Forum menu
Beers needed.
U OK HUN? XX
If you can find any examples of me being so personally nasty to any particular individual I’d be interested to see it
I’m happy to make generic piss-take comments about the PFJ or whatever but I don’t target individuals with snidey nastiness like that
As I’ve described, I’m one of the 3.5 million who haven’t received a single penny of government support in the last year when all my work dried up.
If you think that and the obvious implications of that present fair game as an opportunity to mock me then that says an awful lot about you.
Doesn’t feel very socialist, does it comrade? Rejoicing in other people’s misfortune
I'm starting to worry I won't get a xmas card from binners this year.
I am actually gonna take a break from this thread and maybe STW generally for a while. I don't want to upset anyone, but I'm bored and grumpy and stressed out and a sarky **** at the best of times, so....
Edit: Whoa an ernielynch comeback!
Well, Binners isn’t buying the beers then. I’ll get the first round in…
binners you said U OK HUN in a mocking way to someone who has told you they have been struggling with mental health issues. If I chose to take that personally I could see that as being pretty personal and unpleasant. Get a grip.
Id buy Binners or grum a beer anytime. All of you actually, if I won the lottery.😉
Take a step back lads you have far more in common than you might think and I mean that in a good way.
The way I see it you are both arguing about the best way to save a patient but you are both trying to save said patient which is all that counts.
In the red mist of the moment you might not see that but that doesn't change it being so.
I’m happy to make generic piss-take comments about the PFJ or whatever but I don’t target individuals with snidey nastiness like that
That's exactly how you come across to me: snide and nasty. Earlier, when you asked me to substantiate something, you could've done so without a mouthful of abuse.
So, as I say, try treating people how you wish to be treated. If you do so, I'll respond in kind.
.
These beers are getting warm… where is everyone?
So, as I say, try treating people how you wish to be treated. If you do so, I’ll respond in kind.
I never ever personally insult people, so you can think what you like.
Perhaps you should experiment with the concept? You never know, you might get to like it?
I never respond in kind to you personally attacking me, though I’ve had plenty of opportunities. It’s your default.
@ kelvin,
I'm off to watch Tribes of Europa in a bit, no, that's not some clever political comment. A rather adult SF series as it turns out on Netflix.
Pretty good story line more to the point.
@kelvin I’ll have a glass of red
And it’s good to see that everyone’s favourite Marxist postman is back on the scene. Welcome back comrade. And I am ok hon 😃 xx
Wine?!? Class traitor.
Kelvin called me sucker. I suppose I should be offended but this isn’t real life and I’ve had 30 years of people calling me far worse due to my politics. Someone even tried to kill me once (seriously!) so you lot really need to get some perspective.
I never ever personally insult people, so you can think what you like.
I think that judgement is best left to the people on the receiving end. To me, you're snide and nasty, and a bully at times.
Once again, you've proven that you're unwilling to modify your behaviour, so I'll remind you of this exchange the next time you get all pissy after you've been given a taste of your own medicine.
I suppose I should be offended but this isn’t real life and I’ve had 30 years of people calling me far worse due to my politics.
Sucker was because of your supporting comments about Johnson having “implemented a lot of the Corbyn agenda”. If you actually meant them, he’s played you. I doubt you do though.
To me, you’re snide and nasty, and a bully at times.
People in glass houses. Just satin’
U OK HUN? XX
The Croydon Communist returns....
To me, you’re snide and nasty, and a bully at times.
If it’s worth anything, from a fellow 6th form PFJ ‘comrade’, I can promise you that’s not the case. Binners doesn’t need me to to defend him though. Everyone on here really needs to separate fact from internet fiction.
If you actually meant them
I mean everything I say here.
Good to see the Croydon communist back 😃
[img] 
[/img]
So Keir is wiping the slate clean and reneging on all promises made during leadership election. Honestly this won't bother me if he lays out an ambitious plan going forward.
Electoral reform
Massive infrastructure plan (green)
What else would people like to see?
