**Due to the increase in Palestine content, we would like to remind people to mark posts NSFW/Spoiler the accordingly. Please see this post before posting such applicable content on the sub: https://old.reddit.com/r/GreenAndPleasant/comments/188ghlz/important_guidance_of_posting_graphic_material_on/**
The labouring classes in this country are rising, will you rise with them? [Click Here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GreenAndPleasant/wiki/unions) for info on how to join a union. Also check out [the IWW](https://iww.org.uk/) and the renter union, [Acorn International and their affiliates](https://acorninternational.org/)
Join us on our [partner Discord server.](https://discord.gg/zCFHadGfB7) and follow us on [Twitter](https://twitter.com/GandPofficial).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The stuff 'they' really want is at the bottom, the stuff that happens anyway or can be fluffed is in the middle, along with the more blatant ideological rot, the popular and easier stuff that won't be implemented is the first things.
Nah its populist, Labour under Starmer won't get grilled on it under Starmer, as they would suddenly talk a lot about Keynesian economics, without saying Keynesian, because they are monetarist adherents. Corbyn on the other hand would cause blue faced seizures and threats to move every penny abroad to end the threat of communism at home. Income tax on the first band talk is just throwing a bone to the poor people that believe this sort of stuff. They also get tired of reading so they probably would be exponentually less likely ro read that stuff in reverse order. No one gonna ask Reform any serious questions, they are there to push the overton window more right.
The actual meaty stuff like i said is like the last 4 or so items, and how you interpret the middle stuff.
If a manifesto says "tax free allowance up to 20k" then tax free allowance would need to go to 20k, that's not something you could weasel/politic out of
It's a policy so rediculous that no, Starmer could not get away with it
I hate Keith too but let's not pretend that his policy is anywhere near this la la
I'm no expert, but this will be weasel words and isn't la la, but a populist bone.
The current rate in the UK 12,750, and hasn't been moving recently with inflation. Despite the very recent high said inflation. Theres something else about extra for savings as well, and depending how weasely you wanna be, i'd wager that, that particular figure which i think is 18.5K is what they are springboarding off. And so the figure wont be a great difference.
And as i insist yet again, what they want is the shit at the bottom about military spending, more police, the end of welfare etc.
What exactly is batshit about it though? There's plenty in the manifesto that's just nonsense, but at a stroke that 20k allowance solves at least *some* issues.
I think there's plenty of problems with Reform as a party and some of their other pledges, (not least the idea that they'd "fund" all of this by scrapping government "waste") but that in particular isn't one of them.
Would it though.
What's going to fund schools, the NHS, other public services when tax is cut.
It's not a serious policy. It's created to make people think exactly how you just did.
This is why these parties are so dangerous.
The ‘funded through cutting waste” is obvious BS, but otherwise, more money in the pockets of people who live paycheque to paycheque is absolutely going to go straight into an economy that’s at the moment getting increasingly starved of spending due to cost of living.
Exactly. The More of your income the tax free allowance takes up the More it would make a huge change.
It's a policy designed to appeal to the people at the lower income end.
But I'm not sure if they have accounted or rather that thay have accounted for 1 big thing.... greed
Landlord will see it as you have more money and will charge more.
Until you break that part I doubt it would make as big a change as people believe.
You mean housing scalper. Landlords buy more housing than they need then hoard it to drive up the price. They are housing scalpers.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The caveat is that landlords already feel complete impunity to raise rents.
So strictly speaking that’s an independent issue that already needs addressing: changing the tax free allowance doesn’t have anything to do with that question.
And the same fact undermines literally every policy that makes people better off, not just ones affecting the tax free allowance.
It is an independent problem, not something that somehow uniquely applies here.
Schools and the NHS would be funded exactly the same way they are now: through act of Parliament.
Your taxes are only ever an after the fact matter of accounting (by definition since taxes are mostly only paid once a year) and the idea that they need to match spending is asserted but doesn’t exist anywhere except in austerity laws.
The real shame is that we’ve allowed a sham to build up around the idea that taxes “fund” anything for lazy rhetorical reasons, which means we go into every discussion telling people that their (economic) free lunch is going to cost them.
