What are Labour’s Actual Policies?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 бер 2024
- Sign up to Brilliant (the first 200 sign ups get 20% off an annual premium subscription): brilliant.org/tldreu
Since its inception, Labour Party has wrestled between left and right factions. Corbyn shifted it leftward and now Starmer has been redefining its stance. What does Labour stand for under him? If elected PM, what direction will Starmer take?
🎞 TikTok: / tldrnews
💡 Got a Topic Suggestion? - forms.gle/mahEFmsW1yGTNEYXA
Support TLDR on Patreon: / tldrnews
Donate by PayPal: tldrnews.co.uk/funding
Our mission is to explain news and politics in an impartial, efficient, and accessible way, balancing import and interest while fostering independent thought.
TLDR is a completely independent & privately owned media company that's not afraid to tackle the issues we think are most important. The channel is run by a small group of young people, with us hoping to pass on our enthusiasm for politics to other young people. We are primarily fan sourced with most of our funding coming from donations and ad revenue. No shady corporations, no one telling us what to say. We can't wait to grow further and help more people get informed. Help support us by subscribing, engaging and sharing. Thanks!
If Labour does win, expect to hear ''There's not much we can do because of the previous government'' for the following 5 years.
There's no magic money tree bla bla bla
Any non-Tory government coming in would say this to be fair as they have drained the country to line their own pockets
There not wrong some people are theorising the conservatives are torching the country so that it isn't fixable in a five year term and then when next general election is held the conservatives will be voted back in
Applying to re-join the EU would be a start.
At least that would be an honest evaluation.
this is why you don't do First Past the Post, kids..
PR would just give up a reform/tory coalition
Not in this climate of anger. More likely a Labour/Green or Labour/Lib Dem coalition.
Frit pass the post isn't bad. It's about as bad as the proportional on the continent.
I am from the continent and live in the UK. Both types are equal but both have their pros and cons.
@@tomasvrabec1845 I think the issue is if you have coalitions of many parties is how you bring them all in line to have a consensus becomes really difficult then
FPTP is the least bad electoral system.
Starmer: "we're not going to fix anything, but at least we're not making it that much worse. Maybe,..."
same to the rest of the Labour party will never be trusted to run the Country ever again
I mean they do have the new deal for working people and train renationlisation
@@gothicgolem2947 Unfunded of course.
???
@@gothicgolem2947if you believe theyll actually go through with it, ive got a bridge to sell you
Keir basically conned Labour members into voting for him to be leader. He told us the 2017 manifesto was going to be the "foundational document" and subsequently ditched every pledge he made during that leadership campaign.
What do you think he'll be like when in power?
Yes. I completely agree. Every single policy is missing from the current manifesto
Starmer's a grifter
Better than sticking to it and doing a Lettuce Truss
@@KlownFPV Foundational doesn't mean a repeat as well.
Was a shame the Labour membership thought 17 and 19 were wins. Weren't mature enough to hear "We lost. 17 of the 20 things in manifesto are getting binned".
The part about not taxing the ultra-rich seems like an April's fools joke. Rich factory owners and oligarchs might be the only people in the UK that have not suffered from Brexit. And now the expenses of Brexit will be paid by everyone else... expect the ones that aggressively lobbied for it.
top 5% isn't ultra rich but people on 87k or more. So hardworking professionals who already pay a silly amount in tax.
Given how quickly he has gone from standing for radical change to get elected as labour leader to supporting tory policies to get elected as PM, who really trusts he will follow through with any of his policies?
I think abandoning those policies that cost a lot of money actually shows that you can trust him more because he’s not promising on things that he can’t deliver.
@@TristanJ22yet during the leadership election he made those promises anyway, So was he just lying then?
@@RoseSiamesa lot has changed since then.
@@RoseSiamesno … Liz Truss blew a 30bn hole in the treasury, perhaps closer to 100bn given gilts never recovered
@@RoseSiamesanything to win. Win what is a different story. Was such a huge mistake to have chosen him as leader
Corban was totally vindicated though. Everything about the pandemic showed how much we relied on public utilities. Ridiculed for wanting broadband for everyone, then we immediately started to work and school from home
corbyn will never be vindicated no one even trusted him not the miitary and not the british citizens, if he would of backed brexit then he would of been PM but he decided to go with the left wing of his party and vote to remain and that is what put the nail into his coffin because he was always anti EU when he was on the back benches
His response to the EHRC report (which lost him the whip) was even vindicated recently by Martin Forde KC on LBC, yet it was barely picked up anywhere, wonder why?
His position on Isreal was also completely vindicated
@@RevRev1917 how is it vindicated? when about a 40 MPs have quit his cabnet/party
immediately, the right of the party is called "more pragmatic" as though all those things Corbyn was offering were just wishful thinking. The IFS said, when they came into power, Labour could afford 80% of all they were offering. And we know some of those things were clearly longer-term ambitions for second or even third terms. Nothing pie in the sky about them.
Words matter.
They basically were wishful thinking, because the bankers and billionaires who have the UK's balls in a vice grip would never have let it happen.
This is a liberal channel, what did you expect?
Yeah and the fact they refuse to cover or even remotely call out the transphobic policies of the torries because the channel is dedicated to "neutrality" is pretty disheartening.
@@Canadian_Princess I mean you're clearly biased, judging from your pfp, so I don't blame you. But among all the right-wing parties in the world, the Tories are the only ones to have literally an LGBT group. The Consevatives definitely didn't lost consensus because "they're bad transphobes :(" but for all the other shit they've done. They've lost the more right-wing voters, not the more moderates, who are just old motherfuckers that only want their pensions to be paid. I'm cautiously convinced that if Tories actually stopped immigration, achieving the net-zero, and were a bit more actually conservative on the social side, they would be at least at 30%, as they wouldn't have lost votes who are now more inclined to Reform Britain. And btw banning testosterone injections to minors is definitely not transphobic, I would dare to say it's actually common sense.
