Reform/Farage - economic policies don’t add up.

Oh, of course he is claiming that the vetting agency has stitched him up. He did the same thing about the polling companies which projected that Reform would win few, if any, seats in Parliament.

That's how Farage works, perpetually claiming that it's not fair and the whole 'establishment' is against him. Poor soul, one of nature's victims..

Which is odd, when the 'establishment' appears to be obsessed with him, continually on TV and in the papers...

MaizieD. competence? That’s a good word. Almost forgot it existed.

Nigel Farage has threatened to report the vetting company hired by Reform UK to the police after it failed to run background checks on its candidates in time for the general election.

The Reform leader is pursuing legal action against Vetting.com, alleging it “stitched up” the right-wing party due to chair Colin Bloom’s past links to the Conservative Party.

But Vetting said it simply did not have time to scrutinise all 609 of Reform’s candidates before the snap summer poll.(Independent newspaper)

What did Donny Osmond sing 'One Bad Apple don't Spoil The Whole Bunch Girls' 🍎👍

Aren't Reform claiming that they didn't vet their candidates. They employed a vetting agency to do it but the agency didn't do any vetting?

That bodes well for their future competence😆

Farage’s contract is text book populism - pure snd simple. Straight out of Trumps little red book.

I'm sorry to say that I saw a marked similarity between the contemptuous view expressed about Reform voters in the post previous to Wwmk2's and Ian Gribbin's ludicrous view of women.

Yep- if this candidate is the chosen one, I wonder about the calibre of any rejected prospective ones. Reform are nothing if not consistent in scraping the barrel.

“No one forced Putin to invade Ukraine. He chose to do it because he wanted to restore Russia’s battered self-esteem after the USSR’s collapse. NATO expanded because ex-Soviet bloc countries feared Russia would come for them too, and were desperate for NATO to let them join.”

John Simpson - reflecting on Farage’s unpatriotic statement.

Farage is completely on the ball about Putin.
As for Farage’s take on the economy - it’s no better or worse than anyone else’s. All pretty amateur?

Dear God.

The BBC have been looking at the misogyny many of the Reform candidates have been displaying on various social media platforms.
Here is a taste of one of them.

“Ian Gribbin, the candidate for Bexhill and Battle, who we previously revealed had written that the UK should have stayed neutral in World War Two, posted a series of comments on the UnHerd website which included saying: “Right now all men pay for all women: we pay 80% of tax and you take out 80%. The fact you’re able to write on a technological device is all down to us.

“The cultural feminisation of the west is a disaster of epic proportions. We have elevated female characteristics – especially neuroticism, to the highest levels. Hysteria is now common place. The evidence from repeated psychologically testing is that women are appalling at taking criticism

Modern feminism belongs in the sewer of self hate from which it came: you say it yourself, you’re all jealous of the perceived freedoms of men.”

Farage's economic twaddle was exposed a week or so ago, an i'view with Nick Robinson, he claimed their policies had been developed with "several leading economic experts". . . ."who"?

Farage had a brief, er, um, before coming up with "Institute of Fiscal Studies" -- who get mentioned on every other news bulletin.

They when asked observed that the level of cuts required to pay for all the tax promises would decimate the public services that already have most people round the country moaning, as they've already been slashed to ribbons.

This WILL NOT MATTER to Farage fans, who are usually interviewed in or near a Wetherspoons, generally in an area that's suffered higher immigration levels, and if asked a question about why they like him, can just about manage an "ug" and possibly a dribble.

His latest ill-informed piffle, about Putin and Ukraine, has at least got all the other parties lined up to attack him.

I had a very interesting conversation with a Reform candidate today. He explained that the First Division of the Civil Service is taking the government to court over the Rwandan plans. So since when is a government beholden to the First Division of the Civil Service?
I was interested to hear that the Reform Party wants to change the House of Lords, and the way this country is governed. I hope that one day these improvements come about but I don’t know how soon change can happen.

Absolutely. I’m just astonished and dismayed they’ve got this far.
Their numbers don’t add up, Farage, as before, is a disruptive noise. He would be the worst kind of opposition as he would show disrespect to parliament.
I think remembering his behaviour in the European Parliament should be enough to warn everyone he will not be adding anything to sensible debates and will not be working on select committees, as he’s actually too lazy to do the job of government.

Well done Lyndie

It would be good if all voters did the same as you, rather than relying on the biased reporting and outright lies they read on social media or the right-wing media.

I have looked at the ideology of all the parties. Easy to Google. Then you can see where their journey is heading.

The method of entry may be 'illegal' but those who use it can't be designated illegal immigrants until it has been proven that they are by having their asylum claims processed and refused.

I'm not racist I don't vote reform but I sm still.against illegal immigrants getting free board and lodging and anything else they haven't paid for. Also harassing people for money, food etc. I'm all for legal immigrants from any country coming into the country to work.

None of the parties economic policies add up. There is no other way to sort the economics out than to raise taxes. Whether they are direct taxes or indirect taxes. It's all codswallop. What they say leading up to elections and what they do once in power is never the same. Then they come up with excuses and always blame someone or something else.

Same as the leaflet I received. I googled the name of the candidate. He actually lived locally and his cv was good. Unfortunately his alliance with Reform was not.

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202406/medium-460995-17190714578536860847340157338159.jpg https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202406/medium-796082-17190714840928255593766924076382.jpg

Finance aside, most party candidates have their own smiley face somewhere on their promotional leaflets, don't they? This is the Reform UK leaflet that dropped through my door a couple of days ago:
Hint... The candidate's name is in small print at the top of the page. Two posturing men have their pictures but no picture of the female candidate. This suggests something quite significant to me about Reform UK and I won't be voting for them!

MaizieD I think that for too long people have believed Thatcher's dictat and it is difficult for them to accept that she could have been wrong when she likened governing to house keeping.

Most of us, with more money in our pockets do like to spend occasionally, not just save.

Dinahmo how did you guess!

Dinahmo

BevSec

Readymeals, it will be a lot more tax and will it be spent on improvements in services etc?

If it isn't spent on those things, what do you think it will be spent on? Or will it be kept in a special pot to benefit a small number of people? Higher salaries, bonuses and pension schemes for MPs perhaps?

What I am trying to say is that government spends first, then taxes to control inflation.

It stands to reason that government spending will increase tax receipts because there will be more people in receipt of what the government spends, either directly paid (like public sector workers) or indirectly by either running a business that the government purchases goods and services from, or being employed by such a business, or providing goods and services to the people with the extra money they have been paid, or who have been employed as a result of increased government spending.

I'm wondering if this is too complex for people to understand?

There is no need for the government to tax people any extra.

BevSec

Readymeals, it will be a lot more tax and will it be spent on improvements in services etc?

If it isn't spent on those things, what do you think it will be spent on? Or will it be kept in a special pot to benefit a small number of people? Higher salaries, bonuses and pension schemes for MPs perhaps?