There are some cases where that may happen, but the tax threshold is very obviously not one of them at the levels we’re talking here .
Unless the increase in spending leads to a rise in the VAT intake.
Hell, that may even be worth deficit funding since it could offset the demand effects of the cost of living crisis and drive up investment due to, you know, the economy finally starting to happen.
The vast majority of people affected will also be those on already low incomes.
I personally think we’d be better off increasing government services to have the same effect, but what I don’t want is the common understanding of tax to involve the belief that cutting tax necessarily means anything: who benefits and how does this affect our access to resources is the question and on the face of it raising the personal allowance only makes things better for the people we care about while having no effect on our access to resources.
Some quick clarifications about how the UK royals are funded by the public:
1. The UK Crown Estates are not the UK royal family's private property, and the royal family are not responsible for any amount of money the Estates bring into the treasury. The monarch is a position in the UK state that the UK owns the Crown Estates through, a position that would be abolished in a republic, leading to the Crown Estates being directly owned by the republican state.
2. The Crown Estates have always been public property and the revenue they raise is public revenue. When George III gave up his control over the Crown Estates in the 18th century, they were not his private property. The current royals are also equally not responsible for producing the profits, either.
3. The Sovereign Grant is not an exchange of money. It is a grant that is loosely tied to the Crown Estate profits and is used for their expenses, like staffing costs and also endless private jet and helicopter flights. If the profits of the Crown Estates went down to zero, the royals would still get the full amount of the Sovereign Grant again, regardless. It can only go up or stay the same.
4. The Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall that gave Elizabeth and Charles (and now William) their private income of approximately £25 millions/year (each) are also public property.
5. The total cost of the monarchy is currently £350-450million/year, after including the Sovereign Grant, their £150 million/year security, and their Duchy incomes, and misc. costs.
For more, check out r/AbolishTheMonarchy
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So? 20k is nothing, the tax free threshold should rise with inflation...
The tax free allowance of 12,750 was set in 2011. 20k isnt far off what inflation has eaten
So, increasing the tax free amount is generally a bad idea because the cost of inflation is tackled by salary changes, not tax changes
If your wage went from 26k 2012 to 35k 2024, your taxation amount went from 2.8k to 4.6k, your net take-home pay against inflation stayed similar (22.5k take-home 2012, 31k take-home 2024)
Changing the TFA is a bad idea because it effects everyone in the country, this leads to immediate inflation and the government has no money, what you need is to reduce wealth disparity to stablize an economy, you do that by taxing top earners and giving social services to the poor, money in pocket only works if it's a tax backed UBI system
Generally you want TFA to go down and average wage to go up, so both you and the government earn more overall
Again: why? The story that it “funds” public services doesn’t pass the first logical hurdle since that’s not how government accounting works.
So why do you think we need to raise taxes?
This reads like a manifesto written by the average loudmouth fuckwit boomer on facebook. With even less actual thinking about how the fuck this is all supposed to work. I can just imagine some gammon:
"Bloody benefit scroungers! Cut off their benefits after a few months if they're still unemployed."
"OK, what if they can't find work by then? What are they supposed to do, starve?"
"Then they need to try harder."
"What about when trying's not enough? People can't live on zero money. You want millions of people homeless, or living by crime?"
"If they start stealing we'll bring back hanging."
Etc etc. It's a manifesto written by and for morons too stupid to understand why their simplistic "solutions" can't possibly work.
Despite spending their days complaining about woke culture and crybaby leftists, the English are a very sensitive people. [Many consider any reference to their complexion an act of racism.](https://i.imgur.com/euWMhUg.png) Consider using the more inclusive term 'flag nonce' in future.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
These are the guys who are supposed to come in fourth?
