Anti-Capitalist and thus anti-US sentiment is at the core of Corbyn's Labour Party. Russia is their soul mate and kindred spirit.
So, political insinuation then, not actual information. Or bollocks as it's also known. This kind of talk is what is so very wrong with the world.
Tithes were not deliberate and systematic?
🙂
Molgrips did you read the first paragragph, have you followed McDonnells various outbursts or Momentums agenda or Stop the War which is simply one gigantic anti-American coalition including some very very unsavoury people and groups.
The Toires are silent on all this currently as it's electoral gold dust.
So, political insinuation then, not actual information. Or bollocks as it's also known. This kind of talk is what is so very wrong with the world.
you'll never find a smoking gun where you could quote Corbyn as saying "Russia is fantastic I wish the whole world could be just like them". But the cumulative effect of his whole career suggests he has a soft spot for the place.
Thee BBC link is just a tiny part of that.
Yes, I have Jam, but not being a raging fact-blind Tory I realised that like I said, insinuation is damaging to political debate.
I strongly doubt a lifelong pacifist is going to be supporting a Putin led state. And also, they aren't communist any more, did you know that?
And also, they aren't communist any more, did you know that?
Russia no, Corbyn I am not so sure 😉
McDonnell said he was a Marxist, he's the Shadow Chancellor FFS. Corbyn is totally blind when it comes to Russia just like his idiotic statement on Castro. Capitalism and America is the great Satan as far as Corbyn's Labour Party is concerned.
Jamba is now as beyond parody as the chewbot. It's funny but it's sort of serious as this sort of debate by invention has now largely replaced real discussion, with judges labelled "enemies of the people" and whatnot. It can't be beneficial for our democracy.
McDonnell said he was a Marxist, he's the Shadow Chancellor FFS.
Do you really not understand the difference between supporting Marxism and supporting the Soviet state? Which does not even exist any more anyway!
You know, people like you who deal in insinuation and suggestion often can't understand that some people do simply talk straight. So when Corbyn said that perhaps we should look at the USA's actions, maybe that's what he actually meant, rather than "I love Russia".
Blah blah blah 😉
See you al in 2020 it's going to be carnage.
Corbyn is an anti-Capitalist and wants to take people's money and give it to others. Labour are going to be absolutely crucified. He of course has his £1.6m pension, lucky him. 30 years in finance and I have no chance to accumulate such a pension due to penal tax rates on pension pots. Pot vs Kettle.
Jamba is now as beyond parody as the chewbot. It's funny but it's sort of serious as this sort of debate by invention has now largely replaced real discussion, with judges labelled "enemies of the people" and whatnot. It can't be beneficial for our democracy.
Of course in the Marxist state the free press is at the heart of the rights of the individual.........
The odd thing about newspapers is that they are a great way of looking at the country as they are low cost and widely distributed.
What's the circulation of the Morning Star?
Of course in the Marxist state the free press is at the heart of the rights of the individual.........
Feel free to back up this claim with a reference to the relevant passage in Marx's writing.
Anti-Capitalist and thus anti-US sentiment is at the core of Corbyn's Labour Party. Russia is their soul mate and kindred spirit. Cuba under Castro too
I see you have still not run out of the XMas booze and, yet again, you did not get a big book of facts for xmas
McDonnell said he was a Marxist, he's the Shadow Chancellor
Corbyn is an anti-Capitalist and wants to take people's money and give it to others.
Both positives to me. Are you saying it is a problem, and to who - the fortunate rich people who have been lucky?
Feel free to back up this claim with a reference to the relevant passage in Marx's writing.
Why? I talked of the Marxist state, I'm sure you have a long list of them and the free press enjoyed there
Why? I talked of the Marxist state, I'm sure you have a long list of them and the free press enjoyed there
Indeed - so please tell us which aspect of Marx's philosophy has anything to do with your claims about free press. Or are you just spouting ignorant blx?
[url= https://chomsky.info/20150205-2/ ]USA vs Cuba[/url]
The USA has done more bad in the world than Russia. Corbyn is right to treat Russia and the USA the same.
sounds like you are describing our progressive tax system.
Indeed. This is my point. Saying that socialism is a failure whilst capitalism is a success is silly. There are many aspects of our 'capitalist' system which are straight out of the 'socialist' rule book. Some people like ninfan would rather we do away with things like the welfare state and go back to charity based welfare, but the fact that this is still a fringe opinion would suggest that 'socialism' is more successful than people think.
