Who Will You Vote For?

[Cousin Jack]

Sad I know, buy I have just scanned through the Reform parties 'promises'.

Many may not be achievable, most of the Reform candidates are unknowns with no track record, but most of the ideas make sense to me. If they could achieve even 10% of what they promise...........

I am tempted.

[Mr. Dazzle]

All of their policies which I've heard of sound to me like stuff dreamt up down the pub, seems vaguely sensible at first glance but doesn't stand up to much scrutiny.

We're gonna tell the BoE to stop paying interest to commercial banks on QE reserve and saves tens of Billions. Does the UK government even have authority to do that? And if they did, what would be the ramifications of suddenly just pulling to rug out from existing deals?

We'll send small boat arrivals straight back to France, as international law allows. Well that's all fine and dandy, I'm sure the French would immediately welcome them back.

All Government departments must deliver the same services with 5% less money. People thought the magic money tree was a joke, but its nothing compared to this arbitrary 5% savings bush.

I've not yet found a core policy from reform which you'd reasonably call a policy. They're just wishes

[Cousin Jack]

Yes, some of it is rubbish, but some ideas are excellent.

5% saving IS achievable. All large organizations could save 5%, BT had targets of 10% growth with savings of 10% too. The trick is to weed out the stuff that 'we always do that" and stop doing it. Often no-one even notices, the task was important, 25 years ago, but hasn't been necessary for the last 15 years.

Slashing income tax for the lower paid is doable, at zero cost. We tax people, and then give it back via the benefit system. Madness!

And the entire tax system desperately needs a radical overhaul to make it less byzantine.

[Mr. Dazzle]

I don't think there's been a Government in recent history (i.e. since Pitt the Younger ) who haven't tried to get the various civil services to make savings. It's not a policy, it's an obvious statement.

[mangocrazy]

5% saving IS achievable. All large organizations could save 5%, BT had targets of 10% growth with savings of 10% too. The trick is to weed out the stuff that 'we always do that" and stop doing it. Often no-one even notices, the task was important, 25 years ago, but hasn't been necessary for the last 15 years.

The big problem with this kind of thinking is that people start to expect 5% (or more) savings year on year on year. I think I was still in my 30s when I first heard the phrase 'do more with less'. Since then it's become a management mantra and has lead us as a country into unmitigated disasters like 14 years of Tory austerity.

There comes a time when you're no longer cutting away the fat, but you're down to the bone.

[Mussels]

Yes, some of it is rubbish, but some ideas are excellent.

5% saving IS achievable. All large organizations could save 5%, BT had targets of 10% growth with savings of 10% too. The trick is to weed out the stuff that 'we always do that" and stop doing it. Often no-one even notices, the task was important, 25 years ago, but hasn't been necessary for the last 15 years.

Slashing income tax for the lower paid is doable, at zero cost. We tax people, and then give it back via the benefit system. Madness!

And the entire tax system desperately needs a radical overhaul to make it less byzantine.

It's possible to be low paid and not entitled to any benefits, people will complain the wrong people are benefiting or losing out from that change

[Saga Lout]

All of [Reform's] policies which I've heard of sound to me like stuff dreamt up down the pub, seems vaguely sensible at first glance but doesn't stand up to much scrutiny...

We'll send small boat arrivals straight back to France, as international law allows. Well that's all fine and dandy, I'm sure the French would immediately welcome them back...

We've been welcoming them with open arms for years. Something needs to change.

[Mr. Dazzle]

We've been welcoming them with open arms for years. Something needs to change.

I don't think any of the major parties would disagree, something does indeed need to change.

"Just send em back to France" is unlikely to be a complete solution though...

In a nutshell its this kind of thinking which worries me. Any government is of course in charge 100% of the time, not just some of the time, so while they might have a few sensible sounding aspirations the cold reality is they need to do all the governing, a job which is very messy and doesn't comply with "let's just do XXX, it'll be fine" plans.