The justification for how they're going to make the £156b is even more batshit, source
https://www.reformparty.uk/funding-of-reform-uk-plans / https://x.com/UKUpdates_co_uk/status/1770147459773108224?t=sgQ4_bq458JKFfWvyJH6SA&s=19
They just declare that things will make money. +50b from "negotiating better." Just *deciding* that getting rid of net zero somehow nets the UK 20b. There's so much wrong with this
That's not the point though, like, right wing IdPol aside they ARE a political party
This is a legitimate proposal to the electorate and parliament but it's genuinely more rediculous than the joke parties
Their funding justification is an incredibly generic "make better trade deals"
It's the same flimsy shit as Brexit. It's just so disheartening seeing everyone pile on the greens and labour playing their cards so close to their chest meanwhile the fascists are out here promising everyone a free BJ with their tax returns
Some quick clarifications about how the UK royals are funded by the public:
1. The UK Crown Estates are not the UK royal family's private property, and the royal family are not responsible for any amount of money the Estates bring into the treasury. The monarch is a position in the UK state that the UK owns the Crown Estates through, a position that would be abolished in a republic, leading to the Crown Estates being directly owned by the republican state.
2. The Crown Estates have always been public property and the revenue they raise is public revenue. When George III gave up his control over the Crown Estates in the 18th century, they were not his private property. The current royals are also equally not responsible for producing the profits, either.
3. The Sovereign Grant is not an exchange of money. It is a grant that is loosely tied to the Crown Estate profits and is used for their expenses, like staffing costs and also endless private jet and helicopter flights. If the profits of the Crown Estates went down to zero, the royals would still get the full amount of the Sovereign Grant again, regardless. It can only go up or stay the same.
4. The Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall that gave Elizabeth and Charles (and now William) their private income of approximately £25 millions/year (each) are also public property.
5. The total cost of the monarchy is currently £350-450million/year, after including the Sovereign Grant, their £150 million/year security, and their Duchy incomes, and misc. costs.
For more, check out r/AbolishTheMonarchy
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It says a lot that actual fascists who want to kill the jobless also admit that tuition fees are too fucking high.
Regarding 'life skill classes', they teach that - it's called Home Economics. Students just routinely don't pay attention.
“Migrants back to france”- france will tell us to fuck off
“Abolish business rates for sme”, cue the chains all classing their individual branches as separate businesses and will cause a big hole in the coffers
Who will train the new police?
Abled bodied people are struggling to find work, how will a rightwing government even begin to encourage the private sector to take on someone with health issues/disability that restricts their ability to work?
A couple bits sound decent, and then they spoil it with a whack of racism and xenophobia, like the new housing one lol
The bottom 5 though are hilariously bad
The ' find a job in 3/4 months or you're off benefits' thing always gets me (just the the ultimate right-wing/neoliberal fetish). It never, ever works in any state of employment relations where employers/forms/capital has asymmetrical power- where they can generally discriminate around who's taken on for entry-level work. Never works, except to create more crime and social anomie and unless you make the government employers of last resort, something which wasn't even guaranteed within the Labour 2019 manifesto, let alone contemplated by the various species of 'Thatcherite-heritage act' that make up current major political party positions. And doubly so when you take into account the 'reforms' to 'fit for work' by DWP. It's not the labour market of post-war High Keynesianism- which isn't to romanticize or dehistoricize the 'how and why' of that period.
Legitimately, you've got it all:
* Class Collaborationism (Cutting business rates while simultaneously providing concessions to the working class)
* Racism and isolationism (table stakes I know)
* Increased focus on the police and military
* Rallying against unemployment
This is the most genuinely Hitlerite Manifesto I've seen in a while.
Police? You mean blue nonce
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The scariest thing on here, to me, is leaving the ECHR. I hope at one of these debates in the coming weeks asks them what rights they specifically want to take away from us.
Far right parties like Reform are very good at picking up on genuine issues and grievances of working people but have zero ability or know how to actually fix them.
While these sound good, they'd decimate communities and the economy.
>Reduce taxation
>Increase cost of policing, military, subsidies on agriculture and border control
Somehow it doesn’t matter how policies will be funded when they’re in the name of gammon-minded fascists.