Two things in general:
[1] how come they never ask where the money is gonna come from when it comes to military and defence contracting companies? The UK has its own sovereign currency and is a currency issuer, not a currency user (eg businesses, local govts, people). The only restraint is actual resources it has (manpower, capital, natural resources) which, if managed correctly, can prevent inflation. Japan has 250% debt to gdp ratio and until recently has suffered deflation (recent inflation from supply shocks, but is resuming stable to deflation).
[2] political parties should have a core platform that cannot be changed so that voters know what it stands for in principle. For example, classic labour, due to the unaffordability of housing, would probably implement and NHS for housing. No monthly payments, no rates, just like healthcare-based on need. If a party member or even a majority of them disagree with the core principle, they are free to create a new party to fairly compete with their former party at the polls.
Labour feels, rightfully, that in today's atmosphere, they don't need to stand for anything. They just need to say we are not the lot opposite and will enjoy a shoo-in.
Boy I sure do love first-past-the-post two party systems.
@@hildegunstvonmythenmetz6095 Because any other would make a difference; regardless of party the results are the same because they all answer to the same master.
@@hildegunstvonmythenmetz6095 On the other hand proportional representation can make the task of forming a government a complete mess. There are no perfect systems.
@@hildegunstvonmythenmetz6095Butt cheeks of same man!
@@soundscape26True true. I live in Germany and I have to say I'm not thrilled that our Liberal Party (F.D.P.) keeps blocking every piece of Environmental Legislation the other two coalition partners draft so that at the end we achieve practically nothing except an angry populace and a piece of legislation as effective as a Psychic Vampire repellant. But I still prefer having six big parties and a whole lot of smaller parties, all with their own proposals, that I can actually vote for without feeling like I'm throwing my vote away, over having two parties with basically the same program.
I think I see Starmer's vision now, these points are what I have gathered:
-We're not the Torys
-Look, see, our ties are red
-Uhhh
-Vote now to get rid of the Torys!
I take that you are one of those who believe that people are poor by choice?
@@rollosinternet1853 I take it you support Gaza despite being uneducated on the situation
Britain is on the verge of enslavement: What are Labour's policies?
Starmer's a liar and a nob-head who pretends to defend the poor, but there's no denying Torys robbed the country blind.@@Copium6921
@@Copium6921 Ridiculous answer. Using unconnected topics as a distraction maneuver is an extremely poor argument. Finally people are noticing this.
Ayyyy lets go, Red Tories.
Not at all
@@gothicgolem2947Absolutely at all
Tony Blair type yes Tory reds
Yep, labour are red tories and the tories are blue labour. Different sides of the same coin. A properly different party is required
@@spudders9034 You guys need a properly left wing party, not just different shades of rightism
Labour in its current form is essentially Tory lite in most policy areas. I would vote for them, but only because I believe they are more likely to give renters a better deal and at least take some steps toward addressing the wider housing crisis. That is my top priority, it’s clear it shouldn’t be in the hands of the party with a backbench full of landlords, who are financially invested in keeping housing prices high and ensuring the UK continues to have some of the weakest renter’s laws in Europe.
Ok but how about just not wasting your time? They're already predicted an landslide so why waste your time with lesser evil voting?
A lot of Labour politicians are Landlords.
Why do my comments always get deleted? I'm sure tdlr has blacklisted me for being sometimes displeased with their coverage.
@@Guitar6ty Can't say I've taken stock of exactly how many landlords are in each party. I'm sure Labour has some as well. In the Tories' case, they've recently proven that there is a strong landlord block amongst the bankbenches, which is organised and intent on frustrating Gove and Sunak's efforts to at least look like they care about renters and the housing crisis.
@@lewisbaitup6352 Yeah, I'm been noticing a lot of my comments getting shadowbanned and sometimes even deleted. The thing is, it's not only on TLDR videos, it's happening all over the website which leads me to believe UA-cam is responsible. They've ramped up censorship to the point where even completely polite and rational comments get deleted in droves.
I don’t have much hope for the UK’s future. Looks pretty mad max judging from what recent events
1984 here we come
I don’t have much hope for you Sam, judging by your 7 months subscription to UA-cam..
@@californiadreamin8423 Hahaha nice sarcasm.. I’ve already used UA-cam way before I opened this account. So try again…. Troll.
@@punklesam94 Prove it !!
@@californiadreamin8423 don’t need to. Take a walk and lick some grass 🤡
Why is reversal of austerity deemed far left in this video? It's a return to a 2010 economy. It's hardly Leninist to want to do so.
Because actually doing things that people want costs money, and there's no magic money tree as we have all been reminded many times, so obviously the only way it is possible is when Comrade Corbyn breaks into your nan's house and steals her jewelry to pay for some Scottish Highlander's internet
@@lunac6094 That's what the BBC would tell us. However, one view of a Gary Stephenson video and that argument is blown out of the water. The superrich need taxing as the middle class is disappearing and it's going into their pockets.
Far left for Britain?
Because political attitudes in the UK have shifted rightwards very strongly since the 1980s.
