Is the country ready for a Farage government?

PaynesGrey
Don’t hold back, tell us what you really think. 😂

Primrose53

Casdon

Starmer’s speech has admirably served its purpose I think, which was to rally the Labour troops and rattle Reform. Of course people who don’t want him as PM and don’t like Labour didn’t like it - but that is a mark of its success as a speech. Ed Davey’s was equally powerful. I’m looking forward to hearing Kemi Badenoch next week, I really hope she can do similar.

It was nothing like you describe. Starmer is obsessed with Farage and Reform. He is running (or trundling) scared.

He is the most unpopular PM for years and he knows it.

He is the most unpopular PM for years and he knows it.

I think that's somewhat of an exaggeration, Primrose!
Or have you forgotten Ms Truss?

He was asked last week whether those who work - but get additional income from assets such as shares or property - would count as working people.

I remember when I was a "working person" and had free shares in Abbey National Building Society.
Obviously my job working for the Government counted for nothing!
😁
Really, for an ex-DPP, I'd have thought he would be more careful about his choice of words.

He's still better than the alternative, before I get jumped on.

They "wouldn't come within my definition," he said.

That vital second part of the quote did not post.

I watch Richard Murphy's videos. Is he wrong when says that Reform want to destroy the UK economy and outsource to crypto?

I have been reading Richard's blog daily for the last 10 years. I wasn't defending Truss, as such, just pointing out that the market panic really wasn't her fault. Yes, it did affect the pension funds.

This is an extract from one of a number of posts he posted referring to the Truss fiasco:

So, what about 2022 and the Truss “mini-budget”? That is the inevitable response to such suggestions these days. My suggestion is that a bond market sell-off occurred after Kwasi Kwarteng announced his tax-cutting budget in 2022, for which he provided no funding details. However, it is essential to understand what actually happened.

The prevailing media narrative was that markets simply “lost confidence” in the government's fiscal numbers. But that is not the whole story. What really tipped markets into crisis was that the Bank of England's announcement the day before Kwarteng spoke that it was going to start proactive quantitative tightening, or, in other words, it was going to begin proactively selling off government bonds it already held as a result of acquisitions after the global financial crisis and during the Covid period.

That decision to flood the market with gilts at exactly the moment the government implicitly also announced a significant increase in bond issuance as a consequence of the tax cuts it was planning created a perfect storm. Yields rose sharply. Pension funds, which had used complex leveraged strategies tied to gilt yields, suddenly faced margin calls they could not meet. A wave of insolvencies was threatened in the UK pension sector.

The whole (long) post is here:

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2025/09/03/mmt-and-rules-of-government-borrowing/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

With what I know of MMT and the writings of heterodox economists it makes good sense to me.

Interestingly, I first saw the proposal that the BoE was responsible for the market panic written by a tory peer😆

I don't approve of Reform at all. The only economic proposal that I think makes a modicum sense is releasing more spending power into the economy by raising the tax threshold for low earners, BUT it has to be accompanied by much more taxation of corporations and the wealthy individuals who are sucking up most of our national wealth. Of course, Reform propose to cut their taxes. Idiots...

Doodledog

Allira

‘Working people’ is shorthand for ‘taxpayer’ or ‘contributor’ - those who are supporting everyone else. The people who get up every morning and go to work whilst others choose not to, to make profits for employers (who often use taxpayers’ money to top up low wages) so they can pay rent to those with more than one house, and bills to make profits for shareholders. Retired working people are included in that, as I see it.

We are not working. We are retired. We pay tax.

Same here. Not sure of your point.

People who work (or who made their living by working until they retired) are 'working people' in the sense that the term is currently being used, I think.

I thought my point was obvious.

We are not people who get up every morning and go to work.

Not for a long time.

Oreo

Doodledog

What are the 🤣 emojis adding? According to the description they mean 'rolling about on the floor laughing'. I can't see anything in this debate that is likely to make anyone do that, so assume that they are just there to be rude, and ridicule others. Please correct me if I'm wrong, as I don't want to think that of anyone wrongly.

