this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2025
117 points (98.3% liked)

UK Politics

3509 readers
169 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

What a cunt

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] skozzii@lemmy.ca 10 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

Disabled people already don't make enough to live off of,and they can't do anything about it. They already live in poverty, how much do we want to make them suffer?

Going after them and adding more stress is just terrible.

He should be ashamed of himself. He is going to kill people, blood on his hands.

[–] Fluke@lemm.ee 14 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Disabled and ill peons don't hand out shares and consultancy jobs to politicians.

Disability benefit claimants can't fight back with armies of lobbyists and lawyers, like the US based companies such as Amazon and Meta who not only avoid paying billions in tax every year, but get paid by UKgov to "invest in infrastructure" they need to profit from UK consumers.

"The Labour Party" are choosing to take from the poorest and most needy and give it to giant multinationals, as the Tories before them.

[–] Fluke@lemm.ee 4 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Relevant reading, published today 20/03/2025;

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5901/cmselect/cmtrans/770/report.html

They know being disabled is harder, far more stressful, and more expensive, they simply don't give a fuck.

[–] Twig@sopuli.xyz 10 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Is there any chance of a rebellion within Labour over this?

[–] JasSmith@sh.itjust.works 4 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

With Reform neck and neck with Labour, not a chance. The UK's first past the post system means every lost vote for Labour is a vote for Reform. Labour voters aren't going to risk a Reform government. Of course, the next election is many years away, and much can happen in that time.

[–] Twig@sopuli.xyz 2 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Good point. I guess there's no strong unified opposition within Labour on this doing anything at the moment?

[–] JasSmith@sh.itjust.works 3 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

They have an far left contingent but they don't have much leverage right now. I think the reality is that the UK's high spending, high historical debt, and already high taxes don't leave much room for pet projects and populist spending. If they increase the deficit they risk credit downgrades and much higher cost of debt servicing, exacerbating their issues during their tenure. If they increases taxes even more, they suppress what little economic growth they're likely to see during their tenure, and risk recessions. Their only realistic path here is very centrist: rein in spending to focus more on infrastructure and R&D. Especially the energy grid, which is fucked. If they plunge the country into recession or make things even worse, they guarantee a Reform government in 2029.

There is a ray of sunshine. I'm seeing really promising legislative changes re planning and zoning. Removing a lot of the red tape and disallowing councils from blocking new developments will allow far more housing to be built. This is arguably the single biggest quality of life issue for Brits. Bringing rent and the cost of ownership down could cement Labour as the next winners.

[–] slakemoth@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 8 hours ago

Isnt the main issues that voters have the cost of living, failing nhs, landlords?

Planning regulations aren't going to see any wins, nor is improving energy girds, important as those things are.

Its been shown that increases in housing stock has minimal effects on rent prices. A very cheap solution to this is rent control, it literally costs nothing. They could also build social housing if they wanted to invest money in something useful.

The NHS needs money, there is no getting around this unfortunately. All the fat trimming has been done.

Cost of living is obviously more complicated and i won't pretend to understand that level of macro. But you seem to be concerned that increases in deficit ie borrowing would cause debts to increase. This always happens when any government does anything remotely left wing, look at how the USA treats cuba. The political fact is that to be left wing you have to accept USA aligned countries making it more expensive for you to borrow. If Corbyn had won we would have been battered by this, but the trick is to nationalise the economy and become independent.

I can sympathise with some of what you're saying,but you make it out as if néolibéral policy is capable of doing those things as well as positioning it as the only route possible, which is disingenuous. You're making a political statement, not a descriptive diagnosis.

[–] Fluke@lemm.ee 1 points 8 hours ago

For anyone who is dependent on their disability benefit to not be homeless, starving, cold, or a combination of all three, they are making it a lot worse.

Let's gloss over that though, shall we?

[–] Twig@sopuli.xyz 2 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

Thank you for that information. I guess there isn't the simple solution of "tax the rich", because it's more nuanced than that?

So long as that red tape being removed isn't going to negatively affect the environment or anything like that?

[–] Fluke@lemm.ee 2 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

There are ways, but they'd be immensely unpopular with the corporate overlords, and thus, aren't an option.

God forbid they close loopholes to stop the exporting of profits to overseas entities, for example. Along with all the other ridiculous tax avoidance wheezes multinationals use to obfuscate their way out of paying their fair share, we could cover the welfare budget twice over and have change left.

[–] slakemoth@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 8 hours ago

The red tape being removed just means lower quality housing. Don't fall for sloganeering.

[–] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

"The cost of 0 VAT on financial services is devastating. "

And only used by the wealthy.

Why should someone who needs an accountants time get it tax free. But needing a plumbers time dose not.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 4 points 21 hours ago

You know what costs more?

Plague.

[–] lorty@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 19 hours ago

The UK longs for the 1800s. And they are going to try to go back.

[–] als@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 1 day ago

I'm sure there's no other way to get more money into the government. No possible way.

[–] Churbleyimyam@lemm.ee 58 points 1 day ago

"The cost of tax exemption for assets is devastating"

The next prime minister to say this fixes the economy. Go.

[–] thefluffiest@feddit.nl 48 points 1 day ago

Good thing we can tax the billionaires then, now can’t we?

[–] FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 30 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I think he’s got the wrong part of devastating.

Cutting the meagre money ~~hundreds of thousands~~ millions rely on to survive and surely causing excess deaths in the process is devastating.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] monogram@feddit.nl 51 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Would you like some Tory Light with your order?

[–] sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al 33 points 1 day ago

I'll take a main of Labour, hold the Labour and also, could you leave out all left please and add some extra ring wing, thanks!

[–] alykanas@slrpnk.net 24 points 1 day ago

A month ago he told us of his plans to “Unleash AI” To ‘increase efficiency’ - a phrase long proved synonymous with cutting jobs.

Would love to know what work he expects people to do when they’re kicked off sickness benefits.

Perhaps they will leave their wheelchairs behind and become bricklayers.

He is delivering a future inequality instead of alleviating it.

It’s all just so incoherent. I would settle for anyone who had the inclination to build functional society for the future, instead of the staid old ideas of slavish adherence to neoliberal economics. Academia is yelling out that they have seen the end of that road and it does not look good.

load more comments
view more: next ›