for whatever reason

These are v high level and of course have a margin for error. The major polls in the last 2-3 elections have been dead wrong on the scale of the victories.

Some really good points here. Thanks. And we are all unqualified, aren't we? Just trying to help each other out!

I think the higher turnout favours the Conservatives because of the opinion polls missing the older population who might tend to be more likely to be Tory.

For me, I struggle with Starmer's appeal and the length of time he has been in opposition but has yet to put forward any tangible policies (other than parroting that policy X by the Tories is the sign of a desperate party in chaos).

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Some really good points here. Thanks. And we are all unqualified, aren't we? Just trying to help each other out!

I think the higher turnout favours the Conservatives because of the opinion polls missing the older population who might tend to be more likely to be Tory.

For me, I struggle with Starmer's appeal and the length of time he has been in opposition but has yet to put forward any tangible policies (other than parroting that policy X by the Tories is the sign of a desperate party in chaos).

In fairness, opposition parties shouldn’t have a detailed manifesto too early in the election cycle because the Government can steal their good policies. I agree though at this moment, I don’t know any flagship policies of theirs aside from the VAT on private school fees. Which is a bad policy that will have a net cost to taxpayer. Even just today, reversing the decision to restore the whip for Diane Abbot looks weak - whether or not it’s the right thing to do.

I’ve actually voted Labour in 2015, 2017 and 2019 but I’m doubt I’m going to this year. The only policies that would turn ‘me’ is:
- student loan forgiveness, effectively a lifelong 9% tax
- Planning reform - the tories will never touch it
- scrapping the triple lock pensions, again, the tories won’t touch it
- Meaningful NHS reform that isn’t just ‘more’ funding

That all said, I don’t think it’s a good time for a Labour government with the issues we face as a country. The tories, however, deserve to be kicked out because since 2015, the country has been a basket case.

 

[clint van damme]

I don't like her as a politician because her views are too extreme for my tastes but I do have sympathy for the way she has been treated.

The disciplinary process was - no doubt deliberately - dragged out for a very long time. She is then offered a token gesture of having the Labour whip restored to her.

What does that mean? It means she can sit in the Commons as a Labour MP again. Oh, Parliament has been prorogued and won't sit again until 9th July. She can't sit as a Labour MP then because they have barred her from standing as a Labour candidate.

Starmer described himself as "ruthless" the other day, no doubt thinking this would be regarded as an attractive trait which in my opinion it certainly isn't. I suspect the Abbott process is intended to prove this.

I think Abbott deserves more dignity and respect than she has been shown.

Given some of the shit they've let slide it's a pisstake really.
Considering they let someone who tried to influence the judge in a rape trial cross the floor the other week.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Given some of the shit they've let slide it's a pisstake really.
Considering they let someone who tried to influence the judge in a rape trial cross the floor the other week.

… because he’s a weak politician who has a desire to be liked by everyone rather than make strong decisions that may make him unpopular in some quarters.

He’s a ‘socialist’ yet let’s get into his PLP? At least Corbyn was a man of principle - even if they are often wrong.

 

[Grendel]

Given some of the shit they've let slide it's a pisstake really.
Considering they let someone who tried to influence the judge in a rape trial cross the floor the other week.

I heard on the Niki Campbell show today a claim that the result was known 5 months ago but Starmer and Streeting said less than a month ago the enquiry was ongoing.

Its all pretty strange

 

[skybluetony176]

The weakness with Abbott was waiting until now to reinstate her given the inquiry was apparently completed in December and also the decision to not let her stand at the GE. It shows an inability to make decisions to have let it drag on so long when you clearly only had 2 options, either let her back in or don’t and then justify your decision.

The VAT on private schools costing the taxpayer is nonsense. The majority of pupils in UK private education are foreign nationals, by not charging VAT we’re actually giving tax cuts to foreigners. As for the people claiming that they can’t afford the private education if it has VAT on it, sorry but that’s tough. I have more sympathy with dozens of other groups of people who deserve taxpayer assistance first. Nurses using food banks, first time buyers who can’t get on the housing market, people who can’t afford to insulate their homes correctly etc etc. To quote a former Tory MP, maybe they should cancel their Netflix subscription, stop going to Costa and stop eating avocados on toast, start eating 30p meals. Besides , according to the Telegraph they’re all going to Spanish boarding schools instead anyway and let’s be honest, schools are already crumbling and failing as it is and that’s not due to the number of pupils in school so a few more numbers isn’t going to change that.

