Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: tyke1962 on September 23, 2021, 06:30:03 pm
-
Well said that man .
Fuq you Keith .
https://youtu.be/PVP6PlX_UUA
-
Well said that man .
Fuq you Keith .
https://youtu.be/PVP6PlX_UUA
I love some of the comments on the piece. "The Guardian and the centre Labour Party have a lot to answer for".
That won't be going down well in Australia right now.
Is anyone still delusional enough to think that Labour can win the next GE with Starmer as leader?
-
Well said that man .
Fuq you Keith .
https://youtu.be/PVP6PlX_UUA
I love some of the comments on the piece. "The Guardian and the centre Labour Party have a lot to answer for".
That won't be going down well in Australia right now.
Is anyone still delusional enough to think that Labour can win the next GE with Starmer as leader?
Well if they do it will be minus my vote .
Interesting Conference ahead for Keith with his latest power grab proposal .
Blair's clause 1V moment except he ain't Blair .
Mind you he's banned from attending a good number from the conference who are likely to oppose his proposal .
At least there won't be any left wing fingerprints all over the next Labour election tonking .
You'll have to own this one Keith all though you owned the last one too in reality .
-
Ken Loach. Such a committed Labour party member that he literally founded another party 8 years ago. Before which he had been in bed with the "so far off to the left, he's turned up on the far right" would-be demagogue, Galloway.
Fascinating who we are expected to take lessons from about "uniting the party".
-
Ken Loach. Such a committed Labour party member that he literally founded another party 8 years ago. Before which he had been in bed with the "so far off to the left, he's turned up on the far right" would-be demagogue, Galloway.
Fascinating who we are expected to take lessons from about "uniting the party".
Well it's fascinating to watch Keith who was elected on a " unite the party ticket " continuing to wage war within his own ranks .
It's possibly escaped him due to his focus forever inward that the Tories are gearing up for an election in the non too distant future .
It might be an idea to start focussing on that rather than who his replacement will be when the Tories hammer him at said forthcoming GE .
-
Well said that man .
Fuq you Keith .
https://youtu.be/PVP6PlX_UUA
I love some of the comments on the piece. "The Guardian and the centre Labour Party have a lot to answer for".
That won't be going down well in Australia right now.
Is anyone still delusional enough to think that Labour can win the next GE with Starmer as leader?
It's sad aye, another solid labour man undermining the present leadership as he stands on the beach trying to stop the tide.
I have a lot of respect for labour, their history their heroes, but if you can't read the writing on the wall,
A question Steve, reflecting on the absolute thrashing labour has just received how is a left wing party going to win over a public that is turning right?
-
Well said that man .
Fuq you Keith .
https://youtu.be/PVP6PlX_UUA
I love some of the comments on the piece. "The Guardian and the centre Labour Party have a lot to answer for".
That won't be going down well in Australia right now.
Is anyone still delusional enough to think that Labour can win the next GE with Starmer as leader?
Well if they do it will be minus my vote .
Interesting Conference ahead for Keith with his latest power grab proposal .
Blair's clause 1V moment except he ain't Blair .
Mind you he's banned from attending a good number from the conference who are likely to oppose his proposal .
At least there won't be any left wing fingerprints all over the next Labour election tonking .
You'll have to own this one Keith all though you owned the last one too in reality .
You have been notable by your absence Tyke, not because Starmer has lifted the polls a bit I hope, you could try answering my question to Steve, I have asked you that before but you ignore it.
-
Fascinating how so many on the Left are so cock sure that the Tories will romp the next election. Meanwhile, the Tory lead in the polls has shrivelled from 10% to 3% in 3 months. And an election is at least 2 years away.
-
Well said that man .
Fuq you Keith .
https://youtu.be/PVP6PlX_UUA
I love some of the comments on the piece. "The Guardian and the centre Labour Party have a lot to answer for".
That won't be going down well in Australia right now.
Is anyone still delusional enough to think that Labour can win the next GE with Starmer as leader?
Well if they do it will be minus my vote .
Interesting Conference ahead for Keith with his latest power grab proposal .
Blair's clause 1V moment except he ain't Blair .
Mind you he's banned from attending a good number from the conference who are likely to oppose his proposal .
At least there won't be any left wing fingerprints all over the next Labour election tonking .
You'll have to own this one Keith all though you owned the last one too in reality .
You have been notable by your absence Tyke, not because Starmer has lifted the polls a bit I hope, you could try answering my question to Steve, I have asked you that before but you ignore it.
The country has turned to the right culturally Sydney not economically .
I see no evidence that Labour have any intention of the nationalisation of energy , railways or any number of failing neoliberal industries which were stolen off the UK taxpayer in the 80's and 90's .
I've seen no evidence of ending the privatisation of the NHS either which started under the centre right of the Labour Party .
I've seen no evidence of partnerships with the trade unions and workers given a voice again .
All I've seen is a 12k word statement Keith put out yesterday and partnerships with business .
A Tory could have wrote it and nobody would know .
Just let me remind you that since this charlatan became leader 150k plus members have left or have been kicked out of the Labour Party and the Trade Unions are pulling away from them .
The party is no longer the broad church it claims it is .
That's fine , the direction of travel is now owned in full by the centre right of the party and election day will be judgement day too .
This will be your lots third go including 2010 to win an election and you've failed every time and your vote shares dropped every time since 1997 .
The best result was 2017 under a centre left leader as weak as he was and warts n all .
Which part of economically to the left don't the Labour centre right understand ?
I'll give you a tip free of charge , don't go sucking up to Murdoch and The Sun this time it won't happen .
You'll own the tonking at the next GE alright the same as you did twice previously .
-
Again you haven't answered the question Tyke, it's the most important one you'll face right up to the next election, if you can't answer it now when will you ever be able to.
-
Fascinating how so many on the Left are so cock sure that the Tories will romp the next election. Meanwhile, the Tory lead in the polls has shrivelled from 10% to 3% in 3 months. And an election is at least 2 years away.
£100 to charity for the loser .
Starmer will not win the next election .
Deal ...... ???
-
Come on Tyke stop with the look over there shit and answer a straight question.
Again you haven't answered the question Tyke, it's the most important one you'll face right up to the next election, if you can't answer it now when will you ever be able to.
Modify message
-
No I'm not going to bet on it Tyke. Because I think he will lose. Because people like you, at the end of all the arguments, would rather see the country run by Johnson and Gove and Patel and Rees-Mogg, than vote Labour.
That's the problem in a nutshell.
PS. Centre-Left? Corbyn? Give me strength. Did you ever go out canvassing for Labour and listen to what folk thought of him? Do you realise why Starmer has to put water between himself and such a toxic legacy?
-
Again you haven't answered the question Tyke, it's the most important one you'll face right up to the next election, if you can't answer it now when will you ever be able to.
I've answered it Sydney , what part of culturally to the right and economically to the left is so difficult for you to see .
Your not going to win from the centre , trust me you aren't .
-
A reminder, the question is how are you going to turn the country to the far left and win an election. I would have voted for JC and others arguing a similar line would but plenty on here would not and in the world out there they have shown writ large that they are not interested either.
Q/ How are you going to win power without the centre.
A/ you don't know
there I said it for you.
-
No I'm not going to bet on it Tyke. Because I think he will lose. Because people like you, at the end of all the arguments, would rather see the country run by Johnson and Gove and Patel and Rees-Mogg, than vote Labour.
That's the problem in a nutshell.
PS. Centre-Left? Corbyn? Give me strength. Did you ever go out canvassing for Labour and listen to what folk thought of him? Do you realise why Starmer has to put water between himself and such a toxic legacy?
My days of handing a blank cheque to the centre right of the Labour Party are long gone .
The most despicable bunch of charlatans I've ever come across .
The Tories are the Tories but at least they don't plot against their leader to ensure he or she doesn't win an election
You want my support , your having a laff fella .
-
A reminder, the question is how are you going to turn the country to the far left and win an election. I would have voted for JC and others arguing a similar line would but plenty on here would not and in the world out there they have shown writ large that they are not interested either.
Q/ How are you going to win power without the centre.
A/ you don't know
there I said it for you.
I never said far left Sydney you did fella .
I said economically to the left , do keep up .
Economically to the left is handing power back to the electorate and not the neoliberal elite .
The policies in 2017 were fine with the electorate although the leader wasn't .
Problem is the centre right of the Labour Party is every bit as complicit in protecting the interests of super capitalism which creates inequality .
Either that or they are a bunch of yellow bellied shytebags who daren't stand up so they sell out .
Probably both .
-
No I'm not going to bet on it Tyke. Because I think he will lose. Because people like you, at the end of all the arguments, would rather see the country run by Johnson and Gove and Patel and Rees-Mogg, than vote Labour.
That's the problem in a nutshell.
PS. Centre-Left? Corbyn? Give me strength. Did you ever go out canvassing for Labour and listen to what folk thought of him? Do you realise why Starmer has to put water between himself and such a toxic legacy?
My days of handing a blank cheque to the centre right of the Labour Party are long gone .
The most despicable bunch of charlatans I've ever come across .
The Tories are the Tories but at least they don't plot against their leader to ensure he or she doesn't win an election
You want my support , your having a laff fella .
You don't get it do you, you don't have any power to give, power is government, you have failed miserably, you have manufactured the biggest pasting handed out in decades and you want to blame everyone else for the that failure. The biggest failure for 90 odd years.
-
A reminder, the question is how are you going to turn the country to the far left and win an election. I would have voted for JC and others arguing a similar line would but plenty on here would not and in the world out there they have shown writ large that they are not interested either.
Q/ How are you going to win power without the centre.
A/ you don't know
there I said it for you.
I never said far left Sydney you did fella .
I said economically to the left , do keep up .
Economically to the left is handing power back to the electorate and not the neoliberal elite .
The policies in 2017 were fine with the electorate although the leader wasn't .
Problem is the centre right of the Labour Party is every bit as complicit in protecting the interests of super capitalism which creates inequality .
Either that or they are a bunch of yellow bellied shytebags who daren't stand up so they sell out .
Probably both .
Look over there, that's all I keep reading from you Tyke, the question is simple and I have answered it for you because you can't.
-
Well said that man .
Fuq you Keith .
https://youtu.be/PVP6PlX_UUA
I love some of the comments on the piece. "The Guardian and the centre Labour Party have a lot to answer for".
