Jeremy Corbyn

so there will be no second Referendum

Yup looks like the oldies really have got their wish to turn back the clock

Still we live in hope!

Read a rumour that Labour will support Proportional Representayion in their manifesto on May 15th

"We only lost the election because of the biased first past the post electoral system favours the Tories"
> You mean the one that saw Labour win three elections on the trot under Tony Blair?
"Erm..."

Apparently Andy Burnhams team let it be known that they wouldn't be offended if he didn't feel it necessary to pop over to Manchester while he was up north

Jez is celebrating with a little rally in Manchester.

Sadly, Andy is washing his hair and Jez forgot (ahem) to invite the sitting constituency Labour MP.

[img] [/img]

I'm seeing the words..... I'm seeing the words..... * off back to Islington, you useless *!

🙂

JC should remain a leader of the opposition because he stays true to his principles of not wanting to be poodle of EU bureaucrats.

Jeremy has always been true to his principles - trouble is that when he said he was a Marxist, they didn't know he meant Groucho

"Yep, thought their more blatant anti-Brexit stance would reap dividends, but apparently not."

There's also another group of voters, of which I'm one. Remainers who feel the vote should be honoured. I'd never vote for a party that tried to overturn the referendum. When I voted in was in out was out.

Exactly my feelings. I think it's bonkers leaving eu, but that's how we voted.

Of course, I have a vested interest. When we finally vote yes to indendence, I'll expect the same grace.

X3, voted remain, lost, fully expect leave to be honoured

I consider a 2pc spread inconclusive.

Couldn't give a shit whether the result is "honoured" or not. I consider it an act of national self-harm. I'll go with it, when it happens but if somehow it got overturned, I'd be delighted. As a family, I and my boy (and with a bit of wrangling, mrs DD) can all have Irish passports - so we have a few extra options when it comes to freedom of movement.

As for Jezza - he's been busy massaging his marrow......at the allotment.....to make it grow

Metro mayors - accept that turnout has been, predictably, low but it's the result that counts so....congrats to Andy Burnham (will be held accountable for what he does to address homelessness), Andy Street - hope he can use business experience to effect change in local politics, Ben Houchen - has he prepared for the possibility he could win?

So that's the hors d'oeuvres done, now for the main course; Corbyn's praetorian guard will not allow him to resign and May is doing a passable impersonation of Caligula - throwing some morsels to the populace while doing what she wants.

Interesting that in her presser on Wednesday she referred to the 'continental' media which, to me, is typical of the colonial approach; what about 'european media'?

I voted remain and think that leaving the EU is like a sex maniac in a biscuit tin - f***ing crackers; democracy rules so we have a choice between........
- labour whose leader is, evidently, nice and pleasant and polite - great personal attributes but not the ones I would wish to be dominant in negotiating an extremely complicated legislative, economic and political process
or
- the tories whose leader is petrified of engaging with the electorate, has no experience of complex international negotiations, who seems to believe that switching into dalek mode reinforces her message, who has not articulated a message other than 'stable and strong'.

It's like telling a man about to be killed - you choose, it's either arsenic or cyanide.

If you asked 28 people, 27 would say we don't care because you're going to die and the remaining 1 would say.....help!

@dd - now, where's my Irish citizenship application? Irish mother who was born in Eire so I'm a de facto Irish citizen but, just to formalise, I will be getting my Irish passport which then means my children will also share the same rights.

I will be getting my Irish passport which then means my children will also share the same rights.

Bugger, can't quite remember...we did this all a while back. It's worth checking the rules on passport.ie It may be you have to have them registered on the foreign births register. It's not quite a straightforward as it once was - but their grandmother's citizenship would entitle them anyway, whatever your status. The full rules are on the Irish government website - just not sure about their status as you didn't have an Irish passport when they were born (if you see what I mean...).

I'm not sure who's worse, the tories for torying or corbyn for being a neo tory by failing to oppose the tories.

