Sir Kier Starmer - Odds on not completing a full term?

[Snooky]

Always worth remembering the impact of 2008-09 was much larger following Brown's mismanagement of borrowing, and as a result the Tories were in a far worse position in 2010 than Labour are now

What utter nonsense. For example, the IFS says that:

• The next government is likely to face some of the most difficult economic and fiscal choices the UK has faced outside of pandemics, conflicts and financial crises
• A combination of high debt interest payments and low expected growth is forecast to make it more difficult to reduce debt as a fraction of national income than in any parliament since at least the 1950s
• A new government will inherit taxes at record levels for the UK

https://ifs.org.uk/news/next-governm...es-generations

Meanwhile the UK budget deficit as a percentage of GDP is actually higher now than it was in 2010 (see https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk...fings/sn06167/)



There are plenty of easily accessible sources to disprove what you say, if you can actually be bothered to look.

[agentzero]

g

Always worth remembering the impact of 2008-09 was much larger following Brown's mismanagement of borrowing, and as a result the Tories were in a far worse position in 2010 than Labour are now. Also the impact of Covid and the reaction to it, plus Ukraine did a lot of damage and racked up a lot of public debt (no, not PPE, that is only a minor part of it compared to things like the furlough scheme that kept companies alive).

And Reeves must have known the actual position well before the election since a full analysis is available from the OBR and she must have studied that well before last Saturday.

All the signs are that they are preparing the ground for a tax and spend boom. The economy isn't crashed, and is recovering at least as well as most others, but you won't believe that if you listen to the new PR campaign.

Must be interesting to live in your blinkered world.

UK is a two party state. Had Labour not been in power during the global banking financial crash, the Tories would have been the party in power. It is obvious would have implemented their constantly demanded deregulation. For the UK the experience the effects would have had been much worse than anything we seen in 2009 to 2013. However if Labour had then got in they could have sensibly borrowed for infrastructure projects while interest rates were at historical lows.

You might not be two pence short of a pound, unlike Zigenaire, Vetran and FraidyCat - who have taken over this forum with mad alt right daily ramblings for the worse, just see how far down forum traffic is from google statistics - but that doesn't mean that you are automatically in the right. Your posts always ignore other factors are it is obvious you are an inherently right wing thinker. It's better to be a centrist, as it accommodates balance and the knowledge that being left or right is incorrect.

Evidence: the last 14 years have been dire, which is why have a bunch of not-contractors posting here on inside IR35 contracts, who aren't good enough to get highly paid permie jobs. People on £1K+ day rates (me) used to be the norm here, now it's a divorced dad haven of Reform and immigration-paranoid nonsense here. Still, maybe that lot will see their kids one day...

[malvolio]

g

Must be interesting to live in your blinkered world.

UK is a two party state. Had Labour not been in power during the global banking financial crash, the Tories would have been the party in power. It is obvious would have implemented their constantly demanded deregulation. For the UK the experience the effects would have had been much worse than anything we seen in 2009 to 2013. However if Labour had then got in they could have sensibly borrowed for infrastructure projects while interest rates were at historical lows.

You might not be two pence short of a pound, unlike Zigenaire, Vetran and FraidyCat - who have taken over this forum with mad alt right daily ramblings for the worse, just see how far down forum traffic is from google statistics - but that doesn't mean that you are automatically in the right. Your posts always ignore other factors are it is obvious you are an inherently right wing thinker. It's better to be a centrist, as it accommodates balance and the knowledge that being left or right is incorrect.

Evidence: the last 14 years have been dire, which is why have a bunch of not-contractors posting here on inside IR35 contracts, who aren't good enough to get highly paid permie jobs. People on £1K+ day rates (me) used to be the norm here, now it's a divorced dad haven of Reform and immigration-paranoid nonsense here. Still, maybe that lot will see their kids one day...

Thanks for the considered unbiased response. Always good for the soul to have a good giggle.

Yes it's all crap right now. Why it is crap right now has deep-seated causes stretching back to the 80s. However you are clearly one of those who finds it easier to blame your favourite whipping horse while disregarding the actual historical basis of things.

All I try to do is balance the argument away from the TikTok crowd.

And fwiw I am a centrist with a firm belief in monetarism and a fairly good knowledge of modern history. It's just people don't like seeing an alternative view, based largely on historical and personal experience of both Tory and Labour governments. (And my day rates were around £1500 a day when I was working )

[vetran]

g
Blah Ad Hominin attacks bah

Blah it was a global crisis not Brown's fault blah

Blah sensible fiscal policy executed by a sensible government, hoisting everyone on the PFI petard by a retard PM Blah

Blah Imagine if the Tories had left a note saying no money left

Blah my penis size relates to my imaginary daily rate Blah

FTFY

[woody1]

Thanks for the considered unbiased response.

Says the resident Tory propogandist.

[malvolio]

Says the resident Tory propogandist.

Thanks for totally missing the point. And sorry if its too complicated for you to understand what I say.

Put it this way, I'm not talking about parties, merely events.

[woody1]

Thanks for totally missing the point. And sorry if its too complicated for you to understand what I say.

Put it this way, I'm not talking about parties, merely events.

Just like the DM/Telegraph, everything you come out with is laced with a heavy Tory bias. Fair enough, I get it, you're a true blue.

Unfortunately, your team lost, so you'll just have to grin and bear it for the next few years.

[malvolio]

Just like the DM/Telegraph, everything you come out with is laced with a heavy Tory bias. Fair enough, I get it, you're a true blue.

Unfortunately, your team lost, so you'll just have to grin and bear it for the next few years.

Still don't understand, do you? It's about the difference between socialism and conservatism, not about Labour and Conservative. Religiously sticking everything into a pot with a label is the same stupid tribalism that most football fans favour, it saves them having to think.

[woody1]

Still don't understand, do you? It's about the difference between socialism and conservatism, not about Labour and Conservative. Religiously sticking everything into a pot with a label is the same stupid tribalism that most football fans favour, it saves them having to think.

You think Starmer's Labour are socialist? Left of centre yes but not by much.

I'm no fan of any party/ideology but I'll reserve judgement until they've been in power a few years.

[NotAllThere]

Sir Kier Starmer - Odds on not completing a full term?

Zero. Except in pipe-dreams.