Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: normal rules on September 23, 2021, 08:57:22 pm
-
Bp and shell announcing today that some of their filling stations will not be receiving resupply for a while.
The govt are saying not to panic.
We have just returned from a trip to Suffolk and Essex and I’ve seen (today) diesel as high as £1.44.9 per litre. Which I think is as high as it’s been for a long time. (Shell garage at services on a14 /a140 junction)
The continuing covid issue seems to have smoke screened the increasing price of fuel and I can’t help but think that without the distraction, there would be protests once again.
-
Not good news NR, unfortunately it's not good nor news.
''This is what market failure looks like. There’s a shortage of HGV drivers in an economy that relies on moving mountains of heavy goods. Road haulage companies complain bitterly that they can’t recruit; operators are turning business away for lack of drivers.
Yet at the same time there are large numbers of the unskilled, especially the young, who need training to get a job, or an upgrade from zero-hours, low-paid work to something better. Easy, you might think, to connect the two – but it’s not happening, according to last week’s report from the House of Commons transport committee.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/02/industrial-failure-uk-lorry-trade-truck-driver-squalor-low-pay-no-unions
Aug 2016
The Road Haulage Association says it is short of 60,000 drivers, with an ageing workforce shedding another 40,000 by next year.
We'll Get the Country Moving
Vote Tory
-
The majority of the shortage is due to training centres closing during the Covid crisis/lock downs.
Bloody Tory Government- why couldn’t they have just kept the country moving?
-
There are many reasons we have a shortage. Retirement, covid, brexit, pay, and just plainly that people don’t want to drive lorries. I did it for 6 weeks in between careers. Shit hours, lonely work, unhealthy, crap pay.
-
There are many reasons we have a shortage. Retirement, covid, brexit, pay, and just plainly that people don’t want to drive lorries. I did it for 6 weeks in between careers. Shit hours, lonely work, unhealthy, crap pay.
Nothing like a first hand account NR, when you read about the life of a trucker it's like they are lepers, no facilities having to take a shit in a layby, nowhere to have a shower, sleeping in the cab and low pay to boot.
This has been going on for years, the excerpt and link above I posted is 5 years old and shows the government has done absolutely nothing.
Brexit, Covid and the downturn in the economy probably helped the government by masking over the problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdHg4QEmBvk
-
The average age of a trucker in 2021 is 55. It’s not the most appealing of jobs. I can’t see there would be many 21 yr olds chomping at the bit to do this for a living . And the way drivers that have gone back to the eu are reported to have done so because they have better facilities in Europe for such and better pay too .
-
Not to mention the tax benefits many used have been closed on top of all that.
You have to laugh though, BP closed 5 garages for lack of fuel accross the country. That gets reported and we have mass panic. Ridiculous.
I have to get my fuel from BP too (fuelcard) but most won't use their garages given the price.
-
The average age of a trucker in 2031 is 55. It’s not the most appealing of jobs. I can’t see there would be many 21 yr olds chomping at the bit to do this for a living . And the way drivers that have gone back to the eu are reported to have done so because they have better facilities in Europe for such and better pay too .
It's symptomatic of a very log term structural problem that we have in our economy and society. Will Hutton wrote about it thirty years ago in "The State We're In" and not much has changed since. The basic issue is that our economy is run on the principle that shareholder value is sacrosanct. Companies have a duty to maximise the returns to shareholders. They don't have a duty to consider the strategic national interest, or the conditions of their workers, or the effect that their working practices have on people's lives. So, understandably, companies typically make decisions that maximise their share prices and dividends.
This explains why we are having such severe problems with the gas price spike. Nowhere else in Europe is having this problem to the same level, because they all have bigger stores of gas, precisely to help them ride out short term price spikes.
We used to have large stores. But 10 years ago, Centrica cut its storage capability by 70%, on the grounds that it was costing them too much and hitting profits. Short term company interest over long term national strategic interest.
There are two ways you can curb the power of companies to make these decisions only in their own interests. The first is strong unions. Ones that can hold companies to task over pay and working conditions. So that people have better work-life balance and receive a fairer slice of the pie. But unions have been emasculated for 40 years. So that control on companies has gone. The second is Government regulation to force companies to act in the national interest. But we've lived in an age where Governments of both colours have wanted to rein back their involvement and let the market get on with it. And this is where we end up.
If anyone is interested in this, I can't recommend Hutton's book highly enough. It's still as relevant now as when he wrote it.
-
Just had to queue for fuel, there's a lot of unnecessary panic buying going on. I was genuinely panicking as I was low and I need a full tank to drive to London this weekend.
Aren't a lot of lorry drivers from Eastern Europe these days because British workers, understandably don't fancy doing it anymore? I imagine Brexit is at least part of the problem. And the effect of Covid all on top of the underlying structural problems.
It's just typical of the UK, there's an absolute unwillingness to do any long term strategic planning in anything. It all runs on rubber bands and safety pins. When a rubber band snaps, we're screwed.
-
This winter could be very cold for a lot of people.
-
And hot off the press
''The UK transport secretary, Grant Shapps, said he would “move heaven and earth” to solve the nationwide shortage of truck drivers that threatens fuel supplies at some petrol stations, adding that motorists should not panic as the problem would be “smoothed out relatively quickly”
Right then just leave it to Shapps.
-
The army going to be called in to drive some lorries by some accounts.
-
The average age of a trucker in 2031 is 55. It’s not the most appealing of jobs. I can’t see there would be many 21 yr olds chomping at the bit to do this for a living . And the way drivers that have gone back to the eu are reported to have done so because they have better facilities in Europe for such and better pay too .
It's symptomatic of a very log term structural problem that we have in our economy and society. Will Hutton wrote about it thirty years ago in "The State We're In" and not much has changed since. The basic issue is that our economy is run on the principle that shareholder value is sacrosanct. Companies have a duty to maximise the returns to shareholders. They don't have a duty to consider the strategic national interest, or the conditions of their workers, or the effect that their working practices have on people's lives. So, understandably, companies typically make decisions that maximise their share prices and dividends.
