Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How is he doing as PM? What about his five priorities: easing the cost of living, growing the economy, cutting NHS waiting lists, reducing the national debt and stopping small boat crossings.
I know that he sees himself as a problem-solver. Is he?
How is he doing as PM? What about his five priorities: easing the cost of living, growing the economy, cutting NHS waiting lists, reducing the national debt and stopping small boat crossings.
I know that he sees himself as a problem-solver. Is he?
Given that the current economic crises are global, and that Britain is trying to reduce it's debt and budget deficits, whilst living within the countries means, and there are constraints in relation to what any one politician can do.
It also should be noted that the role of Prime Minister is very different to that of President, and that the PM is merely first among equals in relation to the Cabinet, and faces far more scrutiny from backbench MP's, as well as Parliament, and this was clear in relation to recent tenures in relation to May, Johnson and Truss.
In terms of the cost of living, the main priority is reducing inflation, whilst in terms of energy costs, there was an energy price cap put in place in the UK.
As for economic growth, the Chancellor Jeremy Hunt has set out his priorities in numerous speeches, and I am not going to go through the entirety of his budgets and policy aims, but they can be found in the links below -
In terms of the NHS, despite tight fiscal reigns, and trying to cut budget deficits and debt that was accrued under the pandemic and through the the global CoL crisis, Sunak has made the NHS a priority, and this includes recruitment, as well as reducing pandemic related waiting lists.
In terms of opposition parties they have not set out any credible agenda or realistic policies, whilst in terms of the left wing Guardians Opinion piece nonsense regarding certain concrete building construction methods, most of thesereinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (raac) buildings were built by the left and under Labour Governments during the 60's and 70's, whilst Tony Blair's private finance initiative (PFI), a government procurement policy aimed at creating "public–private partnerships" (PPPs) actually cost the tax payer far more in the long run, and lets also not forget the War in Iraq and the fact that Labour left the country on the brink of bankruptcy in 2010.
In terms of Sunak, he has his vocal critics, however is the Labour leadership and Sir Keir Starmer really that popular, and lets face it Labour don't have any magic wand when it comes to balancing debt and deficits with public service spending, whilst in terms of foreign policy (or lack of it), the left have generally been far more wary and critical of the US, and given the mess and war crime allegations in relation to the Blair years this might be a sensible policy.
Then again Labour is yet to publish a proper in-depth costed analysis of it's future policies, is unlikely to be tough on immigration and is likely to indulge in left wing socialist woke western political and environmental ideology rather than come up within any real properly costed political answers, and in terms of Labour's history, it's not been a great economic record, and the left usually disregard budgets and debt in order to borrow further and even print money to spend on things that the country can not really afford.
Finally there is also the issue of taxes and Labour, including new taxes on car drivers and vehicle ownership, and the prospect of ULEZ and other schemes being launched nation wide, and it seems to be the case that who ever is elected to power is likely to be deeply unpopular given the current economic and political climate.
Last edited by Brave New World; 09-05-2023 at 04:37 AM..
How is he doing as PM? What about his five priorities: easing the cost of living, growing the economy, cutting NHS waiting lists, reducing the national debt and stopping small boat crossings.
I know that he sees himself as a problem-solver. Is he?
The Guardian is extremely 'left wing', its practically Communist!! Its hardly going to publish a 'fair' assessment of the Tories at ANY time about ANYTHING ever.
In terms of Sunak, he has his vocal critics, however is the Labour leadership and Sir Keir Starmer really that popular, and lets face it Labour don't have any magic wand when it comes to balancing debt and deficits with public service spending, whilst in terms of foreign policy (or lack of it), the left have generally been far more wary and critical of the US, and given the mess and war crime allegations in relation to the Blair years this might be a sensible policy.
