Forum menu
Cursive also saying that Johnson polling better in Scotland and he may well hang on to most of the 13 seats up there. (Leave voting unionist scots got to go somewhere)
Labour meanwhile not doing so well against the SNP
The people on here still defending failed market driven policies...
Good god.
Have another five years. It will be medieval by then.
Enjoy the top of the neoliberal pyramid until you get knocked off.
Openreach has been trying for years and not made a dent in it.
That's because outside of government programmes anything Openreach does has to be 'commercially viable' as we found out. So miles of fibre to a remote Scottish island for 30 houses isn't commercially viable, so it won't get done. Or in our case, about 300 yards of fibre to serve a couple of hundred houses in a city doesn't make commercial sense either.
That's the point of nationalisation. I doubt many places would ever have had phones at all if it weren't for state owned BT. Although I'm not a historical telecomms expert so feel free to correct me.
Guardian article. (Katrina Forrester)
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/nov/18/crisis-in-liberalism-katrina-forrester?
Its throwing up some right weird old anomalies is this election. Particularly in Scotland and Norn Ireland.
The one thing that seems to be consistent though is that the labour parties 'don't mention the war' approach to not discussing Brexit and trying to talk about other stuff instead, simply isn't working. This election really is all about Brexit in a way the last one wasn't so exclusively.
The Labour leadership* needs to accept this and start stressing their policy of a second referendum. We know Grandad will only do that through gritted teeth while looking like he's in an ISIS hostage video, but its party policy whether he likes it or not. And one of the few that might actually win them some votes. But in his interviews at the weekend he's again still just as evasive and non-commital about the whole subject, as he is and always has been a committed Brexiteer. So when he's on the subject of a second referendum he just looks like Dot Cotton licking piss off a nettle
* the word is used figuratively in this instance etc....
Asking you to explain how you can recognise immigrants isnt nitpicking. Its questioning your racist language. Perhaps you didnt mean to write it that way but considering instead of thinking about that for a second and rewording it you just started hurling abuse that makes me think you did.
It is clear you are either a racist or an absolute idiot incapable of admitting you made a mistake. Or both since there is a large intersect between the two categories.
Oh my days, apparently stating that there are no immigrants clogging up CyB is racist language - and stating or defending the idea that they actually are is not racist.
Are you Donald Trump?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FopyRHHlt3M
Agreed binners. It wont happen but what Labour should say is:
A second referendum is the quickest way to finish Brexit.
Jeremy Corbyn will remain neutral on Brexit but all other Labour MPs and members are free to campaign how they choose.
All the other policies need tidying up also- maybe something like: Where a state subsidised monopoly is failing a Labour govt will take it over.
Enjoy the top of the neoliberal pyramid until you get knocked off.
Hopefully the revolution will be televised. 🙂
The insistence on persevering with the free-market capitalist model is even more mystifying when you look around the world and see all the successful socialist economies.
Baffling
Yes but a politburo ponzi scheme is much fairer.
Not again… we all live in mixed economies… and policy differentials are all about where the balance between public and private, consumer purchased and taxation funded, regulated and deregulated, lies. There are very few markets in any countries that are “free”, without involvement from the state and intrastate bodies. There are very few services in any countries that have no public provision within them whatsoever.
Ah, but that wasn't real socialism, Comrade.
The insistence on persevering with the free-market capitalist model is even more mystifying when you look around the world and see all the successful socialist economies.
Don't be daft binners. You know as well as I that there are many different ways of running a capitalist economy beyond the two polarised models you mention above. You also know that Labour are not proposing to dismantle capitalism, only to make it a bit fairer by moving the small percentage of it that has been proven to be dysfunctional into state ownership and regulating some other bits of it to make sure multinational companies benefitting from the UK market pay their fair share of tax.
Can anyone name a successful free market capitalist economy? You know a pure free market economy without any state intervention.
The Tory UK, post-brexit?
Oh... successful? Sorry... as you were...