This explains why we are having such severe problems with the gas price spike. Nowhere else in Europe is having this problem to the same level, because they all have bigger stores of gas, precisely to help them ride out short term price spikes.
We used to have large stores. But 10 years ago, Centrica cut its storage capability by 70%, on the grounds that it was costing them too much and hitting profits. Short term company interest over long term national strategic interest.
There are two ways you can curb the power of companies to make these decisions only in their own interests. The first is strong unions. Ones that can hold companies to task over pay and working conditions. So that people have better work-life balance and receive a fairer slice of the pie. But unions have been emasculated for 40 years. So that control on companies has gone. The second is Government regulation to force companies to act in the national interest. But we've lived in an age where Governments of both colours have wanted to rein back their involvement and let the market get on with it. And this is where we end up.
If anyone is interested in this, I can't recommend Hutton's book highly enough. It's still as relevant now as when he wrote it.
In the late 70s to mid 80s we were contracted to Northern Gas to install telemetry equipment. This allowed them to manage their gas supplies and stores gas in their large high pressure mains as well as the large gas holders.
They did this because British Gas asked how much gas they would require and charge them accordingly. If there was a severe winter or cold snap and they had to get more gas then the price for the extra supplies went up dramatically. This had the effect of making Northern Gas very aware of what the costs were if they underestimated demand by much.
Surely the same principles apply now but the extra charge is just lumped on to the customer.
-
Every single petrol station I drove past on my way home from Leeds today was rammed. Motorway stations included.
Nation full of bottlers.
-
My op was misleading, a bit like most of the daily papers, as there is no fuel shortage per say. Just a shortage of drivers that is affecting a handful of filling stations.
Chaos round where we live with ques at every station.
Madness.
-
The average age of a trucker in 2031 is 55. It’s not the most appealing of jobs. I can’t see there would be many 21 yr olds chomping at the bit to do this for a living . And the way drivers that have gone back to the eu are reported to have done so because they have better facilities in Europe for such and better pay too .
It's symptomatic of a very log term structural problem that we have in our economy and society. Will Hutton wrote about it thirty years ago in "The State We're In" and not much has changed since. The basic issue is that our economy is run on the principle that shareholder value is sacrosanct. Companies have a duty to maximise the returns to shareholders. They don't have a duty to consider the strategic national interest, or the conditions of their workers, or the effect that their working practices have on people's lives. So, understandably, companies typically make decisions that maximise their share prices and dividends.
This explains why we are having such severe problems with the gas price spike. Nowhere else in Europe is having this problem to the same level, because they all have bigger stores of gas, precisely to help them ride out short term price spikes.
We used to have large stores. But 10 years ago, Centrica cut its storage capability by 70%, on the grounds that it was costing them too much and hitting profits. Short term company interest over long term national strategic interest.
There are two ways you can curb the power of companies to make these decisions only in their own interests. The first is strong unions. Ones that can hold companies to task over pay and working conditions. So that people have better work-life balance and receive a fairer slice of the pie. But unions have been emasculated for 40 years. So that control on companies has gone. The second is Government regulation to force companies to act in the national interest. But we've lived in an age where Governments of both colours have wanted to rein back their involvement and let the market get on with it. And this is where we end up.
If anyone is interested in this, I can't recommend Hutton's book highly enough. It's still as relevant now as when he wrote it.
My God you are such a hypocrite .
So now you want strong trade unions to keep the fuel in your car .
Funny that , you did nowt but slate the unions and went back to the winter of 1979 to make your point in a debate we had months ago .
-
''Supply chain crisis: Tories poised to U-turn on foreign worker visas
Boris Johnson believed to have overruled ministers unwilling to compromise on post-Brexit immigration as forecourt queues mount''
Looks like Reverse Brexit on the way, fancy that aye?
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/sep/24/supply-chain-crisis-tories-poised-turn-foreign-worker-visas
-
''Supply chain crisis: Tories poised to U-turn on foreign worker visas
Boris Johnson believed to have overruled ministers unwilling to compromise on post-Brexit immigration as forecourt queues mount''
Looks like Reverse Brexit on the way, fancy that aye?
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/sep/24/supply-chain-crisis-tories-poised-turn-foreign-worker-visas
Reverse brexit , wow thats an incredible statement even by your standards Sydney .
The jobs crisis in certain sectors and free movement are two completely different things .
You might also want to acknowledge that the HGV situation is also a European problem too , in short nobody in the numbers that the industry requires no longer want to do the job and who can blame them .
As a solid Labour man that you claim to be surely you don't wish to see migrant labour exploited do you to fill the gaps ?
Personally I think the migrants are in a good position to be attracted to the job crisis rhetoric .
Yeh we'll come but not for the minimum wage .
They are in an extremely good position and I sincerely hope they know that if visas are to be given to EU migrants .
-
''Supply chain crisis: Tories poised to U-turn on foreign worker visas
Boris Johnson believed to have overruled ministers unwilling to compromise on post-Brexit immigration as forecourt queues mount''
Looks like Reverse Brexit on the way, fancy that aye?
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/sep/24/supply-chain-crisis-tories-poised-turn-foreign-worker-visas
Reverse brexit , wow thats an incredible statement even by your standards Sydney .
The jobs crisis in certain sectors and free movement are two completely different things .
You might also want to acknowledge that the HGV situation is also a European problem too , in short nobody in the numbers that the industry requires no longer want to do the job and who can blame them .
As a solid Labour man that you claim to be surely you don't wish to see migrant labour exploited do you to fill the gaps ?
Personally I think the migrants are in a good position to be attracted to the job crisis rhetoric .
Yeh we'll come but not for the minimum wage .
They are in an extremely good position and I sincerely hope they know that if visas are to be given to EU migrants .
typical tory supporter all mouth and trousers, read the link at the top of the thread I posted then get back to me
-
''Supply chain crisis: Tories poised to U-turn on foreign worker visas
Boris Johnson believed to have overruled ministers unwilling to compromise on post-Brexit immigration as forecourt queues mount''
Looks like Reverse Brexit on the way, fancy that aye?