That won't be going down well in Australia right now.
Is anyone still delusional enough to think that Labour can win the next GE with Starmer as leader?
Well if they do it will be minus my vote .
Interesting Conference ahead for Keith with his latest power grab proposal .
Blair's clause 1V moment except he ain't Blair .
Mind you he's banned from attending a good number from the conference who are likely to oppose his proposal .
At least there won't be any left wing fingerprints all over the next Labour election tonking .
You'll have to own this one Keith all though you owned the last one too in reality .
You have been notable by your absence Tyke, not because Starmer has lifted the polls a bit I hope, you could try answering my question to Steve, I have asked you that before but you ignore it.
The country has turned to the right culturally Sydney not economically .
I see no evidence that Labour have any intention of the nationalisation of energy , railways or any number of failing neoliberal industries which were stolen off the UK taxpayer in the 80's and 90's .
I've seen no evidence of ending the privatisation of the NHS either which started under the centre right of the Labour Party .
I've seen no evidence of partnerships with the trade unions and workers given a voice again .
All I've seen is a 12k word statement Keith put out yesterday and partnerships with business .
A Tory could have wrote it and nobody would know .
Just let me remind you that since this charlatan became leader 150k plus members have left or have been kicked out of the Labour Party and the Trade Unions are pulling away from them .
The party is no longer the broad church it claims it is .
That's fine , the direction of travel is now owned in full by the centre right of the party and election day will be judgement day too .
This will be your lots third go including 2010 to win an election and you've failed every time and your vote shares dropped every time since 1997 .
The best result was 2017 under a centre left leader as weak as he was and warts n all .
Which part of economically to the left don't the Labour centre right understand ?
I'll give you a tip free of charge , don't go sucking up to Murdoch and The Sun this time it won't happen .
You'll own the tonking at the next GE alright the same as you did twice previously .
If there is was ever a time to make the case for renationalising energy it is now.
As one after the other of these marketing companies masquerading as energy utilities collapse. The true nature of this fake market is revealing itself as the government is inevitably forced to push people back on to the likes of British Gas.
-
A reminder, the question is how are you going to turn the country to the far left and win an election. I would have voted for JC and others arguing a similar line would but plenty on here would not and in the world out there they have shown writ large that they are not interested either.
Q/ How are you going to win power without the centre.
A/ you don't know
there I said it for you.
I never said far left Sydney you did fella .
I said economically to the left , do keep up .
Economically to the left is handing power back to the electorate and not the neoliberal elite .
The policies in 2017 were fine with the electorate although the leader wasn't .
Problem is the centre right of the Labour Party is every bit as complicit in protecting the interests of super capitalism which creates inequality .
Either that or they are a bunch of yellow bellied shytebags who daren't stand up so they sell out .
Probably both .
Look over there, that's all I keep reading from you Tyke, the question is simple and I have answered it for you because you can't.
I've answered it Sydney but it clearly isn't what you want to hear because it conflicts with your own take .
It's not 1997 and that ship sailed but you lot insist the way back to power is to turn the clock backwards .
I'd have said maybe even a year ago that Starmer was the acceptable face of a left economically leaning party post brexit .
That ship has also sailed with the way he's purged the left and positioned himself and the party towards soft Toryism .
That's one band that didn't need to reform .
You got Corbyn because of New Labour .
Do you think that just happened out of thin air ?
Clearly there's compromise to be had but no .
No Mandelson has seen to that and nobody is going to be fooled by a Blair tribute act .
You haven't the votes to pull this shyte off .
Neither have the left but I ain't hanging my hat on this mug in charge of the party who wants the likes of me out .
I'm out because I'm not wanted , I'm out because I want this country to change not be a puppet to neoliberalism .
Even if you got in government the foodbanks wouldn't go , the inequality would widen , the workers would remain powerless and the NHS privatisation would go on .
There's no point to you .
-
For someone constantly moaning about being on the receiving end of insults you sure know how to hand em' out tyke. Steve you can have a go too if you wish.
I'll leave a blank space where you can clearly and concisely answer my question without all the attached histrionics, please humour me as I find it difficult to separate out.
Try not to include all the complaints in the world and where you think I or anyone else stands politically or any other diversions, please just stick to facts.
Here you go:
Now we have that done it should be a clear race to the line.
Just think on, if you can answer this and your plan is reasonable you might get support from other factions.
thank you for your cooperation.
-
I went down the ‘hard left’ route in the 80’s. Spent more time arguing with the centre of the Labour Party than I did with Tories. Then I was surprised when we lost election after election?
Unfortunately a left wing Labour Party will never achieve power. The majority of the country don’t want it. In the 80’s I had to accept it and the party had to accept it, whether we liked it or not.
The electorate will only put Labour in power when it stops arguing with itself.
We should learn from history.
-
Totally agree HA, disunity is death, we now have a problem where unfortunately the left has lost two elections and although they admit that because of the absolute capitulation last time they want another two goes to try and get back in otherwise they'll take their bat and ball and go home. And they are so angry that the new democratically elected leader wants to oust those in the fifth column.
What's more they cannot tell us how they are going to do it without whining and crying and blaming everyone else for the disaster they have brought about.
If they could put a credible plan on the table maybe they would start to get people to listen.
-
The problem the Left has is that they genuinely don't get how detested Corbyn was outside their circle. He hit -60% net approval ratings in the2019 election. That's unprecedented. And person after person in Labour constituencies when I was campaigning said they were lifelong Labour supporters "but I won't vote for him".
So when Labour has an inquiry into anti-Semitism and when the report is published, Corbyn immediately goes public saying it's a witch hunt run by his enemies in the party, what the f**k is Starmer supposed to do.? When Rayner stupidly retweets an antisemitic tweet, what is Starmer supposed to do?.
But as ever with the Left, it's always someone else to blame. Always they being betrayed.
-
The problem I see with labour a lot of the time and their supporters is an inability to listen to those who hold a different view. The answer is always that those who don't vote labour are the problem or wrong not labour itself and that only leads to more failure for them as there seems to be a failure to understand that they need these votes to win.
They cannot win on a platform many labour supporters want and that's a problem the party just may not be able to overcome.
-
BFYP
I strongly disagree with that last sentence. Labour's domestic policies for years have been very popular in polls. So popular that the Tories have stolen many of them, after denouncing them as Marxist in elections. I do agree with your other point though. The Left is regularly astonished that having popular policies which would be good for the mass of the population, doesn't automatically lead to electoral success. The key problem that they had under Corbyn was an inability to see what was blindingly obvious to people on the outside. Corbyn came across as someone who didn't like Britain. Whether that was fair or not, that was how he appeared to people outside the Left bubble.
-
The problem I see with labour a lot of the time and their supporters is an inability to listen to those who hold a different view. The answer is always that those who don't vote labour are the problem or wrong not labour itself and that only leads to more failure for them as there seems to be a failure to understand that they need these votes to win.
They cannot win on a platform many labour supporters want and that's a problem the party just may not be able to overcome.
That’s a very good point and a view that I’ve been guilty of holding many times.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but wasn't Corbyn's popularity when elected as Labour leader down to thousands of infiltrators joining the Labour party solely to vote for him, thus rendering the party less electable?
-
I inspired the stab in the back scene, my old stabber monica has him down to a tee.
-
BFYP
I strongly disagree with that last sentence. Labour's domestic policies for years have been very popular in polls. So popular that the Tories have stolen many of them, after denouncing them as Marxist in elections. I do agree with your other point though. The Left is regularly astonished that having popular policies which would be good for the mass of the population, doesn't automatically lead to electoral success. The key problem that they had under Corbyn was an inability to see what was blindingly obvious to people on the outside. Corbyn came across as someone who didn't like Britain. Whether that was fair or not, that was how he appeared to people outside the Left bubble.
In some ways they have had some policies that have been taken by other parties (sometimes wrongly in my view sometimes not), so that is a fair point. I would question whether they have put together a package on a whole though that is electable and it is that full package that is key.
I do though think Kier Starmer deserves the opportunity to put a raft of policies together, the same as Corbyn had that chance. However, at the same point it cannot be denied that Kier Starmer so far just hasn't offered much at all and is not really inspiring much.
-
Apparently, Ken Loach originally cast Starmer to play Billy Casper in ‘Kes’. Unfortunately, during the fight scene on top of the coal, Starmer insisted that Casper should stab MacDowell in the back so they gave the role to David Bradley instead.
-
Extremists of the far centre long for the lost days of Tony Blair, the weapons of mass deception criminal.
Good summary from Ronan Burtenshaw of Tribune on the exploitation and posturing of the hard right;
https://youtu.be/NIxcJlHZOBY
Where does Keith think those leaving Labour will go.......just melt into the background?
Keith is likely a dead man waiking in political terms after trying to dilute party democracy with a new electoral college....no coming back from this mistake.
-
BST, your claim that "Corbyn came across as someone who didn't like Britain" is bang on in my opinion. To be perfectly honest though, so do you and your mates on this forum.
-
Extremists of the far centre long for the lost days of Tony Blair, the weapons of mass deception criminal.
Good summary from Ronan Burtenshaw of Tribune on the exploitation and posturing of the hard right;
https://youtu.be/NIxcJlHZOBY
Where does Keith think those leaving Labour will go.......just melt into the background?
Keith is likely a dead man waiking in political terms after trying to dilute party democracy with a new electoral college....no coming back from this mistake.
Centrist Labour
The Tory B team whose job it is quell calls for real change and rearrange the deck chairs to give the illusion of change .
Meanwhile in the real world Thatcher's privatisation legacy is beginning to unravel and we've the aftermath of a global pandemic to negotiate .
Absolute laughing stock .
-
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but wasn't Corbyn's popularity when elected as Labour leader down to thousands of infiltrators joining the Labour party solely to vote for him, thus rendering the party less electable?
They may well have been some but certainly not in the numbers it takes to elect a Labour leader especially one who won two leadership elections by a landslide .
In the first one he was up against the much trumpeted Andy Burnham .
Even in the 2019 election tonking Corbyn won more votes than Blair , Brown and Miliband between 2005 and 2015 .
Perceptions eh ?
-
Tyke.
That line about number of votes is meaningless because it ignores context. 2017 and 19 were the first ones in a generation that were effectively two party elections in most of England.
It's irrelevant how many people voted for Corbyn's Labour. The fact is, he lost . Against two of the most chaotic Tory opponents in history.