If they could achieve even 10% of what they promise...........

.....Yes, some of it is rubbish, but some ideas are excellent.

[Cousin Jack]

The problem is we have had Tory and Labour govt, and Liberal on a coalition, and NOTHING good has changed. Thr only govts in my lifetime that have introduced real change have been Tory, Maggie sold off all the Council houses and pretty much created our current housing crisis. Others have sold off railways, water, etc and that was NOT a good change.

How long can we wait before letting someone with fresh ideas try to sort out the mess? Some of Reforms ideas are simplistic, some are difficult and will take decades, some may be plain silly, but all govts have some silly ideas. Just look at the last lot.

[irie]

Anybody who believes that what Labour will do in government will be any better than what the Conservatives have already done in government is deluding themselves, there is too much structural inertia and vested interest everywhere preventing change. As I see it the best chance of getting structural change is a hung parliament. Why? Because it is in the interests of any party with an overall majority to try to maintain the status quo. With a hung parliament there is at least a chance of change.

[Cousin Jack]

The problem with hung parliaments is that the fringe/extreme parties end up calling the shots. Just look at Israel, the tune is called by the extreme Zionists.

In the UK it is likely to be the SNP or the Greens calling the tune.

[mangocrazy]

Anybody who believes that what Labour will do in government will be any better than what the Conservatives have already done in government is deluding themselves, there is too much structural inertia and vested interest everywhere preventing change. As I see it the best chance of getting structural change is a hung parliament. Why? Because it is in the interests of any party with an overall majority to try to maintain the status quo. With a hung parliament there is at least a chance of change.

If there is a change of government there will be a change of priorities and of policies. The major problem is not these shadowy 'vested interests' but the godawful state the Tories have left the country in. The Tories have systematically undermined and underfunded all the institutions that make the country work and siphoned off billions into the pockets of their mates and themselves. When the answer to refugees arriving by boats is flights to Rwanda you know that most of the cabinet have been at the crack pipe.

[irie]

Anybody who believes that what Labour will do in government will be any better than what the Conservatives have already done in government is deluding themselves, there is too much structural inertia and vested interest everywhere preventing change. As I see it the best chance of getting structural change is a hung parliament. Why? Because it is in the interests of any party with an overall majority to try to maintain the status quo. With a hung parliament there is at least a chance of change.

If there is a change of government there will be a change of priorities and of policies. The major problem is not these shadowy 'vested interests' but the godawful state the Tories have left the country in. The Tories have systematically undermined and underfunded all the institutions that make the country work and siphoned off billions into the pockets of their mates and themselves. When the answer to refugees arriving by boats is flights to Rwanda you know that most of the cabinet have been at the crack pipe.

Funny how memories of Blair, Brown, Prescott, Hain, Straw et al. have morphed into a rose tinted view of history.

... the godawful state the Tories have left the country in

If Labour get in that's all we'll hear for the next one or two parliaments, it's always someone else's fault.

If the Conservatives get in the song will remain the same.

[mangocrazy]

Anybody who believes that what Labour will do in government will be any better than what the Conservatives have already done in government is deluding themselves, there is too much structural inertia and vested interest everywhere preventing change. As I see it the best chance of getting structural change is a hung parliament. Why? Because it is in the interests of any party with an overall majority to try to maintain the status quo. With a hung parliament there is at least a chance of change.

If there is a change of government there will be a change of priorities and of policies. The major problem is not these shadowy 'vested interests' but the godawful state the Tories have left the country in. The Tories have systematically undermined and underfunded all the institutions that make the country work and siphoned off billions into the pockets of their mates and themselves. When the answer to refugees arriving by boats is flights to Rwanda you know that most of the cabinet have been at the crack pipe.

Funny how memories of Blair, Brown, Prescott, Hain, Straw et al. have morphed into a rose tinted view of history.