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/sep/24/supply-chain-crisis-tories-poised-turn-foreign-worker-visas
Reverse brexit , wow thats an incredible statement even by your standards Sydney .
The jobs crisis in certain sectors and free movement are two completely different things .
You might also want to acknowledge that the HGV situation is also a European problem too , in short nobody in the numbers that the industry requires no longer want to do the job and who can blame them .
As a solid Labour man that you claim to be surely you don't wish to see migrant labour exploited do you to fill the gaps ?
Personally I think the migrants are in a good position to be attracted to the job crisis rhetoric .
Yeh we'll come but not for the minimum wage .
They are in an extremely good position and I sincerely hope they know that if visas are to be given to EU migrants .
typical tory supporter all mouth and trousers, read the link at the top of the thread I posted then get back to me
All mouth and trousers wow .
From someone who has seen the impact of free movement as opposed to sunning himself on Bondi Beach .
Your a real Labour man aren't you ?
-
I see you don't like the insults tyke?
To tell the truth I'm sick of hearing your excuses why you supported a bedrock right wing tory proposal which would harm the economy and by default workers rights.
I'm sick of hearing your excuses and explanations which ultimately result in tory government.
You haven't despite all your protestations told me how your plan for world domination by the left wing of the labour party is going to come about, so instead of the insults and excuses get a bit real about the situation that effects millions of ordinary britons queuing for food and get your union buddies to sort out zero hours contracts then come back and discuss the path to government.
2 million poor people in britain while you luxuriate in a fanciful 'ooh I dorn't like that'
''14 million people
Approximately 14 million people are in poverty in the UK – more than one in five of the population, including 4 million children and 2 million pensioners, up by 400,000 and 300,000 respectively over the past five years.6 Feb 2020''
-
I see you don't like the insults tyke?
To tell the truth I'm sick of hearing your excuses why you supported a bedrock right wing tory proposal which would harm the economy and by default workers rights.
I'm sick of hearing your excuses and explanations which ultimately result in tory government.
You haven't despite all your protestations told me how your plan for world domination by the left wing of the labour party is going to come about, so instead of the insults and excuses get a bit real about the situation that effects millions of ordinary britons queuing for food and get your union buddies to sort out zero hours contracts then come back and discuss the path to government.
2 million poor people in britain while you luxuriate in a fanciful 'ooh I dorn't like that'
''14 million people
Approximately 14 million people are in poverty in the UK – more than one in five of the population, including 4 million children and 2 million pensioners, up by 400,000 and 300,000 respectively over the past five years.6 Feb 2020''
If you are going to throw accusations of supporting Tories in my direction Sydney you are going to provoke a robust reaction .
The left that I come from were against the EU
when Johnson and Mogg were still wearing silly hats and carrying hockey sticks at expensive schools .
Your point about Trade Unions is an interesting one , New Labour changed nothing from the anti union legislation brought in by Thatcher , Blair even boasted about having the strongest anti union laws when pitching to European businesses .
The last Labour PM brought private companies in to job centres to kick people back to work .
They were paid on a targets reached basis so you can figure out the culture surrounding how they went about that with many people signed fit to work when many weren't .
Their answer to fighting crime in working class areas where drug dealing and anti social behaviour was rife due to New Labour not addressing the lack of decent jobs post Thatcher was to hire Plastic Bobby's .
No wonder the heartlands turned against them .
Your stripe of the Labour Party are the closet thing you'll get to the Tories .
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
You don't have a clue do you tyke, I've told you before about the insults the same as anyone on the forum, you throw em I give em back, like for like.
If you want a proper conversation keep your insults to yourself.
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?
Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .
Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .
Rayner could very well tempt me back .
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?
Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .
Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .
Rayner could very well tempt me back .
And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils? Ah, the high price of principles!
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?
Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .
Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .
Rayner could very well tempt me back .
And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils? Ah, the high price of principles!
Depends what your view of two evils is .
As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .
If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .
If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?
Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .
Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .
Rayner could very well tempt me back .
And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils? Ah, the high price of principles!
Depends what your view of two evils is .
As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .
If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .
If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .
'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one? If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country. If not then..............
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going. Tell you something, neither do I right now. But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM. No, you do that from within. You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
The above I know from personal practical experience.
-
Mp Tobias Elwood has suggested utilising hundreds of Afghan refugees who drove lorries in their own country to drive UK HGV’s.
He has obv never driven in Afghanistan.
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?
Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .
Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .
Rayner could very well tempt me back .
And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils? Ah, the high price of principles!
Depends what your view of two evils is .
As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .
If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .
If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .
'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one? If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country. If not then..............
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going. Tell you something, neither do I right now. But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM. No, you do that from within. You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
The above I know from personal practical experience.
My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .
The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .
I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .
I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .
I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?
Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .
Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .
Rayner could very well tempt me back .
And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils? Ah, the high price of principles!
Depends what your view of two evils is .
As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .
If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .
If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .
'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one? If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country. If not then..............
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going. Tell you something, neither do I right now. But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM. No, you do that from within. You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
The above I know from personal practical experience.
My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .
The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .
I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .
I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .
I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .
If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority. If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins. In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?
Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .
Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .
Rayner could very well tempt me back .
And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils? Ah, the high price of principles!
Depends what your view of two evils is .
As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .
If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .
If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .
'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one? If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country. If not then..............
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going. Tell you something, neither do I right now. But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM. No, you do that from within. You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
The above I know from personal practical experience.
My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .
The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .
I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .
I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .
I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .
If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority. If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins. In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!
It's down to the Labour Party to attract me enough to vote for them .
They have absolutely no right to my vote otherwise .
No amount of guilt tripping will work on me .
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?
Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .
Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .
Rayner could very well tempt me back .
And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils? Ah, the high price of principles!
Depends what your view of two evils is .
As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .
If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .
If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .
'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one? If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country. If not then..............