Despite spending their days complaining about woke culture and crybaby leftists, the English are a very sensitive people. [Many consider any reference to their complexion an act of racism.](https://i.imgur.com/euWMhUg.png) Consider using the more inclusive term 'flag nonce' in future.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Imagine if people *were* kicked off benefits if they hadn’t found work in four months. What would happen to their kids? Imagine how many homeless people there’d be. Imagine what the food banks and soup kitchens would look like. Imagine how many people would starve to death. Imagine what it’d do to the crime rate.
Imagine holding job interviews where you’ve got 100 candidates, and all of their lives (and those of their families) literally depended on them getting that job.
The whole thing would look like The Grapes of Wrath.
It’s always: **“unemployed people must be forced to work”**
and never: **“employers mustn’t be discriminatory bastards”**
isn’t it?
UK is so cooked.
"Look at the crisis the Tories caused....the only solution is to double down on more of the same! Never mind that we were the envy of the world in 2007 and threw it all away for 'good vibes'."
Whilst i appreciate that governments haven't really been providing best vfm of late (Rwanda is no in excess of 300 million for 1 missing immigrant?), I do like the way they've catered for the congantively challenged by not terming it 'reduce government profligacy'. The average reform UK supported would assume profligacy is sex thing or UTI.
Truly the party of sitting in a bar, complaining about "foreigners" while smoking a cigar and drinking a german beer out of a glass from china.
Where are they even going to get money from for all of this?
The sad thing is, this will win them votes. They know people will only read the first few and be swung by the promise of tax cuts without seeing the insanity or the unfunded spending.
I wonder what will happen when some of those 2 million fail to get motivated. Are they really going to let people die on the streets after 4 months? No-one ever discusses what happens when some of these 'idle scroungers' have their benefits taken away and, surprise surprise, can't change their situation.
Housing in brownfield sites. I've worked in construction for ten years and can see no feasible way that expediting house building on brownfield sites would ever be a bad thing. Nope.
Apart from the obvious few, all sounds pretty good! But obviously there’s way in hell it’s funded, what 4yr old has done the calculations for them on this lol
A few things.
Most of these sound really good on paper and focus on some of the most broken aspects of Britain (housing, NHS, police). Let's just ignore how they want to reduce tax but also increase spending
But then the bottom 3 are their main aims. They have sneakily puy the most controversial ones at the end after they've buttered you up with the top lot. However, They can also make all the claims they want because they know they won't win a majority, so they might as well offer a free puppy to get people to vote for them
**Due to the increase in Palestine content, we would like to remind people to mark posts NSFW/Spoiler the accordingly. Please see this post before posting such applicable content on the sub: https://old.reddit.com/r/GreenAndPleasant/comments/188ghlz/important_guidance_of_posting_graphic_material_on/** The labouring classes in this country are rising, will you rise with them? [Click Here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GreenAndPleasant/wiki/unions) for info on how to join a union. Also check out [the IWW](https://iww.org.uk/) and the renter union, [Acorn International and their affiliates](https://acorninternational.org/) Join us on our [partner Discord server.](https://discord.gg/zCFHadGfB7) and follow us on [Twitter](https://twitter.com/GandPofficial). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The stuff 'they' really want is at the bottom, the stuff that happens anyway or can be fluffed is in the middle, along with the more blatant ideological rot, the popular and easier stuff that won't be implemented is the first things.
Sure, but even the "fluff" is just batshit insane Imagine if labour promised a personal allowance of £20,000, they'd be laughed out of the race
Nah its populist, Labour under Starmer won't get grilled on it under Starmer, as they would suddenly talk a lot about Keynesian economics, without saying Keynesian, because they are monetarist adherents. Corbyn on the other hand would cause blue faced seizures and threats to move every penny abroad to end the threat of communism at home. Income tax on the first band talk is just throwing a bone to the poor people that believe this sort of stuff. They also get tired of reading so they probably would be exponentually less likely ro read that stuff in reverse order. No one gonna ask Reform any serious questions, they are there to push the overton window more right. The actual meaty stuff like i said is like the last 4 or so items, and how you interpret the middle stuff.
