Sticking to tough spending rules in order to deliver economic stability
Code for austerity, some arbitrary cap on fiscal deficit.
Setting up Great British Energy, a publicly owned clean power energy company
How could that be done if spending rules are ‘tough’? By raising taxes on the rich? I highly doubt that even with the higher taxes, the Government would be able to raise enough revenues to ‘fund’ a green transition.
Cutting NHS waiting lists by providing 40,000 more appointments each week - funded by tackling tax avoidance and non-dom loopholes.
NHS would require a shit ton more spending than whatever could be raised by tackling tax avoidance. Decades of austerity has to be compensated for.
Launching a border security command to stop the gangs arranging small boat crossings
Hitler particles detected. How will the security command be paid for? NHS has to be funded by ‘tackling tax avoidance’ but funds for border security never need to be ‘raised’.
Providing more neighbourhood police officers to reduce antisocial behaviour and introduced new penalties for offenders
What is antisocial behaviour? Loitering? Also how are revenues for police officers raised? Every bit of welfare has to be ‘paid for’ by raising taxes or whatever but there is no mention of how police officer salaries would be paid for.
Recruiting 6,500 teachers, paid for through ending tax breaks for private schools.
Its fascinating how he can’t just say ‘Recruiting 6,500 teachers’, he has to ‘pay for it’ with something else. Why do private schools exist in the first place?
This is so bad, Starmer is really showing that he is not different from the Tories.
There’s two reasons why there is a lack of teachers/doctors/nurses/police, and none of them seem to want to acknowledge this…stress, and pay. Solve the pay problem and you’ll solve the other. But no politician seems to want to acknowledge this.
While non of these promises seem very impressive. I will respond to a few of your comments.
Code for austerity, some arbitrary cap on fiscal deficit.
Agree fully
How could that be done if spending rules are ‘tough’? By raising taxes on the rich? I highly doubt that even with the higher taxes, the Government would be able to raise enough revenues to ‘fund’ a green transition.
He is talking about a company competing in the current energy structure.
It really dose not require huge investment. Companies can both sell energy created by other companies. So produce 0 themselves. But only buy from green sources. Already selling. That dose is increase the demand for green energy without actually investing anything in it.
Or it can invest in one or 2 very small energy production schemes that are green. And sell that to other companies
While that costs money. He makes no promises about how much would be spent. It could literally be a company owning one windmill. And his claim has been achieved.
Its really only an expensive promise if you add assumptions about how big the gb energy company is going to be. He has not made any commitments on that.
Cutting NHS waiting lists by providing 40,000 more appointments each week - funded by tackling tax avoidance and non-dom loopholes.
NHS would require a shit ton more spending than whatever could be raised by tackling tax avoidance. Decades of austerity has to be compensated for.
To fix the NHS compleatly yes. But he is only offering to reduce waiting lists by 40000 more appointments
He dose not say what type of appointments or make any promises as to the costs invested.
He could litralling hire a nurse 40hrs a week. Much as GP are already doing. Average of 10 mins an appointment. 240 appointments a week. That is 167 nurses.
Not a huge cost. Or much of a promise.
Hitler particles detected. How will the security command be paid for? NHS has to be funded by ‘tackling tax avoidance’ but funds for border security never need to be ‘raised’.
GODWINS LAW STILL IN FULL SWING.
but I agree its not costed here. But also remember he. He really has not committed to spending much on everything else yet. So how much dose he need. How much is he actually promising here.
what annoys me more. Its just a rebadged tory policy they have failed to achive. So is he planning to copy failure to commit as well as policy? I will add. Tories rwanda bullshit iss costed at 150k per victim sent. So if that is costed in the current budget. Then cancelling it and using that money would technically be costed. So its no worse then tory bulshit.
What is antisocial behaviour?
pretty well defined in the past. By both labour and tories. Its not a new thing.
Also how are revenues for police officers raised? Every bit of welfare has to be ‘paid for’ by raising taxes or whatever but there is no mention of how police officer salaries would be paid for.
Agreed. But again what is he actually commiting to more is not a number. Hiring a few specials (is that the still the name for unqualified part time officers now) would meet the commitment.
Its another promise with no real measure.
Recruiting 6,500 teachers, paid for through ending tax breaks for private schools.
Its fascinating how he can’t just say ‘Recruiting 6,500 teachers’, he has to ‘pay for it’ with something else. Why do private schools exist in the first place?
because some folks want to pay for an elite education. But the better question is why the hell are they allowed to claim charity status and not pay taxes on the fees.
It is potentially a fairly large some of money. Lots of higher earners send kids to privrate school. And every privrate school uses charity status to allow no taxation on the income. I actually like this idea. But its an old one. Labour has used multiple times.
Where it might fail. If you increase the cost of provrate scooling(I’m gonna leave that typo. As I did not go to a privrate school ;) ). As this would fairly huge. You may see an equal number of lower wealthy deciding they cannot afford it. So it deff has a failure point. But less provrate schools is still a win to some extent.
This is so bad, Starmer is really showing that he is not different from the Tories********
Oh def agree. Including typical promises that don’t promise much. Long time tory practice. Offer something that sounds great. But give 0 detail of what it actually will be.
PS I am visually impaired on a tablet. So sorry I make lots of typos. I try to fix the ones I see. So lots of edit but again vision is crap so I just miss loads. Sorry but live with it please.
Code for austerity, some arbitrary cap on fiscal deficit.
How could that be done if spending rules are ‘tough’? By raising taxes on the rich? I highly doubt that even with the higher taxes, the Government would be able to raise enough revenues to ‘fund’ a green transition.
NHS would require a shit ton more spending than whatever could be raised by tackling tax avoidance. Decades of austerity has to be compensated for.
Hitler particles detected. How will the security command be paid for? NHS has to be funded by ‘tackling tax avoidance’ but funds for border security never need to be ‘raised’.
What is antisocial behaviour? Loitering? Also how are revenues for police officers raised? Every bit of welfare has to be ‘paid for’ by raising taxes or whatever but there is no mention of how police officer salaries would be paid for.
Its fascinating how he can’t just say ‘Recruiting 6,500 teachers’, he has to ‘pay for it’ with something else. Why do private schools exist in the first place?
This is so bad, Starmer is really showing that he is not different from the Tories.
There’s two reasons why there is a lack of teachers/doctors/nurses/police, and none of them seem to want to acknowledge this…stress, and pay. Solve the pay problem and you’ll solve the other. But no politician seems to want to acknowledge this.
While non of these promises seem very impressive. I will respond to a few of your comments.
Code for austerity, some arbitrary cap on fiscal deficit.
How could that be done if spending rules are ‘tough’? By raising taxes on the rich? I highly doubt that even with the higher taxes, the Government would be able to raise enough revenues to ‘fund’ a green transition.
NHS would require a shit ton more spending than whatever could be raised by tackling tax avoidance. Decades of austerity has to be compensated for.
Hitler particles detected. How will the security command be paid for? NHS has to be funded by ‘tackling tax avoidance’ but funds for border security never need to be ‘raised’.
What is antisocial behaviour?
Also how are revenues for police officers raised? Every bit of welfare has to be ‘paid for’ by raising taxes or whatever but there is no mention of how police officer salaries would be paid for.
Its fascinating how he can’t just say ‘Recruiting 6,500 teachers’, he has to ‘pay for it’ with something else. Why do private schools exist in the first place?
This is so bad, Starmer is really showing that he is not different from the Tories********
PS I am visually impaired on a tablet. So sorry I make lots of typos. I try to fix the ones I see. So lots of edit but again vision is crap so I just miss loads. Sorry but live with it please.