like the queen this thread will never die: in which we ALL resign (ourselves to disgusting miseries to post-boris politics 2022)

https://www.statista.com/statistics/246355/home-ownership-rate-in-europe/

I think the stats I saw were from a few years ago. Appears in a lot of Eastern European countries the ownership figures are still higher! Spain is still higher than the UK though. PF's comment about flats probably correct.

NY times to boil more Brit journo piss.

New woke slander on the nation just dropped. https://t.co/ANFmbSUzO7

— Elvis Buñuelo (@Mr_Considerate) October 6, 2022

So it seems she's over in Europe begging European leaders to help prevent an energy crisis in the UK this winter.

tbf she is a Remainer though

Brexit seems completely drained of any political capital for now. I think Truss was just as much a Remainer as Kieth was, as in ready to change almost any position at the drop of a hat.

I think selling off council houses dirt cheap and then stopping councils from replacing the housing stock has a something to do with it.

― Fronted by a bearded Phil Collins (Tom D.), Thursday, October 6, 2022 9:52 AM (six hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

A deliberate policy to turn people into Tory voters.

― Fronted by a bearded Phil Collins (Tom D.), Thursday, October 6, 2022 9:52 AM (six hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

it didn't turn me into a tory. but it does mean i can be relatively unworried about the fact i do a minimum wage job cos i still get to live somewhere nice without risk of eviction. doubt someone on even twice what i'm earning could afford to live round here now.

I got a bit a fright a few months back when I got a letter from housing informing me I'm 3 months behind in rent arrears. It was just a system glitch and the problem was easily sorted out. But if I was living in the private rental sector I'd have been getting eviction notices after a few weeks.

Is home ownership where people of limited means should sink their life savings? Is this a good practice overall? On the surface it seems to make sense.

What life savings?

Or go to debtor's prison ...

a lot of things will go up a couple of percent - benefits, NHS funding - far behind inflation, and because of the way math works the tories will tout it as “the largest ever increase in benefits spending, helping you get through these tough times”

If this is true in a non-socialist economy, should it be taken as bitter medicine?

I think home ownership could be socially valuable for hosting family or friends or for storage or as the accepted means of investing any savings, but the way homes are built seems wasteful.

i’m not sure what you mean about bitter medicine youn. i don’t think increasing benefits or NHS funding by less than the rest of inflation should be accepted.

What I mean is the way increasing benefits or NHS funding seems to give license to inflation, assuming price controls are not acceptable. It's not fair and bitter because those increases will be spent disproportionately on essentials, but there seems to be no way out. There seems to be something fundamentally wrong with existing economic models.

my understanding is that other economic models are available but they don't suit the interests of the wealthy

What a racket.

BREAKING: Baroness Doreen Lawrence, Prince Harry, Sir Elton John and David Furnish, Elizabeth Hurley and Sadie Frost are all suing Associated Newspapers #DailyMail #MailonSunday #Mailonline accusing them of "abhorrent criminal activity and gross breaches of privacy"

— Rebecca Barry (@BeccaBarry) October 6, 2022

bun dem

I appreciate the wider implications of this but still don't care about what privacy breaches rich people suffer at the hands of right-wing rags. It's one for the things you just don't care about column for me.

Doreen Lawrence getting some justice would be nice.

I went on the first Stephen Lawrence march in '91 going past the Nazi book shop in Welling and seeing all sorts of scenes.

1993, surely?

no deffo not '93 - erm possibly '91 then? lol can't remember

He was killed in ‘93 - I remember being in Rough Trade talking to one of the staff, who lived in South East London and had flyers for the march.

there was a 2nd march this was the first one. I remember ringing my step-dad on the way back and asking if it had made the news and he was giving me all this "lefty-fucking rent-a-mob" aggro. Yeah it was '93. I struggle with getting years right these days.

oh to be 20 years old again

yeah but not in 2022 cheers

When I look back at periods of unemployment when you'd turn up 2 hours late with a hangover to sign on and be very rude and flippant when they'd suggest you apply for some £3.86 ph packing job. Didn't realise I was living in a golden era for welfare state protection!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FeaEdpkWAAklFzS?format=jpg&name=900x900

the man in the high castle

Again, 'greener' is a strange word for this image.

