Rachel Reeves

I mean, the faux outrage over the utterly commonplace and relatively insignificant trend of embellishing and over exaggerating what’s on your CV. A bit like losing your sh1t because somebody paid for the prime minister’s f***ing glasses. How does it compare to the massive pile of corruption that the Tories indulged in? Millions and millions of pounds. Taxpayer’s  money sometimes, and donations from Russians and perverts and freaks.  So many examples it became normal. I guess, there are plenty of gullible folk who are susceptible to the dog whistle GB News and Daily Mail tripe. Usually stupid and easily indoctrinated people who’ll swallow all that confected cobblers without acknowledging who’s feeding it to them. Non UK resident, non tax paying gaslighters pulling the chain of the frightened and the susceptible - billionaires with an axe to grind. As if it matters what Rachel Reeves puts in her f*ucking CV. The state of public services and real lives are the issue.

Quoted from chaos33

As if it matters what Rachel Reeves puts in her f*ucking CV.

Exactly, people are just jealous of how successful she is; first woman to climb Everest,  win the Tour de France and The Nobel Prize for literature. They should leave her alone to continue her research into nuclear fusion.

Quoted from chaos33

I mean, the faux outrage over the utterly commonplace and relatively insignificant trend of embellishing and over exaggerating what’s on your CV. A bit like losing your sh1t because somebody paid for the prime minister’s f***ing glasses. How does it compare to the massive pile of corruption that the Tories indulged in? Millions and millions of pounds. Taxpayer’s  money sometimes, and donations from Russians and perverts and freaks.  So many examples it became normal. I guess, there are plenty of gullible folk who are susceptible to the dog whistle GB News and Daily Mail tripe. Usually stupid and easily indoctrinated people who’ll swallow all that confected cobblers without acknowledging who’s feeding it to them. Non UK resident, non tax paying gaslighters pulling the chain of the frightened and the susceptible - billionaires with an axe to grind. As if it matters what Rachel Reeves puts in her f*ucking CV. The state of public services and real lives are the issue.

So in short you are saying its okay for Labour politicians to lie, those same politicians who have taken the moral high ground for the last 14 years.
Embelishing a CV is one thing but the blatent lies are another.
Its the Hypocrisy of these people that is so distasteful.

Talking of Non UK resident and Non UK taxpayers, has anyone wondered why Black Rock have been meeting the PM both before and after the Election.

Quoted from Azimuth

So in short you are saying its okay for Labour politicians to lie, those same politicians who have taken the moral high ground for the last 14 years.
Embelishing a CV is one thing but the blatent lies are another.
Its the Hypocrisy of these people that is so distasteful.

Ahem. Did you get worked up back in 1993 when Lamont broke the Tory manifesto promises to raise taxes massively?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1993_United_Kingdom_budget

Reeves' tax rises: £40 billion
Lamont's tax rises: £80 billion (taking into account inflation since 1993)

I bet loads of people complaining about Lamont's budget must really have lost their excrement when the Tories hiked taxes such an enormous amount back in 1993, and the largest part of the hike came from massive VAT increases which affected everyone, not the mostly the wealthy as is the case with Reeves' budget.

Regardless of the rights or wrongs of either budget, let's be honest here, rather than sucking up some bullshit pushed by the right-wing media and some anus who doesn't understand our electoral system setting up a meaningless petition (the similarly meaningless call for a rerun of the Brexit referendum was 'signed' by over 6 million people, incidentally. It will be interesting to see how many of the votes in this turn out to be bots from abroad. I think the UK Government site is pretty good at tracking respondents so we will see how the figures work out. The rate of the votes coming in will also be interesting. If it is evenly-spread, that will be very suspicious indeed.

Anyway, I've been a vehement critic of Reeves, because her choices are excrement and just continue on from the terrible Tory governments of the past decade (though a bit less maliciously).

However, to claim that somebody with a degree in PPE from Oxford who then got a Masters degree at the London School of Economics isn't an economist is just bloody stupid. It's in the flipping name of both of her degrees.

Gideon Osborne had a degree in Modern History, never had a job until he started working for the Conservative Party and never had any economic training. Can you remember the outrage when he was made Chancellor? Nope, me neither, and there wasn't any outrage when he completely copulated over the economy with his dimwitted austerity, either.

People are losing their excrement at the lines they are being fed by the media and social media. We've got no chance when such nonsense disinformation is sucked up by such a large chunk of the electorate so willingly. The division is going to be as bad as in the US before long, at this rate.

Please engage brains and think deeply about what is actually being pushed at the moment. It doesn't mean that Reeves' budget isn't excrement, but it is still less excrement than most of those from the past 14 years.

Quoted from Humbercod

I do love a bit lefty virtue signalling, it’s been lacking of late on here, give yourself a clap.

This isn't about me. I'm happy to call myself a girl private. Point still stands about you and ad hominem attacks aimed at me don't take away from your sexist attitude. Something you seem to have no defense of so went to change the topic.

In fact you creating your own post on a popular topic probably shows you're own motives are more focussed on your reputation. So pretty ironic really.

Quoted from AncientExiledMariner

This isn't about me. I'm happy to call myself a girl private. Point still stands about you and ad hominem attacks aimed at me don't take away from your sexist attitude. Something you seem to have no defense of so went to change the topic.

In fact you creating your own post on a popular topic probably shows you're own motives are more focussed on your reputation. So pretty ironic really.

Get a grip pal ,if you can’t see the funny side of ‘Rachel from accounts’ in these deeply depressing times, then you are seriously lacking a sense of humour. If the compulsive lying chancellor was a man called Dave, then would you be ok with me saying ‘Dave from accounts’! Lighten up a bit and let go of your inner wokism.