@@lunac6094 "it costs money": as do the tax breaks for millionaires which Tories love. And the UK is raking in record tax receipts at the moment, so what's the use of that if it's not being spent on something useful to the population in general rather than pockets of it who happen to be Tory donors?
i want food
ok
frfr
hopefully you get to eat some food 💪💪
same
EU has plenty. maybe the UK could make a deal with the EU so that food doesn't take a week to import. so that food could be imported cheaper. it will most likely be food that is so bad that it can't be sold in the EU (meat from animals that died from disease and so on) because they can easily sell that inside the EU. but it is better than nothing.
Not having tuition fees is a hard left extremist position in your country? I feel sorry for you guys.
The UK is not a democracy, so everything should be viewed through! His lens
Scotland already has free fees for its citizens but fuck the rest of us
The UK media is almost entirely owned by oligarchs who use that power to shape political discourse. Anything that would cost them money is "far left extremism." It's also shaped how people talk about Corbyn - the media largely depicted him as a hopelessly naive idealist or a lunatic even after Labour made significant gains under him in 2017.
I certainly don't agree with all of Corbyn's decisions or policies - he's something of a useful idiot when it comes to Ukraine, for example - but comparing how they talked about Corbyn to how they talk about far-right cartoon villain Suella Braverman is enough to give you whiplash. Corbyn was a radical fringe lunatic for wanting to raise taxes and spend more on public services, but Braverman's efforts to rid the UK of asylum seekers and make protesting the war in Gaza illegal just means that she represents the right wing of the Tory party, and plenty of papers applaud her for it. It's absurd.
Sadly, oligarchs own our media and shape political discussion. Anything that would cost them money is "extremist."
The UK is a country full of bad vibes people where as long as there’s someone doing worse than you people are happy. The thought of policies which benefit younger people are sacrilegious
Both lab and con stand for themselves. They stand to keep a two party system. Their raison d'etre is to not leave.
Nonsense post.
Fact check: true
@@ASocialistTransGirlnonsense post
Lol while labour keeps losing against the tories, I think they should relised that the UK population is generally Conservative. The reason for the labour being higher in the polls is that people want a different party but the next election in 2029 will swing back to the Conservative.
@@tomasvrabec1845 it’s not
Okay, so a major issue with the information just given here is that it ignores the difference between expenses and investments. No rich person counts their £28 billion worth of new stocks as an EXPENSE. It is not money that is being "spent" in the same way that you spend money on a holiday or a car.
Until journalists stop treating every single type of government spending as the same we will never have good politics in this country because the average person will be misled into thinking that £28 billion invested in the economy is the same as a £28 billion tax cut to be funded by borrowing. These things are worlds apart. Please do better and make this clearer in your reporting.
And the absolute worst spenders are those who rationalize everything they want to buy as 'investments' and then wonder where things went wrong when their mansion is foreclosed and their Ferrai repossessed.
@@Nasrudith an investment is spending money on something that will pay itself off in its value, whether monetary or otherwise
@@zeahhhh most billionaires considered lobbying thinktanks that corrupt politics to their liking and fake charities for tax breaks as “investment”. Hell the richest garbage pile in the world consider tweeting great replacement with neo nazis 16 hours a day as “work”.
The electorate wants hope and vision, Labour has neither
That's why it's time for Reform UK
Bullshit. Labour has vision and the electorate clearly don't want hope and vision.
@@AC-tn9hg Hahahahahaha good one
The electorate wants hope and vision - never once do they consider that they themselves are capable of it. No instead they don't want the responsibility so instead they'll give authority over themselves to someone they know absolutely nothing about, through a process that often sees the one they did choose not even get the seat... and then wonder why things never change.
If the electorate wants to start blaming anyone, each one can simply start by looking in the mirror.
@@metalhead2550Is it that bad?
There should not be any left or right of a party. Break up these large parties and implement proportional representation.
Which just forces coalitions to after the vote, with no input from voters, between parties. Rather than beforehand, within parties, that voter then explicitly votes on.
@@danielwebb8402 honestly we should be voting for individual representatives, not parties
👏👏👏👏👏
Two things in general:
[1] how come they never ask where the money is gonna come from when it comes to military and defence contracting companies? The UK has its own sovereign currency and is a currency issuer, not a currency user (eg businesses, local govts, people). The only restraint is actual resources it has (manpower, capital, natural resources) which, if managed correctly, can prevent inflation. Japan has 250% debt to gdp ratio and until recently has suffered deflation (recent inflation from supply shocks, but is resuming stable to deflation).
[2] political parties should have a core platform that cannot be changed so that voters know what it stands for in principle. For example, classic labour, due to the unaffordability of housing, would probably implement and NHS for housing. No monthly payments, no rates, just like healthcare-based on need. If a party member or even a majority of them disagree with the core principle, they are free to create a new party to fairly compete with their former party at the polls.
So agree and that's why I'm voting Liberal Democrat
The current state of UK politics is the best argument for a proportion system, I've always been fine with FPTP but can't vote for either party, we need more viable parties
It will never happen as both the Tories and Labour know if they passed that vote they would be severely damaging their power.
@@ben77790 Not if people keep voting for them. If you support proportional representation vote for a party that isn't Labour or the Tories.
Two things in general:
[1] how come they never ask where the money is gonna come from when it comes to military and defence contracting companies? The UK has its own sovereign currency and is a currency issuer, not a currency user (eg businesses, local govts, people). The only restraint is actual resources it has (manpower, capital, natural resources) which, if managed correctly, can prevent inflation. Japan has 250% debt to gdp ratio and until recently has suffered deflation (recent inflation from supply shocks, but is resuming stable to deflation).
[2] political parties should have a core platform that cannot be changed so that voters know what it stands for in principle. For example, classic labour, due to the unaffordability of housing, would probably implement and NHS for housing. No monthly payments, no rates, just like healthcare-based on need. If a party member or even a majority of them disagree with the core principle, they are free to create a new party to fairly compete with their former party at the polls.
