Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Does it not depend on who is having to pay taxes as to whether the rises will be unpopular? I wouldn’t see many objecting to a hike on the likes of Centrica.
Does it not depend on who is having to pay taxes as to whether the rises will be unpopular? I wouldn’t see many objecting to a hike on the likes of Centrica.This is a sensible approach. As we saw with Truss, anything ‘unfunded’ for day to day stuff will, rightly or wrongly, be slaughtered by the markets.
The alternative is to start suggesting theyll spend more but that it will require higher taxes…unlikely to an election winner especially in the middle of a cost of living crisis
Their first job is to get into power and whether people like the approach or not, Starmer and Reeves have rebuilt labours credibility when it comes to the economy/public finances so the strategy does appear to be working. The problems will be if shadow ministers start suggesting they can deliver more than perceived to be affordable as Clint mentioned about streeting
Still waiting for the long term vision/plan from any party.
Five yearly elections don't help thatStill waiting for the long term vision/plan from any party.
This is a sensible approach. As we saw with Truss, anything ‘unfunded’ for day to day stuff will, rightly or wrongly, be slaughtered by the markets.
The alternative is to start suggesting theyll spend more but that it will require higher taxes…unlikely to an election winner especially in the middle of a cost of living crisis
Their first job is to get into power and whether people like the approach or not, Starmer and Reeves have rebuilt labours credibility when it comes to the economy/public finances so the strategy does appear to be working. The problems will be if shadow ministers start suggesting they can deliver more than perceived to be affordable as Clint mentioned about streeting
Still waiting for the long term vision/plan from any party.
Does it not depend on who is having to pay taxes as to whether the rises will be unpopular? I wouldn’t see many objecting to a hike on the likes of Centrica.
Probably because he didn’t do what she claimed he did. And she would have been sued into the middle of next week otherwise.Interesting that she decided to retract - surely it’s perfectly possible for him to denounce the attacks, and then subsequently equivocate and deflect when talking about them. Corbyn’s lawyers must have been on the phone!
I believe it's good for people with some forms of intestinal trouble.Byng was a weirdo who drank coffee in a hotel bar and his mate Labowitch I think had tomato juice - who has tomato juice?
I disagree. It's just the Tories have been so utterly incompetent at it for 13 years people think they can't be any worse.This is a sensible approach. As we saw with Truss, anything ‘unfunded’ for day to day stuff will, rightly or wrongly, be slaughtered by the markets.
The alternative is to start suggesting theyll spend more but that it will require higher taxes…unlikely to an election winner especially in the middle of a cost of living crisis
Their first job is to get into power and whether people like the approach or not, Starmer and Reeves have rebuilt labours credibility when it comes to the economy/public finances so the strategy does appear to be working. The problems will be if shadow ministers start suggesting they can deliver more than perceived to be affordable as Clint mentioned about streeting
Still waiting for the long term vision/plan from any party.
Seems like the journalist in question was very much held to account!It’s about time people were actually held to account when they spout shit online, even more so when they are a journalist and expected to be truthful.
On this occasion. The episode just exposes a complete lack of journalistic rigour if something appears to agree with her own worldview.Seems like the journalist in question was very much held to account!
Well without knowing specifically what comments she was referring to in her original tweet, the notion that a public figure (especially one like Corbyn) was deflecting and equivocating on a sensitive issue like this one hardly sounds like unusual behaviour for a politician, and accusing someone of doing so sounds to me like it’s in the realm of fair comment. Personally I think journalists (and all of us!) should have some degree of freedom to make such comment without having to worry about lawyers ringing them up a few days later to get it all retracted. Maybe you disagree, or maybe you think the accusation was just completely offbase/untrue, but browbeating journalists into apologies is not always the sign of a healthy society.On this occasion. The episode just exposes a complete lack of journalistic rigour if something appears to agree with her own worldview.
Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
Well without knowing specifically what comments she was referring to in her original tweet, the notion that a public figure (especially one like Corbyn) was deflecting and equivocating on a sensitive issue like this one hardly sounds like unusual behaviour for a politician, and accusing someone of doing so sounds to me like it’s in the realm of fair comment. Personally I think journalists (and all of us!) should have some degree of freedom to make such comment without having to worry about lawyers ringing them up a few days later to get it all retracted. Maybe you disagree, or maybe you think the accusation was just completely offbase/untrue, but browbeating journalists into apologies is not always the sign of a healthy society.
I’m not defending her specifically. I just think that terms like “deflecting” and “equivocating” are so nebulous and subjective that it seems like overkill to threaten legal action against someone for accusing a public figure of doing either. Unless she completely fabricated something that Corbyn said (did she?), then it appears fact checking isn’t the issue here, it’s just not being very good at her job. Disappointing, yes. Worthy of legal action, probably not.Journalists failing to do the most basic fact checking isn't either, especially one who is purportedly 'Associate Political Editor' for erm The New Statesman.
I have a journalist in my close family and I know how important they see fact checking. I'm sure you agree, given that it is a fairly fundamental ethical standard in your chosen profession.
People like her do YOU no favours at all, so I'm not really sure why you feel the need to defend her.
Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
To be fair they are her description of what she'd said, not the verbatim words. I'm not sure what the words actually were but I wouldn't be surprised if she has understated them.I’m not defending her specifically. I just think that terms like “deflecting” and “equivocating” are so nebulous and subjective that it seems like overkill to threaten legal action against someone for accusing a public figure of doing either. Unless she completely fabricated something that Corbyn said (did she?), then it appears fact checking isn’t the issue here, it’s just not being very good at her job. Disappointing, yes. Worthy of legal action, probably not.
And in other news the sun is hot.
And for bullying of all things, out of the frying pan and into the fire springs to mindDefecting from the SNP to the Tories. Kin’ell.
Here's a policy decision that I just know will go down well on here:
The Times really is just the Sun with a different font isn't itHere's a policy decision that I just know will go down well on here:
The Times really is just the Sun with a different font isn't it
Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
How can you be simultaneously convinced of your unassailable poll lead yet terrified of the opposition
Labour to omit funding of social care reform from manifesto and scale back Lords plans
Dismay as key proposals are downsized in order to make election offer to voters ‘bombproof’www.theguardian.com
Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
And you know the media is so biased in favour of the Tories and unfortunately is prepared to do anything to see them in power.Because you’ve seen Labour fuck it up from here before.
But they're miles ahead having already talked about social care and house of lordsBecause you’ve seen Labour fuck it up from here before.
But they're miles ahead having already talked about social care and house of lords
Now they just look like anything they've said has no credibility
The cast iron fiscal rule nonsense will strangle them
Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
Also seem to be quite inconsistent in what lost them previous elections, I thought it was all down the leader at the timeThey’re absolutely terrified.
They’re absolutely terrified.
It’s a bizarre argument - why wasn’t Blair terrified?
Also job was a lot easier in the 90s compared to todays media landscape.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?