NHS spending increased and waiting lists dropped significantly under their watch and the inequality gap narrowed, so I'll take that. There was nothing as batshit crazy as the Rwanda plan when they were in power either. The only (major) blot on the legacy was playing poodle to George Bush and assisting in the illegal and unwarranted invasion of Iraq.

[mangocrazy]

... the godawful state the Tories have left the country in

If Labour get in that's all we'll hear for the next one or two parliaments, it's always someone else's fault.

So fourteen years in control means that it's still not the Tories' problem?

Don't let the reality of the situation intrude into your world view, if only for consistency's sake.

[irie]

If there is a change of government there will be a change of priorities and of policies. The major problem is not these shadowy 'vested interests' but the godawful state the Tories have left the country in. The Tories have systematically undermined and underfunded all the institutions that make the country work and siphoned off billions into the pockets of their mates and themselves. When the answer to refugees arriving by boats is flights to Rwanda you know that most of the cabinet have been at the crack pipe.

Funny how memories of Blair, Brown, Prescott, Hain, Straw et al. have morphed into a rose tinted view of history.

NHS spending increased and waiting lists dropped significantly under their watch and the inequality gap narrowed, so I'll take that. There was nothing as batshit crazy as the Rwanda plan when they were in power either. The only (major) blot on the legacy was playing poodle to George Bush and assisting in the illegal and unwarranted invasion of Iraq.

Just for starters, how about PFI which is a disaster par excellence? Trouble is, people like you believe whatever is consistent with your confirmation bias. Unlike you, I'm apolitical.

[cheb]

How soon we forget that Brown ended boom and bust economics too.

Also at least Rwanda's warm, Blair wanted them rounded up and sent to some desolate island off Scotland: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 70463.html

[mangocrazy]

Just for starters, how about PFI which is a disaster par excellence? Trouble is, people like you believe whatever is consistent with your confirmation bias. Unlike you, I'm apolitical.

That's a particularly nasty little post, even for you. Belittling, self-righteous and patronising, all in one nasty little post.

And you are absolutely not apolitical. I agree that PFI was a disaster and we are still feeling the ramifications of it now. But on balance the Blair/Brown administrations got more decisions right than they got wrong. I can't say that for the current lot.

[irie]

Just for starters, how about PFI which is a disaster par excellence? Trouble is, people like you believe whatever is consistent with your confirmation bias. Unlike you, I'm apolitical.

That's a particularly nasty little post, even for you. Belittling, self-righteous and patronising, all in one nasty little post.

And you are absolutely not apolitical. I agree that PFI was a disaster and we are still feeling the ramifications of it now. But on balance the Blair/Brown administrations got more decisions right than they got wrong. I can't say that for the current lot.

The only (major) blot on the legacy was playing poodle to George Bush and assisting in the illegal and unwarranted invasion of Iraq.

Oh, so playing poodle to George Bush wasn't after all the "only (major) blot on the legacy". Now who'd have thunkit, just gotta love the rose tinted spectacles. Confirmation bias in extremis.

[mangocrazy]

Just for starters, how about PFI which is a disaster par excellence? Trouble is, people like you believe whatever is consistent with your confirmation bias. Unlike you, I'm apolitical.

That's a particularly nasty little post, even for you. Belittling, self-righteous and patronising, all in one nasty little post.

And you are absolutely not apolitical. I agree that PFI was a disaster and we are still feeling the ramifications of it now. But on balance the Blair/Brown administrations got more decisions right than they got wrong. I can't say that for the current lot.

The only (major) blot on the legacy was playing poodle to George Bush and assisting in the illegal and unwarranted invasion of Iraq.

Oh, so playing poodle to George Bush wasn't after all the "only (major) blot on the legacy". Now who'd have thunkit, just gotta love the rise tinted spectacles. Confirmation bias in extremis.

I forgot about PFI. Simples. Does that make you feel better? You do sound in need of a hug. You should change your forum handle to 'irascible'...