People in glass houses. Just satin’
I've already said that I'm prepared to modify how I talk to you. But you're not, so it's business as usual.
What else would people like to see?
Electoral reform, more localised devolved power, universal basic income for starters.
Well done for trying to move the conversation forward. Let's see if big hitters allow it.
Let’s see if big hitters allow it.
In that case - has anyone asked Reg?
(Sorry couldn't resist)...
I suppose 'trot' sounds suitably offensive and dismissive even if you have't a clue what it means.
Electoral reform, more localised devolved power, universal basic income for starters.
All three for me please. But then those aren’t policies that will win more seats for Labour (in England). If they were proposed by a proven Labour government when seeking re-election, the public might go for them… but that isn’t a platform to win over the voters who currently don’t trust Labour (despite all the evidence that the alternative are the ones who can not be trusted). I’d be very happy for a Labour to have all three in their next GE manifesto, but I fear it would just result in more arguments “won”, rather than an election won.
UBI is pretty pointless without a job guarantee scheme which would establish a living wage and generate a productive capacity for state spending/ infrastructure etc.
UBI is just another way of controlling benefits/wage subsidies. But I'm not totally against it - just not in isolation.
If you think Keir is giving you anything groundbreaking - you haven't been paying attention to the last 12 months.
So Keir is wiping the slate clean and reneging on all promises made during leadership election. Honestly this won’t bother me if he lays out an ambitious plan going forward.Electoral reform
Massive infrastructure plan (green)What else would people like to see?
They'll do bugger-all - they haven't got the balls to shake things up. As Angela Rayner proved on Breakfast this morning the main Labour policy is bash the Tories on every interview. It's getting tiresome.
Simple question, asked many times - "If 1% payrise is too low, what % payrise would the Labour Party give nurses" - Angela Rayner just kept banging on about wasted NHS Covid contracts given last year.
If they'd just clearly explain what they would do they'd wipe the floor with them.
I had high hopes for Kier Starmer, but he's proving to be a bit of a wet lettuce.
If they’d just clearly explain what they would do they’d wipe the floor with them.
Not necessarily true given the 'demographic' and opinions of their lost 'Red Wall' voters....
There is already an arms length body that proposes across the board pay increases. The Unions want more. The government has overridden the existing proposals and slashed the pay “increase” to 1%. The media questions are aimed at pulling Labour into either a “people versus the unions” or alternatively a “Labour versus the unions” distracting narrative, which is why the front bench are being very careful not to set a top down figure, but to support the arms length body (with likely reform). They are trying to avoid the big bleedingly obvious trap, while keeping the focus on the 1% imposed by the Tories against recommendations and the existing NHS pay plan and recent Conservative promises. The latest line about getting a vote in Parliament on the 1% “increase” is an attempt to pressure the Government into a change in policy this year… to be seen as an “effective opposition”… there is no need for Labour to make commitments on numbers themselves now, when there is no way they can be in government for years.
'If they’d just clearly explain what they would do they’d wipe the floor with them.'
Only if they proposed to do things any differently. If they don't name a figure they don't have to fight for it.
I know they're playing the game and trying to avoid Tory traps. But they just aren't very good at the game. It's like Accrington Stanley -v- Man City at the minute.
Being dictated to by 'avoiding the weekly Tory traps' is a guaranteed losing strategy.
I would say at least 52% of the population think politics is just circus like PMQs and so is basically just like a plot thread on Hollyoaks.
Labour could press the nuclear button and just market themselves as the "Party for People who aren't ****s". Ready and waiting to take in anyone who is grown up enough to know that the rest of the world does not wake up every day saying "thank god for Spitfires and Hurricanes". Policies? Forget those, those boxes can be filled in later.
A lot of anti Brexit feelings were about unelected bureaucrats and waste so scrapping the Lord's or reducing its numbers plus all this wasted money on T&T should be vote winners.