PR might be necessary to break the deadlock, but as a voting system it sucks. No country that uses PR has any long-term political stability and no one can predict the odd configuration of alliances that are inevitable after a confusing election result. PR is just the vanity voters of thinking at least they made a mark, but at the expense of the nation as a whole.
@@fredneecher1746
Denmark, sweden, Germany, New Zealand? Unstable?
How did he not see that tuition fees would have such a massive effect. It shows he doesnt look ahead at all. Imagine he makes this kind of mistake while in office. Scary stuff
Also, who is most likely to have tuition fees? The middle class, who are encouraged to go to uni by their families.
Who is most likely to have to pay for them? The working class, who go straight to work.
All about "not taking advantage of the poor" until it comes to them, huh.
@@cantin8697what are you talking about? The reason he abandoned that pledge was because we just cannot afford it. How much headroom is there at the moment? Basically none. And yes those fiscal rules are done by the tories and you don’t have to stick to them but the next election will be fought on the economy and if Labour looks like they will be worse than the tories they might just manage to lose the election. This video did such a terrible job in showing what Labour stands for it goes over a few abandoned pledges without looking at what is actually in place. The green prospers plan for example did not get abandoned the finances for it changed. The majority of the plan is still in place.
@@cantin8697and the working class who aspire to better themselves and go to university can get fucked i guess
@@user-mr9jw2he8mnaive for a country to not invest in its own people. We need politicians to give a damn about the country long term, not successive governments for decades who only care about their party and career, short term gains for long term pain.
@@TristanJ22 I'm talking about an obvious fact --- nothing is free, and the working (mostly the poor) pays for everything though our wages.
The middle class goes to uni. The poor, without such an advantage, pays taxes to balance the cost. That's the reality of tuition being scrapped.
Let’s face it, both parties suck. 😂
Life before Tories was so much better though! Labour brought in so many things that benefited everyone. Surely you would rather a Labour gov than the rich serving only Tories?
@@KlownFPV that was before though. now labour support the genocide just as much as the Tories and they have the same economic policies. every time Tories criticise something starmer said then starmer goes back on what he said. Tories effectively control starmer more than the labour party members do.
Vote Green! Send labour a message because they are going to win anyway
Tories 1000 times worse - but yes both parties do indeed suck.
@@APAGMy ideal scenario: Labour win, but barely. With a load of votes going to Green and Lib Dem, so Labour get the message that we needed the Tories out, but we don't want a Labour that acts like "soft" Tories.
If you're not going to spend any money or raise taxes how are you going to do anything? I also doubt the UK is at its highest tax burden since WW2 could we get some analysis on that?
Labour stands for whatever Israel wants.
But Tories are usually more pro isreal though
Can any believe that a speech from Starmer would hold a crowd at Glastonbury?
It doesn't speak well for representative democracy in the UK that Corbyns popularity is what brought him down
popular, popular with who, only the far left....and supporters of terrorism.
Can anyone believe that the leader of the Labour party can appeal to more that a few coked up hippies who don't vote anyway
Popularity... among middle class hippies / children.
Point of politics is to win elections. Not get wanked off by Glastonbury crowd. The later is student union talking shop.
Someone's clearly not been to Glastonbury. It's full of working (and some middle) class people who like music. You're getting confused with Woodstock.
@@TheGerkumanthat can afford £400 for the tickets and probably majority won't really bother to vote.
5:35 How long until he U-Turns on this?
Why can't we tax the rich? They have even more money now than they did before, so they can be taxed more!
Unfortunately it's not that simple, the people you are talking about are so rich, that in the press of a button they can move their business out of the UK and somewhere like Asia where they won't be taxed as much, if we were to suddenly that taxing these millionaires and billionaires more they'd simply move out of the UK and the economy would suffer, people would loose jobs, unfortunately these big companies hold us hostage, it's as simple for them as, tax us more we move out
@@AdventureShorts33 Shows how corporations and the Banking sector have a complete stranglehold on the UK now. We are basically the new Feudal domain for them to asset strip and extract wealth from. Even a simple man like myself can see this is going to end in violence or some kind of rebellion in England eventually. You can't strip the Working and Middle classes of wealth forever. Eventually a breaking point will be reached and they will start burning shit down.
youd have a california/NY to texas/florida situation except it would be a much worse UK to EU movement. probably UK to Ireland tbh.
@@AdventureShorts33 you nationalise their assets and ban their transfer out of the country
@@AdventureShorts33yes except they haven’t left other European and Scandinavian countries where the taxes are way higher. It’s a useful scare tactic but that’s all it is.
Starmer is no representative of Labour and Labour no longer represents the working man or woman
The working man represents a pocket a politician can pick as and when they feel at liberty to, and the working woman represents a purse the politician can rob from when ever they feel at liberty to.
You literally said nothing… Angela Rainers plan for working people, if implemented, will be one of the biggest workers right reforms in the UK. What would you like Labour to do?
Lots of nonsense there Zaros.
This is true.
Fact check: true!!!
Never let a circular argument get in the way, we’ll, of a good argument
@@californiadreamin8423 Thank you. I mimicked your politicians. It is not a difficult task. Still, from the evidence I can see for myself, that 'nonsense' remains to be understood by many more people than yourself.
And your (possibly) two allies?
This is basically the shit and shit lite party situation all over again
Dont play it.
Reform or don’t vote. As nothing will change if not. This video has literally just said 5yrs of the same to come. With no action on anything. All broken promises before he’s even in power!
