Government want to look at disability bank accounts to see what we are spending on: this is not good for us autistic.

I too have read this. It is alarming and scary. 

But - this is mostly pre-election rhetoric, aimed at gathering support from the far-right part of the electorate. In the event, it wouldn't be cost-effective to check or monitor the accounts of all people in receipt of disability benefits. I believe (happy to be corrected if I'm wrong) that the DWP can already do this, if they choose to, as they can also monitor social media accounts, in any case, so what would change? 

The Tories are caught between a rock and a hard place, behind 8n the polls on one side and under pressure from Reform for the far right vote, so at this point, they'll say pretty much anything that might help them gain support.

I agree. It's fodder for their base. Or what's left of it.

Or what's left of it.

Not much!

Well, we'd better hope they do go down, otherwise things will get worse.

Non-doms are absolutely not middle class. As soon as you start having enough money to benefit from tax avoidance and tax evasion, you're hitting that higher bracket that most middle class people could only hope to achieve. And also, did you not notice that the push to leave the EU only really ramped up when the EU brought in extensive tax avoidance legislation? If we'd stayed in the non-doms and co would have lost quite the little loop hole. 

The Tories are potentially bringing in things that will impact some landlords, likely the small time ones, but you can bet that it'll be done in such a way that it'll still protect the landlords who have massive property portfolios and those that own farms, land etc. They're never going to bring something in that will impact their party donors.

And yes, the Blairite era Labour were more centre leaning that previous Labour governments, but they were, and still are, centre left. Not right, or centre right like the Tories. There is a big ideological difference there, and it has practical implications for the society they govern.

Having grown up through the tail end of Thatcher/Major, into Blair/Brown, and now the clown car of interchangeable Tory leaders, each more underwhelming than the last, I'm very well aware of the differences between the two parties. Yes, there is some common ground between them, because frankly they're not the polar opposites at each end of the political spectrum like communism and fascism, but the differences are very important.

taxing non doms more would be good, it hits the globalist middle class i was on about lol no more just running off to the eu for them and ignoring their countries troubles while still negatively voting here, yeah they can be taxed 100% for all i care. 

id say landlords too but the tories have actually set out alot of things that is going to harm landlords so there is a decent push against landlords even in under the tories. but yeah there perhaps should be a residential only rule where you can only own 1 property and prove you live in it. id ban land lording myself personally.

the thing is though you use the last labour government as a example of labour... thats a very bad example as the last labour government is still accused of being a red tory party.... even kier starmer people are already calling a red tory too. this is perhaps what im on about, no matter if you get labour when you get them they will be so much alike as the tories anyway that you will all just call them red tories. but yet despite that no one votes for lib dems lol

the elites, businessmen, bankers and so on all want to force us back into the eu so they can trot around the eu making it vague as to who they owe tax to so they can essentially evade tax by the eus free movement, and also get in cheap slave labour by the eus movement and undermine working conditions and wages to make more profit.

BeckyThump said:

There is a difference between the parties, and as a disabled bisexual woman with a mental health condition, a disabled son, a husband with mental health conditions, and friends and family who are also not generally liked by the Tories, I resent being told that they're all the same because with regards to me and mine, they absolutely aren't.

I'll drink to that.

Well said 

Amerantin (former member) said:

people who build an identity around a political party

Yes, I've voted for a range of parties over the years.

They're not the same, just looking at the last 12 years of Tory leadership against the previous Labour governments shows that. Whilst there might not be too much difference in their agendas on paper, in practice they're very different, even with Starmer having to become more centrist.

A Labour government would spend a bit more on the NHS and schools, paid for by taxing non-doms and private schools a bit more. They would extend help with gas and electricity bills, paid for by raising a bit more from the windfall tax on oil and gas companies. They would aim to replace the House of Lords.

A Labour government would devote more of the proceeds of growth to spending on public services, whereas a Conservative government would devote more to tax cuts, and has in fact done so.

Take one less-obvious example: rough sleeping. It can never be eliminated completely, but under the last Labour government it was reduced to a minimum. Since then it has gone back up, except for two weeks in March 2020 when the pandemic prompted the authorities to clear the streets. It doesn’t take much public spending to solve rough sleeping, but it does take some, and it takes political will, which was fitful under the Tories and focused under Labour. Suella Braverman is a prime example of the Tory stance on this.

Essentially, the main differences between the Tories and Labour are how (or if for the Tories) they tackling poverty and inequality. They take very different stands on taxation and the extent to which state should intervene in the economy of the country.

They're not the same.

they are though.... if you see the policies you notice that labour and the tories often leap frog each other...

infact jeremy corbyns policies when he ran against borish johnson he promised LESS to the nhs that what boris did... so how does that match with everything you get told? ... it doesnt doesnt it? ... why do labour do this though? .... its a simple phenomena of winning voters over... you see labours worry is that everyone will think they will overspend on things... and so because of that they seek to try spend LESS on things that the tories or aim to not go too far above them, then the tories get worried they get seen the party of cutbacks so they want to promise more spending than labour... so this effect you get the parties becoming opposities, in that the tories will end up spending more than labour while labour will end up cutting back more, all of this is to control themselves for voting, to not seem as bad as their criticism.... but yet this effect acts also as a rubber band in which both parties do infact get stuck together, closely aligning policies together.