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going. Tell you something, neither do I right now. But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM. No, you do that from within. You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
The above I know from personal practical experience.
My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .
The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .
I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .
I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .
I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .
If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority. If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins. In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!
It's down to the Labour Party to attract me enough to vote for them .
They have absolutely no right to my vote otherwise .
No amount of guilt tripping will work on me .
And, by default, the Tories do?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkZSeJ6-Gu4
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?
Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .
Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .
Rayner could very well tempt me back .
And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils? Ah, the high price of principles!
Depends what your view of two evils is .
As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .
If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .
If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .
'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one? If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country. If not then..............
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going. Tell you something, neither do I right now. But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM. No, you do that from within. You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
The above I know from personal practical experience.
My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .
The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .
I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .
I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .
I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .
If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority. If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins. In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!
It's down to the Labour Party to attract me enough to vote for them .
They have absolutely no right to my vote otherwise .
No amount of guilt tripping will work on me .
And, by default, the Tories do?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkZSeJ6-Gu4
To tell the truth I've seen no evidence Keith and his henchmen even want to defeat the Tories themselves .
They seem more focused on having total control of the party above everything else and even want to load the dice in choosing their successors .
The ex leader who changed the way the party elects it's leader now wants to return to the older model .
And you believe these people are a better option than the Tories ?
The very same people who would sooner throw its elected leader under a bus and plot against him rather than support him at a GE .
These people are supposed to be worth my vote ?
There's the width of a fag paper between Tory and the current Labour party when it comes to fit for government .
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?
Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .
Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .
Rayner could very well tempt me back .
And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils? Ah, the high price of principles!
Depends what your view of two evils is .
As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .
If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .
If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .
'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one? If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country. If not then..............
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going. Tell you something, neither do I right now. But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM. No, you do that from within. You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
The above I know from personal practical experience.
My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .
The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .
I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .
I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .
I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .
If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority. If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins. In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!
It's down to the Labour Party to attract me enough to vote for them .
They have absolutely no right to my vote otherwise .
No amount of guilt tripping will work on me .
And, by default, the Tories do?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkZSeJ6-Gu4
To tell the truth I've seen no evidence Keith and his henchmen even want to defeat the Tories themselves .
They seem more focused on having total control of the party above everything else and even want to load the dice in choosing their successors .
The ex leader who changed the way the party elects it's leader now wants to return to the older model .
And you believe these people are a better option than the Tories ?
The very same people who would sooner throw its elected leader under a bus and plot against him rather than support him at a GE .
These people are supposed to be worth my vote ?
There's the width of a fag paper between Tory and the current Labour party when it comes to fit for government .
Yes, I believe they are better than the current gang of Tories, I'm surprised you don't. And as I said earlier, the only way to bring about change is from within. Criticising from the outside will achieve nothing other than the continuation of the status quo.
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?
I accept people are entitled to their tribal position, you cannot argue against a personal opinion but you'll never find where I have used insults instead of an argument, first at any rate.
-
Tyke you complain a lot about the labour party and you complain about blair a lot, where was the left candidate when blair won the leadership?
This is not to start another endless argument but when you say labour have to 'earn your vote' do you do anything within the labour party, do you canvass for votes to you work within the machine at all?
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?
Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .
Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .
Rayner could very well tempt me back .
And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils? Ah, the high price of principles!
Depends what your view of two evils is .
As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .
If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .
If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .
'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one? If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country. If not then..............
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going. Tell you something, neither do I right now. But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM. No, you do that from within. You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
The above I know from personal practical experience.
My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .
The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .
I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .
I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .
I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .
If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority. If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins. In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!
It's down to the Labour Party to attract me enough to vote for them .
They have absolutely no right to my vote otherwise .
No amount of guilt tripping will work on me .
And, by default, the Tories do?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkZSeJ6-Gu4
To tell the truth I've seen no evidence Keith and his henchmen even want to defeat the Tories themselves .
They seem more focused on having total control of the party above everything else and even want to load the dice in choosing their successors .
The ex leader who changed the way the party elects it's leader now wants to return to the older model .
And you believe these people are a better option than the Tories ?
The very same people who would sooner throw its elected leader under a bus and plot against him rather than support him at a GE .
These people are supposed to be worth my vote ?
There's the width of a fag paper between Tory and the current Labour party when it comes to fit for government .
Yes, I believe they are better than the current gang of Tories, I'm surprised you don't. And as I said earlier, the only way to bring about change is from within. Criticising from the outside will achieve nothing other than the continuation of the status quo.
But I see the Tories and the centre of the Labour Party as the status quo , do you see the problem I have here ?.
Keith has broken every promise he stood on to get elected which makes him no different to Johnson .
Why should I believe a word Keith says anymore than I believe what Johnson spouts ? .
Why should I be encouraged to vote for someone who wanted a second referendum because he didn't much care for the result of the binding first one ? .
I could get on board with Rayner who isn't afraid of using a bit of class warfare to make her point and is extremely authentic as a Labour working class MP .
I can see a significant difference between Tory and Labour under Rayner and that's important to me .
Keith could sit at the side of Johnson and nobody would be surprised .
It's high time Labour elected a women as leader and with her fesitiness she'd connect today .
With her early life she'd attract the vote that feels excluded in politics .
I like her , it goes along way .
-
I said on the other thread you cannot argue against personal opinion.
-
Tyke you complain a lot about the labour party and you complain about blair a lot, where was the left candidate when blair won the leadership?
This is not to start another endless argument but when you say labour have to 'earn your vote' do you do anything within the labour party, do you canvass for votes to you work within the machine at all?
The candidate on the left to Blair was absolutely non existent .
Blair was a very clever bloke who packaged New Labour very well and was a man of the times .
The problem today is that inequality and the power the establishment have is far far greater than what it was in 1997 .
This country needs massive change and in my opinion the centre of the Labour Party have neither the enthusiasm , the will , the policies or even the vision to change anything of note .
There's little point to them .
You need a pair and some radical policies to drive the change needed .
All I see is Keith getting in to bed with the usual suspects to gain power without clout .