On paper, Rishi Sunak is an amazingly capable guy. He established those credentials before marrying into the Infosys billions. After the Liz Truss debacle, it's certainly good to have a PM who thoroughly understands finance. I personally don't care for someone that socially conservative and right wing but he's not going to crash the British Pound or the bond market. From across the pond, that's important.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 4 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,185 posts, read 13,469,799 times
Reputation: 19508
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD
On paper, Rishi Sunak is an amazingly capable guy. He established those credentials before marrying into the Infosys billions. After the Liz Truss debacle, it's certainly good to have a PM who thoroughly understands finance. I personally don't care for someone that socially conservative and right wing but he's not going to crash the British Pound or the bond market. From across the pond, that's important
There were a number of factors in relation to the bond and pound crash, including the leveraged Liability-Driven Investment (LDI) fund, something what had been warned about for years, as well as rises in US interest rates that were not matched quickly enough by the Bank of England under it's much criticised Governor Andrew Bailey, and the pound was not the only currency badly effected at the time.
Whilst Truss's plan to cut taxes while ramping up borrowing in a bid to produce faster growth, was clearly problematic at a time of already high inflation rates and in relation to government debt at a time of rapidly rising global interest rates.
However US criticism was a bit harsh, given that Truss was only going to cut the top rate of tax to 40%, it's 37% in the US, and that the US was fast approaching it's own debt threshold, which would months later lead to the 2023 United States debt-ceiling crisis.
One of the major reasons for the recent downgrading of the US credit rating was the recent US debt crisis, with the debt exceeding the previously agreed cap of $31.4tn (£25.2tn), which was agreed by Congress.
The resulted in what were called "extraordinary measures" being used to provide the US government with more cash while it figured out what to do.
As a result the Biden administration came up with the new Fiscal Responsibility Act, which rather than trying to solve the issue. merely suspended the debt limit until January 2025, thereby just kicking the can further down the road rather than trying to deal with the problem.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 4 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,185 posts, read 13,469,799 times
Reputation: 19508
^^^
As for Labour, it's usually the party that increases borrowing and which is less economically prudent.
Whilst in terms of US/UK relations, I think they would revert back to Pre-Blair type of relations, and I can't see the current Labour Party becoming embroiled in any further US led foreign escapades, indeed the far left of the party are not big supporters when it comes to Atlanticism and US influence.
Whilst Keir Starmer, has already been outspoken in relation to Trump and a future Labour administration and Trump White House would make for extremely uncomfortable future relations.
Then again post-Afghanistan, UK foreign and defence policy has already significantly shifted, with pressure for further reform in relation to areas such as the current extradition treaty, and many in the Labour party have pushed for further accountability of US bases in Britain etc.
As for Labour, it's usually the party that increases borrowing and which is less economically prudent.
Whilst in terms of US/UK relations, I think they would revert back to Pre-Blair type of relations, and I can't see the current Labour Party becoming embroiled in any further US led foreign escapades, indeed the far left of the party are not big supporters when it comes to Atlanticism and US influence.
Whilst Keir Starmer, has already been outspoken in relation to Trump and a future Labour administration and Trump White House would make for extremely uncomfortable future relations.
Then again post-Afghanistan, UK foreign and defence policy has already significantly shifted, with pressure for further reform in relation to areas such as the current extradition treaty, and many in the Labour party have pushed for further accountability of US bases in Britain etc.
Why do your posts always invariably start harking on about Us relations and the dead issue of Afghanistan.
It's well known that you are devoutly anti- American and a Brexit voter. Why not let sleeping dogs lie
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 4 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,185 posts, read 13,469,799 times
Reputation: 19508
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Austen
Why do your posts always invariably start harking on about Us relations and the dead issue of Afghanistan.
It's well known that you are devoutly anti- American and a Brexit voter. Why not let sleeping dogs lie
This thread is about your Prime minister
The recent war in Afghanistan, has led to a significant shift in UK Foreign and Defence Policy, and it is not dead issue at all and I am certainly not going to just forget the 546 British lives lost due to the US led campaign in Afghanistan (and 222 lost due to the Iraq War), or the unprecedented criticism of the US President Joe Biden by the British Parliament and other US allies following the 2021 withdrawal.