Problem is, once you sign up to the Osborne-style 'fiscal responsibility', 'paying back the debt', 'can't just print money' etc you've shown yourself to be a tory. To put a percentage on it would leave him open to the accusation of having principles so we're stuck with 'fair pay', 'the future will be different to the past', 'be nice to animals' etc. Even Osborne did have the decency to admit that austerity wasn't about paying back the debt but maybe Starmer missed that bit.
I suppose ‘trot’ sounds suitably offensive and dismissive even if you have’t a clue what it means.
Trot is extremely offensive to anyone who ascribes to libertarian socialist ideas. All you need to know is a little history.
Simple question, asked many times – “If 1% payrise is too low, what % payrise would the Labour Party give nurses” – Angela Rayner just kept banging on about wasted NHS Covid contracts given last year.
Exactly what I was saying yesterday. Labour criticise the tories but they wouldn't do much different. If a 1% rise is an insult then so is 5%. In reality nurses and other public sector workers like them should get something like a 30-50% pay rise. Will labour say that? Of course they won't, because when it comes down to it they agree with the tories on all the important stuff.
If a 1% rise is an insult then so is 5%
I'd like to explore that concept further. Can you please elaborate?
I’d like to explore that concept further. Can you please elaborate?
I don't know the exact figures but I'm sure I read that for the typical nurse a 1% pay rise equates to about £3.50 a week. 5% would then be £17.50 a week. What major difference is 17 quid a week going to make to anyone? Mrs Daz is a senior social worker which is fairly similar to a nurse in pay terms. She had to study for longer, has to maintain her professional qualifications, has a more responsible job, is more professional, works far harder, and undoubtedly provides far more value to society in her job than I do. Yet she gets paid less than half than I do. This is pretty typical across the board. One of my mates is a paramedic, again he gets paid half of what I do. Same for police, firefighters etc. Labour should be addressing this ridiculous imbalance but instead they talk in terms of single figure percentages. It's pathetic.
In reality nurses and other public sector workers like them should get something like a 30-50% pay rise. Will labour say that?
In one year? Would sir like his moon on a stick gold plated?
In one year? Would sir like his moon on a stick gold plated?
It could be phased in over a parliament. The message would be that by the time a labour goverment is finished, public sector workers/professionals would be paid the same as their private sector peers. I don't that's at all unrealistic or controversial. The only reason it is perceived to be unrealistic is because labour are no different to the tories on the central issue of government spending and finances.
So, you could be backing, say, 5% (or even 3.5%) this year, rather than 1%, and also be talking about a much more significant cumulative rise by 2030? They're not incompatible. But you can see why keeping the media message simple... "1% this year is an insult"... seems to be the aim. Voters are thinking about now, not even the next election, never mind where we could be once a "Labour government is finished"... that needs to be spelled out in an election year, based on what is known then.
I saw the figures the other day of stagnant wages vs inflation. I think in line with inflation of the last 10 years would be a good starting point.
So 10% rise minimum.
I think you both have it right... a series of pay rises that over the next 8 years brings their wages at least up to where they would have been had they tracked inflation while the Conservatives have been in power, but ideally more to bring them closer to private sector wages. All paired with a retention and recruitment programme (including funding nurse training/education again, along with all other post A-level age education). That should be long term policy.
This month is should all be about how the Government promised one thing, and then delivered far less, with a cut to their planned wage increases, at a time when the country has relied on and cheered on health and care staff, and their hardwork, dedication, and their willingness to do what had to be done for all of us at increased risk to themselves. Keep that running in all media channels by all possible means. Make it stick.
So 10% rise minimum.
I hadn't seen that chart, but yes the bare minimum should be an immediate 10% rise for all public sector workers followed by further rises over a parliament which bring them up to the level of their private sector peers. I'd actually argue they should get paid more, as they provide more value to society but I'd settle for them being the same.
10% this year? The bounce back on that, by a public seeing their own income at risk, and wages on hold, would be huge. Sadly. Of course the staff deserve it. And arguably it's required to avoid a worsening staffing crisis, but Labour have to take the public/voters with them.