Yes I've campaigned for the party during the Thatcher years .
I was active in the poll tax era including the riots in central London .
I was active at Wapping in the mid 80's also .
I fought the fight of course during the strike .
I've done my bit for the party but was always more trade union minded than anything else which at one time was hand in hand with the Labour movement .
When Blair came on the scene I ceased because I wasn't wanted anymore so I let em get on with it although I voted for him .
I care passionately about working people and it's my opinion the centre of the Labour Party doesn't or hasn't ever done enough for them .
It's done some things but nothing like it should have done .
Hence my distaste for the direction Keith is taking the party .
-
A lot of messageboards on the motorways coming home saying either no diesel or HGV fuel only for service stations.
-
Tyke you complain a lot about the labour party and you complain about blair a lot, where was the left candidate when blair won the leadership?
This is not to start another endless argument but when you say labour have to 'earn your vote' do you do anything within the labour party, do you canvass for votes to you work within the machine at all?
The candidate on the left to Blair was absolutely non existent .
Blair was a very clever bloke who packaged New Labour very well and was a man of the times .
The problem today is that inequality and the power the establishment have is far far greater than what it was in 1997 .
This country needs massive change and in my opinion the centre of the Labour Party have neither the enthusiasm , the will , the policies or even the vision to change anything of note .
There's little point to them .
You need a pair and some radical policies to drive the change needed .
All I see is Keith getting in to bed with the usual suspects to gain power without clout .
Yes I've campaigned for the party during the Thatcher years .
I was active in the poll tax era including the riots in central London .
I was active at Wapping in the mid 80's also .
I fought the fight of course during the strike .
I've done my bit for the party but was always more trade union minded than anything else which at one time was hand in hand with the Labour movement .
When Blair came on the scene I ceased because I wasn't wanted anymore so I let em get on with it although I voted for him .
I care passionately about working people and it's my opinion the centre of the Labour Party doesn't or hasn't ever done enough for them .
It's done some things but nothing like it should have done .
Hence my distaste for the direction Keith is taking the party .
Not being smart here but it's difficult to complain about Blair when according you there wasn't another horse in the race?
The problem today is that inequality and the power the establishment have is far far greater than what it was in 1997 .
Agreed, how can you fix this from opposition?
This country needs massive change and in my opinion the centre of the Labour Party have neither the enthusiasm , the will , the policies or even the vision to change anything of note .
Agreed, how can you fix this from opposition?
You need a pair and some radical policies to drive the change needed .
Then you'll probably never get into power.
All I see is Keith getting in to bed with the usual suspects to gain power without clout .
You still haven't said how you are going to get power, politics very rarely jumps from far left to far right or or massively in any direction without a revolution and unfortunately the right have the upper hand atm using a mixture of R & L policies.
I care passionately about working people and it's my opinion the centre of the Labour Party doesn't or hasn't ever done enough for them .
You're not Robinson Crusoe nor the only lefty in the village.
-
Tyke you complain a lot about the labour party and you complain about blair a lot, where was the left candidate when blair won the leadership?
This is not to start another endless argument but when you say labour have to 'earn your vote' do you do anything within the labour party, do you canvass for votes to you work within the machine at all?
The candidate on the left to Blair was absolutely non existent .
Blair was a very clever bloke who packaged New Labour very well and was a man of the times .
The problem today is that inequality and the power the establishment have is far far greater than what it was in 1997 .
This country needs massive change and in my opinion the centre of the Labour Party have neither the enthusiasm , the will , the policies or even the vision to change anything of note .
There's little point to them .
You need a pair and some radical policies to drive the change needed .
All I see is Keith getting in to bed with the usual suspects to gain power without clout .
Yes I've campaigned for the party during the Thatcher years .
I was active in the poll tax era including the riots in central London .
I was active at Wapping in the mid 80's also .
I fought the fight of course during the strike .
I've done my bit for the party but was always more trade union minded than anything else which at one time was hand in hand with the Labour movement .
When Blair came on the scene I ceased because I wasn't wanted anymore so I let em get on with it although I voted for him .
I care passionately about working people and it's my opinion the centre of the Labour Party doesn't or hasn't ever done enough for them .
It's done some things but nothing like it should have done .
Hence my distaste for the direction Keith is taking the party .
Not being smart here but it's difficult to complain about Blair when according you there wasn't another horse in the race?
The problem today is that inequality and the power the establishment have is far far greater than what it was in 1997 .
Agreed, how can you fix this from opposition?
This country needs massive change and in my opinion the centre of the Labour Party have neither the enthusiasm , the will , the policies or even the vision to change anything of note .
Agreed, how can you fix this from opposition?
You need a pair and some radical policies to drive the change needed .
Then you'll probably never get into power.
All I see is Keith getting in to bed with the usual suspects to gain power without clout .
You still haven't said how you are going to get power, politics very rarely jumps from far left to far right or or massively in any direction without a revolution and unfortunately the right have the upper hand atm using a mixture of R & L policies.
I care passionately about working people and it's my opinion the centre of the Labour Party doesn't or hasn't ever done enough for them .
You're not Robinson Crusoe nor the only lefty in the village.
Sydney .
To be left wing is to believe in common ownership , to believe in owning the means of production .
So to not believe in those things in my opinion is to be a believer in super capitalism , super capitalism equates to someone gaining at another person's expense in a game of dog eat dog .
Now bear with me .
The country is not and never will be a socialist state and I understand that perfectly well .
What it can be is a mixed economy which isn't by any means hard left ( your words ) .
You make the argument that certain industries are better value for the citizens of this country , energy and the railways would be perfectly reasonable examples .
Of course you are going to be killed by the Tory press but you present the facts to the electorate that win over the public .
This wouldn't be so difficult to do given the present energy crisis and the ever increasing costs placed on our commuters to deliver shareholder profit .
My compromise with who owns the means of production is to decide that everyone owns it , so if everyone owns it then by definition everyone has a voice .
These are extremely sellable policies given the state of the nation and the ever increasing wealth gap .
