Reform UK - A symptom of all that is wrong?

[crankedup5]

valiant said:

crankedup5 said:

You seem to be saying that Political Parties only get elected by offering the electorate acceptable and attractive policy proposals. Well of course and that’s been my starting point throughout. But this attractive policy stuff is always abandoned as soon as Governance is won.

But that's Reform in a nutshell. Offer unicorns that are unworkable but are appealing to their base. Should the unthinkable happen and Reform get elected most of their manifesto would have to be massively modified or abandoned.

Slogans are fine until you start asking for details.

Take the London Reform leaflet just posted. The Mayor has no control over LTNs and 20mph limits (that are not on a red route) as it's the local councils that decide it but the 2% of Londoners thinking of voting for Reform for London Mayor will believe it.

You're offering unicorns and rainbows and are no different to the Monster Raving Loony Party in that respect.

Of course, all political parties do this, but much then depends upon how those proposals resonate.
The Labour Party are not offering anything at all, well other than some mealy mouthed ‘ambitions’ which is meaningless waffle. Your saying it’s not OK for one Party to offer lofty appealing proposals but it is OK for Labour to offer ‘ambitions’ which they cannot possibly achieve owing to the Shadow Chancellor setting out strict financial restrictions. Unless of course another Labour Government decides to throw the financial restriction policy into the bin.
The point is with Reform UK they are clearly saying here is what we would like to do.(ambitions) The response is. 12% - 15% poll rating, a fairly high number of individuals if you believe polls. The two major parties will look at this and decide how to respond. I’ve said so many times now, smaller Parties offer alternatives to the main Parties in the trust that people will be attracted.
I believe that Reform U.K. do have a number of proposals that are interesting and innovative. But that doesn’t matter because the Party will get nowhere near Governing the Country, certainly not for a couple of Parliaments.
The two major Parties have served the Country so well over the past 50 years, let’s elecone of those again for more decay

[President Merkin]

Ah

crankedup5 said:

The Labour Party are not offering anything at all, well other than some mealy mouthed ‘ambitions’ which is meaningless waffle.

Oh

crankedup5 said:

The point is with Reform UK they are clearly saying here is what we would like to do.(ambitions) The response is. 12% - 15% poll rating, a fairly high number of individuals if you believe polls.

[Killboy]

crankedup5 said:

The Labour Party are not offering anything at all, well other than some mealy mouthed ‘ambitions’ which is meaningless waffle.

Here is Khans - added bonus of what he has achieved.



As you can see, a little more detail, a little more attainable, and a whole lot less "I promise just to reverse everything" Cox.

[valiant]

crankedup5 said:

Of course, all political parties do this, but much then depends upon how those proposals resonate.
The Labour Party are not offering anything at all, well other than some mealy mouthed ‘ambitions’ which is meaningless waffle. Your saying it’s not OK for one Party to offer lofty appealing proposals but it is OK for Labour to offer ‘ambitions’ which they cannot possibly achieve owing to the Shadow Chancellor setting out strict financial restrictions. Unless of course another Labour Government decides to throw the financial restriction policy into the bin.
The point is with Reform UK they are clearly saying here is what we would like to do.(ambitions) The response is. 12% - 15% poll rating, a fairly high number of individuals if you believe polls. The two major parties will look at this and decide how to respond. I’ve said so many times now, smaller Parties offer alternatives to the main Parties in the trust that people will be attracted.
I believe that Reform U.K. do have a number of proposals that are interesting and innovative. But that doesn’t matter because the Party will get nowhere near Governing the Country, certainly not for a couple of Parliaments.
The two major Parties have served the Country so well over the past 50 years, let’s elecone of those again for more decay

Labour and the Tories have to offer policies that are grounded in reality according to the economic conditions of the time. They have costed plans which won't be offering unicorns as they'll rightly be held to account when manifestos are released and any 'unicorns' will be analysed to the nth degree. Any holes will be mercilessly jumped on.

You may like Reforms proposals as they are offering unicorns that appeal to you. Where are the costed elements to this? Its all pie in the sky wishful thinking designed solely to appeal to it's base knowing they'll never have to enact any of it.

[bad company]

Killboy said:

Here is Khans - added bonus of what he has achieved.



As you can see, a little more detail, a little more attainable, and a whole lot less "I promise just to reverse everything" Cox.

Why should all taxpayers pay for free school meals? That’ll include children of some very wealthy parents.

[TTwiggy]

bad company said:

Why should all taxpayers pay for free school meals? That’ll include children of some very wealthy parents.

I can't possibly imagine why it might be preferable NOT to single some children out for different treatment.

[bitchstewie]

Makes me laugh.

Of all the things you could have a go at Khan over even I'm surprised that feeding hungry kids would be the thing to pick.

[valiant]

bad company said:

Why should all taxpayers pay for free school meals? That’ll include children of some very wealthy parents.

So what?

All kids get fed. Simpler to manage and administer and you’re not singling out kids who are in dire need of a free hot meal. Kids can be cruel sometimes.

Thought you’d jump on the ULEZ thing when it comes to Khan to be honest.

Edited by valiant on Tuesday 30th April 18:54

[TTwiggy]

'Are there no workhouses? Are there no prisons?'

Reform UK - I want my Dickensian country back.

