Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
- 1.9K All Categories
- 1 Site Stuff
- 31 Admin (FAQs, rules, queries etc.)
- The Boleyn Arms
- 51 General Chatter
- 9 Member info & Family Album
- 3 Radio Llama (music videos)
- 567 Fun & Games
- 183 BA Predictor Threads
- 6 Fantasy Football
- 52 Word Games
- 4 Quizzes
- 2 Pun Threads
- 360 Magic Minutes
- 3 Other Fun & Games
- 144 Current West Ham
- 214 Men's First Team
- 4 Women's Team
- 13 PL2 & Academy
- 36 Management & Board
- 16 Stadium & Training Ground
- 33 West Ham Miscellaneous
- West Ham Matches
- 468 Match Threads
- 138 MOTM
- 12 West Ham Nostalgia
- 37 Former Players and Staff
- 5 Past Games & Glories
- 43 Transfers
- 51 Transfer Speculation
- 88 Completed Transfers
- 59 Internationals
- 52 Men's Internationals
- 5 Women's Internationals
- 2 Youth Internationals
- 141 Football Chatter
- 43 Football Chatter
- 289 Other Teams & Matches
- 27 Other Players & Staff
Comments
My take on him would be as follows.
He came to power at a time when populist politics had diminished our standing in the world and made trading with our nearest trade partners in Europe more difficult, all due to a nonsensical populist Brexit based upon an idea of UK strength and exceptionalism that had no basis in reality, but was sold to a portion of the population as viable and beneficial. This was Johnson. Then markets which are hugely important when you have as much debt as we have had begun to get concerned due to Truss making no fiscal sense whatsoever.
So Starmer's big problem is it's now very difficult to generate growth but he can't spend without growth or cuts. People want better services and way of life but we can't spend without being able to show where the money will come from.
He has decided to try and make cuts where least hurting those in most need and generate growth slowly but in the right direction, all whilst reassuring markets he can be trusted. In doing so he has made some political mistakes such as winter fuel allowance, something that makes sense as it was a non means tested benefit but is politically an own goal. He has made a few other needless political mistakes in my view but nothing major. Globally he has instilled a trust in his sincerity, especially in Europe and did a great job of schmoozing Trump until it became impossible not to stand against him over this current war.
Growth is currently the best in the G7
Immigration which shot up after Brexit now falling
illegal immigration falling
Trust with European partners slowly being restored
I think he lacks political instinct and charisma but is doing a good job in hugely difficult circumstances, and most of all may be one of the last public servant politicians we get to see.
That's starmer, not you Jay
U turns don't automatically represent a failing of a leader or leadership in my view, which U turns have you found make you doubt his ability Expat?
That is all
We will cut the benefits bill. Again the backbenchers scream and what do we get, a U turn.
There have been so many changes in policy from his lot I've forgotten most of them.
IMO he reminds me of our own sullivan, and will do anything to cling on to power.
The mistake was that many pensioners may not only have their state pension and be on supplementary benefit ( which was his first cut off), but still be in need. I can't recall the cut off it landed on eventually but I recall saying as soon as that policy was announced that it's a bad policy unless the cut off is much higher at maybe 30k threshold. It was an obvious flaw in the policy and shouldn't have needed back benchers to draw attention to it but it was good that it was finally spotted and rectified.
Altering course and making a u turn is really a show of flexibility, not much different to a football manager changing things up at half time, but the change or turn needs to make sense and I think the winter fuel U turn made sense. It would have been very bad to not alter it's course. Thatcher was famous for saying 'this lady's not for turning' but she would have benefitted from more flexibility. the poll tax bought her down for a similar reason, an ill thought through policy that needed revisiting, but she prided herself on never changing her mind.
To return to the football analogy/metaphor? ( not sure which it is) if manager starts 4-4-2 and it's not working no one says he should see it through as that's his decision ! we want them to be able to change their mind and make changes to try and get the best outcome.
Sadly his judgement regarding Mandleson was awful.
He's a law man,
A man who refers to the books for guidance on what happened in past cases,
When he has to make a decision himself he falls down on the job more often than not.
Still hasn't managed to get the boats to do u turns in the channel has he, now that's a political grenade for me to be castigated over!
How many clubs might make a claim against City if they’re found guilty and have a big points deduction. Not sure if it was just the one season or multiple seasons the 115 offences occurred.
