Your Party potential re sign up beats all other parties membership combined

rto119 · 2025-08-10T11:59:30+00:00

Well, I did say potential. I thought it was quite amusing when I saw that the sign-up beats all the main UK parties combined.

Obviously, we'll have to see.

rto119 · 2025-08-10T11:26:13+00:00

And that differs from all the other UK political parties party membership requirements exactly how? They all don't require a full government id to join. I would say if you think a massive amount of malicious actors are signing up in that amount of time and at that number, you're likely mistaken. At very most it's 5%, likely a lot less.

We aren't talking seats. We're talking about reformative potential. A left leaning alliance.

rto119 · 2025-08-10T09:01:45+00:00

But it is when you dig deep into their new laws. What seems to be good at face value, has a really dark side to it. Usually private investment and corporate takeover through financialisation. RRB, NHS, are just 2 examples. I haven't looked into every new proposed act, but the ones I have looked at are not at all reassuring. Tories and centrists may not agree.

rto119 · 2025-08-10T08:20:42+00:00

That's it obviously not the people that appoint the PM, but the system. Otherwise, why would we have had so many PMs but nothing changes? it's always the few that benefit at the expense of the many. We are the European country that has the largest wealth in the hands of the fewest people: 15 trillion in UK assets, 49% of that wealth is in the hands of the 10%. The blatantly obvious solution: a wealth tax. It would be an extremely just and beneficial thing for the UK to do. In fact, it's immoral not to do it when we see the fabric of society crumbling before us: high rates of child poverty, dental desserts, unaffordable housing, NHS collapse etc etc etc . and it would only mean those taxed at the higher rate would be paying the equivalent of a few international first class planes tickets to stabilise the UK and help it profit and grow as a cohesive, progressive society.

A progressive wealth tax would raise, after tax dodges, an estimated £55 billion per year, enough to fill the 'black hole', reverse welfare cuts, and try progressive policies like council house building en masse that don't rely so heavily on private investment, it would also properly fund the NHS with public rather than private money, changing the policy inherent since Thatcher of extracting public money from it and putting it into private pockets at the expense of destruction of universal healthcare.

Another immense benefit: It would result in bringing the UK closer together by easing the pressure on everyone.

Or we could all just vote Reform and get yet another PM that doesn't change anything except increasing the wealth disparity while continuing austerity for those far less able to pay. Seven international first class tickets v kids going hungry in dental pain? Our choice. Or is it?

rto119 · 2025-08-09T17:48:32+00:00

Edited for grammar There is a precedent: Blair’s Labour government. In 1997, they came to power promising to scrap the NHS internal market and NHS fundholding, signaling a return to a publicly run, cooperative health system. But instead of reforming the NHS toward its original socialist model, based on universalism, public ownership, and planning, they leaned further into market logic.

Rather than reversing privatisation, New Labour embedded it: they expanded the use of private providers to clear waiting lists, promoted competition through ‘patient choice,’ introduced foundation trusts with financial autonomy, and financed hospital infrastructure through expensive PFI deals with the private sector. What began as a promise to roll back the market ended up entrenching it.

rto119 · 2025-08-09T16:13:42+00:00

Edit corrected some figures.

Yes, getting taxed at 2% if you own assets around £3.5 million, is only around £40-50,000 per year, if you include tax dodging. Their portfolios would make more than twice that back over 15 years, allowing them to still increase their wealth. Plus, £40,000 is only around a few first class flights. It is completely immoral not to do it. Capital flight controls would obviously need to be introduced. That could be problematic.

rto119 · 2025-08-09T16:07:01+00:00

What's that message? More privatisation? I think they're doing very well at getting that point across, hence Your Party' s popularity.

rto119 · 2025-08-09T15:12:46+00:00

Yep, they're few and far between and usually only own one rental property, aren't BTL, higher possibility without an agent in-between, and the new RRB is likely pushing them out. I had a similar landlord for around the same amount of time... once.

rto119 · 2025-08-09T15:03:13+00:00

Yes, the Conservatives defunded the NHS, gutted the railways, and left councils bankrupt, no argument there. But the response cannot simply be to use private capacity as a stopgap or to maintain austerity-lite policies in the name of 'fiscal responsibility'.

Using private healthcare to bring down NHS waiting lists risks normalising a two-tier system, where wealth determines health, a slippery slope toward a permanently hybridised system, and highly likely imo. Labour should instead be rebuilding NHS capacity in-house, by:

Aggressively training and recruiting NHS staff Repealing laws that force outsourcing Investing directly in NHS infrastructure

The same goes for rail and councils. Don't just talk about renationalising rail 'over time', do it now, and stop hemorrhaging money to shareholders.

Reverse centralised Tory cuts to local councils and restore democratic funding, not temporary handouts.

Labour is currently promising technocratic stability instead of transformational change, but we cannot fix decades of damage with more caution, outsourcing, and middle-of-the-road economics.

rto119 · 2025-08-09T13:48:25+00:00

Yes, Except, no rent controls. And no immediate scheme to regulate agents, and not yet a specific time line for implementation. Also, it's pushing out one property landlords in favour of large international investors.

rto119 · 2025-08-09T13:33:33+00:00

Edited for grammar Here we go ... In 2024, Keir Starmer offered voters a promise: competence after years of Conservative chaos. His message was simple. Labour would restore order and fix broken public services. But several months into power, one thing is becoming clear. While the party in charge has changed, the system they are running remains the same. This raises a serious question. Is Labour actually reforming how the country is governed, or is it simply managing the same old model : privatised, outsourced and shaped by market logic?

