Jeremy Corbyn

So - to recap.

Corbyn's Labour - unelectable
UKIP - Ridiculous
LibDem - Poisoned by the Coalition
Tory - Well, they're Tories; what can you expect?

Who do people vote for?

jambalaya - Member
Thenlast Corbyn / Owen hustings where in London in front of a Jewish audience. It's fair to say Corbyn's reception there was very negative.

That's not how the Jewish Times reports it:

Although Owen Smith received more support from the audience across the debate, Corbyn fared better than might have expected and received a rapturous response when discussing the Jewish community’s role during the Battle of Cable Street

Harder left has always strayed from supporting Palestine via being anti-Isreal policy to be anti-Isreal in general (20% Isrealis are Arab and not all Isreali's support the governments policy) and that anti-Isreal [b]in general morhphs into outright anti-semtism[/b] as all Jews are treated as being agents of the Isreali state.

So you've gone from supporting the Palestinians, to being anti-Israeli govt, to anti-Isreali people, to anti-Jews. What a load of bollox. Sorry I can't be arsed to actually respond with anything sensible because that's such a ridiculous warping of logic and outright inuendo even my 12 year old could spot the stupidity of it.

Do UKIP and Tories have anti-Israel policies ?

Faed with irrefutable proof of what parties harbour the racists - who knew it was right wing folk who were the racists eh who knew- he then just brings up Israel and cherry picks furiously

You just dont have fact based opinions do you.

TO quote Daz

If you're not in favour of the state of Israel murdering palestinians and illegally occupying their land, or show any support for the palestinians in any form, then that makes you an anti-semite and a bona fide hater of jews. I'm not sure what's worse, the deliberate and disgraceful twisting of the truth itself, or the brazen way in which they're using one of the worst instances of racially-motivated genocide to score some petty political points against Corbyn and his supporters

Where the councils in Glasgow and Leicester that flew Palestinian flags over the town hall and support BDS Tory or UKIP ?

Was the MP who declared Bradford an Isreali free zone UKIP/Tory ?

You can find racist anywhere even on here. However the facts are
1. More rw folk are racist than left wing folk
2. Criticism of israel or support for Palestine is not proof of anti semitism though claiming it is proof of stupidity

If I think Zimbabwe's government is bad does that make me racist?

Don't know, do you regard people who say things like this:

[i]"Our struggle against the zimbabweans is very great and very serious. It needs all sincere efforts. It is a step that inevitably should be followed by other steps. The Movement is but one squadron that should be supported by more and more squadrons from this vast Arab and Islamic world, until the enemy is vanquished and Allah's victory is realised."[/i]

And

"[i]The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Zimbabweans, when the Zimbabweans will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Zimbabwean behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Zimbabweans."[/i].

As your friends?

Then yes, you probably are

If I think Zimbabwe's government is bad does that make me racist?

Are your friends are in the KKK?

Surely you're not taking the Hamas comment out of context are you?

Surely you're not taking the Hamas comment out of context are you?

the whole corbyn/anti-semite/hamas/racist nonsense is a very juvenile and completely laughable smear..

no-one's buying it no matter how much the young conservatives chant it in the playground

silly

Corbyn refused to talk/acknowledge/be civil to Cameron

Is it worth including some facts here about a phrase used once?

Giving evidence at the home affairs select committee on Monday, the Labour leader said that he had used the phrase to describe the militant groups during a meeting in parliament in 2009.

“The language I used at that meeting was actually here in parliament and it was about encouraging the meeting to go ahead, encouraging there to be a discussion about the peace process,” he said.

Asked whether he still regarded Hamas and Hezbollah as “friends”, the Labour leader said: “No. It was inclusive language I used which with hindsight I would rather not have used. I regret using those words, of course.”

no-one's buying it no matter how much the young conservatives chant it in the playground

that's what i said... the young conservatives

EVIDENCE please

yay russell crowe!!

[img] [/img]

anti-semite

[i]ninfan - Member
The stones and trees will say[/i]

"[i]Crikey, 309 pages?!?!?!?![/i]"

I'm not your secretary, but as you used upper case,

I suspect his motives are 'the cause justifies the means', but I don't think that's any better than if he was just a simple old fashioned racist.

Seriously? One wants to secure peace to end suffering, the other hates people of different colour for no reason, and you think they are the same thing?

"The accusations come from within labour. The tories seem to be letting them get on with it."

This. The Tories have very little to gain from getting involved. I'd guess they'll say as little as possible until the election.

Comedy gold:

Lol yes what a fool Chris Leslie is!

John Macdonnell seems to have got a bit confused and ended up delivering a speech written in 1977.

I don't want this thead to get derailed but 2 comments.

Whether Corbyn & Momentum believe they have an issue with anti-Semitism others certainly do and far from dealing with it they have inflamed the situation.

Secondly, it is absolutely OK to criticise Israel's actions in say the West Bank or Gaza.

What is not ok is to target Jewish people throughout the world as a proxy for Israel.
What is not ok is to say that Jews excerpt control of the media, finance or the US - as is frequently done to "explain" foreign policy support of Israel as to imply to support Israel would otherwise be "irrational".
What is not ok is to support BDS which is a thinly disguised boycott of predominantly Jewish business and people.
What is not ok is to support the deligitimisation of the state of Israel and to campaign for a single-state solution, namely Palestine which is the main objective of so called anti-Zionitsts and of organisations such as Hamas.