Just about everyone on this forum uses emojis so picking up another poster about it really is strange.As you know the 🤣means someone thinks it’s funny so why not use it.
This thread is about politics and not a serious subject such as abuse or tragedy. It’s being the thread police otherwise.

Thread police? That's ironic 🤣🤣

I found myself rolling on the floor laughing at that. There are numerous emojis that show smiling faces, and they all mean different things, from a smile that shows a comment is meant kindly to a 'rolling on the floor laughing' one, which is usually understood to signify extreme amusement - laughing at rather than with people (as you know?).

For the tape - I was asking why it was being used in this case, in case I was being judgemental by thinking it was inappropriate, not 'policing' anything.

Allira

Primrose53

Casdon

Starmer’s speech has admirably served its purpose I think, which was to rally the Labour troops and rattle Reform. Of course people who don’t want him as PM and don’t like Labour didn’t like it - but that is a mark of its success as a speech. Ed Davey’s was equally powerful. I’m looking forward to hearing Kemi Badenoch next week, I really hope she can do similar.

It was nothing like you describe. Starmer is obsessed with Farage and Reform. He is running (or trundling) scared.

He is the most unpopular PM for years and he knows it.

He is the most unpopular PM for years and he knows it.

I think that's somewhat of an exaggeration, Primrose!
Or have you forgotten Ms Truss?

IPSOS Poll says he is!

edition.cnn.com/2025/09/30/uk/keir-starmer-labour-party-conference-intl

Primrose53

Casdon

Starmer’s speech has admirably served its purpose I think, which was to rally the Labour troops and rattle Reform. Of course people who don’t want him as PM and don’t like Labour didn’t like it - but that is a mark of its success as a speech. Ed Davey’s was equally powerful. I’m looking forward to hearing Kemi Badenoch next week, I really hope she can do similar.

It was nothing like you describe. Starmer is obsessed with Farage and Reform. He is running (or trundling) scared.

He is the most unpopular PM for years and he knows it.

The reviews in the media do not concur with your interpretation of how the speech was received Primrose53. Of course, they picked up what he said about Farage and Reform which made that the headline, but you can’t have listened to the whole speech if you think that was the main focus, because it was not, it was about rallying the Labour Party to fight together for a fairer society.

According to statistics, and I have no idea who compiled them,but I read them in a newspaper so they must be true, Starmer is the most unpopular Prime Minister ever, even more so than Edward Heath.

Starmer says he is going to look to see how international law is being used by human rights lawyers.
I know he’s been involved in a few issues lately but surely to god this thought must have crossed his mind.
Added to that he was DPP for some years so surely there are numerous lawyers/ barristers he could call on.

But the point is, Casdon, whatever the main point of Starmer's speech was he did not present it convincingly enough to make an impact.
This speech will be remembered by its news headlines because he has gone beyond the boundaries of what is regarded as being acceptable when speaking of an opponent.
Makes good copy.

A lawyer, not a leader.

Make an impact on who, eazybee? The party conference is for Labour party members, it’s whether he has convinced them that he can lead the party that counts for his personal future, not public opinion.

StripeyGran

Leader? He's not my leader?

I have no idea what you are talking about.

All these people with the swelling of patriotic feelings in their proud bosoms, what did they do before the flag thing? Did they just quietly hum Vera Lynn to themselves or what? What are they proud of?
Food banks, child poverty,pot holes, football...nobody knows.

Proud of

People being nice to each other - on the whole.
Our past - to a certain extent
Our legal system - on the whole
Some may say NHS
Used to be, if work hard, can improve your life
Less crime than so many other countries
Tv is said to be good by people who come here
Morals - on the whole
Believing in God - more than many other countries
Sense of values
National treasures
National houses
British pubs
Cleanliness- though not as good as some countries
Less bad manners
We queue well apparently
Royal family - not great at times obviously
Edication - bettter than some countries
Green spaces

Oh I could go on.

A sense of feeling safe - most areas

And quite frankly this is what bothers me a bit about well illegal immigrants.
Would they fight for this Country?
Or against it?