That's about as left as I get .
To do nothing from a centrist Labour position is to agree with the status quo , if you can't beat em then join em if you will which seems pretty pointless to me .
I find the centre of the Labour Party a set of lame ducks who settle for the easy ride in order to attempt to gain power .
It could be said that if they agree with super capitalism then they may as well sit on the other side of the house .
The only people at least in my opinion who are driving change are the left and this seems to collide head on with the present owners of the Labour Party .
Do you yourself believe in some common ownership and the means of production owned by everyone Sydney ? .
I'd be interested to know other than what we already know in that you are anti Tory and left wing .
What's your beliefs and convictions ?
-
Tyke I would regard myself as a political socialist and abhor the sell off of state property to carpet baggers, but unfortunately as in Australia those of us that think this way have been outflanked. But it has been a steady chipping away from the council house sell offs to Royal Mail. I have had to temper and change my view over the years about how to attain government because labour governments are hard to come by and as I said in my post you can do very little from opposition and if you go for the big ticket socialist policies in this climate you'll get smashed.
Eternal vigilance ............... the job will never be completed but you have to start somewhere and you have to get power to do it, standing on your dick and allowing a tory government another term is not the way.
-
Sydney how strongly do you believe that? Are you a shareholder? Are your pensions invested in companies?
-
Sydney how strongly do you believe that? Are you a shareholder? Are your pensions invested in companies?
I don't have any pension/s and I haven't drawn a state pension to which I'm entitled to.
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?
Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .
Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .
Rayner could very well tempt me back .
And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils? Ah, the high price of principles!
Depends what your view of two evils is .
As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .
If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .
If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .
'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one? If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country. If not then..............
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going. Tell you something, neither do I right now. But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM. No, you do that from within. You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
The above I know from personal practical experience.
My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .
The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .
I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .
I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .
I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .
If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority. If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins. In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!
It's down to the Labour Party to attract me enough to vote for them .
They have absolutely no right to my vote otherwise .
No amount of guilt tripping will work on me .
And, by default, the Tories do?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkZSeJ6-Gu4
To tell the truth I've seen no evidence Keith and his henchmen even want to defeat the Tories themselves .
They seem more focused on having total control of the party above everything else and even want to load the dice in choosing their successors .
The ex leader who changed the way the party elects it's leader now wants to return to the older model .
And you believe these people are a better option than the Tories ?
The very same people who would sooner throw its elected leader under a bus and plot against him rather than support him at a GE .
These people are supposed to be worth my vote ?
There's the width of a fag paper between Tory and the current Labour party when it comes to fit for government .
Yes, I believe they are better than the current gang of Tories, I'm surprised you don't. And as I said earlier, the only way to bring about change is from within. Criticising from the outside will achieve nothing other than the continuation of the status quo.
But I see the Tories and the centre of the Labour Party as the status quo , do you see the problem I have here ?.
Keith has broken every promise he stood on to get elected which makes him no different to Johnson .
Why should I believe a word Keith says anymore than I believe what Johnson spouts ? .
Why should I be encouraged to vote for someone who wanted a second referendum because he didn't much care for the result of the binding first one ? .
I could get on board with Rayner who isn't afraid of using a bit of class warfare to make her point and is extremely authentic as a Labour working class MP .
I can see a significant difference between Tory and Labour under Rayner and that's important to me .
Keith could sit at the side of Johnson and nobody would be surprised .
It's high time Labour elected a women as leader and with her fesitiness she'd connect today .
With her early life she'd attract the vote that feels excluded in politics .
I like her , it goes along way .
Tyke, if you continue to want what you want without being prepared to compromise then you'll NEVER get what you want, nor anything near to it.
There are things that I would like to change, that I accept will NEVER change, EVER. There are things that I would like to change that I can see changing, even under Starmer. When people see those changes and the benefits they bring to 'the man in the street' then the opportunity will be there for a press for further changes, again for the better.
But none of that will happen if people like you keep the Tories in power, EVER!
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?
Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .
Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .
Rayner could very well tempt me back .
And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils? Ah, the high price of principles!
Depends what your view of two evils is .
As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .
If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .
If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .
'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one? If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country. If not then..............
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going. Tell you something, neither do I right now. But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM. No, you do that from within. You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
The above I know from personal practical experience.
My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .
The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .
I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .
I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .
I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .
If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority. If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins. In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!
It's down to the Labour Party to attract me enough to vote for them .
They have absolutely no right to my vote otherwise .
No amount of guilt tripping will work on me .
And, by default, the Tories do?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkZSeJ6-Gu4
To tell the truth I've seen no evidence Keith and his henchmen even want to defeat the Tories themselves .
They seem more focused on having total control of the party above everything else and even want to load the dice in choosing their successors .
The ex leader who changed the way the party elects it's leader now wants to return to the older model .
And you believe these people are a better option than the Tories ?
The very same people who would sooner throw its elected leader under a bus and plot against him rather than support him at a GE .
These people are supposed to be worth my vote ?
There's the width of a fag paper between Tory and the current Labour party when it comes to fit for government .
Yes, I believe they are better than the current gang of Tories, I'm surprised you don't. And as I said earlier, the only way to bring about change is from within. Criticising from the outside will achieve nothing other than the continuation of the status quo.
But I see the Tories and the centre of the Labour Party as the status quo , do you see the problem I have here ?.
Keith has broken every promise he stood on to get elected which makes him no different to Johnson .
Why should I believe a word Keith says anymore than I believe what Johnson spouts ? .
Why should I be encouraged to vote for someone who wanted a second referendum because he didn't much care for the result of the binding first one ? .
I could get on board with Rayner who isn't afraid of using a bit of class warfare to make her point and is extremely authentic as a Labour working class MP .
I can see a significant difference between Tory and Labour under Rayner and that's important to me .
Keith could sit at the side of Johnson and nobody would be surprised .
It's high time Labour elected a women as leader and with her fesitiness she'd connect today .
With her early life she'd attract the vote that feels excluded in politics .