So is it true that by UK standards, the American Democratic Party is considered conservative and the American Republican Party are ultra conservatives?
yes spot on
The Democratic party is mostly center to center-right and the republicans are center-right to right. the Democrats and Republicans are almost identical if you measure politics, except for center-left democrats like sanders and right wing republicans
1.5 million homes partly funded by private equity and asset mgmt firms 😂 two groups ‘famous’ for not wanting short term returns via asset inflation. House prices how do they work again 🤣?
Don't forget that's a 10 year commitment. That's roughly the same number of houses built in the previous 10 years. They've literally promised nothing.
An article I read described him as "The centre-left's absentee dad" and that's really stuck with me ever since.
Starmer andLabour are no longer left wing
Modern Man (Stephen Fry): I'm New Labour, so I don't believe in anything.
From "The Complete & Utter History of Everything"
the only time labour won anything in the recent years is being new labour, cope and seeth socialist labour.
YES REFORM UK IS THE ONLY WAY OUT OF THIS MESS.
@@Theforestbandit. Still recovering from your lobotomy ?
@@californiadreamin8423the crazy thing is, despite reform being even worse than the tories in nearly every way, they also claim to want proportional representation, which is the first step in fixing the UK, so the ideal 2024 election result probably would include some reform MPs, just in a weak government that requires a coalition with several small, PR supporting parties.
@@dombo813 Unfortunately Reform plc are given the oxygen of publicity whatever electoral system we have. We know that from Farages activities when we were in the EU and he could only be elected by PR , and sufficient people listened .
They’re crooks, and need to be exposed as such.
Unlike 1997, this upcoming election isn’t exactly a pro-labour election, more just an anti-tory election.
Stammer makes it hard for anybody properly left of center who is paying attention to vote for him. He is something of a red tory. I would also trust a duck with the economy more then the nasty party.
i trust the labour party more than the party of literal aristocrats
But his constituency is bloody Holborn and St Pancras. Do you genuinely think people in his constituency (one of the most left leaning in the country) will struggle to vote for him?
This is the first time Labour will get a majority easily without any worries, so this would be the time to be bold and try to implement real socialist changes, you would say..
No. They're on for a huge majority specifically because they're not promising that. Corbyn would probably lose this election
You will be sorry.
What you're missing is that the right-wing client media will jump on anything that's remotely centre left in an attempt to paint Starmer as some dangerous socialist who will put Britain at risk because, reasons.
The man has no principles or stances, he's just doing the least he can possibly do to get in on the "we're not Tories (allegedly)" vote.
'fiscal responsibility' = protecting the ruling class.
Spending other people's money, including your own grandchildren's = .... selfish, childish, economically illiterate
I'm hoping that for now Starmer is being pragmatic and slowly getting the country used to more left-centre policies (compared to the Tories) for now (look what happened to Corbyn and Labour's set count in 2019). Then come the next election he will shift more to the left...
Only time will tell, I suppose...
!Vote Green and Send them a message!
YES REFORM UK WILL GET OUR COUNTRY BACK TO A GREEN AND PLEASANT LAND
@@Theforestbandit What, the racist party that wants to ruin my future by ignoring the climate catastrophe. The party that wants to loosen regulations on the 1 percent in order to make everyone else's lives shit, vote for the party that wants to lower taxes when the country is in a state? The party that is adamant that Brexit was a good thing? The party that is obsessed with people speaking 'foreign on trains' , that won't open safe and legal routes to save lives because they want the small boats problem to complain about? The party that would decimate our care system through stopping people - who are already treated very poorly - from coming to work there?
@@Theforestbanditapag never said reform, by vote Green they likely meant the green party, stop putting words in other peoples mouths.
@@Theforestbandit That's right, more wingnut Thatcherite bollocks, racism, and culture war shite! It's what made the conservative party the electoral powerhouse they are today, and Reform are even better at it!
@@Granolora Are you five or thick?
Thanks. Australian here. I've been hearing for the last 5 or more years, how incompetent and unlovable the UK Tories are, but not very much about the Labour alternative. Recently, after the Borris and Natasha and Truss and Rishi dance, I knew the Left was up by 20 points or more, and the Labs were a shoe-in for the next election win, but I had to google who their leader was ...
Starmer doesn't seem to stand for very much, but history says anything you stand for, in politics, seems to be the thing that kills you. The greatest asset (it seems), is to be uncommitted and smart and know when to keep your big mouth shut. That probably says something really depressing about human psychology. If we all agree that politicians are such arseholes, maybe (in their defence) we should look at what happens to politicians who are not arseholes.
There is a lot of criticism for Starmer/Labour that they are not articulate enough in their policies/promises, but they are in a very difficult situation. They need to safeguard their IP/USP until the start of the election campaign. Until that, the moment they say something that is concrete AND good/implementable, Tories will immediately nick it.
Status Quo but in red instead of blue
If the difference between tuition being a national scandal is whether or not you're willing to tax rich people, you may be a bit shit.
Tbf i think child destitution and increased poverty and hunger is more urgent than renewable energy and net zero
I agree. Starving children now or cleaner air tomorrow. Both are bad, but one can be dealt with immediately.
Labour's health policies seem doomed to fail for several reasons. First and most worrying is that Wes Streeting says engagement with stakeholders is bad because they are 'vested interests'. Never mind every analysis says without that any changes are destined to be unproductive, especially in such complex systems as the NHS. It also receals a disdain for the staff (asked to acheive 2% efficiency savings, as pay has been cut and workloads ramped up, year on year since ~2004). The NHS is becoming an infamously toxic place to work!