Would I now? You learn something every day don't you!
Read what I said, the 'welfare state' isn't a socialist concept, it predates socialism by centuries.
Well chaps you have a few years yet to practice your doorstep winning arguments about the differences between Marxism/Trotskyism/Communism/Corbynism. That and how he's not a terrorist sympathiser, how submarines with no missiles are a good idea and how Momentumites are not going to steal the Middle Class's savings. There's quite a long and growing list but there is time, 3.5yrs to be precise. Currently he's making new problems faster than Labour can create solutions but that has to stop eventually surely ?
I did have the biggest laugh earlier about the coverage of Corbyn's upcoming 2017 "rebranding" as the anti-establishment candidate. The man of great principals and a "new kind of politics" is getting a rebrand. How very Saatchi and Saatchi. Brilliant. 🙂
@dazh what we have in the UK is modern socialism. This is what it looks like. Welfare state, health provision, progressive tax system etc.
Indeed. This is my point too. Saying that capitalism is a failure whilst socialism is a success is silly. There are many aspects of our 'mixed' system which are straight out of the 'capitalistt' (sic) rule book. Some people would rather we do away with things like the market and go back (?) to state allocation of resources, but the fact that this is still a fringe opinion would suggest that 'our mixed model' is more successful than people think.
The odd thing is that if you look at reality versus rhetoric, supposed RW parties often do more LW things and vv - the latter best illustrated in Scotland where a supposed L of centre anti-austerity party does things that would make the Tories blush!
Well chaps you have a few years yet to practice your doorstep winning arguments
This again (and again and again and again) We aren't talking about how to get votes - that is obviously to promise tax cuts and to "send the ******* back home".
Saying that capitalism is a failure whilst socialism is a success is silly.
And vice versa.
Indeed Hurty. Don't forget George Osbourne happily nicking most of Millibeans ideas as well
Where to start with Jeremy's 'populist' relaunch? Given that the most successful populist of recent times - Farage - did so with his grinning bloke down the pub routine, pint in one hand, fag in the other, can you see Jezza doing that?
He looks like he's never been near a pub in his life, and the permanent furrowed brow and generally dour, humourless manner are going to make that a pretty hard sell.
Remember when they tried to get Gordon Brown to smile? But instead of being reassuring, he looked like a serial killer?
I expect this attempt to be far far more sinister looking, and transparently weirder than that. Be afraid. Be very very afraid....
what we have in the UK is modern socialism.
No, what the Swedes have is closest.
We have private companies making a profit out of basic needs and human rights, and a government that wants to cream off even more to private companies whilst standards are squeezed by commercial pressures and the needy suffer. Not socialism.
And vice versa.
woosh, Doc 😀
woosh, Doc
whoosh, TM
TM
sorry have you trademarked (whoosh) missing the earlier point? 😉
ZZzzzzz......
We have private companies making a profit out of basic needs and human rights
Where do you draw the line?
Presumably you don't mind [i]people[/i] making a profit out of basic needs and human rights? You know, we pay the police, the doctors, the nurses for their work, none of them are working for free, they all make a profit in return for their services.
Perhaps not, perhaps police work and nursing should be community responsibilies and people should do them unpaid as a way of serving the community? like police specials, mountain rescue, lifeboats etc?
Is it ok for companies selling food to make a profit? Food is a basic human right isn't it? How about the farmers who grow the food? Can they make a profit? Or do you expect them to produce at cost?
What qbout the people who sell stuff to the NHS? Are they allowed to make a profit? The computers, paper tissues and cleaning chemicals, do they need to be provided at cost?
Where do you draw the line as to who is allowed to make a profit from services?
Where to start with Jeremy's 'populist' relaunch?
Announcement of the policy details for nationalisation of GP services and Dentistry seems an ideal start. Got to get the private sector out of the NHS!
We have private companies making a profit out of basic needs and human rights, and a government that wants to cream off even more to private companies whilst standards are squeezed by commercial pressures and the needy suffer. Not socialism.
Interesting, the utility nationalisations provided massive off balance sheet finance for infrastructure investment, have social obligations, provide subsidised bills for the poorest in some sectors.