I like her , it goes along way .
Tyke, if you continue to want what you want without being prepared to compromise then you'll NEVER get what you want, nor anything near to it.
There are things that I would like to change, that I accept will NEVER change, EVER. There are things that I would like to change that I can see changing, even under Starmer. When people see those changes and the benefits they bring to 'the man in the street' then the opportunity will be there for a press for further changes, again for the better.
But none of that will happen if people like you keep the Tories in power, EVER!
But I find Keith every bit as dishonest and untrustworthy as Johnson is .
I wouldn't expect anything less from Johnson but I expect far more from a Labour leader .
I find it abhorrent that you can break everyone of the pledges you made to get the Labour leadership .
I cannot support this man in any shape of form .
-
I'm not sure why you're telling me any of this tyks as I'm only using stuff you have told me, whereas you are making stuff up.
There's little point debating with someone who holds such a tribal position Sydney from the centre of the Labour Party .
Clearly Keith doesn't want to either given the purge of the left .
You own it now lock , stock and barrel .
It seems tribal positions are working both ways, heres a novel idea, how about meeting in the middle?
Done that most of my life Filo but not with the current leader , once bitten and all that .
Get a new leader in who isn't shyte scared of wanting real change in this country and I'll get on board .
Rayner could very well tempt me back .
And in the meantime you'd rather have the worst of the two evils? Ah, the high price of principles!
Depends what your view of two evils is .
As far as principles are concerned it's simply a case of not supporting something I fundamentally disagree with .
If principles are to be judged by not giving Starmer a blank cheque then so be it .
If I support something that means I agree with it and I don't agree with the direction Starmer is taking the party .
'Evil' in this case is what is worst for the country as a whole. Can you seriously say that the county, as a whole, is better off under a Johnson led government than a Starmer led one? If so then yes, your principles can be judged by you giving Johnson a blank check to lie, cheat and look after his 'mates' at the expense of what would be less worse for the country. If not then..............
You don't like the way the Labour Party is going. Tell you something, neither do I right now. But you won't fix that by putting a Tory Government with 'populist policies', (which they don't actually put in place), in power who then openly lie and blame others to cover their mistakes - particularly given the backing they get from an equally corrupt MSM. No, you do that from within. You do that through persuasive argument and discussion.
And you do it by accepting that, in the short term, things will not be as good as they should be; but they will be a site better than the alternative.
The above I know from personal practical experience.
My take is that supporting a Tory government is to vote for one at elections and something I've never done or will do .
The Labour Party will have to work for my vote and it's no longer a given .
I'm particularly keen to avoid what Mandelson described as " they haven't anywhere else to go " .
I simply refuse to give the Labour Party with the direction it's taking a blank cheque .
I'm comfortable in my skin with my stance .
If you understand democracy then you'll accept that an abstention effectively counts for the majority vote, not the minority. If you abstain then you are giving a blank cheque to whoever wins. In the case of the last election, that's the Tories; however, it equally could have been Labour, which kind of defeats your argument.
I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in MY skin being responsible for bestowing the current Tory government on the people of this country when you had the opportunity to do otherwise!
It's down to the Labour Party to attract me enough to vote for them .
They have absolutely no right to my vote otherwise .
No amount of guilt tripping will work on me .
And, by default, the Tories do?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkZSeJ6-Gu4
To tell the truth I've seen no evidence Keith and his henchmen even want to defeat the Tories themselves .
They seem more focused on having total control of the party above everything else and even want to load the dice in choosing their successors .
The ex leader who changed the way the party elects it's leader now wants to return to the older model .
And you believe these people are a better option than the Tories ?
The very same people who would sooner throw its elected leader under a bus and plot against him rather than support him at a GE .
These people are supposed to be worth my vote ?
There's the width of a fag paper between Tory and the current Labour party when it comes to fit for government .
Yes, I believe they are better than the current gang of Tories, I'm surprised you don't. And as I said earlier, the only way to bring about change is from within. Criticising from the outside will achieve nothing other than the continuation of the status quo.
But I see the Tories and the centre of the Labour Party as the status quo , do you see the problem I have here ?.
Keith has broken every promise he stood on to get elected which makes him no different to Johnson .
Why should I believe a word Keith says anymore than I believe what Johnson spouts ? .
Why should I be encouraged to vote for someone who wanted a second referendum because he didn't much care for the result of the binding first one ? .
I could get on board with Rayner who isn't afraid of using a bit of class warfare to make her point and is extremely authentic as a Labour working class MP .
I can see a significant difference between Tory and Labour under Rayner and that's important to me .
Keith could sit at the side of Johnson and nobody would be surprised .
It's high time Labour elected a women as leader and with her fesitiness she'd connect today .
With her early life she'd attract the vote that feels excluded in politics .
I like her , it goes along way .
Tyke, if you continue to want what you want without being prepared to compromise then you'll NEVER get what you want, nor anything near to it.
There are things that I would like to change, that I accept will NEVER change, EVER. There are things that I would like to change that I can see changing, even under Starmer. When people see those changes and the benefits they bring to 'the man in the street' then the opportunity will be there for a press for further changes, again for the better.
But none of that will happen if people like you keep the Tories in power, EVER!
But I find Keith every bit as dishonest and untrustworthy as Johnson is .
I wouldn't expect anything less from Johnson but I expect far more from a Labour leader .
I find it abhorrent that you can break everyone of the pledges you made to get the Labour leadership .
I cannot support this man in any shape of form .
In which case, you will continue to help keep the Tories in power to the detriment of the less well off in this country. Also, you appear to be making your decision based on your personal dislike one person; the Labour Party is more than Sir Keir Starmer.
-
The inability of Labour to form a genuine opposition will be the reason why the Tories will stay in power, not due to voter apathy or voters taking their votes elsewhere.
Labour have had an open goal of Ronnie Rosenthal-esque proportions to take advantage of these past 18 months and they couldn't even hit the crossbar. Their shot was closer to the corner flag and they have become a complete irrelevance in politics.
-
There's a significant difference between compromise and selling out .