I think Labour have pledged planning reforms to kickstart house building

 

[Grendel]

The weakness with Abbott was waiting until now to reinstate her given the inquiry was apparently completed in December and also the decision to not let her stand at the GE. It shows an inability to make decisions to have let it drag on so long when you clearly only had 2 options, either let her back in or don’t and then justify your decision.

The VAT on private schools costing the taxpayer is nonsense. The majority of pupils in UK private education are foreign nationals, by not charging VAT we’re actually giving tax cuts to foreigners. As for the people claiming that they can’t afford the private education if it has VAT on it, sorry but that’s tough. I have more sympathy with dozens of other groups of people who deserve taxpayer assistance first. Nurses using food banks, first time buyers who can’t get on the housing market, people who can’t afford to insulate their homes correctly etc etc. To quote a former Tory MP, maybe they should cancel their Netflix subscription, stop going to Costa and stop eating avocados on toast, start eating 30p meals. Besides , according to the Telegraph they’re all going to Spanish boarding schools instead anyway and let’s be honest, schools are already crumbling and failing as it is and that’s not due to the number of pupils in school so a few more numbers isn’t going to change that.

I think Labour have pledged planning reforms to kickstart house building

Tony about 10% of independent school attendees are foreign nationals

 

[skybluetony176]

I see Liz Truss’ grift to far right has took another leap. Appearing on Lotus Eaters a far right conspiracy theory platform. What’s the betting on her being the next leader of the Conservative Party. An observation that a commentator made yesterday was that all the Tories might have left after the GE is the far right nutters in the party that they used to keep on the sidelines as for some reason they always stand them in the safest of safe Tory seats. Her own included, you’ve got to go back to the 50’s to when it wasn’t Tory.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

The weakness with Abbott was waiting until now to reinstate her given the inquiry was apparently completed in December and also the decision to not let her stand at the GE. It shows an inability to make decisions to have let it drag on so long when you clearly only had 2 options, either let her back in or don’t and then justify your decision.

The VAT on private schools costing the taxpayer is nonsense. The majority of pupils in UK private education are foreign nationals, by not charging VAT we’re actually giving tax cuts to foreigners. As for the people claiming that they can’t afford the private education if it has VAT on it, sorry but that’s tough. I have more sympathy with dozens of other groups of people who deserve taxpayer assistance first. Nurses using food banks, first time buyers who can’t get on the housing market, people who can’t afford to insulate their homes correctly etc etc. To quote a former Tory MP, maybe they should cancel their Netflix subscription, stop going to Costa and stop eating avocados on toast, start eating 30p meals. Besides , according to the Telegraph they’re all going to Spanish boarding schools instead anyway and let’s be honest, schools are already crumbling and failing as it is and that’s not due to the number of pupils in school so a few more numbers isn’t going to change that.

I think Labour have pledged planning reforms to kickstart house building

Those people who can no longer afford private education, where will they go? State schools. Which is a sector already under strain.

The point of the tax is to raise revenue and if people change behaviour (i.e. withdraw from the activity/service) all you have done is put more strain on our state sector - already overcrowded and underfunded.

If anything, a shrewd government will incentivise behaviour that takes the burden away from our public services until we’ve done something to relieve the strain.

 

[Grendel]

Those people who can no longer afford private education, where will they go? State schools. Which is a sector already under strain.

The point of the tax is to raise revenue and if people change behaviour (i.e. withdraw from the activity/service) all you have done is put more strain on our state sector - already overcrowded and underfunded.

If anything, a shrewd government will incentivise behaviour that takes the burden away from our public services until we’ve done something to relieve the strain.

Hardly any foreign nationals attend private schools - its utter nonsense

 

[wingy]

Why is the slogan CHANGE, surely reset would work better?🫣

 

[wingy]

Hardly any foreign nationals attend private schools - its utter nonsense

Window dressing then?

 

[David O'Day]

Turns out Abbott has not been barred from standing.

 

[wingy]

Turns out Abbott has not been barred from standing.

Campaigning then?

 

[OffenhamSkyBlue]

Why is the slogan CHANGE, surely reset would work better?🫣

CTRL-ALT-DEL ???

 

[Skybluekyle]

CTRL-ALT-DEL ???

Hopefully the electorate then opens up Task Manager and selects "Ends Process" on "Tories.exe".

Hmm, seemed funnier in my head...

 

[fernandopartridge]

Those people who can no longer afford private education, where will they go? State schools. Which is a sector already under strain.

The point of the tax is to raise revenue and if people change behaviour (i.e. withdraw from the activity/service) all you have done is put more strain on our state sector - already overcrowded and underfunded.

If anything, a shrewd government will incentivise behaviour that takes the burden away from our public services until we’ve done something to relieve the strain.

