Agree on both fronts! I'm sure "we will raise taxes" would lose some votes in some places, but given the state of the public sector, it's going to feel very different to raising taxes when public services were actually okay.
And on Truss - Labour ought to turn her into their own "Long Term Economic Plan". Though we weirdos know that Truss…
Agree on both fronts! I'm sure "we will raise taxes" would lose some votes in some places, but given the state of the public sector, it's going to feel very different to raising taxes when public services were actually okay.
And on Truss - Labour ought to turn her into their own "Long Term Economic Plan". Though we weirdos know that Truss and Sunak are from different wings of the party and hate each other, most people will just see two politicians wearing the same blue jersey.
Moreover, Keir Starmer has put an absolute ton of work into communicating to the British public how he is different from his disastrously unpopular predecessor. Rishi Sunak... hasn't.
Yep - also re: Truss, the long-term effect is that her premiership basically turned mortgage-holders into solid Labour voters. This, and how that month-and-a-half transpired, gives Labour more latitude for planning reform (these voters learned the hard way that interest rates matter more for them than house prices do) and tax hikes (they also learned that interest rates matter more than marginal tax rates).
Also an argument for the "we will have to raise taxes" position is that the current position of pretending that radical improvements are possible without raising taxes is idiotic - witness the "VAT on independent school fees" debate - a tax that will raise essentially zero £s will apparently fund all things for all people.
There is perhaps some coherence in a "taxes will have to rise, but Labour will do it fairer/nicer/more progressively" position".
Agree on both fronts! I'm sure "we will raise taxes" would lose some votes in some places, but given the state of the public sector, it's going to feel very different to raising taxes when public services were actually okay.
And on Truss - Labour ought to turn her into their own "Long Term Economic Plan". Though we weirdos know that Truss and Sunak are from different wings of the party and hate each other, most people will just see two politicians wearing the same blue jersey.
Moreover, Keir Starmer has put an absolute ton of work into communicating to the British public how he is different from his disastrously unpopular predecessor. Rishi Sunak... hasn't.
Yep - also re: Truss, the long-term effect is that her premiership basically turned mortgage-holders into solid Labour voters. This, and how that month-and-a-half transpired, gives Labour more latitude for planning reform (these voters learned the hard way that interest rates matter more for them than house prices do) and tax hikes (they also learned that interest rates matter more than marginal tax rates).
Also an argument for the "we will have to raise taxes" position is that the current position of pretending that radical improvements are possible without raising taxes is idiotic - witness the "VAT on independent school fees" debate - a tax that will raise essentially zero £s will apparently fund all things for all people.
There is perhaps some coherence in a "taxes will have to rise, but Labour will do it fairer/nicer/more progressively" position".