All of the above constitute anti-Semitism

Clive Lewis isn't a happy Shadow Defence Secretary. Speech changed by Milne at the 11th hour. At least Corbyn has got the joke that unilateral disarmament is a vote loser and confirming the Defence budget at 2% GDP goes some way to addressing his weaknesses on security.

@ninfan you clearly don't understand how free money works, tou just magic it up. Of course alternatively the £500bn represents the savings we'll make from nkt oaying into the EU budget - £500 bn = 50 years using my numbers or 60 years using @mikesmith's/factcheck.

Another policy Corbyn trailered was social housing, instead kf laying £9.5bn in housing benefit to private landlords he intends to build council houses and save money, so back of the envelope £9.5bn is about £120bn of housing, so thats another cheuck of borrowing and rents will be what £3-4bn which I doubt would cover interest costs, administration and repairs

The there is the investment bank £250bn

[b]So £500+£120+£250 = £870 billion. I mean why not round it up to a £ Trillion ? [/b]

All of the above constitute anti-Semitism

Hm. I only see two.

If a thing references Israel then it's anti Israel. If it references Jews as people then it's anti-Semitic. Otherwise you fall foul of your own first not-okay.

Another policy Corbyn trailered was social housing, instead kf laying £9.5bn in housing benefit to private landlords he intends to build council houses and save money, so back of the envelope £9.5bn is about £120bn of housing, so thats another cheuck of borrowing and rents will be what £3-4bn which I doubt would cover interest costs, administration and repairs

whatever he intends to do about it the present situation should be considered a crime

But the new Rentier classes vote Tory...

Government owned Social housing is a proven fiscal multiplier, if anyone with a finger more on the pulse could post the actual ratio, and but I'm guessing at least 2 to 1, so why the hell would the UK tax payer possibly want that over the buy to let portfolio Rentier model?

Edit: I was way off, a quick Google suggests 2.85, so nearly £3 earned for every quid spent

Government owned Social housing is a proven fiscal multiplier, if anyone with a finger more on the pulse could post the actual ratio, and but I'm guessing at least 2 to 1, so why the hell would the UK tax payer possibly want that over the buy to let portfolio Rentier model?

I assume because you get exactly the same multiplier if the private sector build houses, so you might as well let them do it and have the benefit of the 3-1 multiplier without having to pay the '1' and the hassle of doing it, and the blame if you get it wrong (tower blocks).

As long as the local authorities are the landlords receiving the rent monies, and not a private individual or organizations

As long as the local authorities are the landlords and not a private individual or organizations

Nope, unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean by multiplier. I took you to mean House gets built and that money+the presence of the house stimulates the economy to the tune of 3 times the investment.

EDIT: Yes, I can see from the link you meant what I think you meant, and it doesn't matter where the cash comes form, the effect is the same.

The ratio would be lower, as the government wouldn't be recipients of the rents, therfore less goes back in to the government coffers, but yes those investments and spends would still reap a tax take. I think you grasp the basics

http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/what-is-fiscal-multiplication-explained.html?m=1

Not quite the same as the government wouldn't get back the rents, but even though some of those rents would be paid out by the benefits agency in Housing Benefits. They would however still recieve any taxation on earnings from a private renter as you point out

But on the other hand, the private sector could invest those rental takings, further generating taxable income... Mmm complex!

I think you grasp the basics

I think I do. In contrast this: "As long as the local authorities are the landlords and not a private individual or organizations" indicates that you had been badly mislead. So perhaps instead of reading the opinions of angry people you should read the views of calm and rational people.

How misled? The way I see it, private landlords could also be just as likely to bank any profit, rather than purely make further investment, therefore a lower tax take?

What's the argument here? That private landlords renting to housing associations is as good as state owned housing?

I think Corbyn's point is that paying £9.5bn to non-state landlords is a waste of money as state housing would be much cheaper, I do wonder exactly where are they going to build the 600,000 required houses / flats ?

@Yunki we should have a Social House building programme and I am against right to buy. Councils shouod not be able to sell off housing stock either.

Hm. I only see two.

Anti-Zionism means the Jewish people (a race and a religion) have no right to their own country anywhere. I don't see a similar movement targetting any other race ?

Molegrips, it's an argument on semantics of fiscal multiplication of state owned over private social housing.
My gut feeling is government owned would be a higher ratio, but as oitofbreath points out its a very difficult calculation

Jamb, agreed re right to buy and state owned housing stocks

But aside from that state owned housing has some other clear advantages surely?

Anti-Zionism means the Jewish people (a race and a religion) have no right to their own country anywhere.

Ok, but again that's not the same as anti-Israel.

I know that link I provided up the page might have offended outofbreath, Molegrips, but it does describe the concept in layman's terms, and reinforces your stance I'd say

But aside from that state owned housing has some other clear advantages surely?

Yup, feel free to provide a link to a comprehensive list of advantages and disadvantages of state owned/maintained housing. I was addressing only the single claim made above.

As I have said many times I thiught he'd drop out humiliated and had zero chance of winning even the GOP nomination. Now he is in a 2 horse race for The White House. He could win, he really could

Sound familiar?

I do wonder exactly where are they going to build the 600,000 required houses / flats ?

Some of them on the public land they are currently giving away to developers of luxury flats.