Jeremy Corbyn

Jeremy Hunts tenure?
[url= https://mobile.twitter.com/LabourEoin/status/864138660287008769/video/1 ]Mr Corbyn, ever so unpopular... [/url]

@molgrips the NHS budget has only gone up. - I don't really need to post my chart again do I. Over a 5 year Parliament the NHS needs an extra 23%, so in round numbers thats an extra £30bn per anum. The issue is that the cost of service provision is rising at 4% pa (older population, growing population, increased cost of treatments as new tech comes in). IMO A&E waiting times are up due in significant part to changes in working practices by GPs.

So you're saying:

1) It's gone up by not enough - ok fair enough, still not enough
2) It's GP's fault.

That right?

what are these "significant changes" to which you attribute the cause?

I can only guess as to how the appointment system works now. Touch wood am I rarely at the GP's but I now Mrs Gob can get really frustrated waiting 1 to 2 weeks for an appointment. We means some people will bypass and go to A&E.

Anyway, at A&E the muppets who go there with such trivial matters should be automatically triaged so they spend at least 4 hrs there.

If we replaced the current culture of sick care with health care, we'd start to see reductions in NHS costs. This sadly is not something the Tories will ever do so it's no surprise that the NHS keeps struggling (and failing).

Don't think anyone would go as far as saying its GP's 'fault', but i was pretty shocked when i went in for regular blood test last week and overheard the next available doctors appointment was 25th.

I can understand how people end up at A&E if they simply can't get an appointment.

Jamba
Your opinion about GPs is wrong ( apart from the shortage of them). Its nothing to do with them its to do with the collapse of social care. GPs have more appointments outside of normal working hours than they did and the cuts are real - and the waste on needless ideological fake markets takes over 10% of the budget in England as well as making it impossible to plan effectively.

the main issue is social care and its unavailability due to the poor and decreasing funding of it.

When there is a shortage of nurses then cutting the bursary that encourages people to train as nurses makes a great deal of sense doesn't it

Yes, you are working class.

if you work for a living (you receive a wage) and you don’t own or control capital.
If your employer gets more “value” from the work you do than you receive in wages, you’re working-class.

It is important to distinguish economic class (people’s relationship to capital and the “means of production” — how goods, services and profit are produced) from the sociologist’s “social class” — a hierarchical division of people (at its crudest, “upper,” “middle” and “lower” class) according to their income, lifestyle or tastes.

Don’t be fooled either by the fact that you and your partner own the home you live in.
Yours isn’t an investment property (the fact that you rent out a room to pay the mortgage is irrelevant) and you don’t make a profit on it so it isn’t “capital.”

And you don’t have to be in employment to be working class.
You could be unemployed for various reasons, including disability, but the chances are you’d still be dependent on others in work — if not directly (your family or friends), then (if you receive benefits) through other workers’ taxes. But you’d not be making a profit from their labour and you’d still be working class.
Today the working class, understood on these terms, constitutes upwards of 85 per cent of the population. Yes, you are working class.

If we replaced the current culture of sick care with health care, we'd start to see reductions in NHS costs.

Aneurin Bevan believed that the cost of the NHS would decline for this very reason. It didn't happen 🙁 It's just not the nature of things.

All the stuff I have seen on social media, Corbyn seems to be getting big crowds and going down well, just don't think he has enough time for the word to truly spread and to overcome the media

It was also brought up on the R4 news. Big crowds and support.

So what;s he spend his money on?
Anyone see him on the tv earlier and when asked if he is wealthy on £135k kept saying he is well paid but not wealthy due to what he does with his money but he doesn't wish to discuss it.

One of those, why bring it up if you don't want to mention in.

Anyone see him on the tv earlier and when asked if he is wealthy on £135k kept saying he is well paid but not wealthy due to what he does with his money but he doesn't wish to discuss it.

One of those, why bring it up if you don't want to mention in.

What does 'big' crowds really mean. Let's face it even in constituencies where Labour will get hammered they'll still get a good few thousand plus voters, so a few hundred turning up to see Corbyn means little.

The only thing that matters for Corbyn is whether people who voted for other parties previously, now come around to Labour.

So you're saying:

1) It's gone up by not enough - ok fair enough, still not enough
2) It's GP's fault.

That right?

1) yes so whilst there is more money it is not enough to keep up - you'll have seen me on here calling for a lot more money for healthcare (nhs and non-nhs) many times - 30% pkus increase immediately
2) big part of A&E issue imo, GPs have changed their practices / hours in responce to both Labour and Tory Government changes

BTW some surveys have Tories rating higher than Labour on the NHS, the message that the NHS needs a strong economy is a powerful one, trust in Labour re econony is very low

[quote=greentricky ]All the stuff I have seen on social media, Corbyn seems to be getting big crowds and going down well, just don't think he has enough time for the word to truly spread and to overcome the media

The real problem is the silent majority. Those that are too ashamed to speak out about their convictions. The closet tories/ right wingers.

1) yes so whilst there is more money it is not enough to keep up - you'll have seen me on here calling for a lot more money for healthcare (nhs and non-nhs) many times - 30% pkus increase immediately

2) big part of A&E issue imo, GPs have changed their practices / hours in responce to both Labour and Tory Government changes

I can only go on what you say, but it doesn't sound like he brought it up.