-
Tyke.
That line about number of votes is meaningless because it ignores context. 2017 and 19 were the first ones in a generation that were effectively two party elections in most of England.
It's irrelevant how many people voted for Corbyn's Labour. The fact is, he lost . Against two of the most chaotic Tory opponents in history.
I could get behind Rayner I'll say that .
Gave Raab a right kicking the other day at PMQ's .
Wasn't afraid to use a bit of class warfare either which I like .
The best mauling of a Tory I've seen for a good while .
Well done that women .
-
Tyke.
That line about number of votes is meaningless because it ignores context. 2017 and 19 were the first ones in a generation that were effectively two party elections in most of England.
It's irrelevant how many people voted for Corbyn's Labour. The fact is, he lost . Against two of the most chaotic Tory opponents in history.
This is the daftest post I have seen in years.
What context is it in which MORE votes are not as good as FEWER votes?
Unreal!
The 2 party election point will not apply next GE, because the Tories will lose votes in the south to the LDems....buyers regret, many Tory voters dislike Bozo.
The question for Labour is how to regain enough seats to form a government. At least 25 seats in Scotland need to be won, and standing for Unionism will not allow that to happen.
Some red wall seats can be won (buyers regret again), but nowhere near the numbers required.
Pitching as a tweaked Blue Labour is a distinction without a difference.
For me, Keith is the same type of corporate politician that Theresa May was, a different flavour of neo-liberal. Bozo sold himself as a Punch and Judy character, different from the bland normal.
What political niche does Keith occupy to show a new political narrative?
Back to the future...no thanks, it was not very good!
Now Keith has fallen out with the Unions;
https://labourlist.org/2021/09/starmer-rule-changes-not-going-to-friday-nec-after-car-crash-union-meeting/
Great!
-
Tyke.
That line about number of votes is meaningless because it ignores context. 2017 and 19 were the first ones in a generation that were effectively two party elections in most of England.
It's irrelevant how many people voted for Corbyn's Labour. The fact is, he lost . Against two of the most chaotic Tory opponents in history.
This is the daftest post I have seen in years.
What context is it in which MORE votes are not as good as FEWER votes?
Unreal!
The 2 party election point will not apply next GE, because the Tories will lose votes in the south to the LDems....buyers regret, many Tory voters dislike Bozo.
The question for Labour is how to regain enough seats to form a government. At least 25 seats in Scotland need to be won, and standing for Unionism will not allow that to happen.
Some red wall seats can be won (buyers regret again), but nowhere near the numbers required.
Pitching as a tweaked Blue Labour is a distinction without a difference.
For me, Keith is the same type of corporate politician that Theresa May was, a different flavour of neo-liberal. Bozo sold himself as a Punch and Judy character, different from the bland normal.
What political niche does Keith occupy to show a new political narrative?
Back to the future...no thanks, it was not very good!
Now Keith has fallen out with the Unions;
https://labourlist.org/2021/09/starmer-rule-changes-not-going-to-friday-nec-after-car-crash-union-meeting/
Great!
" Aren't you embarrassed by the energy crisis ? "
I'd have loved to be a fly on the wall when that question hit Keith right between the eyes .
-
Tyke.
That line about number of votes is meaningless because it ignores context. 2017 and 19 were the first ones in a generation that were effectively two party elections in most of England.
It's irrelevant how many people voted for Corbyn's Labour. The fact is, he lost . Against two of the most chaotic Tory opponents in history.
This is the daftest post I have seen in years.
What context is it in which MORE votes are not as good as FEWER votes?
Unreal!
The 2 party election point will not apply next GE, because the Tories will lose votes in the south to the LDems....buyers regret, many Tory voters dislike Bozo.
The question for Labour is how to regain enough seats to form a government. At least 25 seats in Scotland need to be won, and standing for Unionism will not allow that to happen.
Some red wall seats can be won (buyers regret again), but nowhere near the numbers required.
Pitching as a tweaked Blue Labour is a distinction without a difference.
For me, Keith is the same type of corporate politician that Theresa May was, a different flavour of neo-liberal. Bozo sold himself as a Punch and Judy character, different from the bland normal.
What political niche does Keith occupy to show a new political narrative?
Back to the future...no thanks, it was not very good!
Now Keith has fallen out with the Unions;
https://labourlist.org/2021/09/starmer-rule-changes-not-going-to-friday-nec-after-car-crash-union-meeting/
Great!
Albie.
It's almost embarrassing to have to spell this out, but in 2005 and 2010 there was a resurgent LD party that was taking votes off Labour. In 2015, there was a surging UKIP taking votes off Labour. Those two parties had essentially evaporated by 2017 and 19 [1]. Corbyn inherited the helpful situation that across vast swathes of the country, if you wanted to vote anti-Tory, there was really only one choice.
Ignoring that fact and claiming his electoral performance (in which he lost, twice, the second one by a historic margin) is a bit silly.
[1] He inherited a dead LD party. Miraculously, he did the impossible over the first half of 2019 in raising it from the dead with his Brexit policy, before the grown ups in the party put him in his box.
-
Tyke.
That line about number of votes is meaningless because it ignores context. 2017 and 19 were the first ones in a generation that were effectively two party elections in most of England.
It's irrelevant how many people voted for Corbyn's Labour. The fact is, he lost . Against two of the most chaotic Tory opponents in history.
This is the daftest post I have seen in years.
What context is it in which MORE votes are not as good as FEWER votes?
Unreal!
The 2 party election point will not apply next GE, because the Tories will lose votes in the south to the LDems....buyers regret, many Tory voters dislike Bozo.
The question for Labour is how to regain enough seats to form a government. At least 25 seats in Scotland need to be won, and standing for Unionism will not allow that to happen.
Some red wall seats can be won (buyers regret again), but nowhere near the numbers required.
Pitching as a tweaked Blue Labour is a distinction without a difference.
For me, Keith is the same type of corporate politician that Theresa May was, a different flavour of neo-liberal. Bozo sold himself as a Punch and Judy character, different from the bland normal.
What political niche does Keith occupy to show a new political narrative?
Back to the future...no thanks, it was not very good!
Now Keith has fallen out with the Unions;
https://labourlist.org/2021/09/starmer-rule-changes-not-going-to-friday-nec-after-car-crash-union-meeting/
Great!
Albie.
It's almost embarrassing to have to spell this out, but in 2005 and 2010 there was a resurgent LD party that was taking votes off Labour. In 2015, there was a surging UKIP taking votes off Labour. Those two parties had essentially evaporated by 2017 and 19 [1]. Corbyn inherited the helpful situation that across vast swathes of the country, if you wanted to vote anti-Tory, there was really only one choice.
Ignoring that fact and claiming his electoral performance (in which he lost, twice, the second one by a historic margin) is a bit silly.
[1] He inherited a dead LD party. Miraculously, he did the impossible over the first half of 2019 in raising it from the dead with his Brexit policy, before the grown ups in the party put him in his box.
What about the dead LD's on Miliband's watch post coalition in 2015 and pre referendum .
Want to walk us through that one Billy ? .
Corbyn polled more .
-
UKIP Tyke.
-
Combined vote for LD+Green+UKIP/BP
2010 - 8.0m
2015 - 7.4m
2017 - 3.5m
2019 - 5.2m
Any analysis that ignores those numbers is worthless.
Oh aye. And the 2015 figures included the highest ever Green vote. 1.1m. Presumably swelled by the left leaning people who couldn't, just couldn't bring themselves to vote for someone as far right as Miliband. The Tories won a sliver of a majority in that Election. Just a couple or three hundred thousand of those Greens voting for Miliband would have prevented a Cameron majority, prevented the Brexit vote, prevented the ascendancy of the Johnson programme.
But conscience is more important.
PS. Since Ken Loach had just started up his own party, I'm guessing he didn't vote Labour in that election either.
-
Fascinating how so many on the Left are so cock sure that the Tories will romp the next election. Meanwhile, the Tory lead in the polls has shrivelled from 10% to 3% in 3 months. And an election is at least 2 years away.
£100 to charity for the loser .
Starmer will not win the next election .
Deal ...... ???
I’m sure you’ll be doing your damndest to stop him Tyke.
Close one eye when you put your cross in the Tory box, eh?
-
BST,
Are you saying the voters that opted for UKIP then reverted to boost Labour under Corbyn?
They didn't....they moved largely to the Tories.
If you have any evidence from a reliable source to back up your claim, please post it.
-
Fascinating how so many on the Left are so cock sure that the Tories will romp the next election. Meanwhile, the Tory lead in the polls has shrivelled from 10% to 3% in 3 months. And an election is at least 2 years away.
£100 to charity for the loser .
Starmer will not win the next election .
Deal ...... ???
I’m sure you’ll be doing your damndest to stop him Tyke.
Close one eye when you put your cross in the Tory box, eh?
Well I couldn't possibly have voted for Nick Fletcher who is the first Tory to represent the Doncaster area .
Meanwhile despite the 25 years apathy my town remains Tory free .
Own it sunshine .
-
UKIP Tyke.
Both Labour and the Tories lost votes to UKIP , six and two three's .
The Lib Dem vote went to the Tories which was clearly significant in 2015 .
-
Getting the figures and the numbers right is important but not as important as supporting the leader and getting government, which would lead to the possibility of Raynor being annointed at some point.
But the longer those mardy sods play politics with their vote due to spite the longer labour will be in opposition.
-
BST, your claim that "Corbyn came across as someone who didn't like Britain" is bang on in my opinion. To be perfectly honest though, so do you and your mates on this forum.
this is what your f**ked up tory party has done to britain bb, I hope you are proud of em.
Iceland boss: UK has more food banks than McDonalds
Iceland boss: UK has more food banks than McDonalds
Close
A retail boss had said cutting universal credit would be “a choice between heating and eating” for many people.
Iceland's Richard Walker said there had been an "alarming rise" in the number of UK food banks, and there were now more of them than branches of the McDonald's fast food chain.
And he would be happy to see income tax go up to keep the £20 temporary weekly uplift in universal credit, which is due to end within days.
https://www.bbc.com/news/politics
Brexit & the tories, a choice between heating and eating
vote conservative
-
BST,
Are you saying the voters that opted for UKIP then reverted to boost Labour under Corbyn?
They didn't....they moved largely to the Tories.
If you have any evidence from a reliable source to back up your claim, please post it.