Anyway, all this chatter is exactly why Labour are avoiding a number for this year. Anything they say will shift the focus on to their figure being too low/high... rather than keeping all eyes on the "the 1% this government is imposing is an insult".
'In one year? Would sir like his moon on a stick gold plated?'
'Yes, thank you kindly,' said the sales rep from Serco,'but spread it over two years.'
The bounce back on that
And that's exactly what labour should be addressing directly. There's an assumption that public sector workers are less valuable than those in the private sector when the opposite is true. It's true in normal times but the pandemic has massively reinforced the case so it should be a very easy message for labour to get across. It needs to go beyond the virtue signalling of calling people heroes though and actually have some substance behind it, and that needs more than a single figure percentage pay rise.
Does anyone actually believe Starmer will do this though? Of course he won't. All we'll get is more clapping, more talk about heroes, and then the usual 'we can't afford anything more than 3%' bollox. This stuff is the bare minimum labour should be proposing but they can't even do that.
Getting the government to back track on 1% this year, back to 3.5% (or better still 5%), and then come the election having a programme to increase wages, retainment, and training if the Labour party is elected... that's what I'd like to see.
But again, avoiding this "Labour wants less than the Unions" type narrative is why there is currently no headline figure for this year from the Labour front bench. Keep the focus on the government and their "1%" figure. Don't give the media a chance to make this into another "the Labour movement divided" story with a low figure, or a "the Labour movement against the people" story with a higher figure. People should only be talking about one figure right now... "1%".
rather than keeping all eyes on the “the 1% this government is imposing is an insult“.
Why is it an insult?
What wouldnt be an insult?
Journalists are obviously going to ask the question what would be fair and they are going to look pretty poor (as indeed Starmer did) when refusing to answer the question.
If he wants to show himself as trustworthy then he needs to answer questions rather than just wrapping himself in the union jack and act as a johnson mk2.
Yes it's not hard to answer the question. It's been answered on this page pretty much.
Rachel Reeves in the NS writes for 3 pages on the post-war settlement and concludes what we need is 'decent pay', 'common decency', 'togetherness and inclusiveness'.
She makes the much repeated claim that we live in the world we live in. Fighting talk.
Not sure it's on topic but I note that Joe Biden appears to have gone full MMT with his astonishing $1.9 trillion splurge in response to covid. If ever labour had a gold plated opportunity to change the debate on public finances now is it. Will they accept the gift horse that's been handed to them? Will they f***!
If they were in government they would have that opportunity. Instead all the tools to set the agenda are in the hands of another party.
Instead all the tools to set the agenda are in the hands of another party.
And that in a nutshell is where they are going wrong. It's the job of the opposition to change the debate and set the agenda. If they don't they remain the opposition, because why would anyone want to replace the sitting government if the opposition do not offer anything different?
Yes it’s not hard to answer the question. It’s been answered on this page pretty much.
Indeed in their great completely overshadowed launch of something or another today they managed to actually come up with some basic figures to start with.
It’s the job of the opposition to change the debate and set the agenda.
I was pointing out that Biden has different tools available to him now that Starmer does not. It is still essential that Labour is seen by voters as ready for government, not a talking shop pressure group. Starmer needs to look at what Biden did to get in power, not what he’s able to do now he is there.
I've never understood the split between public sector and private sector for pay rises. If one area deserves a rise then everyone else does. We're just all cogs in the big machine.
A 30% rise would cause a massive rift between the two, even if medical front line workers have excelled. What about the construction guys busting their balls in crap conditions without PPE against covid, don't they deserve 30% extra? Medical gas engineers have been flat out with very little time off in the last year, so why shouldn't they get it as well?
A fair pay rise has to be fair to everyone else. How do you differentiate between ICU nurses and say anaesthetists and surgeons above had less work due to cancelled ops. I know a few who have been in their own words "bored" do they get 30% extra.
