-Removed-I've not sparred with you in recent memory. Is this really the extent of your reasoning skills? No one, Labour included, is gunning for ALL the pensioners. Those who truly need the fuel subsidy will still get it, from the looks of it.
Similar ideas get mooted now and then in the US. We have millionaires and billionaires who still get to collect Social Security checks when they retire. But Social Security should, ideally, be something like an insurance policy that ensures a decent living in old age. Maybe one won't need it upon turning 65, having been more fortunate than others in their careers, collecting inheritances from dead relatives, or whatever. I imagine there are at least some quite well-off pensioners in the UK who don't need fuel welfare.
I will add, though, that Social Security or a pension is something of a contract, and government should not renege on such contracts willy-nilly. Changes should be made gradually, years in advance, starting with the youngest earners and moving up the age brackets with time.
-Removed-It's like the nonsense with China being "communist." Yeah, it's convenient to call it communist, since that word carries such weighty historical baggage. But such distortion of the word leads to certain quandaries, such as: If communism is a "failure," and China is "communist," then why is China giving the entire capitalist world such a run for its money?
So people will say, well, communists have no compunction about enslaving workers to undercut the competition. Seems reasonable, except that enslaving workers is completely contrary to communist philosophy and economic theory. Then there is the problem that multinational corporations are among the chief beneficiaries of Chinese worker exploitation. And so it goes, with Western capitalist propaganda eating its own tail like a blinkered ouroboros.
All you're broadcasting here is your personal loathing of "socialism" in general, together with a general ignorance of the meaning of the word. It detracts from your intended message, which is that you hate Labour and Starmer. Talk about crappy debate tactics.
@Soothfast saidOh geester, it looks like you’re diving like a 109 over the cliffs of Dover in 1940.
It's like the nonsense with China being "communist." Yeah, it's convenient to call it communist, since that word carries such weighty historical baggage. But such distortion of the word leads to certain quandaries, such as: If communism is a "failure," and China is "communist," then why is China giving the entire capitalist world such a run for its money?
So people wi ...[text shortened]... your intended message, which is that you hate Labour and Starmer. Talk about crappy debate tactics.
Best bail before you’re spanked like a tory st the last election…
@divegeester
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer‘s wanted to strike Russia with his nation’s arsenal of long-range missiles, despite Putin saying that meant direct war with NATO.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/madness-antony-blinken
He is insane. He wants WW3 just like Blinken does. They should both be in mental institutions.
@Soothfast saidhttps://hbr.org/2021/05/americans-dont-know-how-capitalist-china-is
It's like the nonsense with China being "communist." Yeah, it's convenient to call it communist, since that word carries such weighty historical baggage. But such distortion of the word leads to certain quandaries, such as: If communism is a "failure," and China is "communist," then why is China giving the entire capitalist world such a run for its money?
So people wi ...[text shortened]... your intended message, which is that you hate Labour and Starmer. Talk about crappy debate tactics.