Just to be clear, here is the evidence to the contrary;
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/06/22/how-did-2015-voters-cast-their-ballot-2017-general
Tories picked up UKIP in 2017 by 45%, Labour only 11%.
Labour picked up from others, with Greens loaning votes to Labour because of the Corbyn green policies.
Tactical voting BST, more of a player than back when you were a lad!
-
BST,
Are you saying the voters that opted for UKIP then reverted to boost Labour under Corbyn?
They didn't....they moved largely to the Tories.
If you have any evidence from a reliable source to back up your claim, please post it.
I'm saying there was a large shift in all the minor parties' votes to both Lab and Con in 2017.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/06/22/how-did-2015-voters-cast-their-ballot-2017-general
59% of people who voted Green in 2015 voted Labour in 2017.
29% of 2015 LD voters likewise.
11% of 2015 UKIP voters.
That movement alone made up 2 million of Labour's increased vote in 2017. Because the minor parties in 2017 were the most irrelevant they had been for a generation.
I've said for years now that Corbyn pulled off a masterstroke in 2017. He was able to convince 1.5m ex-Green and LD supporters that he was a Remained, and 400,000 UKIP supporters that he was a Brexiter.
That was genius. And he nearly managed to unseat May. But as I said at the time, the claim that these people voted Labour because they supported Corbynite Labour was self-deception which paved the way for the disaster of 2019.
By the way. Picture the past 8 years if those half a million Greens who had voted for Corbyn in 2017 had voted for Miliband in 2015. And ask yourself what the difference was in Labour domestic policies that caused that shift. Because there was barely a fag paper between the two economic or environmental manifestos.
-
Albie
You are rather missing the point in this.
I'm not questioning the fact that the Tories lost and then regained more votes to and from UKIP. I'm saying that in 2017, Labour made large net gains from UKIP, Green and LD 2015 voters combined. Including 400,000 from UKIP. I'm saying you have to consider the near irrelevance of the minor parties in 2017 to understand the vote allocations.
Corbynistas frequently point to the fact that Labour increased its vote on 2017 as evidence of the brilliance of Corbyn and the attraction of his party. But May also greatly increased the Tory vote and everyone accepts that she ran the most appalling campaign in living memory. The point is, both increased the vote because the third-parties were irrelevant for the first time in 50 years.
-
And in the context of this thread, as I say, ask yourself who Loach supported in 2015 when there was a clear chance to oust Cameron and have the most left wing Govt since 1951. And then ask yourself why we should be lectured by him about unity.
Or indeed by anyone else on the Left who refused to vote Labour in 2015.
-
All this talk of statistics and reasons why voters vote in certain ways is naive in the great scheme of things. Ordinary, normal people don't vote following such in-depth statistical research, they vote for people who they consider to talk the least b*llocks.
-
Sorry BST, but I think it is you who is missing the point.
UKIP were a bridge to a change in voting intentions from traditional Labour supporters long in the making.
Socially conservative older voters in the red wall had become increasingly disillusioned with New Labour, and the vote fell every election until the nadir of 2010. They were right to feel taken for granted.
That was not wholly the fault of Brown, but he failed to take steps to revitalize the party and reverse the declining trend.
Habits of a lifetime die hard, but UKIP gave them a reason to step away.
Once you have made that shift, the next step is easier to take, and as the Tories were offering a Brexit too good to be true, many walked that mile.
Alongside the UKIP disturbance of the model, came tactical voting as a significant force.
This was inevitable as New Labour missed the chance for voting reform, so voters took the only option they could to make their voice count.
Tactical voting will increase next election, and that is the change that will have a lasting effect until PR is introduced.
So the question for Labour is how to max the tactical vote contribution, whilst bringing new voters into the fold.
Keith seems to think it is by courting soft Tories. That will only have an impact where it is a narrow two horse race between Labour and Tory. Soft Tories will flip to LDem where they have traction.
There are not the numbers in the data to support the Starmer approach. Labour can regain some seats on bounceback, but the net position is likely to be a defeat. Now you either settle for a few more seats without power, or you look to differentiate the policy offer to draw in the excluded and the tactical vote.
Starmer is taking Labour down the road of managed decline.
I don't know whether that is incompetence or malevolence, but I can't see any actions taken by the leadership that add weight to Labour as an alternative.
You must know that Keith is burning bridges before he has crossed them...let's hope he can swim, Eh!
-
''Keith seems to think it is by courting soft Tories''
I think you mean swing voters or ex labour voters Albie, unless you are describing a separate cohort of tories that starmer thinks he has more chance of winning over.
Tell me how many votes you think a labour left drive to win power will need and where they will come from?
that is the question.
-
Syd,
You can call them swing voters if you prefer.
There are those who are former Labour first time Tories, and another group of Tories by instinct who are pissed off with Johnson...the sort of people who support the likes of Dominic Grieve and co.
Keith is relying on older voters reverting, and disregarding the new voters coming on to the register, and those too disillusioned to vote.
I think the latter group offers a bigger potential gain than the home owning codgers.
The future of Labour depends on regeneration of the membership, and with that comes policy change to speak to their concerns.
The progress made on this front since 2015 has been reversed by Keith, and the decline under way in the New Labour days will kick in again.
No future for Labour in reliance on corporate donors, despite what the disgraced Peter Mandelson might believe.
-
Problem is the centre right of the Labour Party is every bit as complicit in protecting the interests of super capitalism which creates inequality .
Hmm. Not quite how I remember the Blair years. Healthcare waiting lists down, Sure Start for the disadvantaged, no food banks, tax credits for the low paid, introduction of a minimum national wage. No doubt there was other stuff that created more inequality...
-
Syd,
You can call them swing voters if you prefer.
There are those who are former Labour first time Tories, and another group of Tories by instinct who are pissed off with Johnson...the sort of people who support the likes of Dominic Grieve and co.
Keith is relying on older voters reverting, and disregarding the new voters coming on to the register, and those too disillusioned to vote.
I think the latter group offers a bigger potential gain than the home owning codgers.
The future of Labour depends on regeneration of the membership, and with that comes policy change to speak to their concerns.
The progress made on this front since 2015 has been reversed by Keith, and the decline under way in the New Labour days will kick in again.
No future for Labour in reliance on corporate donors, despite what the disgraced Peter Mandelson might believe.
I think swing voter reflects a more accurate position as to where these people are politically is all, and yes, inspiring those that don't get out of their chairs would be good too but it appears that large cohort that can't be arsed to even think about it. It's faily obvious why the tories would never change the voting system. That is something that blair should have pushed for.
-
Put this on the fuel thread, but it is also relevant here.
"Good old Keith has reneged on the Labour commitment to public ownership of energy and utilities;
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/26/starmer-labour-would-not-nationalise-big-six-energy-firms
Open goal, and Keith knocks it out of the ground.
Incredible incompetence, or a strategy to merge Labour with the Tory narrative?
Existential crises for Labour now, Keith will kill Labour as a viable force before the next election.
Some think that is his aim!"
Keith cannot even understand that public ownership of these industries is popular....so why would you abandon those policies which enjoy public support?
-
Put this on the fuel thread, but it is also relevant here.
"Good old Keith has reneged on the Labour commitment to public ownership of energy and utilities;
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/26/starmer-labour-would-not-nationalise-big-six-energy-firms
Open goal, and Keith knocks it out of the ground.
Incredible incompetence, or a strategy to merge Labour with the Tory narrative?
Existential crises for Labour now, Keith will kill Labour as a viable force before the next election.
Some think that is his aim!"
Keith cannot even understand that public ownership of these industries is popular....so why would you abandon those policies which enjoy public support?
Because if the truth be known Keith and his centrist mob and supporters are actually Liberals .
The Labour Party offers them a bigger stage for their thirst for power and standing .
-
Keith has been slapped down by Labour conference on public ownership of energy;
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/starmer-labour-nationalisation-energy-companies-b1927267.html
The bloke does not seem to understand the party, let alone the issue of dealing with fuel poverty.
If he reckons he can sort fuel poverty without taking the sector in house, then good luck with that.
Looking untenable for Keith now in the longer term, even the right must see that.
Remember Ian Duncan Smith getting the Tory bumsrush......will Labour flush Keith sooner, or wait for him to fail even more?
-
Albie, I remember when Starmer won the leadership and he was feted as the man to lead Labour to a great victory and depose the government.
Things don’t appear to have gone to plan do they.
I feel sorry for him really as he has to deal with discontent in his Party but finds himself in a difficult position.
Rayner will soon be looking to jump into his shoes in my opinion.
-
Albie, I remember when Starmer won the leadership and he was feted as the man to lead Labour to a great victory and depose the government.
Things don’t appear to have gone to plan do they.
I feel sorry for him really as he has to deal with discontent in his Party but finds himself in a difficult position.
Rayner will soon be looking to jump into his shoes in my opinion.
Don't waste any pity on this charlatan hound he's brought this on all by himself .
He's the war mongerer , he's the aggressor and his slime ball partner Mandelson .
I was prepared to give him a good go despite our clear political differences in many areas but there's only so much you can stomach with his tribe .
The quicker he goes the better .
-
Albie, I remember when Starmer won the leadership and he was feted as the man to lead Labour to a great victory and depose the government.
Things don’t appear to have gone to plan do they.
I feel sorry for him really as he has to deal with discontent in his Party but finds himself in a difficult position.
Rayner will soon be looking to jump into his shoes in my opinion.
Yes, mate, people enthusing on here about Starmer running rings round Johnson at the despatch box, as though that has any relevance; any f*cker could have done that.
It needs someone who can get the red wall back in the North and North-East, and that person definitely isn't Starmer. It needs Raynor, Burnham, or someone else to do that.
-
Albie, I remember when Starmer won the leadership and he was feted as the man to lead Labour to a great victory and depose the government.
Things don’t appear to have gone to plan do they.
I feel sorry for him really as he has to deal with discontent in his Party but finds himself in a difficult position.
Rayner will soon be looking to jump into his shoes in my opinion.
Yes, mate, people enthusing on here about Starmer running rings round Johnson at the despatch box, as though that has any relevance; any f*cker could have done that.
It needs someone who can get the red wall back in the North and North-East, and that person definitely isn't Starmer. It needs Raynor, Burnham, or someone else to do that.
I really had no interest in politics at all until I joined this forum.