[S600BSB]

bhstewie said:

Makes me laugh.

Of all the things you could have a go at Khan over even I'm surprised that feeding hungry kids would be the thing to pick.

There’s some fking sad people about!

[bad company]

bhstewie said:

Makes me laugh.

Of all the things you could have a go at Khan over even I'm surprised that feeding hungry kids would be the thing to pick.

Why should I pay to feed other people’s kids including those with millionaire parents?

[valiant]

bad company said:

Why should I pay to feed other people’s kids including those with millionaire parents?

You pay tax that pays for all sorts of stuff that you won’t use or agree with. It’s all part of living in a civilised society.

The Mayor (in this case) decides where it will spent much like the government decides where it will spend its tax receipts. Don’t like it? Tough. The majority voted for him and you do like democracy don’t you?

[TTwiggy]

bad company said:

Why should I pay to feed other people’s kids including those with millionaire parents?

Because it's vital kids get at least one hot meal a day.

Because telegraphing that some kids are POOR isn't good.

[bitchstewie]

bad company said:

Why should I pay to feed other people’s kids including those with millionaire parents?

It's how society works.

Seriously how do you end up not wanting to pay for kids school meals because you might end up feeding the odd millionaires child amongst them all?

I do wonder how people lose their way like this.

[valiant]

bhstewie said:

bad company said:

Why should I pay to feed other people’s kids including those with millionaire parents?

It's how society works.

Seriously how do you end up not wanting to pay for kids school meals because you might end up feeding the odd millionaires child amongst them all?

I do wonder how people lose their way like this.

It’s only state schools anyway and I’m not sure millionaires would be sending offspring to mix with the great unwashed.

[Mr Penguin]

bad company said:

Why should I pay to feed other people’s kids including those with millionaire parents?

The cost of means testing can be more than the saving of just paying for everything
The children who have the vouchers get picked on for being poor

[bad company]

valiant said:

You pay tax that pays for all sorts of stuff that you won’t use or agree with. It’s all part of living in a civilised society.

The Mayor (in this case) decides where it will spent much like the government decides where it will spend its tax receipts. Don’t like it? Tough. The majority voted for him and you do like democracy don’t you?

Yes I do like democracy and if Khan is re elected which looks likely I’ll accept the vote. Otherwise I might be compared with the ‘Remoaners’.

[Blue62]

bad company said:

Why should I pay to feed other people’s kids including those with millionaire parents?

A very good point and well made, driving it home as usual. I feel the same way about my taxes paying for Michelle Mone’s yacht, or Donalon’s apology, or Patel’s bullying settlement figure, well into six figures. We can add free school meals for kids to the list, it’s entirely their own fault and they should be punished, let them eat cake.

[turbobloke]

valiant said:

crankedup5 said:

Of course, all political parties do this, but much then depends upon how those proposals resonate.
The Labour Party are not offering anything at all, well other than some mealy mouthed ‘ambitions’ which is meaningless waffle. Your saying it’s not OK for one Party to offer lofty appealing proposals but it is OK for Labour to offer ‘ambitions’ which they cannot possibly achieve owing to the Shadow Chancellor setting out strict financial restrictions. Unless of course another Labour Government decides to throw the financial restriction policy into the bin.
The point is with Reform UK they are clearly saying here is what we would like to do.(ambitions) The response is. 12% - 15% poll rating, a fairly high number of individuals if you believe polls. The two major parties will look at this and decide how to respond. I’ve said so many times now, smaller Parties offer alternatives to the main Parties in the trust that people will be attracted.
I believe that Reform U.K. do have a number of proposals that are interesting and innovative. But that doesn’t matter because the Party will get nowhere near Governing the Country, certainly not for a couple of Parliaments.
The two major Parties have served the Country so well over the past 50 years, let’s elecone of those again for more decay

Labour and the Tories have to offer policies that are grounded in reality according to the economic conditions of the time. They have costed plans which won't be offering unicorns as they'll rightly be held to account when manifestos are released and any 'unicorns' will be analysed to the nth degree. Any holes will be mercilessly jumped on.

You may like Reforms proposals as they are offering unicorns that appeal to you. Where are the costed elements to this? Its all pie in the sky wishful thinking designed solely to appeal to it's base knowing they'll never have to enact any of it.

There's something available on funding of Reform UK plans, the situation may not be the cost crazy Green Party type of funding snafu you make it out to be.

Not that I've put my calculator on overtime checking it all. I won't be voting Reform, so the incentive is lacking. However, it's here:
https://www.reformparty.uk/funding-of-reform-uk-pl...

As mentioned above x2 they won't be enacting any of it.

Labour puntsvarious envy proposals on a reasonably regular basis designed solely to appeal to its base, only in this case they'll never make their base significantly better off, or that base won't be voting Labour so much any more. 13 years of Labour did little, the Socialist Worker was thick with headlines on how Blair was busy enriching the 1% if you can remember back to those good old days.

[MiniMan64]

bad company said:

bhstewie said:

Makes me laugh.

Of all the things you could have a go at Khan over even I'm surprised that feeding hungry kids would be the thing to pick.

Why should I pay to feed other people’s kids including those with millionaire parents?

What about using the roads? Or the health service? Or the police, or the fire service? Would you rather not pay for those in case millionaires use them?