My biggest hope is that Labour is just trying to get as many seats as possible so they can make sweeping constitutional reforms, ones which would fix the political/electoral system and stop the UK from having such a prolonged period of senseless governance in the future. Maybe if they change the voting system people could actually feel represented and the party system would be fairer.
Why would labour vote to make sweeping changes to an election system that put them in power and likely keep them in power for years to come ?😊
Some hope...could try Reform for a change at least.
@@johnlesoudeur3653 Nope, I'm not an idiot
REFORM is a big world labour cannot even reform its own party
Why would Labour change fptp when they benefit from it as much as the Tories?
Now is when you need to tax the rich the most! You need social programs.
I think calling the right of the party 'more pragmatic' reveals a lot about TLDR's bias.
I mean pragmatic in the sense that the only wing of Labour to win power since 1974 was that same centrist wing. It's literally just how electoral history has played out.
@@addazarmy6826It doesn't mean much if they not only win power, but bolster Tory economic messaging, meaning that the Overton window shifts towards the right. I'd be willing to call them pragmatic if they they were moderately centrist but left the door open for left wing change. But the so called pragmatic centrists winning power these days aren't just not left wing, they're openly anti-left wing with no evidence they ever intend to do anything remotely left wing or good for the country at all. Even their most seemingly left wing policies, like a national sovereign wealth fund, are just public private partnerships by a different name. For those who don't know, PPP is when the government guarantees private profits in exchange for private sector investment. This sounds good, but all it really means is that the profits of a supposedly public endeavour get privatised, and any losses are born by the tax payer. This isn't pragmatism, it's corruption of a party that used to be for the people (in general) by private school and business elite who just want to play the game.
@@addazarmy6826that's why we are f.cked
Them hiding all the comments calling them out for misrepresenting Labour tells even more.
Well TLDR are centrist
I feel like "tax the rich" is the absolute bare minimum foundation of a liberal party. If you're backtracking even that, all your party stands for is "well at least we're not the other guys".
Sounds a lot like the situation in the United States.
I think that Labour have judged that they are only electable when they have little or nothing to offer. As Starmer has abandonned Labour policy without replacing it with a vision of his own, Labour's poll rating has shot up. If the electorate appear to reward vacuity, one cannot blame Labour for being vacuous.
The biggest arguement against Democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average politician.
Arguably the opposite is true. Why would you advocate from non democratic system... If you think they are all bad? That would mean that have more power, no forced cooperation and can do whatever they decide!
3:50 why is spending government money seen as bad for the economy, why is it accepted that not spending any money is ‘fiscally responsible’? That’s the opposite of responsible, you’ve got to invest in the economy to grow it!
It's particularly a sensitive issue at the moment because of the UK's crazy high level of debt. So much government money is just going towards paying off interest. It's very high risk to try to spend your way out of it.
To the average voter, if they had a friend who was up to their neck in debt but wanted to start a business to grow their income, most people would say 'Pay off the debts first to give yourself breathing room before you risk going bankrupt'. Rightly or wrongly people see the economy the same way
@@Phobosandpanic Yeah that makes sense if we’re talking about a traditional personal debt. But the government pays off its own debt in its own currency and most of its debt comes from its own bonds not from external sources. So we are just like American wherein we can afford to have big debt levels as most of that debt is our own bonds and we issue our own currency in our own banks. America has a giant debt ratio yet it’s the biggest economy in the world, furthermore just after WW2 our debt was 4 times the size of our gdp level and it led to the highest growth in our countries history (our debt level is only 2x our gdp right now) so clearly debt isn’t as big of a deal as right wing economists make it seem
Also debt usually isn’t a bad thing anyway if you tell people what you’re going to do with that money (if we’re using the business analogy) telling your investors that you’re taking out debt to expand the business which will make them returns in the long run is a lot more sensible than taking out random debts, this is why liz truss’s mini budget crashed the economy as she didn’t explain how 40Bn of tax cuts would grow the economy but labours previous 28Bn investment plan would be sensible as we knew where the money was going and how it would grow the economy.
@@Splooshua. Yeah absolutely agree, and very well put! I think the 28bn green investment plan would have been great and would have been 'good debt'.
The problem is they're at the will of voters, who don't all understand the power to use and leverage debt in the way you do. Ultimately they need to be sensible and appeal to the average man on the street, who won't see debt in the same way. If they can get in power with a big enough majority, hopefully then they will be more radical with spending, but first they need to get into power with mass appeal
"We investing in the economy" are the people creating businesses, not the state
@@Phobosandpanicthe debt has been higher...it's not important
Labour stands for pay more tax , work for FA , and a piss poor pension when you retire at 70 .
I don’t think that a tax raise is a costly policy. You are thinking of a tax cut surely?
The Laffer Curve - even though it sounds counter-intuitive, you can only raises taxes so much before they start to raise less money.
Nothing.
I found this really useful to see what some of the key differences are about decarbonising electricity by 2030 and about house building. I had fallen into the feeling that they don’t stand for anything and was struggling to align with them just to just to get rid of the tories
On the other hand - these are both variations on previous Tory policies that they have failed to deliver and rolled back (they pledged to build 300k houses a year and decarbonise electricity by 2035) and both these less ambitious policies were widely considered in those industries impossible.
What is the point of democracy when parties aren’t held to account for their policies?
That's what FPTP was designed to achieve
Labour are accountable for the promises they make, that's why they're so careful about making them. It's the Tories who get away with breaking them all the time because they have the client media to cover for them
@@leikfroakies Starmer has literally been quoted as saying “I’m ready to break pledges to make Labour electable” - and had U turned on a bunch of Labour policies as covered in this video. There is an argument they weren’t campaign pledges so they weren’t what they were elected on - but Labour have broken manifesto pledges before like when they over promised there would be no tax raises by their government in the 2005 manifesto.
