Mandatory ID will mean he can do the same thing to naughty citizens as he does to the naughty Labour MPs.

Who's setting up a lettuce stream? If lettuce streams become a tradition of unwelcome politicians I wouldn't be mad.

I won't lie, the cabbage was pretty popular. It was Truss who was less than useless as a politician.

Lettuce.

Here's a drinking game if you want to stay sober:

Take a drink every time you see someone who's working class, at a Labour Party conference.

They've long time lost their way.

Have they, though?

• nationalising trains
• nationalising steel
• nationalising a part of our energy sector
• bringing the NHS back under direct public control
• ending various tax-dodging loopholes, such as the IHT for farmers
• windfall tax on energy companies
• charging VAT on private schooling
• expanding free childcare
• restarting SureStart (albeit under a different name)
• expanding free school meals
• expanding school breakfast clubs
• guaranteeing jobs for young people (announced this morning)
• big increases to the minimum wage, especially for the youngest
• expansion of workers rights
• expansion of renters rights
• big increase in infrastructure investment, particularly for renewables

OSA, fair enough. I'm sure plenty of young people especially aren't happy about that. But overall, how are they actively working against people they're supposed to be helping?

Pretty sure voters of one party hates leaders of all other parties. But Keir is additionally also hated by voters of his own party, making him lower than everybody.

Speaking in political compass terms, Stalin was around -5,10.
Starmer's nearer something like 5,8.
Other side of the economic scale.
Maybe if he disregards the will of the people, and institutes the Digital ID, he can get that up to a 5,10.

Either way, this is not what freedom looks like.

I call him that because it's funny.

Ironically all of the laws he was using to crack down on protests and arrest over Facebook posts were put in place by the tories. The Online Safety Act was also from the tories. He's just inherited the tools they gave him

His supposedly labour government has also doubled down on censoring wikipedia, calling people pedo-sympathizers for resisting absurd internet control laws that literally affect every digital facing international company, and is now promoting a digital ID straight out every digital era authoritatians or fascist's wet dreams.

Is he better than sunak? Probably? Kinda? That's a very low bar though and the fact that we even talk about it is sad. Their actions have been so much unlike what people think about when voting labour parties that it's surreal.

People reasonably feel cheated on given the party's supposed focus.

It's the expectation.

Boris and Truss were abject morons and Sunak was an insulated, rich Tory. They were expected to be terrible and so we weren't surprised.

Starmer won in a landslide victory for Labour and went about screwing the poor, arresting old ladies, and presiding over genocide. Conservatives hate him because he's on the Red Team, and the Left hate him because he acts like a Tory.

If he'd run as a Tory, he'd be scoring higher than everyone since Cameron, but he was supposed to fix the mess, not make it worse.

Kier is boring

You'd think he'd at least be a bit more lively, with all that powder up his nose.

Remember the 107th rule of acquisition: Win or lose, there's always Huyperian Beetle Snuff

Sunak and Kier seem like a wash almost.

Boris's policies weren't the worse. He was just absolutely incompetent at actually leading the party/government on a personal level and was prone to slight corruption

I am sure purging all the leftists and reformers out of the left Center option was the better strategy, on the backs of openly false allegations at that. /s

Labor is a fucking joke and it's going to hand England to the far right that will fix themselves into Power with the help of the US and Russia, same as macron is going to hand over france, and Europe is going to fall like fucking Domino's to Fascist governments because we have all allowed conservatives to seize our mainstream political parties and Ratchet privilege to the plutocracy. The only reform option is the far right.

The Internet Wanking License hasn't been a clear winner either. He voted against that when the Tories were in power, then flipped when they realised they'd be the ones doing all the spying. Wait until Farage gets in and uses that to collect a list of rainbow flag people to bully once he's done with the brown people.

What do you call making a masterbaitorbase and connecting ip and id and face to every single computer in a place any organized group could access.

Or cancelling the right to protest, forbidding defenses that acquit accused protesters, calling protesyers terrorists and equating the entire protest with the proscribed group?

You think things are fine? Jesus christ.

His attacks on trans people are also scummy.

Rich ass farmers paying tax? Not against that in the slightest

Huh? You're pro rich people dodging tax?

Shit loads of multi-millionaires/billionaires were buying farmland as an asset so they didn't have to pay inheritance taxes out on it, too.

It's absolutely right that Labour started making them pay tax again (yes, again, they used to do it and family farms still thrived back before Thatcher gave a Tory-voting demographic a tax exception)

What a strange take. I definitely think that we should support farmers, but not by exempting them from inheritance taxes. We should incentivise the correct things - If they work the land give them subsidies.

If you don't tax inheritance you're creating a generational wealth hoarding. Let's take Jeremy Clarkson for example - he openly stated that the reason he bought farmland was so that his children can inherit it tax free. If he didn't have a farming tv show, he would lease that land to actual farmers.

It might be different in other parts of the world, but in the UK, that has relatively high population density, sitting on farm land for generations can be very very lucrative. Most of the richest pieces of real estate in this country were farmland a century or two ago.

Farmers usually have a lot of money invested in capital equipment but their lifestyles are anything but lavish.

They often hide it, but the farmers I know are far from poor. Like a lot of us, they're rich in illiquid assets but not in terms of cashflow. That's my situation too, though I'm not a farmer, and I don't whinge about it.

Inheritance tax is a tax on unearned wealth. There's no reason to distinguish one asset from all others. Those inheriting almost invariably did nothing to earn it; it's almost always an accident of birth that puts them in line for an inheritance. That, and the whims of some elderly person. A steeply progressive inheritance tax, with no exceptions besides spouses, would be ideal. And if you're concerned about corporations grabbing all the arable land, regulate them to prevent any firm directly or indirectly owning more than, say, 10 hectares of land. A similar rule should apply to housing.

How are you enjoying Mark Carney? The Governor of the Bank of England during (what I call) "a very British genocide", (or what others call) "the fit-to-work scandal", culling >130,000 of the disabled and poor in a decade. Seems to love being appointed, but could he be elected fairly? Carney, Starmer, same "big club". They do these things to seize power, to maximally extract wealth, and to soft-kill. Because they were told to.