• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Keir Starmer at it again..

Indirectly he's correct when it comes to 21st century immigration. Without it you don't have Farage or Brexit, without Brexit you don't have the Johnson and post Johnson Conservative government. I appreciate that's not the message though.
They'd have found something else to scapegoat, probably the sick, unemployed and elderly
 
While I agree with the broad thrust of that, it does mean we need to pay more taxes.

When the welfare state was established you would start work at 16, work for 50 years and then die ten years later. 5 years of work to fund each year of retirement.

Nowadays its more typical to start work at 21, retire at 65 and live for 20 years - 2.2 years of work for each year of retirement.

So we can raise the retirement age - and we've seen the shitshow that would cause - or we increase taxes, which is never popular.
Just to add to this.... there are incredible numbers of accountants in the country and so many of them specialize in helping companies to avoid and evade paying tax. It's quite evident that those who can simply do not pay much tax while those of us who are taxed at source have no choice but pay 100%. Tory governments have been passing tax laws with multiple loopholes and 'advantages' for decades. In that time they have also reduced the number of tax inspectors and thoroughly encouraged tax evasion and avoidance through the MSM. It's all about right wing freedoms and reducing the state.
Two inevitable questions:
Who and which organisations are actually paying anywhere near their full tax responsibility?
Who and which organisations are net takers of money from the state?
No wonder we are in a mess.
 
Last edited:
Just to add to this.... there are incredible numbers of accountants in the country and so many of them specialize in helping companies to avoid and evade paying tax. It's quite evident that those who can simply do not pay much tax while those of us who are taxed at source have no choice but pay 100%. Tory governments have been passing tax laws with multiple loopholes and 'advantages' for decades. In that time they have also reduced the number of tax inspectors and thoroughly encouraged tax evasion and avoidance through the MSM. It's all about right wing freedoms and reducing the state.
Two inevitable questions:
Who and which organisations are actually paying anywhere near their full tax responsibility?
Who and which organisations are net takers of money from the state?
No wonder we are in a mess.
I would guess you could find a strong correlation by seeing who the donors are to the Torys (and labour now unfortunately)
 
Many of them in the North voted Labour less than a year ago though or at least their areas returned Labour MPs and in Runcorn there is a like for like comparison. I don't agree with yesterday's statement however neither do I agree that he can afford to just write off those voters.
 
Last edited:
Many of them in the North voted Labour less than a year ago though or at least their areas returned Labour MPs and in Runcorn there is a like for like comparison. I don't agree with yesterday's statement however neither do I agree that he can afford to just write off those voters.
Many will have voted with the "anyone other than the Tories" mantra.
 
Many will have voted with the "anyone other than the Tories" mantra.
Reform took 4 times the number of Labour council seats than all the other parties combined. That's not a switching from the Tories stat. Neither is overturning a 15k majority in Runcorn. If he doesn't regain that electorate he'll be destroyed at the next election.
 
Reform took 4 times the number of Labour council seats than all the other parties combined. That's not a switching from the Tories stat
In the GE I meant?

People voted GTTO in the GE, they've since switched to Reform in many cases. As Reform gather more support they'll be seen as genuine majority government option in the next GE. Starmer needs to be an opposition, not a watered down version of them, where will support for that come from? No one wants neither one or the other.
 
Many of them in the North voted Labour less than a year ago though or at least their areas returned Labour MPs and in Runcorn there is a like for like comparison. I don't agree with yesterday's statement however neither do I agree that he can afford to just write off those voters.
Well if they voted for Labour, they would be expecting the party to deliver on their manifesto at least. If they were of the Reform persuasion I would have expected them to have voted Reform at the GE.

The ones that are becoming disillusioned with the mainstream parties inabilities ti deliver on their promises will be attracted to Reform. Becoming ReformLite isn't the solution.
 
Back
Top