The strain on public services is reduced by spending an adequate amount of money of them

 

[clint van damme]

I heard on the Niki Campbell show today a claim that the result was known 5 months ago but Starmer and Streeting said less than a month ago the enquiry was ongoing.

Its all pretty strange

Heard that, I think that's what was leaked to the papers.

 

[David O'Day]

Campaigning then?

Says she is

 

[CCFCSteve]

Those people who can no longer afford private education, where will they go? State schools. Which is a sector already under strain.

The point of the tax is to raise revenue and if people change behaviour (i.e. withdraw from the activity/service) all you have done is put more strain on our state sector - already overcrowded and underfunded.

If anything, a shrewd government will incentivise behaviour that takes the burden away from our public services until we’ve done something to relieve the strain.

Yeah, my concern is those that can borderline afford it will have to withdraw their kids. Hopefully schools will look at an internal bursary/assistance scheme to help these parents with the additional cost

An alternative option could’ve been to say to schools that to retain charity status they need to give scholarships/bursaries to X% from disadvantaged backgrounds

 

[shmmeee]

These are v high level and of course have a margin for error. The major polls in the last 2-3 elections have been dead wrong on the scale of the victories.

This is just provably false.

Election results 2019: Opinion poll accuracy holds up - BBC News

This time the opinion polls called it correctly, says BBC political analyst Peter Barnes.

www.bbc.co.uk

General election 2017: How reliable are the polls? - BBC News

Political polling is under scrutiny as never before. But how reliable are they?

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[shmmeee]

Those people who can no longer afford private education, where will they go? State schools. Which is a sector already under strain.

The point of the tax is to raise revenue and if people change behaviour (i.e. withdraw from the activity/service) all you have done is put more strain on our state sector - already overcrowded and underfunded.

If anything, a shrewd government will incentivise behaviour that takes the burden away from our public services until we’ve done something to relieve the strain.

You realise the £1.7bn extra money is after expected side effects right? It’s already taking into account some movement to state.

 

[shmmeee]

People genuinely believe they’ve thought of stuff in their spare time that analysts and data scientists haven’t don’t they?

 

[shmmeee]

Yeah, Im with Clint in terms of sentiment but the repercussions for many and the wider economy would be huge (people feel poorer, stop spending, economy unravels)

The solution is build a lot more houses than the net migration numbers require. Not happened for years, probably ever, though

There’s no way you’re looking at a 30% fall in prices from building. You’d need to build more than the industry could manage, millions a year.

Most places that liberalise planning to allow more homes instead see rents and prices either mildly deflating or staying roughly the same.

The way out of you hold house price increases below wage increases for a while. Shake the investors out expecting huge returns along the way.

 

[shmmeee]

JL Partners are a Tory thinktank. They started out as Theresa May's research team. Wouldn't trust any of JLP's data for a balanced view, but to my recollection YouGov's polls haven't been particularly accurate either.

Thanks for the explanations about the methods used for polling, but i think the "silent majority" that they may well miss will have more impact than people recognise.
The polls were pretty accurate in 2019, but there were several previous elections where the polls as a whole were not a good guide to the result.

There’s no benefit to a polling company to being intentionally inaccurate.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

The strain on public services is reduced by spending an adequate amount of money of them

That’s such a low resolution response. How do you that?

The IMF is already saying we need more spending cuts and tax raises. With interest rates being relatively higher there’s a looming debt crisis. Liz Truss sparked a near economic crisis by suggesting relatively inexpensive tax cuts and the cap on energy prices.

Your response to everything seems to be ‘just throw more money at it’ which isn’t a sustainable solution, is it?

 

[CCFCSteve]

There’s no way you’re looking at a 30% fall in prices from building. You’d need to build more than the industry could manage, millions a year.

Most places that liberalise planning to allow more homes instead see rents and prices either mildly deflating or staying roughly the same.

The way out of you hold house price increases below wage increases for a while. Shake the investors out expecting huge returns along the way.

Agreed. It’s impossible to catch up sufficiently to significantly reduce prices in the short to medium term. Increasing housing stock will stabilise prices over time though

Only thing that would drive prices down is a deep recession whereby unemployment increases significantly. None of us want that happening though

edit - my point was nobody would want house prices dropping by 30% anyway though due to the repercussions throughout wider economy

 

[fernandopartridge]

That’s such a low resolution response. How do you that?

The IMF is already saying we need more spending cuts and tax raises. With interest rates being relatively higher there’s a looming debt crisis. Liz Truss sparked a near economic crisis by suggesting relatively inexpensive tax cuts and the cap on energy prices.