have you seen labour criticising the tories? .... they say the tories arnt cutting migration as much and attacking them on that, this shows labour is saying they will crack down on migrants harder... hate the tories for cracking down on migrants? ... well, labour are saying they will crack down harder on them... likely labour will also take a point of cracking down on benefits too because they will likely point out how benefit spending and fraud is high under the tories and point out its incompetent and they can do better, and so they will crack down on that more... this is what real politics is like, there is no feeling or emotion, there is just governing and issues and trying to do better than the other at it... labour isnt pro migration, all the government see migration as a problem to fix, labour is saying they can fix the problem better... this is politics... problem plus who can fix it better... if benefit fraud is a problem then no party is on your side in stopping benefit fraud measures, both parties will be trying to be the best at tacking the problem, because that is politics... one upping, doing better than the other at fixing the problem.

they are though.... if you see the policies you notice that labour and the tories often leap frog each other...

infact jeremy corbyns policies when he ran against borish johnson he promised LESS to the nhs that what boris did... so how does that match with everything you get told? ... it doesnt doesnt it? ... why do labour do this though? .... its a simple phenomena of winning voters over... you see labours worry is that everyone will think they will overspend on things... and so because of that they seek to try spend LESS on things that the tories or aim to not go too far above them, then the tories get worried they get seen the party of cutbacks so they want to promise more spending than labour... so this effect you get the parties becoming opposities, in that the tories will end up spending more than labour while labour will end up cutting back more, all of this is to control themselves for voting, to not seem as bad as their criticism.... but yet this effect acts also as a rubber band in which both parties do infact get stuck together, closely aligning policies together.

have you seen labour criticising the tories? .... they say the tories arnt cutting migration as much and attacking them on that, this shows labour is saying they will crack down on migrants harder... hate the tories for cracking down on migrants? ... well, labour are saying they will crack down harder on them... likely labour will also take a point of cracking down on benefits too because they will likely point out how benefit spending and fraud is high under the tories and point out its incompetent and they can do better, and so they will crack down on that more... this is what real politics is like, there is no feeling or emotion, there is just governing and issues and trying to do better than the other at it... labour isnt pro migration, all the government see migration as a problem to fix, labour is saying they can fix the problem better... this is politics... problem plus who can fix it better... if benefit fraud is a problem then no party is on your side in stopping benefit fraud measures, both parties will be trying to be the best at tacking the problem, because that is politics... one upping, doing better than the other at fixing the problem.

Non-doms are absolutely not middle class. As soon as you start having enough money to benefit from tax avoidance and tax evasion, you're hitting that higher bracket that most middle class people could only hope to achieve. And also, did you not notice that the push to leave the EU only really ramped up when the EU brought in extensive tax avoidance legislation? If we'd stayed in the non-doms and co would have lost quite the little loop hole. 

The Tories are potentially bringing in things that will impact some landlords, likely the small time ones, but you can bet that it'll be done in such a way that it'll still protect the landlords who have massive property portfolios and those that own farms, land etc. They're never going to bring something in that will impact their party donors.

And yes, the Blairite era Labour were more centre leaning that previous Labour governments, but they were, and still are, centre left. Not right, or centre right like the Tories. There is a big ideological difference there, and it has practical implications for the society they govern.

Having grown up through the tail end of Thatcher/Major, into Blair/Brown, and now the clown car of interchangeable Tory leaders, each more underwhelming than the last, I'm very well aware of the differences between the two parties. Yes, there is some common ground between them, because frankly they're not the polar opposites at each end of the political spectrum like communism and fascism, but the differences are very important.

taxing non doms more would be good, it hits the globalist middle class i was on about lol no more just running off to the eu for them and ignoring their countries troubles while still negatively voting here, yeah they can be taxed 100% for all i care. 

id say landlords too but the tories have actually set out alot of things that is going to harm landlords so there is a decent push against landlords even in under the tories. but yeah there perhaps should be a residential only rule where you can only own 1 property and prove you live in it. id ban land lording myself personally.

the thing is though you use the last labour government as a example of labour... thats a very bad example as the last labour government is still accused of being a red tory party.... even kier starmer people are already calling a red tory too. this is perhaps what im on about, no matter if you get labour when you get them they will be so much alike as the tories anyway that you will all just call them red tories. but yet despite that no one votes for lib dems lol

They're not the same, just looking at the last 12 years of Tory leadership against the previous Labour governments shows that. Whilst there might not be too much difference in their agendas on paper, in practice they're very different, even with Starmer having to become more centrist.

A Labour government would spend a bit more on the NHS and schools, paid for by taxing non-doms and private schools a bit more. They would extend help with gas and electricity bills, paid for by raising a bit more from the windfall tax on oil and gas companies. They would aim to replace the House of Lords.

A Labour government would devote more of the proceeds of growth to spending on public services, whereas a Conservative government would devote more to tax cuts, and has in fact done so.

Take one less-obvious example: rough sleeping. It can never be eliminated completely, but under the last Labour government it was reduced to a minimum. Since then it has gone back up, except for two weeks in March 2020 when the pandemic prompted the authorities to clear the streets. It doesn’t take much public spending to solve rough sleeping, but it does take some, and it takes political will, which was fitful under the Tories and focused under Labour. Suella Braverman is a prime example of the Tory stance on this.

Essentially, the main differences between the Tories and Labour are how (or if for the Tories) they tackling poverty and inequality. They take very different stands on taxation and the extent to which state should intervene in the economy of the country.

They're not the same.