Don’t be daft binners. You know as well as I that there are many different ways of running a capitalist economy beyond the two polarised models you mention above. You also know that Labour are not proposing to dismantle capitalism, only to make it a bit fairer by moving the small percentage of it that has been proven to be dysfunctional into state ownership and regulating some other bits of it to make sure multinational companies benefitting from the UK market pay their fair share of tax.
Which other successful states with a good welfare system have undergone a huge program of nationalisation, stakeholder takeovers and assaults on intellectual property rights recently?
a huge program of nationalisation
Huge? Really?
Trains, electricity, water, broadband - that’s huge in that the costs involved will be. Denying that it isn’t a big investment that is unmatched by any western nation - including the “democratic socialist” ones - is not the way to defend labours position. You need to convince people that it is an economically sound choice.
That is before we mention the seizure of shares and intellectual property.
Trains, electricity, water, broadband
Over what timescale? I agree with all of those, as it happens. I agree that to totally nationalise all of those quickly would be unwise and questionable. Elements of all need to be back in the public sector ASAP though.
That’s the point of nationalisation. I doubt many places would ever have had phones at all if it weren’t for state owned BT. Although I’m not a historical telecomms expert so feel free to correct me.
Who knows ... I rather suspect like most other modern perks it would be because of trickle down economics that despite being deliberately misinterpreted is what has brought us indoor toilets, central heating and mobile phones and now e-cars in my lifetime.
Over what timescale? I agree with all of those, as it happens. I agree that to totally nationalise all of those quickly would be unwise and questionable. Elements of all need to be back in the public sector ASAP though.
Now I can maybe start to see some sense in that line of reasoning, I just don’t think Labours leadership or the conservatives view the economy with the kind of long term planning required to test the water, analyse the effects of incremental change and do this sensibly.
raybanwomble
I just don’t think Labours leadership or the conservatives view the economy with the kind of long term planning required to test the water, analyse the effects of incremental change and do this sensibly.
I see two UK's regardless of how the election goes.... and both rely on unicorns and forced doctrine.
Precisely Steve. If we get either party, then they are going to do things that at least 59 percent of the population hate because of the voting system.
On the topic of labour, I don’t see how making such grand changes to the economy will be seen as legitimate given that they’d likely only have a mandate of thirty odd percent of the population if they did. Their policies are, like the Tories - hated by the other side.
I rather suspect like most other modern perks it would be because of trickle down economics that despite being deliberately misinterpreted
No because as I've shown if left to commercial imperatives then things don't get done. If you look at the few hundred a year you generate from the phone bills of a remote island, versus the £100k it costs to put their phone cable in, why would a commercial company do that?
The policies presently being advocated by both main political parties are just two competing visions of national economic suicide
Very different, but equally insane, with the same end result
I rather suspect like most other modern perks it would be because of trickle down economics that despite being deliberately misinterpreted
thats entrely the problem
its not trickled dowm, https://ig.ft.com/gb-broadband-speed-map/
There’s more consensus than the noise suggests… both parties are committed to throwing money at improving communications infrastructure, and both parties are happy to claim that ending our Freedom of Movement is “democratic”.
Very different, but equally insane, with the same end result
No, cos in one the poor get looked after, and in the other the rich get looked after.
had a local labour canvasser round yesterday
I felt slightly bemused to hear myself explaining to him that, even though we are both pretty much as unimpressed with Labour as at any point in the last 12ish years, it's likely to be the first time we've both voted Labour in a GE...
No, cos in one the poor get looked after, and in the other the rich get looked after.
On the run up to this election, millionaires are writing the Labour manifesto, and ordinary members told to lump it. Will it be any different if they win?
I felt slightly bemused to hear myself
Well done Doris, I’m in the same position. Anyone that helps Johnson get a majority because they are disappointed in what Labour are doing or offering, need to have a long hard think about what they’re doing.
thats entrely the problem
its not trickled dowm, https://ig.ft.com/gb-broadband-speed-map//blockquote >
In what way? Anyone can move to an area with faster broadband if for some reason you think that is how you define your success in life or as per the article they can pool together and lay their own.
Anyone can move to an area with faster broadband
Whoosh… that’s the entire point going over your head.
Whoosh… that’s the entire point going over your head.