It’s not on the same scale of the current government who seem able to say whatever they like, break almost all of their pledges and still keep winning support - time for a change for certain! But let’s not pretend the alternatives are going to be perfect either.
Wow, the Overton window is shifted to the right that you considered Corbyn far left. He'd be considered left in parts of Europe.
This 9-minute video could have been done in 1 minute.
Nobody talkes about it, but Disco Elysium reference in thumbnail is very nice, I see fellow people of culture.
So they basically stand for more status quo bs. Got it.
where did you note his policies? you noted everything he backed out on and 2 stances, but no specific policies
One of the most interesting battles in the labour party is the battle between labour together and the tony blair Institute. Should NHS data be sold to private companies that publicly talk about privatizing the NHS? It'll sure provide funds in the 10s of billions.
yes selling state assets always generates immediate funds what a surprise
@@jotoenatehaaenIdk what your point is but the funds will be sustained on a yearly basis as the data will be sold annually. Secondly, there are only a few private companies that have the capacity to process and analyze this data to find such patterns useful to create new pharmaceutical products and medicines so the anonymised data isn't massively useful to the state anyway. Furthermore, the state will still have access to the data even if the NHS did want to use it, this is the sale access to the data. It's an interesting debate. I see the reasons for but the companies processing the data I'm not to sure about
I see you watched Andrew marr too!
@@DansTrailShreds That's insane Wes Streeting wants to sell your NHS data to Palantir. Do you know who Peter Thiel is?
@@nathandrake5544 he's pretty horrendous ik. He's one of the ceos or managers behind palantir right? He said some strange and ridiculous things like claiming the NHS is the organization that causes sickness and the police is the main cause of crime. Saying that, the NHS data is very valuable and the NHS and the state doesn't really loose anything by selling access to this data. my only worry is these people could get hands on more power in the future and could miss use it in some way. Surely there must be other companies rather than palantir?
Labour is the best we can realistically hope for. UK elections are a joke, and the only ones laughing are Labour, and the Tories.
Vote independent! I will not pick either butt cheeks sane man!
neither can do anything within a year we will be wanting the Tories back. when bugger all is getting done and we are all worse off. and begging in the streets
@@davidsworld5837maybe that will be when people see real change is needed and will vote elsewhere instead of continuing to implement essentially a de facto 2 party system
RespectiveLY disagree we might as well get a whole different party Greens or but not more of the same Cons=Labs=Reform Party 👉NO THANK YOU!
There is no hope with Labour, I lived under them for 13 years and they destroyed the country and caused the 14 years of Tory we are currently suffering. Why vote for the same old? Reform4me.
Can we expect to see a video on Vaughan Gething & Welsh Labour?
Let's also not forget his u turn concerning trans people
As an outsider , I can't understand why people didn't vote in Jeremy Corbyn. He was such a good socialist leader . Starmer seems like your usual neoliberal WEF puppet.
Trash
people dont like socialism obviously
He was a shit leader. He had zero people or leadership skills
The country cared about brexit and immigration and he campaigned on free wifi and removing student debt. Arguably the worst campaigning strategy in the uks political history
@@ginjii3667he had some actual policies in his campaign its just the opposition was composed of the clown that is boris johnson who won solely because he appeared on have i got news for you once
It stands for very little under Starmer
The Tories are making Labour do good in the polls. Labour currently seems to be working hard to turn young people away from them.
Labor.... how about representing the ones that go to work every day.
Backtracking on increasing tax on the top 5% because the economy has gotten worse? no, you misunderstand, you're supposed to DO that because the economy has gotten worse
The leader of the opposition should oppose. Agreeing wih Sunak's shameful tansphobic and anti-protestor laws are shameful.
Would be great to see one of these for every party
We need our own New Mass workers party
Good luck with your little party with the first past the post
No, we need a workers mass party
That’s Galloway’s party
If you want work to pay then Reform, strength in numbers if you want a change to the system.
@@maccagrabme 😂🤪😂🤪😂😭😂😂😂🤪😂
Keir Starmer and Rishi Sunak are two cheeks of the same backside “ George Galloway 😂😂😂.
George Galloway is a genocide backing fascist. He's worse than Sunak
Damn, Tories eventually going Center and Labour also eventually going Center
Which parties gonna represent the Left and the Right now?
We are months away from the general election, and what do they stand for? More austerity. In 1997 Blair offered some hope, but Starmer doesn't. Wes Streeting shadow health Secretary said no hope is better than any. Labour are only likely to win the election as the Tories are in meltdown. Voters dont really like either party.Also, should this atrocity in Gaza still be going on, Labour wouldn't seek to call out Israel for war crimes.
Currently, Zionism
Kid Starver is a Tory lite. It' won't get much better with him in charge.
Keir Starmer* some one can't spell,LOL,You about as stupid as the Labour party crap rubbish
We're in a situation not unlike 1945. We need bigger spending. People can survive if the country has debt. People can't survive if they have no environment, healthcare, or jobs. Labour are pitching to the British people that we will have eternal austerity, which means poor people will continue to suffer. Labour under Starmer is for the few, not the many.
Not even a mention of immigration despite it being an issue that bothers many of the electorate. But I suppose thats because labour said little to nothing about it.
Both Labour and Conservative want immigration as it suppresses wages, keeps those pesky plebs on their toes
Corbyn is centre left, your graphic is Extremely misleading
Not among uk humans he isn't. Easily in most 10% left-wing.