And what about you StripeyGran.

I once had a talk with someone famous on another forum. Who was not born here.
I asked her if she would let or want her son fighting for this Country.
She said no.

petra

Starmer says he is going to look to see how international law is being used by human rights lawyers.
I know he’s been involved in a few issues lately but surely to god this thought must have crossed his mind.
Added to that he was DPP for some years so surely there are numerous lawyers/ barristers he could call on.

He must be getting desperate if he now feels he needs to look at things he himself used to be involved in.

I cant see him still being PM past next Summer.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/4795129-what-do-you-like-about-the-uk

Thank you, Maizie. So my follow up questions are these and I apologize in advance if they seem naive.

If:

The prevailing media narrative was that markets simply “lost confidence” in the government's fiscal numbers. But that is not the whole story. What really tipped markets into crisis was that the Bank of England's announcement the day before Kwarteng spoke that it was going to start proactive quantitative tightening, or, in other words, it was going to begin proactively selling off government bonds it already held as a result of acquisitions after the global financial crisis and during the Covid period.

The date of the Budget is not a secret. The tax cuts had been announced ahead of the day.

1. Why did the BoE chose the day before th Budget to start QT? It seems deliberate.

2. Why did Kwarteng not react to that and change tack?


The argument about Reform’s proposed tax cuts is that they would benefit poor households the least, as you already know:

IPPR data:

www.ippr.org/media-office/analysis-of-reforms-tax-plans

Increase in the tax-free allowance:

Current allowance: £12,570
Proposed allowance: £20,000
Cost for 2024-25: £41bn
Poorest 20 per cent of households: An increase of £380 in average annual household disposable income
Richest 20 per cent of households: An increase of £2400 in average annual household disposable income
Distribution of benefits: 32 per cent of the tax break goes to the richest 20 per cent of households

Increase in the higher income tax threshold:

Current threshold: £50,270
Proposed threshold: £70,000
Cost for 2024-25: £18bn
Poorest 20 per cent of households: An increase of just £17 in average annual household disposable income
Richest 20 per cent of households: An increase of £2700 in average annual disposable income
Distribution of benefits: 80 per cent of the tax break goes to the richest 20 per cent of households

£60 billion on income tax cuts sounds generous but it will make little difference to the poorest households. The poorest 20% of households would be just £1 a day better off, while the richest would be £14 day better off. It isn't going to simulate a spending spree in the poorest and the richest will probably just squirrel it away.

1. Why did the BoE chose the day before th Budget to start QT? It seems deliberate.

I have no idea.

But it has been pursuing QT, quite unnecessarily for some time. The bonds could well have sat with them until maturity at no detriment to the nation's finances.

Apparently, the UK is the only country that is doing it. All the others which carried out QA are just hanging onto the bonds. The really annoying thing is that the BoE are selling them at a loss. As it was the BoE that created the money to buy them in the first place it seems really weird.

I note the figures you quote, but the Reform plan is to cut taxation for the wealthy and corporations, too. Of course the wealthy will win out in that situation. If they were more heavily taxed, that is, if their tax bill was actually progressive, making the over all percentage they paid equal to the percentage currently paid by the remaining 'percentiles' they would lose the estimated advantage.

£60 billion on income tax cuts sounds generous but it will make little difference to the poorest households. The poorest 20% of households would be just £1 a day better off,

I'm in my mid 70s. I have seen an awful lot of budget days. I have read plenty of analyses the next day telling me that the projected increase in the threshold, or projected tax cuts are going to make me, oooh, say £150 a year better off. Wow!

£365 pa sounds pretty good in comparison...

You do have to consider what the over all effect on the economy of £60 billion 'would be if' it was going to end up in the hands of the poorer people, who would most definitely spend it into the economy. Even half of that would be pretty useful.

Unlike the wealthy, who have a well documented 'marginal propensity to spend'. They'd just speculate with the extra in order for it to grow more money for themselves. They rarely 'invest' in anything productive.