Exactly ... though the fact remains.
You can tax the people who live in areas with faster broadband (including the poorest living in zero and 1 bed fire traps) to subsidise those who refuse to move because they are enjoying many benefits of living in for example a small Scottish island but who's kids can go outside and have a garden.
while we are at it we can build a dual carriageway bridge and open a Starbucks...
Well done Doris, I’m in the same position. Anyone that helps Johnson get a majority because they are disappointed in what Labour are doing or offering, need to have a long hard think about what they’re doing.
I'm not in that situation but I'd vote labour if it was relevant.
However, it really won't make the UK a pleasant place whilst the biggest divide in the country is brushed aside.
FFS
https://twitter.com/independent/status/1196352646543761410?s=21
After the local Green candidate has stepped aside and campaigned for Labour locally.
So, this is the pitch to young people is it? You can’t trust Labour on climate change. You can’t trust Labour to make this a less hostile place for migrants. You can’t trust Labour to protect your right to leave the country to better yourself.
People blame the young for not voting, but it’s a vicious circle of pandering to the Boomers of this world, and expecting the younger generation to lump it and vote anyway.
both parties are committed to throwing money at improving communications infrastructure, and both parties are happy to claim that ending our Freedom of Movement is “democratic”.
That's why Labour need to be a party of opposition, rather than "what they said, but we are nice"
LibDem's have that, but still no realistic chance.
BJ it is, then.
And maybe then, for once, the Labour party will listen to the electorate rather than Momentum and get a leader in who can pull the party along behind them. Can they not bring John Smith back from the dead?
BJ it is, then.
If he wasnt determined to launch us off the Brexit cliff & plunge us into a decade more of these divisive & poisonous Brexit negotiations, then maybe
but youd be insane to think that this will be good for the country
After the local Green candidate has stepped aside and campaigned for Labour locally.
The Green party candidate in our constituency (Bury North) stepped down yesterday and issued a statement supporting the labour candidate (ours is an ultra-marginal Tory/Labour seat). I'm sure he'll be happy with todays back-tracking.
I presume this is another policy decided and voted on by the membership at the party conference and now dropped like a hot turd because Len said so?
Is there anyone in Momentum still gullible enough to buy the complete cobblers that Corbyn and his cabal are in any way 'restoring democracy to the party'? looks like they're making it up as they go along
On the run up to this election, millionaires are writing the Labour manifesto, and ordinary members told to lump it. Will it be any different if they win?
Yes.
If he wasnt determined to launch us off the Brexit cliff & plunge us into a decade more of these divisive & poisonous Brexit negotiations, then maybe
The issue really STILL is that unless you believe in unicorns that both sides look like a cliff edge. Unless you want to abandon democracy then Labour can't do anything except be a opposition unless they come out with something people enough will vote for.
On the run up to this election, millionaires are writing the Labour manifesto, and ordinary members told to lump it. Will it be any different if they win?
Yes.
So you are basically saying the manifesto is what? Lets con the electorate then do what we planned?
On the run up to this election, millionaires are writing the Labour manifesto, and ordinary members told to lump it. Will it be any different if they win?
Yes.
Yes, because the leadership of opposition parties always become infinitely more democratic and accountable once they get their mitts on the levers of power, and theres absolutely no track record whatsoever of them developing authoritarian streaks and becoming tinpot dictatorships. Particularly given the open, transparent, democratic and accountable nature of those in the bunker around Corbyn
So you are basically saying the manifesto is what? Lets con the electorate then do what we planned?
Eh? I don't think we are talking along the same lines.
Manifestos are, as always, this is what the party wants to do, but it may not work out that way. At least Labour are being honest by withdrawing plans they don't think they will end up doing. I doubt Johnson has any intention of following through with anything in particular.
I, for one, could never trust a lifelong Brexiteer to fight my corner.
JC has voted against every single major piece of pro-EU legislation since 1975.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.markpack.org.uk/153744/jeremy-corbyn-brexit/amp/
(I used that link as it conveniently has a good list of JC’s record on EU).
If Labour had a more pro EU leader then they’d have a much better chance of getting somewhere.