@@danielwebb8402 You do realise the vast majority of the policies he stands for has over 50% UK public support?
@NANA-kf1cs
Hence he won 2 general elections out of 2 and has been a great PM since 2017. Implemented all those policies.
Pmsl
CENTRE LEFT😂 he literally goes round wearing the same attire as Lenin you clown
Tories, or Tories but red. Those are the UK’s options right now.
Or Tories but yellow
vote LABOUR then
@@ozzie2612 I’m talking about labour? (Though, I’m Canadian, so I won’t be voting for any UK party… we have our own mess to deal with.)
just vote labour
Tories are toast but that doesn't mean you don't put Labour under full scrutiny. Just look at Wales under Labour governance. There's a reason to be wary.
New Labour is back baby!!
Wonder which country he'll invade first.
whoever thought having the labour party led by "sir" anything was a good idea?
Labour stand for the status quo, which is broken
Starmer doesn't need to issue his manifesto or go into extreme detail about his policies right now.
Saying too much too soon would be far too dangerous.
Regardless of their economic policies, the one undeniable advantage of a Labour government is that they'll not waste time with all the stupid culture wars that the Tories love so much these days.
While I'd love Labour to have more ambitious policies, the simple fact that they'll not be actively stoking division and bigotry makes them easily the better option.
Labour started culture wars fully FORTY YEARS AGO after socialism collapsed in 1979, a busted flush and their new narrative
was to label their Tory opponents as fascists and Nazis, as racists playing the race card, indulging in dog whistle politics.
These were vile, lurid slurs from an empty, broken political party. The word ''socialism'' was unmentionable, electoral poison.
A dialogue of desperation. Then twenty years ago, Labour took up all this eco narrative, green hysteria to frighten everyone.
They are just more sneaky racist
Ah yes the party which has gone down for multiple counts of antisemitism is definitely going to unite the country 👍
“Lets not be the tories!” - sounds like a winner
I hope you are joking! Labs and cons are the same!
@@inkipinki8468 hope u joking,Labour Party are a lot worse,Look what they did to our Country,Do you want the red ties back in again LOL They won't be getting no votes from me
Killing Children and Women?
Instead of scrapping tuition fees, why don't we just make the loans interest free, or at least a minimal 1-2%?
The main issue with Labour promising anything on the economy rn is that their inheriting a complete mess from the Conservatives, which means once their in power, achieving their more ambitious aims might prove impossible and unpopular. Its not a great look if your spending billions on a long term plan to make the energy sector green when millions of your citizens are regularly going to food banks.
completely agree. it’s easy to get idealistic about what we want to see in this country but we’re in the midst of a deep recession, how are we supposed to sustainably reform the public sector when we’ve inherited the tories’ wrecked economy. i do wish though that labour would at least try and communicate this long term vision to give voters some confidence and “a song to sing to the voting booth”
@stefanristicmovies yeah, my main hope is if Labour is elected, they'll be able to stabilise the economy, and then the left wing of the party will exert influence to push the government in a more ambitious direction
It's not about promising gimmicks. It's about turning the economy around: not treating a country's economy like a household economy, recognizing that economic stimulus has been successful and austerity hasn't, and, importantly, it's about not talking out of both sides of one's mouth. And he's been dreadful.
It's not an either/or situation. We are an incredibly rich country, very bad wealth distribution, but we can and should do both - and the green prosperity plan went some way to doing just that, with a boost to the sector creating more jobs. Government spending like this is termed as an investment as it boosts economic activity and ends up paying for itself - literally growing the economy that they keep saying they're going to do. 14 years of austerity spending cuts have utterly failed, so spending billions is exactly what we need - and we need to fund it by taxing the billionaires and multi millionaires wealth and the oil giants and Amazon etc etc.
Sounds like you are making excuses for Labour
You should do this when they announce their manifesto for the next election. Doing it now is kinda pointless.
They will though.
Speculation has always been a part of this kind of news and current affairs coverage.
Complete misdirection on your part. We do know (roughly) what they will stand on at the next election: no extra tax income, therefore, no money for public services that need it and further cuts to some others.
Labour's plans are a non-starter just for those.
It's a hit piece. Very odd for TLDR
How is being honest a hit piece? They've made loads of videos recently about how badly the tories are doing.
Two things can be true at once. Politics are in a bad place right now, partly because people engage in this polarised black and white mentality.
I'd still vote Labour, but only because they're the better choice out of those who can win. If the system let the Greens have a chance to win, I'd be voting for them, because they are closer to my political positions.
@@TheGerkuman It's dishonest. TLDR even hid a comment of mine where I made this point. They omitted all actual policies and areas in which they differ, and there are loads. Examples: water regulation, asylum, NHS, etc. they even included a lie that Starmer supports the national insurance changes and he doesn't. He called it an unfunded tax cut that's worse than Truss.
Read Labour's joke manifesto for serious policies on Immigration, Industrial Policies, Business and Domestic Rates Reform, Increasing GDP and increasing employment.
Blank pages.
If Starmer and Reeves are really concerned about the cost of living and how MP's are perceived why won't the Labour party vote against the proposed inflation busting 5.5% salary increase for MP's?
Snouts in the trough.
KS has no policy, and he is the leader for Labour.
Tony Blair said that it's crucial to maintain some sort of amburgity when you are in opposition - and I do agree, though labour's position seems to be a bit too ambiguous for me.
Labour stand for tony Blair , this blight will never leave them . Just look at the calibre of their MPs and judge for yourself
As my late father-in-law once said, "they all piss in one bucket"