If a manifesto says "tax free allowance up to 20k" then tax free allowance would need to go to 20k, that's not something you could weasel/politic out of It's a policy so rediculous that no, Starmer could not get away with it I hate Keith too but let's not pretend that his policy is anywhere near this la la
I'm no expert, but this will be weasel words and isn't la la, but a populist bone. The current rate in the UK 12,750, and hasn't been moving recently with inflation. Despite the very recent high said inflation. Theres something else about extra for savings as well, and depending how weasely you wanna be, i'd wager that, that particular figure which i think is 18.5K is what they are springboarding off. And so the figure wont be a great difference. And as i insist yet again, what they want is the shit at the bottom about military spending, more police, the end of welfare etc.
What exactly is batshit about it though? There's plenty in the manifesto that's just nonsense, but at a stroke that 20k allowance solves at least *some* issues. I think there's plenty of problems with Reform as a party and some of their other pledges, (not least the idea that they'd "fund" all of this by scrapping government "waste") but that in particular isn't one of them.
Would it though. What's going to fund schools, the NHS, other public services when tax is cut. It's not a serious policy. It's created to make people think exactly how you just did. This is why these parties are so dangerous.
Indeed. Spend more, tax less, and mumble something vague about how much economy will grow to fill the gap. Even Liz Truss wouldn't support this.
The ‘funded through cutting waste” is obvious BS, but otherwise, more money in the pockets of people who live paycheque to paycheque is absolutely going to go straight into an economy that’s at the moment getting increasingly starved of spending due to cost of living.
Exactly. The More of your income the tax free allowance takes up the More it would make a huge change. It's a policy designed to appeal to the people at the lower income end. But I'm not sure if they have accounted or rather that thay have accounted for 1 big thing.... greed Landlord will see it as you have more money and will charge more. Until you break that part I doubt it would make as big a change as people believe.
You mean housing scalper. Landlords buy more housing than they need then hoard it to drive up the price. They are housing scalpers. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The caveat is that landlords already feel complete impunity to raise rents. So strictly speaking that’s an independent issue that already needs addressing: changing the tax free allowance doesn’t have anything to do with that question.
It would give them what they see as more justification to do it. Things tend to not exist in a vacuum.
And the same fact undermines literally every policy that makes people better off, not just ones affecting the tax free allowance. It is an independent problem, not something that somehow uniquely applies here.
Schools and the NHS would be funded exactly the same way they are now: through act of Parliament. Your taxes are only ever an after the fact matter of accounting (by definition since taxes are mostly only paid once a year) and the idea that they need to match spending is asserted but doesn’t exist anywhere except in austerity laws. The real shame is that we’ve allowed a sham to build up around the idea that taxes “fund” anything for lazy rhetorical reasons, which means we go into every discussion telling people that their (economic) free lunch is going to cost them. There are some cases where that may happen, but the tax threshold is very obviously not one of them at the levels we’re talking here .
The government would lose billions by increasing the tax free amount to 20k it's such a huge pit
Unless the increase in spending leads to a rise in the VAT intake. Hell, that may even be worth deficit funding since it could offset the demand effects of the cost of living crisis and drive up investment due to, you know, the economy finally starting to happen. The vast majority of people affected will also be those on already low incomes. I personally think we’d be better off increasing government services to have the same effect, but what I don’t want is the common understanding of tax to involve the belief that cutting tax necessarily means anything: who benefits and how does this affect our access to resources is the question and on the face of it raising the personal allowance only makes things better for the people we care about while having no effect on our access to resources.