In my time on here I have read stuff that has been enlightening and some which has been downright one sided and blinkered. #bothsideism.
At first I was taken in by the opinions of some posters who appeared to know how things worked but over time it has become apparent that there are so many varying points of view on so many subjects that I have come to realise why I didn’t really have any interest in politics.
-
Albie, I remember when Starmer won the leadership and he was feted as the man to lead Labour to a great victory and depose the government.
Things don’t appear to have gone to plan do they.
I feel sorry for him really as he has to deal with discontent in his Party but finds himself in a difficult position.
Rayner will soon be looking to jump into his shoes in my opinion.
Yes, mate, people enthusing on here about Starmer running rings round Johnson at the despatch box, as though that has any relevance; any f*cker could have done that.
It needs someone who can get the red wall back in the North and North-East, and that person definitely isn't Starmer. It needs Raynor, Burnham, or someone else to do that.
Maybe the future of the Labour Party hinges on Marcus Rashford receiving a career ending ACL .
He's done more for disadvantaged people in the last 12 months than Keith would do if he was PM for three terms .
Not that it will happen mind .
-
I'm an angry old man, so angry I'm damn well going to do ................... nothing
-
I'm an angry old man, so angry I'm damn well going to do ................... nothing
I wouldn't go as far as to say Keith is old but I take your point .
How's the weather today in Oz Sid ?
-
I'm an angry old man, so angry I'm damn well going to do ................... nothing
I wouldn't go as far as to say Keith is old but I take your point .
How's the weather today in Oz Sid ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZ9myHhpS9s
-
People have died in the fight for the right to vote, in my view if you don't intend to vote then you don't get a say.
-
Keith has been slapped down by Labour conference on public ownership of energy;
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/starmer-labour-nationalisation-energy-companies-b1927267.html
The bloke does not seem to understand the party, let alone the issue of dealing with fuel poverty.
If he reckons he can sort fuel poverty without taking the sector in house, then good luck with that.
Looking untenable for Keith now in the longer term, even the right must see that.
Remember Ian Duncan Smith getting the Tory bumsrush......will Labour flush Keith sooner, or wait for him to fail even more?
Good luck keeping prices down without competition.
-
People have died in the fight for the right to vote, in my view if you don't intend to vote then you don't get a say.
Quite right Sid , especially those who fecked off to warmer climates and are citizens of hmm ..... Well you tell me .
-
Tyke, have you considered voting for the Greens or NIP?
-
People have died in the fight for the right to vote, in my view if you don't intend to vote then you don't get a say.
Quite right Sid , especially those who fecked off to warmer climates and are citizens of hmm ..... Well you tell me .
You're sounding more like the tory you're helping elect every day they're not big on aliens either.
Try to prove your credentials by being the angriest man in Britain about the state of politics is only showing that you are beyond the point of rationality that you're so angry that you can't do anything.
You are denying the generations following the benefits the generations before you fought for, do you think they had the luxury of a nice pension or even the right to vote?
You are not making any sense by just being angry and showing how angry you are if you don't actually do anything about it.
Epitaph of a warrior 'I did my bit'
Listening to you is like a monty python sketch where 'I used to live in't puddle'
You are not impressing anyone because you are not doing anything except talking big.
-
Filo was only talking about compromise earlier and look what has happened at the conference
''Labour leadership rule changes pass after last-minute Unison backing
Narrow victory at conference after members had torn into Starmer’s plan ends difficult week for leader''
I won't put up a link as I know you will have read about it, I guess this will make you more angry.
-
People have died in the fight for the right to vote, in my view if you don't intend to vote then you don't get a say.
Quite right Sid , especially those who fecked off to warmer climates and are citizens of hmm ..... Well you tell me .
Showing your ignorance here tyke, you don't appear to understand the place international politics has in the modern world, how political parties of similar flavours help each other out. Look how Morrison (Oz PM) sucked up to trump and then how biden has told him where he he shove his trade deal, a bit similar to johnson's position.
Getting good results in one country always helps others, it gives the strength, like when I think of your comments ............. give me strength.
-
BFYP,
Gas prices are mainly determined by international markets, and constraints on supply.
The idea that they are kept low by competition in a single country market is not correct.
Many suppliers duplicating admin costs, and looking to secure small supply deals are at a disadvantage compared to a large unit buyer.
It is a myth put about to justify the sale of public assets to private interests who need to meet shareholder returns.
Monies lost to dividends is money not invested in the system.
-
I'm an angry old man, so angry I'm damn well going to do ................... nothing
You don't have to do anything, Syd old boy; just relax on Bondi Beach.
It'll help ease the pain of Starmer's dicking at the next GE. That is, if he's not removed before then.
-
Andy McDonald resigns from Starmer shitshow;
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1442524697346945032/photo/1
What a fiasco!
-
It really is Albie.
McDonald has resigned in protest at being told to oppose the Minimum Wage being set at the level of the median wage.
Just ponder that for a moment then come back and explain McDonald's logic to me.
-
Not sure why you are asking me, BST, I am not Andy McDonald.
What do you think the minimum wage and statutory sick pay should be?
The £10 figure was first agreed in 2015 I think. Labour cannot win power before 2024.
You are aware that the £10 figure is below the current living wage figure for London weighting?
Keith has form on this;
https://twitter.com/i/status/1442561275515613190
Two faced Keith speaks with forked tongue!
-
Albie.
You think it's a fiasco that McDonald has resigned. Given that a major stated reason for his fury with Starmer is the minimum wage issue, I'm asking you to enlighten me how that is supposed to work.
What Starmer's office did was instruct him not to support a policy that is a logical impossibility. Him resigning over that, and being lauded across the Left says everything about the current state of the Left.
-
BST,
No, the fiasco is the management of conference under the control of Mandelson and the hard right.
The minimum wage is implemented by legislation.....what is difficult to understand here?
I don't know what you are talking about, "logical impossibility".....what drivel.
So, could you answer my question what does the Labour right think is a fair minimum wage for 2024?
Inflation will hit 4% this year, according to the Bank of England forecast.
It looks very much like you support in reality a cut in purchasing power, hence living standards.
You are beginning to sound like a Boris fanboy!
-
It is a logical impossibility to have a minimum wage at the level of the median wage.
Stop chucking the insults out and muddying the water by wrongly claiming what I think for a moment and think why.
-
The median wage will rise in tandem with the increase in the minimum wage.
Sorry if you took offence at light hearted jibes.
Now stop the bullshit and answer the question asked;
"So, could you answer my question what does the Labour right think is a fair minimum wage for 2024?"
-
I've no idea what "the Labour right" thinks. Why do you think I do?
What I DO know is that if you raise the minimum wage to median wage levels, you either end up with 50% of the workforce on the minimum wage or you unleash 20, 30 or 40% inflation.
Basic economics. McDonald has chosen an utterly stupid hill on which to die. Unless his actual aim isn't about this policy of course.
But the Left won't engage in this argument. It will all be "principled man of the Left forced out by Red Tory."
If you want to know what MY policy on low wages is, I'd make a significant increase to the minimum wage, but not one that would immediately erode the gain by forcing massive rises across the workforce and firing up double digit inflation. 6-8% is a start. And where that wasn't enough, I'd raise working benefits, initially by borrowing, then as the economy started to grow, by increased taxes on companies and the highly paid.
What I wouldn't do is promote an idiotic policy in order to stoke up a party argument.
-
The median wage will rise in tandem with the increase in the minimum wage.
Sorry if you took offence at light hearted jibes.
Now stop the bullshit and answer the question asked;
"So, could you answer my question what does the Labour right think is a fair minimum wage for 2024?"
And thus how much inflation do you think that would cause? Plus the inevitable interest rate hike and shortage in other jobs.
See it's a tough thing raising the wages of those in the lower bands too much, otherwise you lose the incentive for people to do other jobs.
The daftest thing is this overshadows now some potentially interesting policy ideas mooted by the shadow chancellor today.
-
I'm an angry old man, so angry I'm damn well going to do ................... nothing
You don't have to do anything, Syd old boy; just relax on Bondi Beach.
It'll help ease the pain of Starmer's dicking at the next GE. That is, if he's not removed before then.
tell me what you do Steve except rant and rave on a third tier football forum?
-
It's very tricky this. The inflation we see is cost push, arising from pressure on limited supplies of fuel, principally Nat gas but also oil and coal.
China is competing with Europe for gas supplies from Russia as they try to ramp up production after the pandemic. Russia is itself increasingly concerned about reaching a peak in gas production and will eventually begin to prioritise its own supply.
Personally I think we're heading for a global energy crunch this winter. My guess is when gas becomes too expensive manufacturing will simply stop. There are signs it's already begining in China.
https://wolfstreet.com/2021/09/26/suppliers-in-china-for-apple-tesla-intel-nvidia-qualcomm-nxp-infineon-ase-tech-forced-to-halt-production-amid-chinas-energy-crackdown/
That will then cause another financial crisis.
It would be unwise to try and anticipate future inflation levels. It's likely to be volatile.
One thing is sure, we can take this BoE talk of a potential interest rate rise with a pinch of salt. It would crash the already weak economy.
-
What are your intentions should labour win the next election Mr McDonald?
I am/labour is going to help the working poor.
How are you going to do that Mr McDonald?
I am going to resign from the labour party front bench?
Oh right
-
The bigger impact on median earnings is from disproportionate rises in salaries at the top end.
This is another variable in play on the median wage issue....the possibility of controls on high salaries.
If the impact of large increases in earnings at the top end are offset against increases for the low paid, the possibility of inflation is reduced.
I don't know what Labour proposes in terms of high earners other than marginal tax increases.
The 15% demand is from the Trade Unions, the organisations which fund the Labour Party. It is intended to reclaim ground lost over recent years of below inflation settlements.
As a percentage increase on a baseline pay rates way below the level of inflation over time, it seems very modest to me. Compare the buying power of earnings in 2010 to today to get a metric.
15% of below subsistence pay is still unlikely to remove all in work poverty.
Subsidising low wage employers via the benefits system seems to me the wrong answer to the wrong question.
Keith seems to have changed his mind;
https://twitter.com/siennamarla/status/1442549278145089543/photo/1
It was good enough for him in 2019.
-
Albie
Wages at the top end have zero effect on MEDIAN wages. Median means the mid point if you out every number in rank order.