Instead of saying yes I earn a lot, several times he said, I wouldn't say I am wealthy because of what I do with my money but I don't want to discuss that, just seemed strange as he made a non-issue in to an issue that he does something with his money that he doesn't want to discuss but means he isn't wealthy. Was like a weird humble brag.

1) yes so whilst there is more money it is not enough to keep up - you'll have seen me on here calling for a lot more money for healthcare (nhs and non-nhs) many times - 30% pkus increase immediately

So you support Corbyn's policy for increasing tax to fund the NHS?

[url=

Seems like a person with leader potential to me.

@pondo I meant we need an increase in skending on nhs and non-nhs - ie private. The funding shortfall we have in UK is in large part as we spend less on private care, eg insurance and if course unlike a lot if Europe our health service is free at the point of delivery

@molgrips of course we need higher taxes, that isn't a "Corbyn policy" - I think we need much more of a Lib Dem approach - ie higher taxes for everyone as that's really the only way to raise enough money

ie higher taxes for everyone

Even really poor people?

on - Member

What does 'big' crowds really mean. Let's face it even in constituencies where Labour will get hammered they'll still get a good few thousand plus voters, so a few hundred turning up to see Corbyn means little.

This for sure. Corbyn has a very strong core vote. Several hundred thousand disenfranchised more left wing socialists who see him as a hope for if not all but a good part of their ideals. They'll turn out for rallies and meetings, join the labour party because he's their best shot. As a group their probably the most active and passionate political movement in the country. But is it enough ? Probably not most voters aren't party members, wouldn't be seen dead at a political rally and see Corbyn as a bit of a dinosaur. Regardless of whether they view his policies as good, the feeling is he and his team don't have the abilities needed to lead the country. Especially with all the challenges faced by brexit. I don't think the vote will be as one sided as people think but a Tory government is still going to still be in place on June 9th. All IMHO of course.
 

Is it just me, but has brexit been a strangely muted issue in the campaign so far? I've barely heard it mentioned by May, Corbyn, the news etc. If this is the case it should help labour as it's the big issue they're weak on.

dazh - It's because there isn't really anything to say. May hasn't a clue what deal she could get and neither does JC.

Plus, mentioning Brexit without saying the EU are all corrupt shysters who hate Britain is like prodding a hornets nest. It immediately sends the Mail, et al into vitriolic 'Enemies of the People' meltdown.

Despite marching to their drum from day one, I doubt the Maybot thinks she can keep Dacre and his toxic minions onside for the duration of the campaign. Best to just endlessly repeat meaningless soundbites instead

[url= https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/may/14/is-paul-dacre-most-dangerous-man-in-britain-daily-mail ]A really interesting article about Dacre, the Mail, and their influence on where we are now, from Sunday's Observer[/url]

Finally one of the decent PLPMPs comes out with the start of a plan
http://www.politico.eu/article/peoples-labour-jeremy-corbyn-loses-general-election-2017/
I still think they should have secured Progress money from Sainsbury to do it, rather than rely on the legal process to get short money, but it could still happen.

http://www.politico.eu/article/peoples-labour-jeremy-corbyn-loses-general-election-2017/

The Labour 'rebels' should have done this immediately after the failed bid to unseat Corbyn. But they were too spineless, and knew they lacked a leader of any description. Things will be even worse once they've lost a load more MPs next month.

MPs should be prepared to “remake” the party.

Splitters.

The Labour 'rebels' should have done this immediately after the failed bid to unseat Corbyn

Brexit has been low on details from the start, no one wants to go into specifics in too much detail, the final detail obviously wont please us bitter remoaners and certainly not the deluded Brexies....

Splitters.

Bless. Has the discussion taken too much of a grown up turn for you?

Anyway, on the article. Much will depend on how much of a hammering Labour take. They resisted the obvious anti-Brexit move to centre-ground where they could take pro-Remain votes from soft Tory voters out of fear of losing the northern pro-leave votes. But as seen in the local elections (in so far as we can take them as a barometer) those votes have gone Blukip anyway. So they're lost to the Tories.

If they don't take enough of a hammering - then do they have the "mandate" to move away from Corbyn?

The best hope for the future is a pro-remain party breaking away from underneath Corbyn and McDonnell and be there for the election that may well happen before 2022 as the ramifications of Brexit are being felt around the UK and enough Leavers have changed their minds.

I don't particularly want to see a Tory landslide, as May is nowhere near as good as she's being painted but it may be the only thing to force Labour to change its ways. Momentum will only stick another Corbyn-alike in, who will be demolished by the RW media again - being a party of protest is fine for a while but no point in doing it forever.

What might be interesting to work out is what the momentum/progress ratio will be in a post-election-oblivion PLP and whether it actually swings to one from the other?

Im bored so Ive had a quick look at some numbers.

