Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" sooo another u turn by starmer its about time he went taxie for starmer" Why, what's tge u turn? Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" sooo another u turn by starmer its about time he went taxie for starmer" Negotiations and concessions are not a U-turn, it's how democracy works. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" sooo another u turn by starmer its about time he went taxie for starmer" You would prefer a stubborn leader that doesn't listen to the mood of his party or the country. Does something because they won a election by a few votes and now think their Emperor for life. Even a stubborn leader like Thatcher changed her mind on a few things like poll tax for example, when the tea leaves said it was the correct thing to do. Despite her claims of the Lady is not for turning. Not a fan of the man or Labour, but it's one trait he has that I welcome. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" sooo another u turn by starmer its about time he went taxie for starmer" A 4 letter word. Dear oh dear. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" sooo another u turn by starmer its about time he went taxie for starmer" Why? Just why, we've had what 5 years of constant upheaval and chopping and changing with the previous government causing not only financial fluctuations but the people's trust in leadership has been diluted to the point of them losing the election partly as a result. Now you are suggesting that labour government down the same road, what a bunch of anti establishment nonsense. Who would you suggest take's over,or are you another bitter Tory wanting a snap election because you lost?? Honestly I can't see what benefit ( excuse the pun) it would be too anyone other than the other side to point fingers and jeer like children. Personally ( I'm not a Labour voter) think he's shown strength by listening to criticism although it's forced his hand, he's changed his mind and listened. Do you think Trump or Thatcher, Brown, Johnson or other world leaders would have? He's the best of a bad bunch. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A good leader will willingly invite criticism of their plans and intentions. They will actively encourage scrutiny. They will pivot if a compelling and rational argument is presented to them. . Weak leaders, tyrants and dictators hide behind authoritarianism. They brook no dissent. They have notoriously thin skins. The do not admit they are wrong. . A "U-turn" is a highly desirable virtue. It means that the person who makes the U-turn is amenable to new information and willing to change their opinion on a subject. . People "bend" and that's a good thing. " EErrr no. I believe it was his backbenchers proposing an amendment, that would of killed the welfare bill dead no come back in its present form, he would of looked weak and humiliated. He really had no choice. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" sooo another u turn by starmer its about time he went taxie for starmer Negotiations and concessions are not a U-turn, it's how democracy works. " The time to listen is when you’re putting policy together, not when you’re facing a rebellion in parliament. I actually think the system needs looking at but I can’t really comment on if what the government were planning was in the right areas or not as it’s not something I’ve paid a lot of attention to. There’s definitely too many people with “mental health conditions” being handed out cash left right and centre. Being anxious about what people might think of you in the workplace is not a reasonable claim for disability benefits in my opinion. Parents getting DLA for a kid with ADD and ADHD is another area that should be looked at. And a lot more should be done to combat fraud. Some people make a very good living out of being a benefit claimant | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A good leader will willingly invite criticism of their plans and intentions. They will actively encourage scrutiny. They will pivot if a compelling and rational argument is presented to them. . Weak leaders, tyrants and dictators hide behind authoritarianism. They brook no dissent. They have notoriously thin skins. The do not admit they are wrong. . A "U-turn" is a highly desirable virtue. It means that the person who makes the U-turn is amenable to new information and willing to change their opinion on a subject. . People "bend" and that's a good thing. EErrr no. I believe it was his backbenchers proposing an amendment, that would of killed the welfare bill dead no come back in its present form, he would of looked weak and humiliated. He really had no choice." What's wrong with that ? . I've implemented things in the past which a team has refused to do and vetoed. They came up with compelling evidence that the thing was not as skilful as it could have been. I listened to the team and binned the idea, then thanked them for their input afterwards. That's how it's supposed to work for goodness sake. No one, not even the boss, has a monopoly on good ideas, nor should they. That way lies egomania. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" sooo another u turn by starmer its about time he went taxie for starmer" Personally I don't care about politicians changing their mind. It's much more important to me that they do the right thing for the country and the population. Although that's become a rare thing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A good leader will willingly invite criticism of their plans and intentions. They will actively encourage scrutiny. They will pivot if a compelling and rational argument is presented to them. . Weak leaders, tyrants and dictators hide behind authoritarianism. They brook no dissent. They have notoriously thin skins. The do not admit they are wrong. . A "U-turn" is a highly desirable virtue. It means that the person who makes the U-turn is amenable to new information and willing to change their opinion on a subject. . People "bend" and that's a good thing. EErrr no. I believe it was his backbenchers proposing an amendment, that