So pretty much everyone in this thread hates Starmer as far as I can tell. But surely you lot would rather see him as PM than any of the current crop of senior Tories?

Think again. I don't give a fuck.

they've tried the 'fairer' thing before too and the Tories just co-opted it with the exact opposite meaning ("rich people contribute more, is it fair to penalize them with higher taxes?")

everything just feels so pointless and pathetic these days. Starmer, Truss, Johnson, whoever - it's the same shower of cunts who couldn't give a fuck about improving the lives of the vulnerable and needy in society. We all deserve better but we're not going to get it.

labour seems to be leaning harder than ever into NF imagery and sloganeering in lieu of any positive programme - is literally anyone ever convinced by this shit? even your hardcore flag waving types must be able smell the desperation here

Any political party that wants hardcore flag wavers to vote for them can gtf.

it's not the lesser of two evils and I really hope people resist falling into that trap out of desperation or naivety - it's the same evil and they're not even being shy about it this time

the rachel reeves comment the other day was a classic example of boneheaded new labourism starmer-style - trying to outflank the tories from the right about immigration - an “issue” that every recent poll says nobody gaf about

The last leadership ended up having compromised opinions on migration too but I feel that Corbyn would've stopped flights to Rwanda or any such schemes. They would've communicated a different message/outlook. It wouldn't have been perfect but things have gone so far I would've been happy with any kind of reversal.

there are plenty of ways in which a Starmer government with a comfortable majority could be worse than the current gov. there's a ton of reasons to not vote for this Labour Party: the unaddressed institutional racism and islamophobia is enough of a reason for me

i might grudgingly admit that the poorest people in the country might be fractionally better off under a non-Tory government, but not in any way that will make their lives less precarious and fraught. so a vote for Labour is a vote for racism, transphobia, neoliberal economics and authoritarian policing. anybody who bangs on about getting the Tories out is voting for that stuff, no excuses.

funniest possible outcome would be the Lib Dems holding a balance of seats then going into coalition with the Tories again, but i don't think "centrists" learn anything no matter how hard you kick them and inspect their wallets

Funniest possible outcome would be the Lib Dems in the kingmaker role but they can't agree to jump in with either side due to real or perceived extremism, resulting in an endless hung parliament with the only real option being some combination of clowns forming a coalition with a referendum-demanding SNP.

<q>there are plenty of ways in which a Starmer government with a comfortable majority could be worse than the current gov. </q>

I think this is nonsense tbh. Have you looked at the current government lately? I have no illusions about Kieth and his gang, but I would prefer absolutely anyone else in the UK as Home Secretary rather than Suella B.

this week Rachel Reeves criticized the government for being inefficient at deportations

the Blair government introduced ASBOs and the Yarl's Wood detention centre

https://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/publications/cjm/article/toxic-legacy-new-labour

I know all this and I think Reeves is awful and I won't vote Labour at the next election - my vote is meaningless in my constituency which will always vote Tory. But I think the lesser of two evils cliche is exactly right! Nothing but love for the UKpol radge cru, but the idea that Starmer would be even worse than Truss is ILX doomerism at its worse imo.

tbf i said "in some ways" and that includes the idea of them having a majority that allows them to indulge their worst instincts. i did also say that not having a Tory government would be marginally less worse for the poorest, so yeah maybe a tiny bit of hyperbole but in general i think nu Lab are very good at stealth cruelty when they're empowered

it could only ever be better through a hell of a lot of pressure from the kind of mass movement which has yet to cohere in a sustainable form - even then no credit should go to the party (ever, for anything, 1945 included)

Lesser of two evils is a refusal to look at what's in front of you.

'surely you would rather...' type questions just sum up the shitness of the system and the prospects. no offence paolo but no-one should have to stoop to that here.