|
Post by alf on May 9, 2017 13:32:01 GMT
Indeed - if it's on FaceBook it must be so!!!!
One that is not a joke, however, is that Labour seem to have decided today that all Corbyn needs to win us all over is more air time, and are putting him more front and centre of their campaign. There were endless fawning (all female) supporters on the BBC news saying how amazing he is, such a compassionate man, etc etc.
Leaving aside my own politics (and I have had a lot of respect for part leaders of all parties in the past) - WTF are these people on? What do you lot think of him? Yes his stated policies are often those that might be deemed "good", supporting those in need and so on, but for me - just like Livingstone - he has only one facial expression, which is sneering contempt, and I have a strong vibe from his general demanour that given half the chance he'd be the first to put everyone daring to support capitalism up against the wall and watch them be shot. He strikes me as a quite a frightening character, like a Martin McGuiness, who can debate things efficiently until the cows come home but you know as soon as you cross him that he'd rather be gutting you with a hunting knife than accepting any other argument. Maybe that's just me.... I find something quite chilling about a lot of these "Momentum" cronies, chanting communist songs and carrying out a big drive against the Blairite party members who are actually electable.
|
|
|
Post by johnc on May 9, 2017 14:24:29 GMT
Indeed - if it's on FaceBook it must be so!!!! One that is not a joke, however, is that Labour seem to have decided today that all Corbyn needs to win us all over is more air time, and are putting him more front and centre of their campaign. There were endless fawning (all female) supporters on the BBC news saying how amazing he is, such a compassionate man, etc etc. Leaving aside my own politics (and I have had a lot of respect for part leaders of all parties in the past) - WTF are these people on? What do you lot think of him? Yes his stated policies are often those that might be deemed "good", supporting those in need and so on, but for me - just like Livingstone - he has only one facial expression, which is sneering contempt, and I have a strong vibe from his general demanour that given half the chance he'd be the first to put everyone daring to support capitalism up against the wall and watch them be shot. He strikes me as a quite a frightening character, like a Martin McGuiness, who can debate things efficiently until the cows come home but you know as soon as you cross him that he'd rather be gutting you with a hunting knife than accepting any other argument. Maybe that's just me.... I find something quite chilling about a lot of these "Momentum" cronies, chanting communist songs and carrying out a big drive against the Blairite party members who are actually electable. I have faded memories as a small boy of the 70's when the lights used to go out at 6pm, there was no TV some nights and no trains the next, rubbish would pile up on the streets and there was no petrol for days or weeks on end. All of these things were inflicted on the electorate by a Corbyn type of Socialism which promised lots as long as other people were paying for it. Many of those "other people" like my great uncles, pop stars, successful businessmen etc left the UK and took their money to the Channel islands, IOM or some warmer tax haven. Meanwhile businesses survived by the skin of their teeth on poor productivity, sudden strikes and all sorts of supply, distribution and demarcation issues leading eventually to their financial failure and men in the street demanding jobs and blaming the bosses. These are the Politics of Corbyn but unfortunately the young have not experienced the danger and downside of the utopian view of everything for everyone as long as someone else is paying.
I agree he is dangerous if for no other reason than it has been 40+ years since these policies were tried and failed but half the electorate has never experienced it and such things could/would never be taught in school - you had to be there.
Because the Labour Party now elect their leader by a vote of the membership and the membership is full of those who believe in Corbyn type Socialism, the Labour Party will never again elect someone who will have the broad acceptance of the electorate. If there was a Nick Clegg type Liberal Democratic party I think it could feed very well off the remains of Labour.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on May 9, 2017 14:44:42 GMT
Corbyn and his team are unelectable muppets. I'm waiting with interest to see what the more Blairite Labour folk do on June 9th - assuming any of them are actually left in Parliament.