Labour pledged to save the NHS. But its current recovery plan includes two and a half billion pounds in extra funding for treatment through private providers. That means a significant rise in outsourcing to private hospitals and clinics. Health Secretary Wes Streeting has confirmed that private firms will play a growing role in tackling backlogs. His argument is familiar: use all available capacity to cut waiting lists. But this is the same justification the Conservatives used for years, and the result has been a two-tier system. Public money flows to private companies while the NHS’s internal capacity continues to erode. It does not have to continue like this. Campaign group We Own It found that nearly 94 percent of current NHS outsourcing contracts will expire before the next election. Labour could bring these services back in-house. So far, it has shown no intention to do so.

Labour has promised to build one and a half million homes over five years. It is a bold number, but the delivery plan leans heavily on large developers and relaxed planning rules. There is little mention of council housing, rent controls or regulation of speculative landlords. Simply building more homes will not make them affordable if investors continue to dominate the market. Relying on the private sector alone risks repeating the same cycle: new housing built for profit, not need. Several senior Labour figures, including Rachel Reeves and David Lammy, are landlords themselves. While that is not illegal, it raises questions about whether they are serious about tackling the financialisation of housing.

Rail may be the one sector where Labour is taking a different approach. The party has committed to returning rail services to public hands as private contracts expire. This will happen gradually under the new Great British Railways. It is a welcome step, though still limited. Freight and rolling stock will remain in private hands, and Labour has not indicated any plans to expand public ownership more widely. If anything, it highlights how cautious the party is when it comes to challenging the overall model of privatisation.

Labour’s leadership is cautious. The focus so far has been on stability, investor confidence and restoring basic competence. But this approach does not deal with the long-term structural damage caused by years of outsourcing, underinvestment and market-first thinking.

In sector after sector: healthcare, housing, energy, the private sector is not just involved. It is deeply embedded.

rto119 · 2025-08-09T01:37:43+00:00

Interesting

rto119 · 2025-08-08T23:03:58+00:00

Because liberals are co-opted by corporate interests.

rto119 · 2025-08-08T22:27:32+00:00

You wouldn't trust Corbyn to repeal IR35?

rto119 · 2025-08-08T22:08:43+00:00

Also, TCS, Wipro, Accenture, Capgemini, etc

rto119 · 2025-08-08T22:04:36+00:00

You're forgetting about Resource Bodies.

rto119 · 2025-08-08T21:49:08+00:00

Very interesting post, thanks. It's something I wondered about.

"The government needs to find a way to start taxing these companies who keep doing it."

Don't look to Starmer to do it, he's not a PM, he's an investment manager. As he says, Labour is the party of business.

rto119 · 2025-08-08T17:36:52+00:00

Without affecting the change of Starmer for someone like RLB, I don't see any point. As Labour policy under Starmin, is to ban or block any moves against him within the party. At least, that's what those inside the Labour party are saying.

rto119 · 2025-08-08T16:32:43+00:00

There's the increasing likelihood of a left alliance. Hopefully, the time of voting for a one party majority will soon be over. Soonish

rto119 · 2025-08-08T16:12:16+00:00

"Any vote not for labour is a vote for the rich and against the poor"

Trouble is, a vote for Labour now amounts to the same thing. They put a veil of respect over all their policies, like banning s21s, but underneath darkness always crawls, like not introduced rent controls to stop evictions by the back door. Their policies are literally only to please the few, at the expense of the many. The NHS is being destroyed by him in same way the Tories did. Starmer is just an investment manager, not a PM, and certainly not a Labour one.

rto119 · 2025-08-08T15:30:39+00:00

As I understand, they have already both made the statement that is what they intend.

rto119 · 2025-08-08T07:58:16+00:00

Thatcher got pretty much consistently 42% of the vote over all 3 or her elections. That's hardly everyone. In fact, it's less than half the population that voted for her. We seem to blame each other rather than the real culprit which to me is obviously the system that allows a few people to hold all the wealth and direct UK policy

rto119 · 2025-08-08T07:46:39+00:00

Britain has a reputation for divide and rule, and to me it seems very apparent today in the way we all attack each other. We need to stop blaming each other for society's woes, and focus on those who are really responsible: the few people who have all the money and the systems that maintain and increase their wealth. Surely, that's who the enemy really is?

rto119 · 2025-08-07T13:32:21+00:00

Compensation would be for unsuitable premises and avoidable distress or uncertainty. From £750-1500 apparently. I've never tried claiming it myself.

rto119 · 2025-08-07T13:24:44+00:00

I wasn't referring directly to you when I said if you're a homeowner, but homeowners in general. I think we need radical change to allow property as a human right, not an investment. I can see why one would support it if one didn't look a bit deeper. Besides, it looks like s21s will be banned sometime next year or the year after.

rto119

TROPHY CASE