Quoted from Maringer

Ahem. Did you get worked up back in 1993 when Lamont broke the Tory manifesto promises to raise taxes massively?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1993_United_Kingdom_budget

Reeves' tax rises: £40 billion
Lamont's tax rises: £80 billion (taking into account inflation since 1993)

I bet loads of people complaining about Lamont's budget must really have lost their excrement when the Tories hiked taxes such an enormous amount back in 1993, and the largest part of the hike came from massive VAT increases which affected everyone, not the mostly the wealthy as is the case with Reeves' budget.

Regardless of the rights or wrongs of either budget, let's be honest here, rather than sucking up some bullshit pushed by the right-wing media and some anus who doesn't understand our electoral system setting up a meaningless petition (the similarly meaningless call for a rerun of the Brexit referendum was 'signed' by over 6 million people, incidentally. It will be interesting to see how many of the votes in this turn out to be bots from abroad. I think the UK Government site is pretty good at tracking respondents so we will see how the figures work out. The rate of the votes coming in will also be interesting. If it is evenly-spread, that will be very suspicious indeed.

Anyway, I've been a vehement critic of Reeves, because her choices are excrement and just continue on from the terrible Tory governments of the past decade (though a bit less maliciously).

However, to claim that somebody with a degree in PPE from Oxford who then got a Masters degree at the London School of Economics isn't an economist is just bloody stupid. It's in the flipping name of both of her degrees.

Gideon Osborne had a degree in Modern History, never had a job until he started working for the Conservative Party and never had any economic training. Can you remember the outrage when he was made Chancellor? Nope, me neither, and there wasn't any outrage when he completely copulated over the economy with his dimwitted austerity, either.

People are losing their excrement at the lines they are being fed by the media and social media. We've got no chance when such nonsense disinformation is sucked up by such a large chunk of the electorate so willingly. The division is going to be as bad as in the US before long, at this rate.

Please engage brains and think deeply about what is actually being pushed at the moment. It doesn't mean that Reeves' budget isn't excrement, but it is still less excrement than most of those from the past 14 years.

So you’re going back over 30 years to try and defend this lying toad. As already been mentioned before if that was any of us caught lying, then we would of been sacked for gross misconduct. Businesses are now going under, the CBI are saying the UK is now uninvestable, the economy is tanking and unemployment is rising, but those of us with engaged brains knew this would happen. How you can defend this absolute shower of shite government is laughable.

Starmer’s mob have made a rod for their own back by running primarily on image & optics rather than policy. They’ve spent years, aided by their friends in the media, telling everyone that they’re pragmatic, competent, honest and are in it for public service rather than individual gain. Well unfortunately for them, their hubris and arrogance has given the game away in just a few short weeks and it is now evident to the entire public what was apparent to many of us well before Murdoch and co. ushered Capital’s B-Team into power.

They’re evidently not pragmatic, they are entirely dogmatic and ideological especially in matters of fiscal and foreign policy.

They’re wedded to neoliberalism - outsourcing, PFI, public assets in private hands, huge fees for consultants & arms-length management, more QUANGOs & committees. At the same time they’re trying to squeeze pensioners and disabled people for a few measly quid whilst their donors are dripping in filthy lucre.

Abroad they’re an active participant in a genocide and a few suited people will be lucky not to be swinging from the gallows at The Hague. They’re so beholden to American imperialism that they’re selling arms to a man that they are obliged to arrest on sight, for committing the very crimes these weapons have enabled. Closer to home Starmer’s hard-man routine has put us closer to nuclear catastrophe than possibly at any time in recent history, and for what?

As for competent, I would simply not embellish my CV and spend 4/5 years loudly proclaiming to be a galaxy-brained BoE economist when in reality I was a middle-manager in a Halifax complaints dept. The issue is, you don’t need to be particularly clever in these roles if you don’t intend to find any new solutions to the big, macroeconomic problems - if you just want to be a caretaker and let your donors make your decisions for you, Reeves’ CV is perfectly adequate. No good for the rest of us though.

Individually, the fact that so many ministers just brazenly accept bribes from corporate lobbyists and are happy to do so really demonstrates how detached these people are from everyday life in this country. Any other job where someone of influence handed you bribes, tickets, clothes worth thousands you’d be sacked before your feet touch the floor. It’s insane.

Said it a long time ago - Starmer govt will go down as one of the worst in history and they’re opening the door to a far right govt in 2029. They killed Corbyn’s leadership for this? Hope they enjoy their time in the trough.

The weirdest thing is that Starmer's LINO party have come into power on the back of a landslide victory and yet they didn't seem to have any plans or well-thought out policies ready for the day they got into power. I realise that they are just tinkering around the edges because they don't have the wherewithal to make the required changes, but it just doesn't make sense that they have just been twiddling around doing nothing for months.

The guff about the 'black hole' in the finances being a surprise is a load of balderdash. Everybody knew that the last budget had fairytale numbers in it. The problem is that Reeves did her Oxford PPE degree so she's absolutely bloody incompetent in economic terms and can't see past the neoliberal policies which have been failing for decades, just like all the other alumni of that particular course.

The way he came in talking about how they’ll need 2 terms to implement their big plans…does he think everyone’s stupid? He’ll be lucky to see out 2 years.

Thing is, he talks a good game about making tough decisions and not being afraid to make enemies, if you’re going to píss off a load of people then why not start with the people who you can get the most money out of? Because they’re cowards.