It's not going to be an easy thing to sort out, I don't envy anyone in that position.
A fair pay rise has to be fair to everyone else. How do you differentiate between ICU nurses and say anaesthetists and surgeons above had less work due to cancelled ops.
Easy, you start with the lowest paid jobs and the ones that have seen the largest real terms cuts and work upwards. You also work up from the bottom and give the roles in the public sector which require degrees and professional qualifications a lift to bring them up to equivalent professions in the private sector. It's ridiculous that senior social workers, nurses, paramedics etc are paid the same graduate civil engineers, especially when they carry the responsibility of saving iives and have a direct duty of care to patients.
Biden, hardly a left winger, has shown them all up. All these poor souls who've been persuaded that their income must be cut to 'pay the debt' must have eyes agog at the neo-liberal united states. Don't suppose they'll be moved by Starmer squeaking on about fiscal rectitude and financial responsibility.
That was on R4 this am alongside a piece on the state of the UK privatized children's homes. The Tories privatized more public assets than all the other countries in Europe put together (they were re-nationalised by other countries that bought in). The LP repeating the mantra 'we live in the world we live in' is signalling 'don't expect any change from us'. I can see the placards being written now for 'fight for the right to decency', 'togetherness is your right', 'down with this sort of thing', nope, we've already had that one rather too often.
You've got to laugh or else suffer clinical depression.
Yup, Biden is doing good stuff. He won elections (not just the presidential race). Take a good look at those elections, the messages used in them, and the tone of the campaigning. If Labour were in government now, they could use this crisis to embed reform. But they aren't. Like Biden (and the other winning democratic candidates), they have to win over voters who previously voted the other way before they get to ever do anything. Of course, they also have to keep and grow support from those that would never vote Conservative. The concerted attacks on Starmer do more to undermine the last part of that than anything anyone on the front bench has said or done in the past year.
Yep, quite agree they need to win over voters. He seems to be struggling a bit in that department.
Take a good look at those elections
Biden campaigned on the covid stimulus. Many democrats campaigned on even more, such as 2k payouts and a $15 minimum wage which Biden hasn't implemented. It's complete fiction to say voters didn't know what they were going to get under Biden. They knew in advance, and they elected him as a result.
Biden campaigned on the covid stimulus.
Carefully caveated with "should conditions require", and no indication of scale or value. All the careful/responsible language/promises that Labour are trying (with perhaps limited success) to also use.
Yep, quite agree they need to win over voters. He seems to be struggling a bit in that department.
For a start you need to know what would make people vote Labour.
There are many non Labour people on this forum, any of you want to say what Labour would need to do/say to get you to vote for them?
There are many non Labour people on this forum, any of you want to say what Labour would need to do/say to get you to vote for them?
You talking about binners here? 😂
You talking about binners here? 😂
If you ask binners what to do you'll get a stale Monty Python joke in return 🙁
Well, one thing he'd want is for his MP to be Labour again... as he voted Labour, sang the praises of the Labour candidate he voted for, and is vocally highly critical of his Conservative successor. But yeah, he's the problem here, isn't he.
But yeah, he’s the problem here, isn’t he.
Lighten up man! It's friday and it was a joke. ✊
Getting fully behind the nurses' pay claim might be an idea. There's 1.3m people working for the NHS and they've got widespread public support. The way things are, if there's a wave of protests the LP leadership will be invisible whilst arguing 'we can't just print money'.
if there’s a wave of protests the LP leadership will be invisible
Have the generators gone down? Not seen/heard any TV/radio news this week? It's been a very rare chance to hear Labour voices being front and centre... and it's 99% because of their vocal focus on NHS pay.
and it’s 99% because of their vocal focus on NHS pay.
And yet I can't find a single news report which answers the question about what they would do instead.