Based on the leaked doc of "Corbyn" support from
http://labourlist.org/2016/03/leaked-list-ranks-labour-mps-by-hostility-to-corbyn/

and assuming that anyone "Neutral" or above would support Corbyn (Generous), then the current PLP is roughly 63%:37% behind Corbyn. Seems unlikely somehow. If I were to reclassify Neutral as Negative, that would become 32%:68% so a lot hangs on those unclassified in the middle.

then take New Statesmen's analysis of 50 top Labour MPs at risk of losing their seat http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/june2017/2017/04/election-2017-50-labour-mps-most-risk-losing-their-seats

which would give labour 186 seats after the election - again seems generous given polling - and the Corbyn support in the PLP is virtually unchanged at 62%:38% (Neutral=Support) and 33%:67% (Neutral=Negative).

So really the election results are likely to have consistent effect on the make up of the PLP at either end of the Corbyn spectrum, BUT the impact of how the 70+ MPs defined as "NEUTRAL BUT NOT HOSTILE" feel after a drubbing at the polls will be key. As ever, the fight will be over the middle-ground.

I wonder what it would look like if I overlaid REMAIN sentiment instead of CORBYN sentiment on the remaining PLP as DD suggests above ^

What is it exactly that you think they could do? And how would they get support from the unions?

I'm going to make a statement that I never though I would:
I'm warming to Corbyn. There, I said it.

My political stance has always been very slightly right of centre but something about JC in the last couple of months has made me see him in a better light than I have previously. Maybe it's that I just don't like what The Tories are up to, maybe I just don't like Teresa May, maybe I just don't like the UKIP pandering direction the party in power have gone down, whatever it is, my eyes have turned to labour again and they're nowhere near as bad as I thought they were.

Yes, I'd rather they have someone like Keir Starmer in charge but fair play Jeremey, you're slowly convincing me. 12 months ago I would not have considered voting Labour, but slowly I'm coming round to the idea, and talking to friends with a similar view, I don't think I'm alone either.

Is it just me, but has brexit been a strangely muted issue in the campaign so far?

It has, but only as sound bites… we're being offered a "Strong and Stable" future inside the single market and the customs union, or we can risk the chaos of going "Back to the 1970s" by leaving the common market. Or something. I might have misunderstood the messages behind the glibly repeated soundbites.

I've barely heard it mentioned by May, Corbyn, the news etc.

Don't forget, the reason the genius Linton Crosby is being employed by May@Co… his style of campaigning is to not taint the illustrious leader by her using any risky language… you get others to feed the press stories that set the mood instead. Read up on his past work, and then think twice when reading an often repeated comment in the press by an "ex minister" or "senior Tory." All carefully coordinated. Plenty of Brexit related nonsense in the press designed to make the Tories look like an essential strong force against those nasty EU people… Gibraltar anyone?

you're slowly convincing me. 12 months ago I would not have considered voting Labour, but slowly I'm coming round to the idea, and talking to friends with a similar view, I don't think I'm alone either.

You might be right - give it another year to eighteen months of leadership and he might persuade enough people to vote Labour to give them a chance in the election.

There were 47 Labour MPs that voted against implementing Article 50. That doesnt represent the whole REMAIN sentiment in Labour I guess, but it's a start.

Of those that voted against A50, they tend to be weighted to the NEUTRAL ground of CORBYN support. SO if a Labour for Remain party were to form after the election, you could probably count on a substantial proportion of the NEUTRAL Labour members siding with it, possibly as much as 78% to 22% of the surviving MPs in favour.

Even really poor people?

Rest of Europe has VAT on food, VAT on childrens clothes in France etc ... primpary burden would be on the employed of course

No party in uk has a credible healthcare policy

The really poor spend far less on food and (new) kids clothes than the rest of us.
Those universal tax breaks aren't the best way to help the poorest really, are they.

Stoner a "Remain" party is pointless, what is needed (if anything) is a full on "Rejoin" party. We will be very much out of the EU by the next GE in 2022 so there will be no possibility of "Remaining". IMO the Lib Dems EU-Ref-2 is going to fall flat and even they will have moved on by 2019/20

True, although I havent mentioned a remain party, just a new labour party with a heavy dose of remain sentiment. What they do with it would be a v long game indeed.

sadly I agree with ninfan

Im still not 100% convinced by Corbyn even if I like many of his policies, but hes better than I thought a while ago, but Im getting ever more convinced the Theresa May wont be good for the country

@kelvin - I pretty much agree with you. The really poor need education/work skills training and of course welfare support. I would weight welfare much more towards the really poor than is done today. That would mean less money for the no-so-poor

damn I agree with Jamba too

things like Sure Start should be getting more funding not less. having worked with kids in some not so great places, putting effort into community centres, activities, giving kids positive role models (and access to good education) is the best way to improve outcomes

its why tory austerity- saving money in the short term, will cost us more in the long term as those left behind will find it harder to catch up as they get older and be a problem for society down the road

Rest of Europe has VAT on food, VAT on childrens clothes in France etc ... primpary burden would be on the employed of course

So despite all your Tory bluster you do have some clear left ideas. Good - and I mean this not just because I also agree but because you're prepared to admit to it despite being on the face of it bluer than Stilton 🙂

You realise May is never ever going to raise taxes significantly to fund the NHS don't you?