I think we desperately need a decent, sensible opposition to keep a bit of focus during the brexit negotiations. Although I do hold out some hope that my mum's suggestion that T May will get a decent majority and then tell the 'Hard' brexiteers to get stuffed will happen.
|
|
|
Post by grampa on May 9, 2017 14:58:28 GMT
Indeed - if it's on FaceBook it must be so!!!! One that is not a joke, however, is that Labour seem to have decided today that all Corbyn needs to win us all over is more air time, and are putting him more front and centre of their campaign. There were endless fawning (all female) supporters on the BBC news saying how amazing he is, such a compassionate man, etc etc. Leaving aside my own politics (and I have had a lot of respect for part leaders of all parties in the past) - WTF are these people on? What do you lot think of him? Yes his stated policies are often those that might be deemed "good", supporting those in need and so on, but for me - just like Livingstone - he has only one facial expression, which is sneering contempt, and I have a strong vibe from his general demanour that given half the chance he'd be the first to put everyone daring to support capitalism up against the wall and watch them be shot. He strikes me as a quite a frightening character, like a Martin McGuiness, who can debate things efficiently until the cows come home but you know as soon as you cross him that he'd rather be gutting you with a hunting knife than accepting any other argument. Maybe that's just me.... I find something quite chilling about a lot of these "Momentum" cronies, chanting communist songs and carrying out a big drive against the Blairite party members who are actually electable. I have faded memories as a small boy of the 70's when the lights used to go out at 6pm, there was no TV some nights and no trains the next, rubbish would pile up on the streets and there was no petrol for days or weeks on end. All of these things were inflicted on the electorate by a Corbyn type of Socialism which promised lots as long as other people were paying for it. Many of those "other people" like my great uncles, pop stars, successful businessmen etc left the UK and took their money to the Channel islands, IOM or some warmer tax haven. Meanwhile businesses survived by the skin of their teeth on poor productivity, sudden strikes and all sorts of supply, distribution and demarcation issues leading eventually to their financial failure and men in the street demanding jobs and blaming the bosses. These are the Politics of Corbyn but unfortunately the young have not experienced the danger and downside of the utopian view of everything for everyone as long as someone else is paying.
I agree he is dangerous if for no other reason than it has been 40+ years since these policies were tried and failed but half the electorate has never experienced it and such things could/would never be taught in school - you had to be there.
Because the Labour Party now elect their leader by a vote of the membership and the membership is full of those who believe in Corbyn type Socialism, the Labour Party will never again elect someone who will have the broad acceptance of the electorate. If there was a Nick Clegg type Liberal Democratic party I think it could feed very well off the remains of Labour.
I have rather more vivid memories of those times - and don't forget Denis Healy having to go to the IMF for hand out - 1979 was the first time I could vote and I voted Conservative because it seemed like Margaret Thatcher was the only hope of saving the UK - of course lots much younger 40 now have this vision of her being an evil witch who destroyed the coal industry - although it seemed to me at the time that Arthur Scargill was doing that with his agenda of 'bringing down the government' - and of her destroying industry rather than her seeing that world forces were doing that and the UK would need an alternative to prosper. She was a long long way from perfect but thank god she came along when she did. Overall it's perhaps a good thing that memories fade when it comes to bad times, but perhaps not always so with politics.
|
|
|
Post by grampa on May 9, 2017 15:00:10 GMT
Don't know why the quote facility didn't work properly with that above post.
|
|
|
Post by LandieMark on May 9, 2017 15:17:57 GMT
Sorted. You typed inside the quoted box.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on May 9, 2017 16:37:14 GMT
Muppets to the left of me, muppets to the right, here I am stuck in the middle with...who?
|
|
|
Post by grampa on May 10, 2017 9:24:24 GMT
Sorted. You typed inside the quoted box. Ta - for some reason the box didn't appear like it normally does.
|
|
|
Post by grampa on May 10, 2017 9:25:06 GMT
Muppets to the left of me, muppets to the right, here I am stuck in the middle with...who? Most incisive comment yet - and rather how I feel. There are times I feel like not voting, it's only the fact that we have the privilege of being able to vote in the UK that keeps me voting for the least of all the evils.