Your response to everything seems to be ‘just throw more money at it’ which isn’t a sustainable solution, is it?

The IMF said the same back in 2010, the programme that followed is disastrous. It is not sustainable to pretend that a sovereign currency issuer must balance its income and expenditure.

The austerity programme has caused myriad problems that will cost a great deal to fix, it is not sustainable to ignore those problems with more austerity.

Every penny the government spends goes into the private sector including paying wages, every penny taken in tax takes money out of the private sector. Are you suggesting the government should be actively removing even more money and demand from the economy?

 

[skybluetony176]

Also why is all the blame put on VAT as to why they can’t afford private school? It will equate to about an extra £60 a week on average. How much has there weekly food bill risen in the last few years? How much has their energy bill risen in the last few years? How much has their mortgage increased because of Trussonomics? Why aren’t any of those the reason that they can’t afford to send their kids to private school? I guarantee all of those things and more have affected their ability to pay private school fees rather than an average of £3131 pounds a year for VAT. Why is all the onus put on a political decision to add VAT but not on the political decisions that have driven up the cost of living like making borrowing more expensive by crashing the economy, or the political decision to let energy companies to profiteer through a lack of intervention on energy prices? There’s plenty the outgoing government could have done to reduce everyone’s cost of living not just those who can afford private education for their kids.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

You realise the £1.7bn extra money is after expected side effects right? It’s already taking into account some movement to state.

People genuinely believe they’ve thought of stuff in their spare time that analysts and data scientists haven’t don’t they?

Have you watched the TV show ‘In The Thick of It?’

If not, you should because it’s a great show. Secondly, there’s a plot where the main character tells the minister to ‘find an expert’ who agrees with government policy. The takeaway here is that anyone can find an expert who justifies their policy.

Experts are only giving their best guess based on assumptions they make that goes into their analysis.

As a generic rule of thumb, a proposed new tax rarely generates the revenue a government expects. People change their behaviours to circumvent the regulations.

 

[shmmeee]

Agreed. It’s impossible to catch up sufficiently to significantly reduce prices in the short to medium term. Increasing housing stock will stabilise prices over time though

Only thing that would drive prices down is a deep recession whereby unemployment increases significantly. None of us want that happening though

edit - my point was nobody would want house prices dropping by 30% anyway though due to the repercussions throughout wider economy

You’d hope that once you’ve stabilised the market a bit intervention like Help to Buy could work as intended and not just adding demand to an already hot market.

 

[shmmeee]

Have you watched the TV show ‘In The Thick of It?’

If not, you should because it’s a great show. Secondly, there’s a plot where the main character tells the minister to ‘find an expert’ who agrees with government policy. The takeaway here is that anyone can find an expert who justifies their policy.

Experts are only giving their best guess based on assumptions they make that goes into their analysis.

As a generic rule of thumb, a proposed new tax rarely generates the revenue a government expects. People change their behaviours to circumvent the regulations.

The point is people changing their behaviour isn’t some amazing insight you’ve had that they don’t know. They know this. Like the “aha but then private school students will move to the state!!” Yes. We know. And the model accounts for it.

Pretending that the world is full of idiots and you as a layman have special insight is just the height of hubris.

And yes economic forecasts are hazy, both ways, it makes your predictions just as hazy. But data scientists will build models using the best they have and will be more accurate than you guessing.

We saw this with climate models, same whinges, yet over 40 years they’ve been shown to be remarkably accurate. Because these people actually know what they’re doing.

This “had enough of experts” mentality that’s come about since the advent of YouTube is one of the worst things to happen TBH. Just endless wasted time.

 

[chiefdave]

Turns out Abbott has not been barred from standing.

Not sure I take Starmer saying 'no decision had been taken' as the green light for Abbot to stand given that he's been saying for months that no decision had yet been made with regard to her returning to the party and that's turned out to not exactly be true.

 

[shmmeee]

The IMF said the same back in 2010, the programme that followed is disastrous. It is not sustainable to pretend that a sovereign currency issuer must balance its income and expenditure.

The austerity programme has caused myriad problems that will cost a great deal to fix, it is not sustainable to ignore those problems with more austerity.

Every penny the government spends goes into the private sector including paying wages, every penny taken in tax takes money out of the private sector. Are you suggesting the government should be actively removing even more money and demand from the economy?

We’ve had the pandemic as a nice Petri dish. Europe went austerity. US went spending. We can see what happened (US recovered far better including inflation) and yet people still argue about it. 2008, Covid, the war. This happens again and again but people won’t accept it because they’ve got deeply held beliefs about how the economy “should” run.