I did say that the 'only' bit of the policy I thought had a 'modicum' of sense was raising the tax thresh hold for the poor. The rest is nonsense, as you demonstrate. The upper thresholds have to stay where they are. Perhaps with an extra tax rate for the super wealthy, who could pay a bit more than 45%...

Primrose53

Allira

Primrose53

Casdon

Starmer’s speech has admirably served its purpose I think, which was to rally the Labour troops and rattle Reform. Of course people who don’t want him as PM and don’t like Labour didn’t like it - but that is a mark of its success as a speech. Ed Davey’s was equally powerful. I’m looking forward to hearing Kemi Badenoch next week, I really hope she can do similar.

It was nothing like you describe. Starmer is obsessed with Farage and Reform. He is running (or trundling) scared.

He is the most unpopular PM for years and he knows it.

He is the most unpopular PM for years and he knows it.

I think that's somewhat of an exaggeration, Primrose!
Or have you forgotten Ms Truss?

IPSOS Poll says he is!

edition.cnn.com/2025/09/30/uk/keir-starmer-labour-party-conference-intl

That isnot the ipsos poll saying he is. It's a CNN view of an Ipsos poll.

Doodledog

Oreo

Doodledog

What are the 🤣 emojis adding? According to the description they mean 'rolling about on the floor laughing'. I can't see anything in this debate that is likely to make anyone do that, so assume that they are just there to be rude, and ridicule others. Please correct me if I'm wrong, as I don't want to think that of anyone wrongly.

Just about everyone on this forum uses emojis so picking up another poster about it really is strange.As you know the 🤣means someone thinks it’s funny so why not use it.
This thread is about politics and not a serious subject such as abuse or tragedy. It’s being the thread police otherwise.

Thread police? That's ironic 🤣🤣

I found myself rolling on the floor laughing at that. There are numerous emojis that show smiling faces, and they all mean different things, from a smile that shows a comment is meant kindly to a 'rolling on the floor laughing' one, which is usually understood to signify extreme amusement - laughing at rather than with people (as you know?).

For the tape - I was asking why it was being used in this case, in case I was being judgemental by thinking it was inappropriate, not 'policing' anything.

Well there you go, you’ve just proved my point as you’re using laughing emojis now.As am I 😂😂
It’s not up to you to decide what’s inappropriate btw.

And what about you StripeyGran

I'm not sure what you are asking?

I would have liked to have been European. I have no feelings of patriotism, never have. I will be happy if there is no need to call up young men to fight.

On Keir Starmer I’ve always thought he was the best of a poor bunch to be leader of the opposition but worried he wasn’t really PM material, not that many of them are anyway.
A decent man in the wrong profession.

You are European Stripeygran as we all are on the Continent of Europe.

StripeyGran

*And what about you StripeyGran*

I'm not sure what you are asking?

I would have liked to have been European. I have no feelings of patriotism, never have. I will be happy if there is no need to call up young men to fight.

You would not fight for the Country. As I suspected.

DaisyAnneReturns

Primrose53

Allira

Primrose53

Casdon

Starmer’s speech has admirably served its purpose I think, which was to rally the Labour troops and rattle Reform. Of course people who don’t want him as PM and don’t like Labour didn’t like it - but that is a mark of its success as a speech. Ed Davey’s was equally powerful. I’m looking forward to hearing Kemi Badenoch next week, I really hope she can do similar.

It was nothing like you describe. Starmer is obsessed with Farage and Reform. He is running (or trundling) scared.

He is the most unpopular PM for years and he knows it.

He is the most unpopular PM for years and he knows it.

I think that's somewhat of an exaggeration, Primrose!
Or have you forgotten Ms Truss?

IPSOS Poll says he is!

edition.cnn.com/2025/09/30/uk/keir-starmer-labour-party-conference-intl

That isnot the ipsos poll saying he is. It's a CNN view of an Ipsos poll.

I suggest you read paragraph 2 again. They are REPORTING on the IPSOS poll not giving their view.

Just 13% were satisfied with Starmer as PM, 79% were unsatisfied with him.