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on May 10, 2017 9:35:27 GMT
Muppets to the left of me, muppets to the right, here I am stuck in the middle with...who? Most incisive comment yet - and rather how I feel. There are times I feel like not voting, it's only the fact that we have the privilege of being able to vote in the UK that keeps me voting for the least of all the evils. +1 for this current election.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on May 10, 2017 11:16:27 GMT
The problem is determining the least of all the evils. For me that's clearly not Corbyn's Labour and equally clearly not the May's Tories (whom I despise). Which leaves the LimpDims, but they do their level best to be unappealing as well through a variety of silly things. Try as I might, I can't take the notion of a PM Farron seriously. He just doesn't have the necessary gravitas, amongst other things. Now you could argue that's immaterial, because it will never happen, but it's hard to vote for a party whose leader you don't take seriously.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on May 10, 2017 11:22:21 GMT
The problem is determining the least of all the evils. For me that's clearly not Corbyn's Labour and equally clearly not the May's Tories (whom I despise). Which leaves the LimpDims, but they do their level best to be unappealing as well through a variety of silly things. Try as I might, I can't take the notion of a PM Farron seriously. He just doesn't have the necessary gravitas, amongst other things. Now you could argue that's immaterial, because it will never happen, but it's hard to vote for a party whose leader you don't take seriously. No but then you have to remember that you're not voting for the leader (despite what the other parties are spouting in their propaganda), you're voting for the party as a whole.
I'm sure that if the Limp Dems do well Farron will be out pretty quickly, as you say he's lacking a certain something(s).
|
|
|
Post by michael on May 10, 2017 11:23:48 GMT
I actually planned to protest vote at the council elections by voting Lib Dem but they weren't even on the ballot.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on May 10, 2017 11:27:48 GMT
My local LD candidate (who hasn't a snowflake's chance of hell of winning against the incumbent Tory) actually seems quite switched on so she'll get my vote. But the LDs do need a root and branch overhaul before they can credibly lay claim to the centre ground that in my view ought to be their natural home.
|
|
|
Post by johnc on May 10, 2017 11:50:53 GMT
My constituency has Jo Swinson standing again for the LD's. I always found she cared about the local community and whilst clearly a career politician, she was at least approachable and reasonably respectful when you spoke to her. I think she has an excellent opportunity of getting in, if she gets out and shows the electorate that she can do some good. I fear though that this election is about one thing alone: Brexit. However in Scotland there is also the Union vote which might over-ride everything for some.
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on May 10, 2017 12:04:28 GMT
Don't be so sure on the Tory vote. I think there are a hell of a lot of old school Conservative remainers who will refuse to vote Blue due to the referendum result. I'm sure that the Lib Dems will take a large number of those votes as there is no other credible option. Add to this the tactics being placed by other parties to field only one other option as a challenge and who knows. So keen are the other parties to get rid of Jeremy Hunt as our government representative that the only other candidate going up against him is some Doctor from a Pro NHS party and they seem to be gaining serious traction.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on May 10, 2017 13:09:44 GMT
I heard some of that interview. I was much more impressed by him than the interviewer.....
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on May 10, 2017 14:03:51 GMT
I heard some of that interview. I was much more impressed by him than the interviewer..... I'm less than impressed with his homophobic views.
|
|
|
Post by michael on May 10, 2017 14:28:48 GMT
I'm less than impressed with his homophobic views. He's said he doesn't believe homosexuality to be a sin, took a while but he said it. I think it's complete non-story, he's religious and subscribes to a faith which has those views - it's a question we wouldn't expect the BBC to ask a muslim. I've never seen any evidence of homophobic actions by Tim Farron and that is surely what matters, beyond actions you're in thought police territory.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on May 10, 2017 14:55:35 GMT
I wonder what answer you'd get to that same question from the average Brexit-leaning Tory...
|
|
|
Post by Stuntman on May 10, 2017 20:21:33 GMT
Ladbrokes now have a Conservative majority at 1/25, with no majority at 16/1 and a Labour majority at 33/1.