The labour party stands for nothing at the moment, it's just looking a bit confused whilst it dies.

corbyn for being a neo tory

Heard it all now.

@dd - have checked and it's all good so they and I can share/enjoy all the benefits of Irish citizenship in the EU......as long as Eire remains a member.
Can't see that changing given the huge benefits they have enjoyed in the pst 30+ years; peasant economy with zero infrastructure outside dublin transformed into developed economy with more benefits still to come.

I too am a remainer that is 'resigned' to the fact we voted and will now be leaving.

What I don't accept though is that the terms of our leaving are now to be dictated by a single party, particularly one with a increased mandate because of an opportunistic election call. As was said on the news last night, 17 million voted to leave; a similar number voted to remain; 13 million didn't register an opinion; and 14 million people below voting age but who will be deeply affected didn't get a say.

To push through the wishes of the 17m and ignore the others completely is not acceptable, we need someone to keep the tories honest, and right now I don't care who that is as long as someone does.

I do also wonder whether the mass migration of the UKIP vote to Tory will be repeated elsewhere. It was a quirk of the counties yesterday that many of the elections were in traditional shire counties, and I wonder whether in more working class areas the 'labour went to UKIP over immigration' voter will go back or will hold their noses long enough to vote tory to secure their wish. Because I suspect they'll find that brexit then becomes the least of their worries.

Yep, thought their more blatant anti-Brexit stance would reap dividends, but apparently not.

My guess is that the feeble, irritating, hypocritical religious nut job that is Tim Farron had a lot to do with it. I vote Green now, but may consider Lib Dem in June from a purely tactical position.

I'm a remainer and I'm kinda resigned to leaving but not because it's the 'democratic will of the British people' or any of that bollocks. We were never asked if we wanted a referendum (ha!) - if we decided everything with referendums we'd bring back hanging too.

Combine that with the outrageous lies told by the leave campaign, the vast swathes of propaganda that dominate our media, the Cambridge Analytica stuff, the Leave bot army on social media, and the closeness of the vote/numbers who didn't vote - this is in no way 'the will of the people'.

i think the problem here is that Farage said if he lost by this result he would not have given up

Remainers feel the same

Couple this with the fact the "promises" of the Leave campaign were gone immediately this leads to the feelign the result was conned

We then have a period for a PM seems hell bent on delivering a Hard Brexit when even the leave caipn were clear to argue that leaving would keep the "economic benefits" of trade.

Yes stay lost but nothing that leave promised to do [ other than the leave bit] will come to pass.
Then those who poitn this out are disloyal , doing britain down , traitors even. Its a long road to acceptance and a united country

I very much doubt May is the person to do this with her "strong and stable" leaderships

How she manages to spin this given she is holding an elections she said she would not to deliver a policy she said she opposed is a masterclass in how much influence the [rw printed]media has to spin BS

We were never asked if we wanted a referendum

It was a conservative manifesto commitment, as was abiding by the result.

this is in no way 'the will of the people'.

Then the people will no doubt reject the government who have driven the process in the upcoming general election.

How she manages to spin this given she is holding an elections she said she would not to deliver a policy she said she opposed is a masterclass in how much influence the [rw printed]media has to spin BS

Or it's a fantastic example of democracy in action, whereby the politicians are forced to change direction according to the democratic will of the people

Then the people will no doubt reject the government who have driven the process in the upcoming general election.

Oh good, are we having a referendum on which party we want in government - when is it?

June 8th - did you miss the announcement?

It is only June 8th if you are voting tory.

For Labour voters it is June 9th.
[img] [/img]

😉

My guess is that the feeble, irritating, hypocritical religious nut job that is Tim Farron had a lot to do with it.

Yep, I much prefer Nick Clegg, who is probably my favourite politician. However, the whole storm in a tea cup Uni Fees thing has put an end to his front line career.

There's also another group of voters, of which I'm one. Remainers who feel the vote should be honoured. I'd never vote for a party that tried to overturn the referendum. When I voted in was in out was out.

