12
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2024
12 points (100.0% liked)
UK Politics
3090 readers
56 users here now
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
bollocks.
No one is talking about ignoring it.
The comment was about the article naming it Labour's "fiscal hole".
No government dose not take the blame. Tories sure as hell did not for the 2008 economic crisis. Again the same paper considered it labours debt when tories took over.
Take it easy buddy, we're only chatting.
Taking the blame and taking responsibility are two different things. Nobody is asking Labour to take the blame for Liz Truss' mistakes. But Labour are now in power so they need to take responsibility of the public finances. These are two separate concepts.
They kinda did. They blamed Labour for financial management but they didn't simply right off the debt and say fuck it we're not responsible. They implemented crushing austerity. You and I might not like how they took responsibility but they worked to try and get the public finances back on track. How successful they were is another matter.
But you can't be saying the Tories should have pretended there wasn't a financial crisis to manage when they took office in the same way that you can't be saying there isn't a large deficit and debt mountain to manage now that Labour have taken office.
That was the whole point of my original comment.
My point was the wording
Labour's "fiscal hole".
In the article we are commenting on. Is trying to do that exactly. There is no other reason to word it that way. The hole exists. Applying a possessive to the term to the government announcing it is entirely to try and remove it from the previse government.
It is an openly biased choice of wording.
It is quoted to indicate it is a questionable fact. And applied to labours possession to imply labour are trying to use the lie to increase spending.
No I don't think so. I certainly didn't read it like you're reading it.
We'll have to disagree on that. But if you feel strongly then you can always write to the press complaints commission and ask for a retraction or rewording?
Lol. Press complaints commission don't care about bias.
Try adding the quotes back into the phrase you copied. Really changes the intent.
OK, well you can either complain to the press complaints commission, to the FT, to the Labour party, or me.
One of these options isn't going to give a shit.