In my constituency, it will be between the Conservatives and the Lib Dems. The Conservatives won the seat from the Lib Dems in 2015. The previous Lib Dem MP strikes me as being decent (I have met him) and he may well get my vote.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 7:32:16 GMT
33-1? Have they missed a few digits?
|
|
|
Post by grampa on May 11, 2017 10:05:34 GMT
Thoughts on nationalised industries? - Is there any way they could work in 2017 or would they inevitably take us back to the strike torn, shoddy service days of the 1970's?
|
|
|
Post by Tim on May 11, 2017 10:34:22 GMT
I always thought that there is a place for them but they should be run on proper commercial guidelines.
One that jumped out was BT - I think they received subsidies every year as a nationalised company but within a year of being privatised they were making decent profits. I'm certainly not suggesting we go back to the '70s but something like the railways appears to be a prime candidate. As far as I can tell it's a huge drain on taxpayers, gives a pisspoor service and is massively disjointed yet the, mainly foreign owned, companies that operate the network appear able to make profits. So why pay the taxpayer money straight abroad?
Obviously you'd have to come up with a new model of nationalisation for it to work.
|
|
|
Post by PG on May 11, 2017 15:52:34 GMT
I always thought that there is a place for them but they should be run on proper commercial guidelines. And therein lies the issue. You can't run them on commercial guidelines. Even if you could get over the profit / loss issue, the biggest problem is that there is no difference between revenue and capital expenditure in the government accounts. So buying assets that will aid the business has to come out of the same pool of money that you pay staff from. Staff always win. So no investment and all that follows. See British Rail in the 1950 and 1960's. That's why politicians dreamt up PFI - and look what a success that was. Far better to just borrow the money and build the bloody hospital but then that's government expenditure. Maybe we coul;d try something new, like let a private company build and run a hospital and receive money based on what they actually do. Like sending patients to a BUPA hospital for care maybe? But then that's total blasphemy....
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on May 11, 2017 16:00:07 GMT
With regard to the railways we are paying the price now for decades of under investment while British Rail was a nationalised industry - the same goes for the water industry, as it happens. Jezza might think it's a good idea to take control of the railways but if he realised the amount of money that has got to be spent on them he'd shit his pants as it became obvious that all his other plans like more money for the NHS, schools, tuition fees etc just got torpedoed.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on May 11, 2017 16:00:11 GMT
I agree. It appears thought that Government agencies in general are shit at writing contracts that work in these situations so when the private company says they won't make enough profit they either get a handout or to walk away with no penalty.
So if we could get someone to sort that it might then be feasible?
EDIT That's in reply to PG
|
|
|
Post by alf on May 12, 2017 14:12:50 GMT
I'm less than impressed with his homophobic views. He's said he doesn't believe homosexuality to be a sin, took a while but he said it. I think it's complete non-story, he's religious and subscribes to a faith which has those views - it's a question we wouldn't expect the BBC to ask a muslim. I've never seen any evidence of homophobic actions by Tim Farron and that is surely what matters, beyond actions you're in thought police territory. Farron's enthusiasm for saying homosexuality is not a sin was comparable to Corbyn's when saying he would use armed force if he had to. In both cases I believe they are lying but absolutely had to clarify this point to have any chance of electability. I find Farron's position bizarre since the Lib Dems are normally very relaxed about this sort of thing. My own Lib Dem ex-MP was a family man who did not seem to thing shagging rent boys was incompatible with that, and the very next constituency along has (or had, not sure if he's still in) the Lib Dem MP who's bisexual lover took his speeding points for him before then telling the police, seeing them both prosecuted. If my local area is anything to go by they are pretty relaxed about legality, sexual tendencies, and so on
|
|
|
Post by grampa on May 12, 2017 16:29:33 GMT
I liked Scott Capurro's answer when he was asked his view on Farron thinking homosexuality is a sin, "Gay sex is so much better when it is a sin!"
|
|
|
Post by michael on May 12, 2017 18:43:41 GMT
Maybe we coul;d try something new, like let a private company build and run a hospital and receive money based on what they actually do. Like sending patients to a BUPA hospital for care maybe? But then that's total blasphemy.... Nothing is stopping them now - well apart from them never making a profit out of it and thefore it being an unsustainable business model. And in the case of some trusts I worked with a few years ago they simply didn't know how to do it.
|
|