I just don't get that. If you think you or someone has made a mistake, what is wrong with changing it / trying to change their mind? The vote was a complete farse, most people voted for things which have nothing to do with the EU. It was also non binding right from the start, so ignoring it / having another vote down the line was never ruled out.

June 8th - did you miss the announcement?

That is the election, you were referring to people deciding something which is different i.e like a referendum.

I have no choice in what party is in government via the current system but would have via a referendum. See the difference?

"she is holding an elections she said she would not to deliver a policy she said she opposed"

True, but given the narrowness of the Referendum result and given she's an 'unelected' PM it can only be a good thing to give people the chance to vote for a PM they prefer or a party that isn't going to leave the EU.

June 8th gives people the opportunity to change everything, you can't reasonably argue an election is the wrong thing to do as things stand.

"I just don't get that."

Me neither.

The vote went one way last year, if we have another one it might go a different way.

If the Lib Dems win on June 8th on a 'don't leave' ticket we shouldn't leave.

It's not somehow immoral to want to ask the same question twice. (Although it may piss people off in a counter productive way after a while!)

its an odd argument as the one thing we can be sure is that if they had lost [ and narrowly] UKIP and all the other leavers would not now be happy remainers due to democracy- Farage said as much himself.

June 8th gives people the opportunity to change everything, you can't reasonably argue an election is the wrong thing to do as things stand.

Apart from anything else you might reasonably argue that we should't be holding another election while the current government is still being investigated by the police for election fraud.

Our local election-fraud-spotlight MP was out this morning in a part of his constituency associated with high levels of poverty, social depravation and reliance on benefits, 250m from the military dockyard hs government are stangling and 500m from the beatifully historic Royal Marines base his government is closing down and selling off to private developers. Tough crowd!! Probably pooping himself about losing his 500 vote majority, even TM made a super-secret visit the other day (seems standard for her 'canvassing'...)

No need for expenses fiddling here though: I live in the neighbouring constituency, where our MP just has a bit of a rest for 6 weeks cos even Paul Nuttall coud get in if he stood for the right party.

"we should't be holding another election while the current government is still being investigated by the police for election fraud."

So all a government that didn't want an election would have to do would be to commit a succession of frauds for decades and they'd never have to face an election until they were all dead or got fed up with being in power.

So all a government that didn't want an election would have to do would be to commit a succession of frauds for decades and they'd never have to face an election until they were all dead or got fed up with being in power.

No.

"No."

Why not.

@ninfan Goucho 🙂 🙂

If Labour's job was simply to "oppose" the Government they would have all campaimed for Leave instead of just the Corbyn stealth non-effort

We have discussed the EU Rerendum and Labour's stance post many times on here and one the 30,000 post thread.

@theotherjonv I'll send you an email

The Manchester Rally was arranged by Momentum which explains the Burnham no-show and local MP not invited

Photobucket not working will post Momentum email later

[quote=outofbreath ]"No."
Why not.

Because its an idiotic interpretation of what he said and it makes no sense whatsoever to propose this or to suggest anyone wants it[ as you suggest not what Grum originally said to be clear]

He said: "we should't be holding another election while the current government is still being investigated by the police for election fraud.".

YouGov have some interesting analysis (on twitter) of how Labour voters defected to UKIP first and are now voting Tory. Also a significant number going direct Labour to Tory now.

@jamba. Deleted it. Sorry, but not interested. I can take other views but you just make stuff up.

IMHO

Your privilige and no I do not. Feel free to post as many things you think I have "made up" as you like. I have said many times read EVERY SINGLE post I make with [in my opinion] at the start and [/in my opinion] at the end

If more people had taken my posts about immigration being a major issue 3 years ago maybe you would not find yourself in this position. No it was all Daily Mail loons. STWers liked to mock when I said I joined vote Leave and spent time campaigning on the streets of Southampton but the fact is hardly anyone made an effort for Remain. Who donated to a Remain campaign or delivered leaflets or spoke to people on the high street ? We see the results.