Edit: Top result on google for 'Labour nurses pay' is the following genius bit of PR. You really couldn't make this shit up. Did it really not occur to the geniuses in labour HQ that if they're going to make such a fuss about nurses pay then they might need to go a bit further than suggesting an insulting rise of 2.1%?
https://labourlist.org/2021/03/labour-criticised-over-refusal-to-back-12-pay-rise-for-nhs-nurses/
Top result on google for ‘Labour nurses pay’ is the following genius bit of PR.
Angela Rayner has been criticised by left activists...
Thanks, "left activists". If anyone can help deflect attention when Labour are finally getting the government on the back foot, and the vast majority of the public on side... it's "left activists". Slow hand clap.
I've posted before about how I've moved towards labour more and more as I've got older. I still absolutely believe that Labour would be infinitely preferable to this current shower.
I am beginning to wonder whether labour's "broad church" is just not suited to the modern world, since the different factions just seem unable to compromise and come together.
I'd far rather they united against the common enemy, but I just don't see it happening, there's just rift upon rift.
I'll vote Labour every time, but just can't see how they'll ever come together to actually form a majority, if everyone just keeps arguing among themselves.
It's bloody depressing, and I wish people would stick with "better than the tories" to get some improvement.
In terms of changing the government, it strikes me as the only possible way, until we get PR, and that will never happen under the tories (appreciate it may not happen ever, but still...)
I went to say something very similar to Fadda the other day but gave up trying to articulate it. There's so much "they're not MY Labour" that it seems to be forgotten that the Tories are the common enemy and the vote should be for whoever holds best chance of opposing them in your constituency.
I'm appalled by the apparent in fighting both within the party and even on here between people who purport to be Labour supporters. I am however unconvinced that this isn't a huge media contrivance, with most of the papers and television being fundamentally if not overtly right wing it seems as if Starmer couldn't get arrested while "Prime Minister" Boris Johnson only has to sneeze to get positive coverage. Corbyn was a gift for the right wing and they're still playing the "at least it's not the other lot in charge" card whenever they do something daft/stupid/dishonest/illegal and Starmer is struggling to break clear of that.
I do wonder what Blair did BITD to get elected and why it's seen as a bad thing to try and replicate it. Even Tory light is better than this True blue UKIP driven Conservative hell.
Thanks speeder - nice to know I'm not alone in my frustration!
It's pragmatism, for me - I'm completely aware that Labour is not perfect, and I know posters on here can be very clear that they're not completely aligned with the posters desires for government, but it would be great if people could put some of their differences aside, and just accept that an "improvement" is all we can realistically get, rather than "everything we want" ...
Thanks, “left activists”.
FFS are you seriously suggesting trade unionists, socialists, plain old social democrats or anyone who has an ounce of compassion or morals should support a 2.1% pay rise? Do you really think anyone is stupid enough to think £7 quid a week more instead of £3.50 is going to make any difference to nurses or win any votes? The whole point is that the vast majority of people will shrug and confirm their long held opinion that they’re all the same.
The only way labour have a chance is by proving that they’re not the same. Forgive the language but I f** despair at the sheer lack of ambition and outright cowardice displayed by Starmer, Rayner et al and anyone who defends this clusterf* of a ‘labour’ leadership. If they can’t even raise themselves to propose something better than 2.1% then they deserve to be annihilated, and they will be, just like they were in Scotland.
*and yes I have been drinking!
FFS are you seriously suggesting trade unionists, socialists, plain old social democrats or anyone who has an ounce of compassion or morals should support a 2.1% pay rise
Remember there is no questioning of the glorious leader. He has spoken and that is that. Okay he was almost as evasive as Johnson but dont mention that. Just repeat the lines you have been given.
Just think back to how the "moderates" behaved under Corbyn and then behave the same way. Maybe include a few moronic screenshots with hilarious captions.
Speeder - in Scotland its worse - we have the tories and labour combining to attack the SNP - the SNP who are close to labour on everything but the constitution
its absurd.
labours behaviour in Scotland and the non aggression pact with the tories saved mays skin by gaining 10 tory seats.