In terms of UK Foreign and Defence Policy, it has seen a number of reviews since then, including the Integrated Review, Global Britain in a Competitive Age, Defence in a Competitive Age (2021) as we and the more recent Defence Command Paper Refresh (2023).
There now seems to be little appetite or interest in authorising military interventions overseas, post Iraq and Afghanistan, and spending has moved away from land forces towards maritime forces, cyber tech, Ai space etc, as opposed to intervention or campaigns in the mould of the Iraq and Afghanistan.
It's a political shift in Britain's Foreign and Defence policy, which I have every right to write about, just as I have every right to write about the impact of the pointless wars and loss of life in Iraq and Afghanistan, or US/UK extradition or the declining US/UK relationship, or other such matters that involve my country.
The truth is recent US led campaigns, interference and rhetoric has had a significant role in relation to UK policies and intervention, and the idea that the UK should go above and beyond the support of our European neighbours in support of a country that has done nothing but criticise, interfere in our domestic politics and make trade threats or goes on constantly goes on about America first, is not the type of ally we should be going out of our way for.
I don't generally become involved in US domestic politics as it has nothing to do with me and I am not interested, however foreign policy is a different matter all together.
Last edited by Brave New World; 09-06-2023 at 03:58 AM..
The recent war in Afghanistan, has led to a significant shift in UK Foreign and Defence Policy, and it is not dead issue at all and I am certainly not going to just forget the 546 British lives lost due to the US led campaign in Afghanistan (and 222 lost due to the Iraq War), or the unprecedented criticism of the US President Joe Biden by the British Parliament and other US allies following the 2021 withdrawal.
In terms of UK Foreign and Defence Policy, it has seen a number of reviews since then, including the Integrated Review, Global Britain in a Competitive Age, Defence in a Competitive Age (2021) as we and the more recent Defence Command Paper Refresh (2023).
There now seems to be little appetite or interest in authorising military interventions overseas, post Iraq and Afghanistan, and spending has moved away from land forces towards maritime forces, cyber tech, Ai space etc, as opposed to intervention or campaigns in the mould of the Iraq and Afghanistan.
It's a political shift in Britain's Foreign and Defence policy, which I have every right to write about, just as I have every right to write about the impact of the pointless wars and loss of life in Iraq and Afghanistan, or US/UK extradition or the declining US/UK relationship, or other such matters that involve my country.
The truth is recent US led campaigns, interference and rhetoric has had a significant role in relation to UK policies and intervention, and the idea that the UK should go above and beyond the support of our European neighbours in support of a country that has done nothing but criticise, interfere in our domestic politics and make trade threats or goes on constantly goes on about America first, is not the type of ally we should be going out of our way for.
I don't generally become involved in US domestic politics as it has nothing to do with me and I am not interested, however foreign policy is a different matter all together.
The US is unlikely to ever again get involved in wars such as Afghanistan. Times are changing and foreign policy thought along with it. In fact if Donald Trump were to get elected again (and recent poll numbers indicate that he has a chance) US involvement with Ukraine would end in a matter of weeks.
So there's really no need to keep repeating the same old concerns that Britain could be "dragged into another US led war" at sometime in the future. The average US voter today has no taste for such wars either and the politicians know it. In fact there are many Republican politicians who tend to believe that a policy of isolationism in the matter of military alliances is a path for the future.
If any blame for the deaths of British soldiers is to be placed on anyone's shoulders then look no further than Tony Blair.
In the matter of a so called UK/US declining relationship that was bound to happen after Brexit. As a major and important member of the EU Britain was what could be called "the go to guy" as far as U.S/European affairs were concerned. Britain's exit from the EU resulted in a loss of significance and focus inevitably shifting to Germany and France
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
