egg

There's a lot of smoke here so there could well be something in it. It's unsurprising that the Romanian PM would deny doing as he's told.

He's constantly moaning about labours broken promises, but champions the cause of a party who's financial policies are so mental they will have to be broken. There's a logic there which is illogical.

Bladder

First you jumped on the 'equivalence'' bandwagon, now the 'child like '. You're better than that. Possibly. You've talked up reform, ergo you're a supporter. The economic policies of a political party affect us all every day if they are elected. Why you'd vote for that if you don't want it only you know.

If you're a reform supporter, it follows that you support their program. If you're not a reform supporter, I've lost track of who/what you support. Apart from waspi 'birds'.

Amen to that. We want equality. But we don't.

Angela Rayner gave her support in 2019. 6 years ago. The world has changed a wee but since then, and our economy has slumped. 6 years ago my missus wanted us to retire by now and enjoy life more. I supported that. 6 years on we can't afford to, so we won't. Things change, so decisions need to change accordingly. That's life.

As is said, they supported the campaign. What did they pledge to do as a government? Regardless, we can't afford to address the issue.

Was the waspi support not more implied by supporting the campaign, rather than a pledge or commitment? I agree with the sentiment though.

I'll continue the theme. That is quite restrained from you Whelk.

Let's get this straight. You're saying that it's "child like" to believe that a ruling party is being sensible rowing backwards on a pledge when they deem it unaffordable? Feck me.

I've never voted Labour mate. Not my party. The rest is too stupid to acknowledge.

Just picking up on this Duck. You criticise Labour for not delivering on things that will have cost a lot of money. You then highlight that spending will have to be cut, which suggests that you acknowledge that we're overspending. No wonder you're loving reform's "spend more and tax less approach". Madness.

How much of that nonsense reform manifesto could they have delivered? The answer is to nex to none. How many promises did the Tories break? You could argue that labour have broken promises. Or, more sensibly, you could argue that they've taken sensible courses by rowing backwards where necessary. As a non labour man, it's obvious where you'll go with that.

Reform voters seem mostly to be Tory voters with even more fanciful expectations, and a lesser grip on reality.

We fundamentally disagree on this Whitey. The fuel allowance was free money. Nobody, absolutely nobody, worked and contributed on the promise of an annual lump of cash, regardless of need. They latterly got it, but they never contributed expecting it. To suggest otherwise is dishonest. Anyone who needs state help is needy. It's not offensive to say that. Anyone who feels an entitlement to it, but does not need it, is being greedy. You can feel otherwise, and as I say, we fundamentally disagree. UK pensions are a separate issue, but I don't accept that the fuel allowance was a state pension bolt on as such. I'd love the state pension to be higher, but my retirement planning is by responsibility, and I'm a realist and acknowledge that what I'd like isn't how it works. Simply, we're skint, and cannot afford to give bigger pensions, and/or fuel allowances to every person of retirement age. As for my mum, I'm delighted that she's financially secure enough to be doing road trips and living her best life. She deserves it. That financial security means that she does not need state support that this country cannot afford and quite rightly are spending where it's actually needed. Indeed, had she had her fuel allowance this year it may well paid for a day out at Dollywood - nobody is persuading me that's a good use of my taxes.

He could have got European attention without empowering Putin.

I agree re complacency. Reliance on the US for so long was daft, ditto reliance on Russia for gas. Europe needed a wake up call and Donny has done that, but done it in a ridiculous way. The GDP comparison point is a bit misleading and compares apples with cabbages. Our GDP buys us overpriced military gear from the US with a shit pound. It doesn't go as far as it should or once did. We also don't produce much. Russia's cash stretches so much further buying from North Korea and god knows where, and they have the ability to produce much more than us, and probably the rest of Europe.

I mean that not every old Doris needs, or should feel entitled to, free cash every year. I have many elderly neighbours. Not one of them needs the fuel allowance. My mum messaged me moaning about it when she was in the States on holiday. These people don't need free money. Stupid of labour to promise to keep it, but fair play to them for sifting the needy from the greedy.

Indeed, my thoughts entirely. I'm not sure I understand LD' point re foreign aid. It doesn't matter that other parties may have done that, the fact is that Starmer has reacted quickly and sensibly in the light of Donny's lunacy. It'll be interesting how they navigate the financial impact of NI increases. Issues galore will unfold there.

It does need 10 years, and about another 100bn of extra tax/less spending. It can't magic the latter though, hence all they can do is move the balls around in the least shit way possible. Labour supporters mostly say that they're doing their best. Tory and Reform supporters seem to have forgotten the last 14 years. Everyone else seems to realise you can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear, although they could have made a better stab at it than they have to date.

As I've said, they've had a shocker, but it still doesn't alter the relevance of them having inherited a shit show. That said, I'm glad they've limited fuel payments to just those who need it, found a way to increase defence spending, not given in to the waspi's. Sure, they've lost trust and confidence by eventually coming it their senses, but they've royally messed up with the farmer's, ditto NI, and although their PR is atrocious and the behaviour of some MP's is poor, let's not pretend it's anywhere near as bad as the swathes of people getting uber wealthy on the back of Tory deals and their general shadiness.

Realistically, what did you expect from them?

Yep!! Labours NI and farmers decisions look almost sane in comparison. Labour and Juric may have inherited shit shows, but by Christ they've both made the worst of bad hands.

By that logic, Juric could have come in, inherited years of abject failure, and got us into the top 4. It hasn't happened because it's an impossible ask. Labour are similarly hampered. I'm not a labour man and I agree they've had a shocker, but, what they inherited is and always be relevant.