Jon,

This EU / Corbyn / Labour issue has had thousands of posts. My 2 pence.

The Leave vote was driven in large part by a desire to end freedom of movement. That's absolutely clear. Also our desire to be able to sign trade agreements with whomever we want, agreements for our benefit and not a hotch-potch of requirements of the other 27

The EU has made it clear that freedom of movement is a clear principal of "the single market" - as such we will 100% be leaving that. If you like that's a mutual decision of the UK and EU.

Being a member of the Customs Union means you cannot negotiate your own trade deals. Hence we must leave that. Similar arguments re: EEA.

The EU has said we may not have sector by sector access to the single market (even though Canarda has exactly). This points to WTO trade arrangements as per US, Australia, China etc

So there is your "Hard Brexit".

May is holding an election meaning people have a direct vote on her approach to Brexit. That's democracy. Yes of course she has one eye on the chaos under Corbyn but Corbyn voted for the election.

Hope to meet for a ride sometime, missing not living in Guildford any longer. Its harder to get motivated to go riding when its nothing like as good.

Andy

Not you Junkyard. I don't give a flying fig what tou think about any topic. My question was clearly not addressed to you. Reported

Read by mistake as your post name starts wirh a J

Lazarus, see?
🙂

Your privilige ([i]sic [/i]) and no I do not. Feel free to post as many things you think I have "made up" as you like.

I think you'll find that's already happened. Quite a lot. By lots of other people as well...

Your privilige and no I do not.

Err yes you do

"some interesting analysis (on twitter) of how Labour voters defected to UKIP first and are now voting Tory. Also a significant number going direct Labour to Tory now."

A quick search of recent Twitter posts suggests we're talking about this:

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/05/05/ukip-gateway-drug-more-are-going-straight-hard-stu/

Jamba / Andy;

I don't understand why you've thrown your toys. I didn't ask you to email me and I'm not prepared to have a private discussion with you on this. As soon as I saw that was the intent of your email, I just deleted it, as said, not interested in an offline discussion because I can't discuss with someone who is a/ more knowedgable and eloquent on this matter and will in a Rees-Moggian way tie me into knots; b/ when I feel I have to either have an encyclopedic knowledge or an online fact checker to know whether I'm being debated with or trolled. I don't need to list out examples where your info has been discredited, plenty of others have.

I'm not a politician, never pretended to be, just a humble scientist alarmed by what I see happening. If I was more capable and eloquent then maybe I'd stand but for now I'll settle for providing my support to people I trust on this issue. And I just don't trust Leave, or May, for obvious reasons.

Re: Personal - I don't know you, I can't even say whether I like you 'as a person' or not. I don't like your politics but if that was the only matter I wouldn't like several of the members of my own family.

Any time you're up here I'd be happy to meet you for a ride (a consequence of seeing the content of your email and deleting it was I missed that bit, now seen as you've reposted your email to me) - but politics will be strictly off limits.

You now seem to have a problem with me - which is fine - so i have removed you from Chub Club as requested, but if you want back in let me know.

Priceless

Seems like a great time to have an election from the oppositipns point of view, the other side in the media for potentially illegal activities in a previous election, all front and centre in media at a time people are slightly more politically aware than usual.

Or it would be if the opposition had a cat in hells chance of winning which Thursday clearly showed they don't.

holding another election while the current government is still being investigated by the police for election fraud."

@theotherjonv

Will not want back into the chubb club thanks. I asked to be deleted based on your accusation here. The honest advice I gave on your other thread was my sincere advice. I sent you an email as the EU stuff on the last few pages is a rehash of the 30,000 post thread, its been done to death.