would of killed the welfare bill dead no come back in its present form, he would of looked weak and humiliated. He really had no choice." That does seem far more accurate. I get that people want a PM that will listen but it's clear that he did not listen until it became clear he was on course for defeat when it came to the vote. Had he calculated that the vote would go his way he would have simply ignored all other opinions. The labour MP's are still wounded from the local election fiasco where the winter fuel allowance was often mentioned for the defeats. He did not listen before the local elections and it took labours heavy defeats to make him finally decide the policy was wrong | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" sooo another u turn by starmer its about time he went taxie for starmer Personally I don't care about politicians changing their mind. It's much more important to me that they do the right thing for the country and the population. Although that's become a rare thing. " The issue with changing their decisions is cost. WFA has cost over £2billion as an example, and Reeves will still need the money it was freeing up, plus the extra 2billion now. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" sooo another u turn by starmer its about time he went taxie for starmer Negotiations and concessions are not a U-turn, it's how democracy works. " Exactly  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" sooo another u turn by starmer its about time he went taxie for starmer Personally I don't care about politicians changing their mind. It's much more important to me that they do the right thing for the country and the population. Although that's become a rare thing. The issue with changing their decisions is cost. WFA has cost over £2billion as an example, and Reeves will still need the money it was freeing up, plus the extra 2billion now. " Would continuing it have wasted more money? The concept of changing their tac based on new information is sensible. If they're doing the right thing. Is my point. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour will be toast at the next general election. Kier Starmer will be replaced as Labour leader and Prime Minister long before then. God knows who will replace him, as the party will lunge to the left." That would be great. Being Tory-lite got them the funding to get elected. But it's not helping anyone else. I don't share your optimism though, no political party will be allowed to do anything positive for British people. They nearly all work for those who donate the most money. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't know how the old policy, the now defunct policy and the new revised policy differ and don't want to get into a debate about that. However, wouldn't it have been more sensible to ensure that a policy would be supported by a substantial number of backbenchers before announcing it ensuring that something like this reversal or watering down of a proposal doesn't happen so publicly, thus making the Govt look a bit feeble? " This is how it appears to me as well. If SKS had been interested in accommodating other opinions he would have changed course when concerns were first raised. Instead it was only when it was clear he would likely loose the vote that he acted. He managed to get into a position of having to choose the lesser of two evils. Either back down which obviously doesn't look good or loose the vote which would look even worse, especially given his majority in the house. Who is responsible though, the PM or the chancellor? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" sooo another u turn by starmer its about time he went taxie for starmer Personally I don't care about politicians changing their mind. It's much more important to me that they do the right thing for the country and the population. Although that's become a rare thing. The issue with changing their decisions is cost. WFA has cost over £2billion as an example, and Reeves will still need the money it was freeing up, plus the extra 2billion now. Would continuing it have wasted more money? The concept of changing their tac based on new information is sensible. If they're doing the right thing. Is my point. " There is one person pushing these particular bad decisions and that’s Reeves, who wants to get her hands on all the cash she can to loosen the fiscal rules noose she placed on herself. Starmer let her run with it, that showed a lack of leadership and attention to detail which is something Starmer should be all over considering his background. He should be doing the right thing all the time, challenging his ministers not letting them steamroll their ideas through at the cost of the tax payer. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wealth tax would help finances and help reduce inequalities" If you want more money spent on public services you should be prepared to pay for it yourself, not ask someone else to pay for it. I don’t see how an increase in the basic rate of tax or NI can be avoided. And socialists should welcome that if they genuinely want to put others before themselves. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wealth tax would help finances and help reduce inequalities" Just change national insurance back how it was , increase basic income tax to 25% and increase personal allowance to £15000 a year, job done | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Labour supporters: Starmer refuses to u-turn: inspirational leadership, man of principle, making tough decisions, greatest PM of all time Starmer u-turns: inspirational leadership, collaborative approach, democracy in action, a true leader isn’t afraid to listen and change course. We’ve had nothing but flip flopping for a year and can expect nothing else for the next four. The dwindling band of Labour shills (only 32% of 2024 Labour voters happy with the government) are going to have their work cut out." Conservative supporters! The lady's not for turning Despite actually turning on the Welsh channel and poll tax Boris bending the knee to Sir Marcus | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