Scotland and NI which didn't nationalise some uilities has had to resort to PFIs because the public money isn't there and have a massive future investment headache
England and Wales also subsidise the local gas bill in Thurso, Oban, Wick and Campbeltown massively
But, nationalise away, adding more pension liabilities, infrastructure investment and running costs to the public accounts is the way to go!!
To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service.
Sums it up really, when is it going to be announced by Corbyn?
But, nationalise away, adding more pension liabilities, infrastructure investment and running costs to the public accounts is the way to go!!
I'm not advocating any of that, quite clearly.
Where do you draw the line as to who is allowed to make a profit from services?
Yes of course. Those evil public sector workers profiting from everyone else getting ill and stuff. It's all just a profiteering racket isn't it? You really do say some of the daftest things I've ever seen on here.
Binners, Jezza has been in a pub. He did so after winning the leadership, stood on a chair and sang The Red Flag. Don't worry you'll see the footage in 2020.
DrJ unless you can win votes and form a Government then arguing about the shortfalls of Capitalism is just intellectual masterbation which is basically the point made to Labour voters about electing Corbyn in the first place.
.You know, we pay the police, the doctors, the nurses for their work, none of them are working for free, they all make a profit in return for their services
Making a profit as in a company profit is not the same as being paid for employment. Making profit is above and beyond wages.
It's possible to pay wages and the profit to be nominal.
I'm not advocating any of that, quite clearly.
What are you advocating when you say this?
We have private companies making a profit out of basic needs and human rights, and a government that wants to cream off even more to private companies whilst standards are squeezed by commercial pressures and the needy suffer.
Because I don't want to be confused and I'm sure you are the latter not the former
You know, people like you who deal in insinuation and suggestion often can't understand that some people do simply talk straight.
You seemed to be suggesting that nationalised industries necessarily include onerous pension liabilities, is that true?
You seemed to be suggesting that nationalised industries necessarily include onerous pension liabilities, is that true?
If you nationalised companies with pension deficits you get a liability. Transferring everyone to public sector defined benefit pensions adds a second layer of deficit
Anyway are you going to answer the question or continue with insinuating and suggesting which would be disappointing
DrJ unless you can win votes
Nobody is trying to win votes here - it's a chat forum. It's possible to talk about things and discuss ideas without always needing to prop up your ideology with lies and propaganda.
I'm not insinuating or suggesting. I never do that. I'm trying to get to the bottom of this pension thing.
Transferring everyone to public sector defined benefit pensions adds a second layer of deficit
Why does public owner ship mean defined benefit pensions?
Why does public owner ship mean defined benefit pensions?
What are you avoiding the question?
To answer yours, the significant majority of public sector employees are on a defined benefit scheme. To transfer in large numbers of defined contribution employees will weaken the position of the DB staff which the Union's (whose staff are on DB schemes) won't stand for
If part of Corbyns revolution is to change public sector pensions to DC then he will be braver than anyone else
Nobody is trying to win votes here - it's a chat forum. It's possible to talk about things and discuss ideas without always needing to prop up your ideology with lies and propaganda.
Well there was me thinking this was a discussion about policies which might have even a remote chance of being put into practice. As we've said all along you are agreeing its a utopian fanasty being discussed here.
@rone businesses have to make a profit to pay their shareholders a return, shareholders want a return which reflects the significant risks they are taking. Businesses fail, shareholders loose everything. So successful businesses have to pay a return which compensates for the ones that fail. You have to have shareholders (inc "sole traders"), the government cannot own everything. Communism (where govt owns everything) doesn't work. In a situation where Govt owned the "means of production" anyone with a remotely good idea wouod setup abroad (in a capitalist country) produce there and export to the UK.
Why does public owner ship mean defined benefit pensions?
It frequently (almost always) does as that way the Govt can fudge the true cost by reducing the annual wage bill. The alternative is the govt would have to pay in 25% (or even more) extra to a private (defined contribution scheme) to try and match the pension benefits. A perfect example is the EU where there are around £6bn of future pension liabilities for UK MEP's which are totally unfunded, not a single penny has been put aside. Their true cost has been massively understated, a good word is [b]hidden[/b].
Well there was me thinking this was a discussion about policies which might have even a remote chance of being put into practice.
It's a discussion about many things - including what is desirable to do even if it is unlikely in the current climate poisoned by people like yourself who simply peddle lies in order to advance their cause.