There weren't any boats before Brexit and we could send illegal immigrants back to France so it's yet another problem created by the Tories that Starmer has inherited
I didn't like Starmer before he was elected Labour leader, I liked him even less after he was elected Labour leader and u-turned on every pledge he'd made before he was elected leader and I certainly don't like him now he's Prime Minister
But its still better than the Tories
There are only boats now because a) the French don’t want them and b) they get free handouts here and c) they know we will not deport them unless we pay them to go.
It was due to be replaced but it and any replacement failed to apply between ourselves and France once Brexit happened. France could just let them set sail and leave it to us, which is what they did.
Would you want to change places with them?
But when I see those people, some with babes in arms, wading out waist high to try to get on an already crammed dingy to take a twenty mile trip across the channel to what they hope is a better life,
I thank my lucky stars that for all the ups and downs of navigating our way through life so far, none of my family or I were ever in such an awful situation position as to even have to contemplate such a dangerous endeavor.
Yes, some are on the make,
Some are obviously chancing their arm,
Some are probably undesirable,
But some are undoubtedly totally desperate.
Identifying to which group each one belongs and acting accordingly is the test for the current system.
Now Crusty, get behind the sofa. I agree that it's better than the Tories,
But I do wonder what they were doing during the fourteen years of Tory rule that they keep referring to,
Current events would point to them being down the Dog And Duck playing darts for most of the time.
It's a similar shift originating from the technological revolution which we are currently in as happened during the industrial revolution. Something new will emerge but it could look very Brave new world and dystopian.
A speech from Shakespeare performed by Sir Ian Mckellen. It was 400 years ago yet as relevant today.
Sir Thomas More tells the story of More’s career as a public official. Its central irony is More’s dedication to the King – indeed, his assertion of the necessity of obedience to Henry VIII – and the deadly consequence to More when he was unable to obey Henry in the “King’s great matter.”
The play begins on May 1, 1517, known to history as Evil May Day, when Londoners rose up against immigrants.
A character grouses about the strangers: “Our country is a great eating country; ergo, they eat more in our country than they do in their own.” Another joins in: “Trash, trash; they breed sore eyes, and tis enough to infect the city with the palsey.”
A riot is brewing until. . .Enter Thomas More, Sheriff of London. “Peace! Peace,” the rabble cry. They’ll listen to him. In a speech very much like Marc Antony’s in Julius Caesar, More warns, woos, and sways them:
Grant them [the immigrants] removed, and grant that this your noise
Hath chid down all the majesty of England;
Imagine that you see the wretched strangers,
Their babies at their backs and their poor luggage,
Plodding to th’ ports and costs for transportation,
And that you sit as kings in your desires,
Authority quite silent by your brawl,
And you in ruff of your opinions clothed;
What had you got? I’ll tell you: you had taught
How insolence and strong hand should prevail,
How order should be quelled; and by this pattern
Not one of you should live an aged man,
For other ruffians, as their fancies wrought,
With self same hand, self reasons, and self right,
Would shark on you, and men like ravenous fishes
Would feed on one another.
The crowd acknowledges the truth of More’s words. One says: “We’ll be ruled by you, Master More, if you’ll stand our friend to procure our pardon.”
Nay, certainly you are;
For to the king God hath his office lent
Of dread, of justice, power and command,
Hath bid him rule, and willed you to obey;
And, to add ampler majesty to this,
He hath not only lent the king his figure,
His throne and sword, but given him his own name,
Calls him a god on earth. What do you, then,
Rising gainst him that God himself installs,
But rise against God?
Sr. Thomas now turns to the immigrants’ plight and how the chastened and now trembling rabble might understand it.
Say now the king
(As he is clement, if th’ offender mourn)
Should so much come to short of your great trespass
As but to banish you, whither would you go?
What country, by the nature of your error,
Should give you harbor? go you to France or Flanders,
To any German province, to Spain or Portugal,
Nay, any where that not adheres to England,—
Why, you must needs be strangers: would you be pleased
To find a nation of such barbarous temper,
That, breaking out in hideous violence,
Would not afford you an abode on earth,
Whet their detested knives against your throats,
Spurn you like dogs, and like as if that God
Owed not nor made not you, nor that the claimants
Were not all appropriate to your comforts,
But chartered unto them, what would you think
To be thus used? this is the strangers case;
And this your mountanish inhumanity.
Immigration reform in the United States is essential. I believe there is nothing un-Christian about either national sovereignty or entry visas. But America’s current view of immigrants borders on xenophobia and is a mountanish inhumanity that needs to end.