Here's a question. If a minimum wage of £15 is a designing issue for MacDonald, why didn't he resign in 2019 when Corbyn's policy was to increase the minimum wage to £10.
If Starmer was supporting a £15 minimum wage, he was demonstrating a lack of understanding of basic economics. You simply cannot have a minimum wage at the level of the median wage without automatically pushing up ALL wages around the median. Which raises the median. And raises inflation. Thereby destroying the effect you wanted to produce. It's not what you and the Left want to hear, but this HAS to be done slowly. And as I say, in the meantime you address poverty by working benefits.
-
The bigger impact on median earnings is from disproportionate rises in salaries at the top end.
This is another variable in play on the median wage issue....the possibility of controls on high salaries.
If the impact of large increases in earnings at the top end are offset against increases for the low paid, the possibility of inflation is reduced.
I don't know what Labour proposes in terms of high earners other than marginal tax increases.
The 15% demand is from the Trade Unions, the organisations which fund the Labour Party. It is intended to reclaim ground lost over recent years of below inflation settlements.
As a percentage increase on a baseline pay rates way below the level of inflation over time, it seems very modest to me. Compare the buying power of earnings in 2010 to today to get a metric.
15% of below subsistence pay is still unlikely to remove all in work poverty.
Subsidising low wage employers via the benefits system seems to me the wrong answer to the wrong question.
Keith seems to have changed his mind;
https://twitter.com/siennamarla/status/1442549278145089543/photo/1
It was good enough for him in 2019.
Isn't it a bit disingenuous to be calling for starmer to support the same things after an election as he did leading up to an election where labour got absolutely smashed?
Added:
You may wish to reflect about that example explaining what insanity is Albie.
-
BST,
Yes, you are right.
I am talking about MEAN, not MEDIAN.
That said, I do not see why wage capping high earners would not compensate for increasing incomes at the lower end, those who need benefit top ups because they do not earn a living wage.
The point about 2019 policy is that we are further down the road now, and the need to improve the minimum wage is greater. Prices of basic commodities are rising, and will continue to do so in the mid term.
Many people do not qualify for the benefit support as top up that you advocate. Ask anyone who has had to apply for Universal Credit if it is a functional system...it is not!
The £10 minimum wage is the same as the Tories have supported. Where is the incentive to support Labour if you are in one of the vulnerable groups?
-
Sydney,
"Isn't it a bit disingenuous to be calling for starmer to support the same things after an election as he did leading up to an election where labour got absolutely smashed?
Added:
You may wish to reflect about that example explaining what insanity is Albie."
No, it is disingenuous of Starmer to pretend to support low paid workers in 2019, then reverse his position as Labour leader.
As has been explained before, Labour got more votes in 2017 and 2019 than in 2010...that is not smashed, it is an effect of FPTP.
I don't know what your added point is about!
-
Sydney,
"Isn't it a bit disingenuous to be calling for starmer to support the same things after an election as he did leading up to an election where labour got absolutely smashed?
Added:
You may wish to reflect about that example explaining what insanity is Albie."
No, it is disingenuous of Starmer to pretend to support low paid workers in 2019, then reverse his position as Labour leader.
As has been explained before, Labour got more votes in 2017 and 2019 than in 2010...that is not smashed, it is an effect of FPTP.
I don't know what your added point is about!
You're over egging it Albie, what proof have you that he pretended to do anything (an aside, whatever starmer said before the election pales into insignificance to what the tories have failed to follow through on) starmer has not reversed his position he's changed it.
You know, it's almost as if you want to set impossible targets and then stand by and hope he fails.
If you don't see 2019 as being smashed then you really don't know what smashed means Albie, let's be honest.
Failure is hard to take and in this case extremely hard to take (just look at the football forum) but the adults in the room understand that you have to take it on the chin, step up again and try harder, if it's important to you that is.
Added, meaning: Doing the same thing and expecting a different result.
-
The bigger impact on median earnings is from disproportionate rises in salaries at the top end.
This is another variable in play on the median wage issue....the possibility of controls on high salaries.
If the impact of large increases in earnings at the top end are offset against increases for the low paid, the possibility of inflation is reduced.
I don't know what Labour proposes in terms of high earners other than marginal tax increases.
The 15% demand is from the Trade Unions, the organisations which fund the Labour Party. It is intended to reclaim ground lost over recent years of below inflation settlements.
As a percentage increase on a baseline pay rates way below the level of inflation over time, it seems very modest to me. Compare the buying power of earnings in 2010 to today to get a metric.
15% of below subsistence pay is still unlikely to remove all in work poverty.
Subsidising low wage employers via the benefits system seems to me the wrong answer to the wrong question.
Keith seems to have changed his mind;
https://twitter.com/siennamarla/status/1442549278145089543/photo/1
It was good enough for him in 2019.
Well this is 2021 and we're the other side of Brexit and a pandemic for f***s sake.
The world changes, circumstances change. If politicians don't change with the times then they're screwed. Or called Jeremy Corbyn.
-
Agree with your first point, BigH.
The pandemic and its after effects is precisely why wage levels need to be boosted to living wage levels, to compensate for lower earnings and rises in cost of living.
Living Wage standards are here;
https://www.livingwage.org.uk/what-real-living-wage
We are talking about where we want to be in 2024, not now.
Labour went on LBC this morning to explain;
https://twitter.com/i/status/1442810266677284864
Syd,
Proof....listen to the video!
https://twitter.com/jrc1921/status/1442549322638319623
"£15 per hour, just asking for the basics."
I still don't see why people think Statutory Sick Pay should be below Living Wage levels, but some on the right think differently.
-
I'm an angry old man, so angry I'm damn well going to do ................... nothing
You don't have to do anything, Syd old boy; just relax on Bondi Beach.
It'll help ease the pain of Starmer's dicking at the next GE. That is, if he's not removed before then.
tell me what you do Steve except rant and rave on a third tier football forum?
Come on, Sydney; everyone knows who does the most ranting and raving on this off-topic forum.
Oh, and by the way, I'm retired so I can do whatever I want. How about you? What do you do?
-
Albie.
What do you think would happen to the cost of living if 15 million people had their wages increased by up to 50%?
It's not heartless or uncaring or even (God forbid!) Blairite, to ask that. I want to see poverty reduced. I want to see low wages rise. But it is a generation long job to do that. Doing it by the method that McDonald resigned over wouldn't solve the issue. Meanwhile, it WOULD throw the economy into chaos.
But let's be grown up about it eh? You and I both know McDonald's resignation was nothing to do with this issue.
-
BST,
You are on the wrong page with this.
The steady increase has been taking place for the last 10 years or more, under the Low Pay Commission guidance
.
No-one is suggesting a 50% increase on current minimum wage levels in one move.
What is under consideration is the rate of annual increase in minimum wage levels, from the 2.2% in 2021.
If you have a target date of 2024, what rate of annual increase do you need to maintain living standards, in order to reach £15 by that time?
With inflation this year expected to be 4%, to keep on track for a higher level the rate of annual increase must accelerate.
We need to factor in the imminent price rises in energy costs coming through.
Not to do so would result in falling further behind and into fuel and food poverty.
There is a guide for those who do not know what this discussion is about;
https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/153343/economics/pros-and-cons-of-raising-the-minimum-wage/
-
Albie, if we raise the minimum wage by £6 an hour over 3 years, who is paying for that? How does the small business with minimal profits pay for that increase?
Wages have grown for the lowest really strongly, not just in the minimum wage increases but tax cuts. They've gone further than I would have but I've also seen the impact on business with those wage increases, it's very tough to cope with that sort of scale. How as a business owner would someone pay for that? How can the pub round the corner cope with a 40% increase in staff costs?
Again you increase those wages to say £15 an hour it's not just that pay you increase but you've just killed the NHS budget increase, you've just created a problem for the guy who currently earns £15 an hour for a stressful job who now earns the same as someone who doesn't. How do you propose you bridge that?
It's a fantasy world if you think everyone can be well off. Closing that gap seems a nice ideology but there's a reason the well paid are well paid. If the wages at the lower end increase, those on higher wages want the same.
-
If you raise the minimum wage so sharply, then business will just pass the cost on to the consumer and that inflation will erode the gains.
-
Albie.
To raise the minimum wage to £15 by 2024 requires three years of 19% increases. You cannot do that without inflation rocketing. It is simply not possible.
This is gesture politics from the Left, being used in a political fight.
If you are serious about wanting to help the lower paid, I'm more than happy to discuss serious policies. This isn't one.
-
If you raise the minimum wage so sharply, then business will just pass the cost on to the consumer and that inflation will erode the gains.
Precisely. Rises in minimum wage levels have to be done at rates that allow the entire economy to rebalance. Do it too fast and the outcome will be worse than the current situation.
-
BFYP,
Higher earners pay for it....either by more progressive tax rates, or the introduction of a wealth tax.
I agree that there will be knock on effects.
The key principle is that of a Living Wage, that seems to me an ethical starting point.
If you argue that the knock on effects cannot be managed, you are saying that poverty pay is integral to the UK Economy, and that the consequences of that are deferred from rogue employers to the public purse via top up support.
The economic distortion is baked into the present economic package. That needs to be unpacked in order to rebase the system.
I think the Living Wage is one way to level up that inequality.
If you disagree, then say how you would manage the position of those not earning enough to keep heads above water?
What about the energy costs about to kick in.....widespread payment default is what I see coming?
-
If we really want to see a significant growth in the levels of low wages, then we have to increase productivity.
That's a big challenge.
-
Is it time you just split into the centre left and hard left parties you clearly are. It’s painful to watch, like a couple who should divorce but are scared of being alone
-
I think the left just have to get over the idea of rapid, radical change. I don't think the UK public are ever prepared to vote for it.
It's got to be better to offer a moderate, prudent (as Gordon Brown was constantly reiterating) alternative and actually have a chance of delivering it.
But it seems that approach can't satisfy those on the left. So. Stalemate and leave the Tories to it.
-
BFYP,
Higher earners pay for it....either by more progressive tax rates, or the introduction of a wealth tax.
I agree that there will be knock on effects.
The key principle is that of a Living Wage, that seems to me an ethical starting point.
If you argue that the knock on effects cannot be managed, you are saying that poverty pay is integral to the UK Economy, and that the consequences of that are deferred from rogue employers to the public purse via top up support.
The economic distortion is baked into the present economic package. That needs to be unpacked in order to rebase the system.