You didn't answer what you thought I had made up. I have zero interest in the other trolls input. I specifically want to know what [b]you[/b] think I [b]made up[/b]

Re: photo I could not post earlier. Momentum arranged Machester rally. Nothing to do with official Labour. Militant Tendancy all over again with lashings of blame "The Media"

[img] [/img]

So, it looks like 'the one percent' is now 'the five percent'

[url= https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/06/labour-tax-80000-general-election-promise ]Income tax rises for everyone on £80k and above[/url]

ninfan - Member

So, it looks like 'the one percent' is now 'the five percent'

Income tax rises for everyone on £80k and above

Ninfan, if you're trying to persuade me to vote Labour, you're wasting your time.

EDIT: reading that article, it's all a bit depressing.

I wonder why none of the other parties are going after the conservatives on the election spending issue.

Makes you think......

Wow, jambalaya's gone full-on weirdo. 😯

Makes you think......

Does it hurt? Hawhawhaw. Yaw.

CountZero - Member

Well, in some of those cases, like in North Wilts, the accusation involving the 'Battle Bus' and funds used is baseless, because it never even came here.

I don't see North Wilts in the list of identified MPs? Michelle Donelan for Chippenham was rumoured to be at one point but bizarrely, it turned out that the photoshoot she did with David Cameron on the bus, didn't take place in her constituency and it never actually visited there- she went and met him somewhere else to give the impression he'd visited. Not election fraud, just normal fraud.

@jamba

I will backtrack on the accusation of 'making stuff up' (others may not, that's their call). I'll go for your explanation of having opinions that I disagree with but you have in my opinion, presented certain of those opinions as fact that simply aren't true. Whether that is deliberate or not, only you know (politicians of all colours have been known to lie after all) and the purpose of that has at times verged on trolling. IMHO.

If that offends, I'm sorry, but it's how I see it. I'm not going to list them out one by one, I don't see the point because you haven't yet shown anywhere where you won't just reaffirm what you already said.

You have your opinion, me mine, and I don't see why that should affect co-existing in other non-political threads, but if you don't want to then it's your call. I've had far worse rows recently with my MiL without getting close to cutting off relationships. I had no problem accepting your membership to ChubClub despite differences, to do otherwise would make me guilty of discrimination. If you feel you can't remain member for the same reason, feels a bit petty to me tbh. But again - your call.

The £80k tax bracket sounds reasonable but no doubt loads of people who will never come close to earning that will still moan about it as they have aspirations

So, it looks like 'the one percent' is now 'the five percent'

Yes, and it should be. Those lucky enough to be in the 5% need to contribute more so there can be a fairer spread of money and resources for the less lucky 95%.

Why wouldn't they want to do that?
Do you really even think people earning over £80K would even notice if they paid a bit more tax?

So googling for numbers 5pc of the working population is 1.6 million, the extra tax Labour need is 45 billion. (That's a number the BBC quote from the Torys, anyone find a better number?)

So about thirty grand each by whatever mechanism is used over whatever period that 45 billion covers.

I guess voters have to decide if the Laffer curve says yes or no...

Looks like Corbyns back to demonising sections of society again, but it's OK because 80k is loads, people earning it are just lucky and they don't contribute enough already. If you look at tax rates historically the percentages were higher for everyone, if you want to return to 70s taxation everyone should be paying more.

It might start off with the top 5% but it'll soon increase. Then again we're back to the stupid situation where a single earning household of 81k will be paying the new rate whilst next door with two 45k earners bringing in 90k still pay 20%. Welcome to Corbyn''s fairer society. Simple polices for simple people, shame the problems aren't as simple.

Any way not going to happen, Corbyn and the Labour party are a total joke completely out of touch with the average voter. Not everyone is as selfish, simple and self obsessed as his Momentum supporters.

^^^

Earns more than 80k 😆

Then again we're back to the stupid situation where a single earning household of 81k will be paying the new rate whilst next door with two 45k earners bringing in 90k still pay 20%. Welcome to Corbyn''s fairer society. Simple polices for simple people, shame the problems aren't as simple.

You mean like osbournes policy on child benefit?

I think it's a perfectly reasonable, and sensible thing to do. We need higher taxes, that much is obvious.

Not everyone is as selfish, simple and self obsessed as his Momentum supporters.