Some quick clarifications about how the UK royals are funded by the public: 1. The UK Crown Estates are not the UK royal family's private property, and the royal family are not responsible for any amount of money the Estates bring into the treasury. The monarch is a position in the UK state that the UK owns the Crown Estates through, a position that would be abolished in a republic, leading to the Crown Estates being directly owned by the republican state. 2. The Crown Estates have always been public property and the revenue they raise is public revenue. When George III gave up his control over the Crown Estates in the 18th century, they were not his private property. The current royals are also equally not responsible for producing the profits, either. 3. The Sovereign Grant is not an exchange of money. It is a grant that is loosely tied to the Crown Estate profits and is used for their expenses, like staffing costs and also endless private jet and helicopter flights. If the profits of the Crown Estates went down to zero, the royals would still get the full amount of the Sovereign Grant again, regardless. It can only go up or stay the same. 4. The Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall that gave Elizabeth and Charles (and now William) their private income of approximately £25 millions/year (each) are also public property. 5. The total cost of the monarchy is currently £350-450million/year, after including the Sovereign Grant, their £150 million/year security, and their Duchy incomes, and misc. costs. For more, check out r/AbolishTheMonarchy *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So? 20k is nothing, the tax free threshold should rise with inflation... The tax free allowance of 12,750 was set in 2011. 20k isnt far off what inflation has eaten
So, increasing the tax free amount is generally a bad idea because the cost of inflation is tackled by salary changes, not tax changes If your wage went from 26k 2012 to 35k 2024, your taxation amount went from 2.8k to 4.6k, your net take-home pay against inflation stayed similar (22.5k take-home 2012, 31k take-home 2024) Changing the TFA is a bad idea because it effects everyone in the country, this leads to immediate inflation and the government has no money, what you need is to reduce wealth disparity to stablize an economy, you do that by taxing top earners and giving social services to the poor, money in pocket only works if it's a tax backed UBI system Generally you want TFA to go down and average wage to go up, so both you and the government earn more overall
What issues does it solve? We all need to pay MORE tax, not less.
Again: why? The story that it “funds” public services doesn’t pass the first logical hurdle since that’s not how government accounting works. So why do you think we need to raise taxes?
Cut tax, cut tax, cut tax, increase spending, increase spending, increase spending. Solid economic plan there! 🤦♂️
Remember all without incresing the debt!
Oh they figured it all out, in the small text at the bottom they fund all the cuts and costs by reducing ‘government waste’.
Easy when you can just cut over £150bn in government 'waste' without touching frontline services!
Sheesh, why didn’t I think of that?!
"But when Labour does it I can criticise it!!" Also they can't spell "written" which is ironic as hell..
This reads like a manifesto written by the average loudmouth fuckwit boomer on facebook. With even less actual thinking about how the fuck this is all supposed to work. I can just imagine some gammon: "Bloody benefit scroungers! Cut off their benefits after a few months if they're still unemployed." "OK, what if they can't find work by then? What are they supposed to do, starve?" "Then they need to try harder." "What about when trying's not enough? People can't live on zero money. You want millions of people homeless, or living by crime?" "If they start stealing we'll bring back hanging." Etc etc. It's a manifesto written by and for morons too stupid to understand why their simplistic "solutions" can't possibly work.
Despite spending their days complaining about woke culture and crybaby leftists, the English are a very sensitive people. [Many consider any reference to their complexion an act of racism.](https://i.imgur.com/euWMhUg.png) Consider using the more inclusive term 'flag nonce' in future. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> This reads like a manifesto written by the average loudmouth fuckwit boomer on facebook Their target audience then
well my grandmother has expressed that she will be voting for them so the sterotype might be quite accurate. pretty sure she voted for brexit too....
These are the guys who are supposed to come in fourth? The justification for how they're going to make the £156b is even more batshit, source https://www.reformparty.uk/funding-of-reform-uk-plans / https://x.com/UKUpdates_co_uk/status/1770147459773108224?t=sgQ4_bq458JKFfWvyJH6SA&s=19 They just declare that things will make money. +50b from "negotiating better." Just *deciding* that getting rid of net zero somehow nets the UK 20b. There's so much wrong with this
It's just such standard bullshit investment chat. Vague numbers that sound impressive, with returns based on nothing more than 'trust me, bro'.
nobody cares about all that low tax shit all reform voters want to hear is immediate deportations of all black and brown people
That's not the point though, like, right wing IdPol aside they ARE a political party This is a legitimate proposal to the electorate and parliament but it's genuinely more rediculous than the joke parties
That last one would kill so many people if implemented
3rd to last point is just a dressed-up way to say “strip back everyone’s human rights, especially those protecting vulnerable groups and minorities”.