I think the Living Wage is one way to level up that inequality.
If you disagree, then say how you would manage the position of those not earning enough to keep heads above water?
What about the energy costs about to kick in.....widespread payment default is what I see coming?
How high do those earners have to be to pay for it? Which element do you target?
To say it's baked in well it isn't lower wages can be increased but more slowly than the ridiculous notion mentioned and should be alongside other social packages.
There's also lots of ways you can help those in the lower bracket in more effective ways. Eg subsidised public transport for low paid workers, increased childcare support for lower earners, winter fuel subsidy increases for those genuinely less well off all of these paid directly to the provider(s) to prevent abuse and tapered to economic situations.
All of this has to be balanced to ensure the balance of society is not impacted. There's nothing wrong with supporting the less fortunate, absolutely not but that also can't be done in a way that makes it too rewarding not to work or do the hard/stressful jobs nor can it be passed ok solely to businesses.
Society will never be totally fair, it's impossible to have that, if it wasn't it would have happened by now.
-
Labour conference has just passed support for the £15 minimum wage target;
https://labourlist.org/2021/09/labour-conference-backs-15-minimum-wage-and-sick-pay-at-living-wage/
-
The vote is little more than an aspiration, the leadership aren't bound by it. It's just highlighting the lack of unity again.
-
BFYP,
Higher earners pay for it....either by more progressive tax rates, or the introduction of a wealth tax.
I agree that there will be knock on effects.
The key principle is that of a Living Wage, that seems to me an ethical starting point.
If you argue that the knock on effects cannot be managed, you are saying that poverty pay is integral to the UK Economy, and that the consequences of that are deferred from rogue employers to the public purse via top up support.
The economic distortion is baked into the present economic package. That needs to be unpacked in order to rebase the system.
I think the Living Wage is one way to level up that inequality.
If you disagree, then say how you would manage the position of those not earning enough to keep heads above water?
What about the energy costs about to kick in.....widespread payment default is what I see coming?
And what about the inflationary effect as those currently on £15/hour want to go to £24/hour and those on £24/hour want to got to £40/hr?
-
Top whataboutery there, BST ......I tip my hat to you!
RD,
Yes, it is not obligatory as you say.
Today the Bakers Union withdrew support from Labour over this (and other concerns).
If Starmer does not take his medicine, I feel others may follow, and that would not be in the interest of Labour.
So who is going to step down first, Steer Karma or RW?
The first half was a stinker.
-
I'm an angry old man, so angry I'm damn well going to do ................... nothing
You don't have to do anything, Syd old boy; just relax on Bondi Beach.
It'll help ease the pain of Starmer's dicking at the next GE. That is, if he's not removed before then.
tell me what you do Steve except rant and rave on a third tier football forum?
Come on, Sydney; everyone knows who does the most ranting and raving on this off-topic forum.
Oh, and by the way, I'm retired so I can do whatever I want. How about you? What do you do?
I'm a community activist.
-
Top whataboutery there, BST ......I tip my hat to you!
RD,
Yes, it is not obligatory as you say.
Today the Bakers Union withdrew support from Labour over this (and other concerns).
If Starmer does not take his medicine, I feel others may follow, and that would not be in the interest of Labour.
So who is going to step down first, Steer Karma or RW?
The first half was a stinker.
You clearly struggle with the concept of "Whataboutery" as much as Wellens's side struggles with the concept of football.
-
Just as you struggle with the idea of electability, along with Keith, BST.
Keith reckons that opposing policies supported by the public is the key to winning elections, despite the evidence to the contrary;
https://tribunemag.co.uk/2021/09/poll-65-of-british-public-supports-15-minimum-wage
He just does not get the Politics game, does he?
-
Or maybe he knows more than the public. Should politicians always follow public support?
-
BFYP,
No, but when their party votes in favour of a policy at Conference, and it enjoys high public approval, then it is a no brainer.
-
Redo the poll. As people if they support a £15/hour minimum wage AND 15% inflation.
And by the way, a consistent and large majority support the reintroduction of the death penalty forcertsin murders. Maybe Labour should have that as a policy too, if we are doing policy by opinion poll?
-
No, because Labour Conference did not support the death penalty.
The party position should be set by conference.
If that position has voter support, the case for adoption is enhanced.
Same thing with nationalisation.
I am well aware of the limitations of volatile polls.
Things may change, but the trend has been towards increasing levels of support against poverty pay.
I think this will grow with the end of furlough, and the reduction in Universal Credit.
The public have seen through the privatisation scam.
-
Just as you struggle with the idea of electability, along with Keith, BST.
Keith reckons that opposing policies supported by the public is the key to winning elections, despite the evidence to the contrary;
https://tribunemag.co.uk/2021/09/poll-65-of-british-public-supports-15-minimum-wage
He just does not get the Politics game, does he?
May as well ask you Albie as tyke's gone quiet, which labour leaders have you supported in the past apart from jc?
-
Me, Syd, Democratic Socialist....you know, 1 person, one vote, that sort of thing.
Clement Attlee was the best, but not without reservations.
That's the point really, the right to disagree.
Now if someone takes a different view to me that is OK...provided they are not lying about it.
I disagreed with New Labour, but I do think Broon was well intentioned, but plain wrong on things like PFI and electoral reform.
Keith is just a careerist wetwipe, no backbone.
My honest opinion is that he is a total Cressida...I hope he proves me wrong, but I don't see it likely.
-
Me, Syd, Democratic Socialist....you know, 1 person, one vote, that sort of thing.
Clement Attlee was the best, but not without reservations.
That's the point really, the right to disagree.
Now if someone takes a different view to me that is OK...provided they are not lying about it.
I disagreed with New Labour, but I do think Broon was well intentioned, but plain wrong on things like PFI and electoral reform.
Keith is just a careerist wetwipe, no backbone.
My honest opinion is that he is a total Cressida...I hope he proves me wrong, but I don't see it likely.
Thanks Albie, that's what it's all about, making a decision about who you want in power, I would be very happy to have most natural monopolies nationalised plus most services as I think the public gets a raw deal-has got a raw deal, and don't get me started about council houses. I don't have a label I've never really thought about it, I support those that can do the most under the circumstances. Ours here is not such a binary choice so I can and do work with people left of the labor party.
Starmer could have used his skills to enrich himself with a lot less pain than the career path he's taken and he's probably like a lot of us .......... sick to death of watching the tories enrich themselves and their mates at the expense of everyone else and the country. He has to change to suit the circumstance, if you or anyone can't see that, well ..... Being angry about things you are unwilling to change as it appears a lot are is mind numbingly frustrating for the rest of us. Showing anger at the tories or those in labour that see a different pathway does not make anyone a hero, it does not make them more caring it does not make them a more real labour person at all. Try thing of the millions classed as poor, the only real growth around 1100-1200% has been in food banks, this reminds me of the stories of rationing after the war. Food poverty, fuel poverty and just plain old poverty.
This is not directed at you, look at the passion created over the selection of a third tier football manager.
-
Just as you struggle with the idea of electability, along with Keith, BST.
Keith reckons that opposing policies supported by the public is the key to winning elections, despite the evidence to the contrary;
https://tribunemag.co.uk/2021/09/poll-65-of-british-public-supports-15-minimum-wage
He just does not get the Politics game, does he?
May as well ask you Albie as tyke's gone quiet, which labour leaders have you supported in the past apart from jc?
I admire old trade union leaders rather than actual Labour Party leaders .
People like Jimmy Reed , Joe Gormley etc etc
Dennis Skinner is possibly my all time Labour Party hero .
Respect for the 1980's Liverpool council and Derek Hatton under attack from Thatcher and their stance
Tommy Sheridan and the poll tax campaign in 1990 .
-
Just as you struggle with the idea of electability, along with Keith, BST.
Keith reckons that opposing policies supported by the public is the key to winning elections, despite the evidence to the contrary;
https://tribunemag.co.uk/2021/09/poll-65-of-british-public-supports-15-minimum-wage
He just does not get the Politics game, does he?
May as well ask you Albie as tyke's gone quiet, which labour leaders have you supported in the past apart from jc?
I admire old trade union leaders rather than actual Labour Party leaders .
People like Jimmy Reed , Joe Gormley etc etc
Dennis Skinner is possibly my all time Labour Party hero .
Respect for the 1980's Liverpool council and Derek Hatton under attack from Thatcher and their stance
Tommy Sheridan and the poll tax campaign in 1990 .
When you could actually respect the left and the Labour Party, so different from the modern day 'party' which grabs on to any student cause / bandwagon
-
Respect for Derek Hatton? Then, given the subject of this thread, I assume you will be screaming blue murder about the fact that he was hoyed out the Labour party on Corbyn's watch?
-
Respect for Derek Hatton? Then, given the subject of this thread, I assume you will be screaming blue murder about the fact that he was hoyed out the Labour party on Corbyn's watch?
What part of Liverpool Council 1980's escapes you Billy ?
I said I had respect for that .
I know folk doing the hard yards is difficult for you to get a handle on as an envelope in a letter box activist but nay mind .
-
Respect for Derek Hatton? Then, given the subject of this thread, I assume you will be screaming blue murder about the fact that he was hoyed out the Labour party on Corbyn's watch?
What part of Liverpool Council 1980's escapes you Billy ?
I said I had respect for that .
I know folk doing the hard yards is difficult for you to get a handle on as an envelope in a letter box activist but nay mind .
Always the jibes and insults when part time labour supporters run out of things to say, aye tyke
On your own admission you aint done nothin' for 20 years and didn't do a whole lot previous to that and you complain about them?????
you don't even vote for them half the time, maybe labour supporter is the wrong tag?
-
Respect for Derek Hatton? Then, given the subject of this thread, I assume you will be screaming blue murder about the fact that he was hoyed out the Labour party on Corbyn's watch?
What part of Liverpool Council 1980's escapes you Billy ?
I said I had respect for that .
I know folk doing the hard yards is difficult for you to get a handle on as an envelope in a letter box activist but nay mind .
Always the jibes and insults when part time labour supporters run out of things to say, aye tyke
On your own admission you aint done nothin' for 20 years and didn't do a whole lot previous to that and you complain about them?????
you don't even vote for them half the time, maybe labour supporter is the wrong tag?
A little hot under the collar Sydney this evening is it getting warmer as you come out of winter ?