Interesting definition of selfish you've got there. I would suggest it's not them that come across as selfish.

This is interesting:

One investment banker complained that earning a few hundred thousand a year “just doesn’t feel particularly wealthy” when others in the City have millions of pounds in bonuses and assets.

http://www.bigissue.com/news/uks-top-1-not-feel-wealthy/

Looks like Corbyns back to demonising sections of society again

they want the rich to pay more tax that is all the colourful language is not helpful but it would be better if you care about bedroom taxes, austerity ion the poor rather than waited only to get outraged when the top 5% in society were targeted

interesting insight into where your moral compass lies

That's a number the BBC quote from the Torys, anyone find a better number?)

You could use Labour's number. Or any random number you want. The Tory number is demonstrably a lie as had been pointed out many times

However, stuff costs money. Anyone thinking that the Tories will deliver Swedish level services with low taxes is seriously deluded. Unfortunately there are actually enough such people to make it a vote winning claim.

but it's OK because 80k is loads, people earning it are just lucky and they don't contribute enough already.

Yep, totally agree - although I realise you don't really think it is okay....

Can you explain why you think someone who is earning £80K per year is not lucky?
Can you explain why you think it is right for one person to earn £80K and another £12K?
Can you explain how taking another few % from someone earning £80K is going to cause them hardship?

Can you explain why you think it is right for one person to earn £80K and another £12K?

Damned straight! Why should a heart surgeon earn more than someone working in the pub? It's a national disgrace. To the barricades, comrades!

He did not ask if you could mock the question they asked if you could explain

Can you?

I don't think anyone is arguing that everyone should earn the same, but the current differentials are obscene.

Why should a heart surgeon earn more than someone working in the pub?

When the job in the pub doesn't pay enough to live on then we have a problem don't we.

Not all jobs are the same, therefore they have different salaries.

Hardly worth explaining, really.

He did not ask if you could mock the question they asked if you could explain

Can you?

I think Kerley is accidentally creating a strawman against his own argument there. Don't even go down that route as it's a stupid argument, a neurosurgeon is clearly more skilled and more important to society than me (spreadsheet wrangler).

As for the selfish accusation. That's bizarre. Wanting higher rates of tax to find a sustainable NHS, effective police, safe social services, quality education is selfish. But throwing a strop because you might have to pay a bit more tax (when you earn more then 95% of people in the country) isn't?

Yes, the couple/household income vs individual income thing is an issue, but how do you fix it? If I share a flat with a mate then what's to stop us claiming we're a couple and getting the associated tax benefits?

Edit: Why bring up surgeons? That's one of the most 'useful' jobs imaginable and pays relatively little compared to a CEO or city trader.

The Cpt's wine cellar will remain well stocked in this event and why should he care about poor people eh ..why did they not work harder etc its HIS MONEY and the rest can well use food banks as that is why we have charity

Any chance of an actual debate?

the real issue is do we think the rich should pay more tax so that spending can increase on some services- NHS for example

i would imagine its a broadly popular tax given we all love the NHS and we dont all earn 80k.
Interesting both labour and lib dems saying tax increases and the Tories refusing to say they wont do it so it seems its coming whatever happens
Tories will probably raise VAT or something that hits the poor disproportionately mind as that is there way - I suspect there is a lot less support for that than an increase on the top 5%

🙄 Perhaps it best you stick to the notsowise cracks capitan.

a neurosurgeon is clearly more skilled and more important to society than me (spreadsheet wrangler).

we do not set pay rates based on "importance to the country"

IMHO the question is a moral one - if i work 40 hours and you do why should i earn less ? the answer given is an economic one hence we get this "debate"

You either want a fair society or you want a society with wildly diverse incomes

I suspect the answer is a mixture of your own moral code and where you sit on that disparity - very few of the top 5% seem to be among humanities more altruistic - its almost as if they are rich because they value money really highly.

"should those people who earn more, pay more tax?".

Isn't that how percentages work anyway?