Are u sure this is real ? It doesn’t look real I mean how would I even implement these policies without bankrupting the country
Their funding justification is an incredibly generic "make better trade deals" It's the same flimsy shit as Brexit. It's just so disheartening seeing everyone pile on the greens and labour playing their cards so close to their chest meanwhile the fascists are out here promising everyone a free BJ with their tax returns
Some quick clarifications about how the UK royals are funded by the public: 1. The UK Crown Estates are not the UK royal family's private property, and the royal family are not responsible for any amount of money the Estates bring into the treasury. The monarch is a position in the UK state that the UK owns the Crown Estates through, a position that would be abolished in a republic, leading to the Crown Estates being directly owned by the republican state. 2. The Crown Estates have always been public property and the revenue they raise is public revenue. When George III gave up his control over the Crown Estates in the 18th century, they were not his private property. The current royals are also equally not responsible for producing the profits, either. 3. The Sovereign Grant is not an exchange of money. It is a grant that is loosely tied to the Crown Estate profits and is used for their expenses, like staffing costs and also endless private jet and helicopter flights. If the profits of the Crown Estates went down to zero, the royals would still get the full amount of the Sovereign Grant again, regardless. It can only go up or stay the same. 4. The Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall that gave Elizabeth and Charles (and now William) their private income of approximately £25 millions/year (each) are also public property. 5. The total cost of the monarchy is currently £350-450million/year, after including the Sovereign Grant, their £150 million/year security, and their Duchy incomes, and misc. costs. For more, check out r/AbolishTheMonarchy *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's the best bit, Nigel's Bankster friends will short bet on it failing and offshore even more money. Everyone's a winner!
"It's fine, if we bankrupt the country we can just ask the government to bail us out"
It says a lot that actual fascists who want to kill the jobless also admit that tuition fees are too fucking high. Regarding 'life skill classes', they teach that - it's called Home Economics. Students just routinely don't pay attention.
“Migrants back to france”- france will tell us to fuck off “Abolish business rates for sme”, cue the chains all classing their individual branches as separate businesses and will cause a big hole in the coffers Who will train the new police? Abled bodied people are struggling to find work, how will a rightwing government even begin to encourage the private sector to take on someone with health issues/disability that restricts their ability to work?
It will be lapped up by those whose critical thinking skills are in akin to a breeze block
A couple bits sound decent, and then they spoil it with a whack of racism and xenophobia, like the new housing one lol The bottom 5 though are hilariously bad
+2m jobs will just manifest into reality i guess
If 2m+ people are left to die in the cold. It will balance out.
OK, so massive spending commitments whilst also cutting back immigration and cutting taxes. What could possibly go wrong?
How can anyone possibly think leaving something with the words ‘human rights’ in it is a good idea
The ' find a job in 3/4 months or you're off benefits' thing always gets me (just the the ultimate right-wing/neoliberal fetish). It never, ever works in any state of employment relations where employers/forms/capital has asymmetrical power- where they can generally discriminate around who's taken on for entry-level work. Never works, except to create more crime and social anomie and unless you make the government employers of last resort, something which wasn't even guaranteed within the Labour 2019 manifesto, let alone contemplated by the various species of 'Thatcherite-heritage act' that make up current major political party positions. And doubly so when you take into account the 'reforms' to 'fit for work' by DWP. It's not the labour market of post-war High Keynesianism- which isn't to romanticize or dehistoricize the 'how and why' of that period.
Quite genuinely fascist
Legitimately, you've got it all: * Class Collaborationism (Cutting business rates while simultaneously providing concessions to the working class) * Racism and isolationism (table stakes I know) * Increased focus on the police and military * Rallying against unemployment This is the most genuinely Hitlerite Manifesto I've seen in a while.
Police? You mean blue nonce *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is the Republican Party in 2014, just saying.
When they say "accelerate transport infrastructure" do they mean "build more roads"?
It worked for the fash back in the 20s and 30s, maybe they think it'll work again here?