At least Billy has the capacity to post envelopes inside letter boxes I'll give him that whilst unfortunately you yourself are reduced to insane rants on a third division clubs off topic section .
As a standing up barometer it's probably as low as it gets so the criticism towards myself is pretty much comedy gold .
I've stood up the things I believe in Sydney which isn't necessarily what the Labour Party believed in but if you want to be told how to think then that's up to you .
-
Respect for Derek Hatton? Then, given the subject of this thread, I assume you will be screaming blue murder about the fact that he was hoyed out the Labour party on Corbyn's watch?
What part of Liverpool Council 1980's escapes you Billy ?
I said I had respect for that .
I know folk doing the hard yards is difficult for you to get a handle on as an envelope in a letter box activist but nay mind .
Always the jibes and insults when part time labour supporters run out of things to say, aye tyke
On your own admission you aint done nothin' for 20 years and didn't do a whole lot previous to that and you complain about them?????
you don't even vote for them half the time, maybe labour supporter is the wrong tag?
A little hot under the collar Sydney this evening is it getting warmer as you come out of winter ?
At least Billy has the capacity to post envelopes inside letter boxes I'll give him that whilst unfortunately you yourself are reduced to insane rants on a third division clubs off topic section .
As a standing up barometer it's probably as low as it gets so the criticism towards myself is pretty much comedy gold .
I've stood up the things I believe in Sydney which isn't necessarily what the Labour Party believed in but if you want to be told how to think then that's up to you .
It's funny you're now standing up for bst only because I've called you out.
''Standing up for things'' there is nothing wrong with having a rant if you put the work in, tell about when you last did tyke?
You haven't actually said which other labour leader you supported?
It's never good to throw the first insult tyke because you get called out, and that's what I'm doing, you spend a good deal of your time criticising others that just get on with trying to remove an obnoxious government and all you appear to have on your record is chat. Am I right? you did say you'd done your bit and you did say it was over 20 years ago and you did say you did more with the union, am I right or am I right?
Try keeping your insults for the real enemy, conservatism, and at least vote to get them out.
You cannot store up credits for what you did decades ago and roll it out every now and again when you walk passed what is happening now.
-
Respect for Derek Hatton? Then, given the subject of this thread, I assume you will be screaming blue murder about the fact that he was hoyed out the Labour party on Corbyn's watch?
What part of Liverpool Council 1980's escapes you Billy ?
I said I had respect for that .
I know folk doing the hard yards is difficult for you to get a handle on as an envelope in a letter box activist but nay mind .
Always the jibes and insults when part time labour supporters run out of things to say, aye tyke
On your own admission you aint done nothin' for 20 years and didn't do a whole lot previous to that and you complain about them?????
you don't even vote for them half the time, maybe labour supporter is the wrong tag?
A little hot under the collar Sydney this evening is it getting warmer as you come out of winter ?
At least Billy has the capacity to post envelopes inside letter boxes I'll give him that whilst unfortunately you yourself are reduced to insane rants on a third division clubs off topic section .
As a standing up barometer it's probably as low as it gets so the criticism towards myself is pretty much comedy gold .
I've stood up the things I believe in Sydney which isn't necessarily what the Labour Party believed in but if you want to be told how to think then that's up to you .
It's funny you're now standing up for bst only because I've called you out.
''Standing up for things'' there is nothing wrong with having a rant if you put the work in, tell about when you last did tyke?
You haven't actually said which other labour leader you supported?
It's never good to throw the first insult tyke because you get called out, and that's what I'm doing, you spend a good deal of your time criticising others that just get on with trying to remove an obnoxious government and all you appear to have on your record is chat. Am I right? you did say you'd done your bit and you did say it was over 20 years ago and you did say you did more with the union, am I right or am I right?
Try keeping your insults for the real enemy, conservatism, and at least vote to get them out.
You cannot store up credits for what you did decades ago and roll it out every now and again when you walk passed what is happening now.
Sydney
I believe I've made what I believe in and what I don't pretty clear on here over the last couple of years .
I don't wake up on a morning and ask myself what I can do for the Labour Party today .
The Labour Party either comes more towards me or we have a particularly difficult relationship .
Most of my life we've had a particularly difficult relationship .
Kinnock didn't support us to any great satisfaction in the strike .
Blair took the party in another direction .
Brown wasn't inspiring neither was Ed .
Corbyn had me ready to do my bit and I joined Momentum to provide some support .
Unfortunately the brexit vote made my position within the group untenable , a pro EU group wasn't for me and I had some pretty robust arguments so I left .
Corbyn whilst having sound policies was a pretty weak leader and an open goal for the right to discredit .
I've tended to concentrate on helping people in a localised way if you will .
Trade Union rep or raising money for a local foodbank more recently , that kind of stuff .
That said I held a Labour Party membership for a good number of years but I'm not attracted enough to rejoin .
There's little point in re-joining these days in any case because most of the left fringe groups that would attract me would also see me thrown out of the party today .
I accept I've a minority position but none the less I maintain that the party would have to come towards me so at least I can hold my nose and vote for them which if the truth be known other than 2017 I've done .
Alas no more .e
-
Keith is really hitting home with Labour voters;
https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1444301885209518080
What a surprise!
Greens will be very grateful, and it is now clear that Keith's codger fondling comes at the expense of younger voters.
All this as Labour will need to row back on the decision to expel members for retrospective association with now expelled organisations. Illegal...Keith should have known really!
Unleash "m'learned friends"!
-
Keith is really hitting home with Labour voters;
https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1444301885209518080
What a surprise!
Greens will be very grateful, and it is now clear that Keith's codger fondling comes at the expense of younger voters.
All this as Labour will need to row back on the decision to expel members for retrospective association with now expelled organisations. Illegal...Keith should have known really!
Unleash "m'learned friends"!
So he's lost over 20% of a vote share that was walloped at the last election .
Cool !!
-
Tyke,I won't continue to quote the whole page but I think this is at the heart of your politics
''The Labour Party either comes more towards me or we have a particularly difficult relationship''
I don't see how any group would be able to accommodate the whims and foibles of every individual and the answer is still the same if you want to get rid of the obnoxious government you have to vote them out.
I think what you are also saying is you haven't voted labour very often.
-
Tyke,I won't continue to quote the whole page but I think this is at the heart of your politics
''The Labour Party either comes more towards me or we have a particularly difficult relationship''
I don't see how any group would be able to accommodate the whims and foibles of every individual and the answer is still the same if you want to get rid of the obnoxious government you have to vote them out.
I think what you are also saying is you haven't voted labour very often.
I've held my nose and voted Labour Sydney every election other than probably 83 when to be honest I knew nowt as a young man and in 2017 when it was a pleasure to tick the box .
So your assumption is flawed .
As I've repeated there's holding your nose which I've done most of my life and total sell out to this current clown who is not fit for purpose in any shape or form .
It doesn't bother me he won't ever be the next P.M. .
-
Tyke,I won't continue to quote the whole page but I think this is at the heart of your politics
''The Labour Party either comes more towards me or we have a particularly difficult relationship''
I don't see how any group would be able to accommodate the whims and foibles of every individual and the answer is still the same if you want to get rid of the obnoxious government you have to vote them out.
I think what you are also saying is you haven't voted labour very often.
I've held my nose and voted Labour Sydney every election other than probably 83 when to be honest I knew nowt as a young man and in 2017 when it was a pleasure to tick the box .
So your assumption is flawed .
As I've repeated there's holding your nose which I've done most of my life and total sell out to this current clown who is not fit for purpose in any shape or form .
It doesn't bother me he won't ever be the next P.M. .
I make assumptions on available information tyke.
Maybe you should step up your work in the foodbank area as the tories have increased foodbank across the UK by around 1200%
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycbgHM1mI0k
-
It's genuinely fascinating that we are having this discussion on a thread about Ken Loach.
My take, always, is that in a FPTP electoral system you vote to get the least bad outcome. If I lived in a LD/Tory marginal, I would vote LD without a moment's hesitation.
Loach has a different take, which Tyke now seems to share. In 2015 when it seemed on election Day that Labour had a genuine chance of unseating the Tories, Loach headed a party that actively campaigned against Labour.
The argument is that principles come above pragmatism. That you follow your true beliefs, and if that results in a right wing Govt, that is someone else's fault, not yours.
I truly do not and will never understand that attitude. It is, in my opinion selfishness and egotistical indulgence of the highest order.
Argue for what you believe in always, of course. But make damn sure you vote in a way that tries to get the least bad outcome.
-
The point about Loach, BST, is that he was criticizing the direction of travel under Keith.....something you seem relaxed about?
With the news that Keith is writing for Murdoch in the Sun tomorrow, trade Unions will be further alienated.
In addition, the expulsions under his watch were unlawful, and could result in expensive settlements after legal determination;
https://skwawkbox.org/2021/09/30/exclusive-bakers-pres-hodson-labour-told-me-expulsions-unlawful-video/
All none too rosy, in the overall scheme of things!
-
Albie.
I'd be happier taking lectures about Labour's direction from folk who hadn't campaigned and voted against them in previous elections.
-
PS.
Skwakbox? Really?
-
Albie.
I'd be happier taking lectures about Labour's direction from folk who hadn't campaigned and voted against them in previous elections.
Does that include the centre right of the Labour Party Billy who pulled against Corbyn in two successive elections and ensured a Tory government .
I'll take no lessons from your tribe either fella .
-
Tyke,I won't continue to quote the whole page but I think this is at the heart of your politics
''The Labour Party either comes more towards me or we have a particularly difficult relationship''
I don't see how any group would be able to accommodate the whims and foibles of every individual and the answer is still the same if you want to get rid of the obnoxious government you have to vote them out.
I think what you are also saying is you haven't voted labour very often.
I've held my nose and voted Labour Sydney every election other than probably 83 when to be honest I knew nowt as a young man and in 2017 when it was a pleasure to tick the box .
So your assumption is flawed .
As I've repeated there's holding your nose which I've done most of my life and total sell out to this current clown who is not fit for purpose in any shape or form .
It doesn't bother me he won't ever be the next P.M. .
I make assumptions on available information tyke.
Maybe you should step up your work in the foodbank area as the tories have increased foodbank across the UK by around 1200%
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycbgHM1mI0k
Perhaps if you felt so strongly about the UK today you too could put your hand to the wheel .
-
I try to do all I can where I am at the time tyke, I even vote to get conservative governments out.