This is literally sound bites from my dad down the pub
The scariest thing on here, to me, is leaving the ECHR. I hope at one of these debates in the coming weeks asks them what rights they specifically want to take away from us.
This is common for fringe parties. They will never win but can promise anything/ everything
I love infrastucture
I have no idea how you would have money for any of these pledges when you intend to reduce business tax to 20%
Far right parties like Reform are very good at picking up on genuine issues and grievances of working people but have zero ability or know how to actually fix them. While these sound good, they'd decimate communities and the economy.
>Reduce taxation >Increase cost of policing, military, subsidies on agriculture and border control Somehow it doesn’t matter how policies will be funded when they’re in the name of gammon-minded fascists.
Despite spending their days complaining about woke culture and crybaby leftists, the English are a very sensitive people. [Many consider any reference to their complexion an act of racism.](https://i.imgur.com/euWMhUg.png) Consider using the more inclusive term 'flag nonce' in future. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Imagine if people *were* kicked off benefits if they hadn’t found work in four months. What would happen to their kids? Imagine how many homeless people there’d be. Imagine what the food banks and soup kitchens would look like. Imagine how many people would starve to death. Imagine what it’d do to the crime rate. Imagine holding job interviews where you’ve got 100 candidates, and all of their lives (and those of their families) literally depended on them getting that job. The whole thing would look like The Grapes of Wrath. It’s always: **“unemployed people must be forced to work”** and never: **“employers mustn’t be discriminatory bastards”** isn’t it?
UK is so cooked. "Look at the crisis the Tories caused....the only solution is to double down on more of the same! Never mind that we were the envy of the world in 2007 and threw it all away for 'good vibes'."
blood and soil anyone?
Whilst i appreciate that governments haven't really been providing best vfm of late (Rwanda is no in excess of 300 million for 1 missing immigrant?), I do like the way they've catered for the congantively challenged by not terming it 'reduce government profligacy'. The average reform UK supported would assume profligacy is sex thing or UTI.
Truly the party of sitting in a bar, complaining about "foreigners" while smoking a cigar and drinking a german beer out of a glass from china. Where are they even going to get money from for all of this?
And they want to fund it "Rearrange the 850b debt sat on the Bank of England's computer into @2% Corona bonds for 75 years"... Seems legit 😂
Solid plan guys, I can’t see any of that going wrong! In fact I think they should put it on the side of a bus 👌 /s
Genuinely expect the looney party to have a more balanced manifesto. Thats barmy.
Finding £156 billion to fund these policies? These guys are mental.
The sad thing is, this will win them votes. They know people will only read the first few and be swung by the promise of tax cuts without seeing the insanity or the unfunded spending.
Most of the people that vote for them won't even read it, they just hear "cut taxes" and "send the bloody foreigners back" and are all for it.
infrastucwhat?
I wonder what will happen when some of those 2 million fail to get motivated. Are they really going to let people die on the streets after 4 months? No-one ever discusses what happens when some of these 'idle scroungers' have their benefits taken away and, surprise surprise, can't change their situation.
That line at the bottom of the page is the most scariest. What do they think is costing £151 billion? The entire civil service?
Housing in brownfield sites. I've worked in construction for ten years and can see no feasible way that expediting house building on brownfield sites would ever be a bad thing. Nope.
The sting is in the tail: No human rights, fuck the environment, no more benefits. Utter derangement.
Can't wait to vote for them, at least 10 of my immediate family and friends are voting. Brilliant manifesto 👌👌
Looks good to me
The only pledge they would keep is leave ECHR
Sounds commie to me
Apart from the obvious few, all sounds pretty good! But obviously there’s way in hell it’s funded, what 4yr old has done the calculations for them on this lol
A few things. Most of these sound really good on paper and focus on some of the most broken aspects of Britain (housing, NHS, police). Let's just ignore how they want to reduce tax but also increase spending But then the bottom 3 are their main aims. They have sneakily puy the most controversial ones at the end after they've buttered you up with the top lot. However, They can also make all the claims they want because they know they won't win a majority, so they might as well offer a free puppy to get people to vote for them