Selling out to gain power so the establishment can rubber stamp a Labour government doesn't work for me .
" you've nowt to fear from us " well you better bloody well should if any Labour leader was worth his salt .
As far as the Labour Party is more than just Keith well that's not really how this is playing out is it right now is it .
If you aren't totally with Keith then you must be against him seems to be the current narrative so you are kicked out .
How can you compromise when compromise isn't on offer .
To support this requires me to sell out not compromise and that's a step too far for me .
Let's not forget Keith got the leadership because enough of the left voted for him .
This is treachery , that's exactly what this is .
Treachery is non repairable in my book .
Get rid asap and Let's get behind someone we can all support with compromise back on the table .
-
There's a significant difference between compromise and selling out .
Selling out to gain power so the establishment can rubber stamp a Labour government doesn't work for me .
" you've nowt to fear from us " well you better bloody well should if any Labour leader was worth his salt .
As far as the Labour Party is more than just Keith well that's not really how this is playing out is it right now is it .
If you aren't totally with Keith then you must be against him seems to be the current narrative so you are kicked out .
How can you compromise when compromise isn't on offer .
To support this requires me to sell out not compromise and that's a step too far for me .
Let's not forget Keith got the leadership because enough of the left voted for him .
This is treachery , that's exactly what this is .
Treachery is non repairable in my book .
Get rid asap and Let's get behind someone we can all support with compromise back on the table .
Treachery is taking or not taking action in your case to enable another Tory Govt, something you claim you do not want, I don’t get why you refuse to see or accept that
-
There's a significant difference between compromise and selling out .
Selling out to gain power so the establishment can rubber stamp a Labour government doesn't work for me .
" you've nowt to fear from us " well you better bloody well should if any Labour leader was worth his salt .
As far as the Labour Party is more than just Keith well that's not really how this is playing out is it right now is it .
If you aren't totally with Keith then you must be against him seems to be the current narrative so you are kicked out .
How can you compromise when compromise isn't on offer .
To support this requires me to sell out not compromise and that's a step too far for me .
Let's not forget Keith got the leadership because enough of the left voted for him .
This is treachery , that's exactly what this is .
Treachery is non repairable in my book .
Get rid asap and Let's get behind someone we can all support with compromise back on the table .
Treachery is taking or not taking action in your case to enable another Tory Govt, something you claim you do not want, I don’t get why you refuse to see or accept that
It's fairly simple to see .
You believe the current Labour Party is better than the Tories and I don't see enough evidence to suggest that's the case .
Or at least enough significant difference that allows me to support this current mob .
All I see is they are sacrificing their heart n soul on the alter of super capitalism for a whiff of power .
Show me some radical policies and the will to stand up and be counted and I'll walk the walk .
Until then .....................
-
You believe the current Labour Party is better than the Tories and I don't see enough evidence to suggest that's the case .
Or at least enough significant difference that allows me to support this current mob .
The level of self indulgent bitterness that this statement implies is deeply depressing.
It reflects the idle "Red Tory" jibe from those on the Left who refused to vote Labour in 2010 and unleashed Cameron's Austerity.
-
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!
-
You believe the current Labour Party is better than the Tories and I don't see enough evidence to suggest that's the case .
Or at least enough significant difference that allows me to support this current mob .
The level of self indulgent bitterness that this statement implies is deeply depressing.
It reflects the idle "Red Tory" jibe from those on the Left who refused to vote Labour in 2010 and unleashed Cameron's Austerity.
Nowt to do with unregulated super capitalism on their watch then .
And still you attempt to blame the left .
Out of ideas in 2010 and nowt much has changed in 11 years .
Try owning it .
-
A fuss about nothing.
-
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!
I understand even the right of the Labour Party hate his guts .
That centre ground has a bit of weight to bear .
Both the left and right are coming after him .
I'd sleep with one eye open if I was you Keith .
-
I had to drive to Birmingham and back today as youngest son moving house and he needed a hand shifting some stuff. Drive through Grantham, Nottingham and central Birmingham. Every fuel station we saw was either closed or just petrol. Ques everywhere at those still open. No diesel anywhere.
Just madness. Just how fragile is our network when a bit of fake news goes viral.
-
Just got back from London.
There's no fuel to be had in North London tonight. Most of the forecourts on the A1 were empty too. I managed to fill up in the middle of nowhere just after Peterborough. They ran out of petrol while I was paying.
-
Proper shyte isn't it .
Shame people won't work for minimum wage anymore or should I say are no longer available to work for MW .
Tough times .
Like managing on MW to keep the country going whilst massively undervalued and still put food on the table .
The system was always proper fecked .
Welcome to reality .
-
Channel 5 are actually showing an hour long programme called Panic at the Pumps! Of course there is no way the media is exacerbating this.
Everytime they urge us not to panic... The more it sounds like Corporal Jones. Don't Oanic! Don't Panic!
The truth is once these things have started, people aren't really panicking. They are making a logical decision to top up because it really is very difficult to get fuel.
-
More than 35 non-league football matches have been postponed due to the shortage of fuel in some areas.
Matches in the Isthmian League and Southern League - the tiers below the National League - have been called off.
The entire programme in the Southern Combination Football League in the ninth and 10th tiers has also been postponed due to fuel-related issues.
-
If everyone carried on as normal there wouldn't be a problem. The problem is the media have promoted this non issue into becoming a problem and also lots of people are stupid. It's the same selfish people who are still stocked up with bog roll from last year.
-
If everyone carried on as normal there wouldn't be a problem. The problem is the media have promoted this non issue into becoming a problem and also lots of people are stupid. It's the same selfish people who are still stocked up with bog roll from last year.
^^^^ This...
-
''Colaianni asserts that irrational behavior is one of the most difficult behaviors to deal with. When someone is being irrational, they don't listen to reason, logic or even common sense. They are laser focused on fulfilling their need(s). And until that need is fulfilled, or they snap out of it, the irrational person can be unpredictable and sometimes even dangerous. But unless they have some sort of psychosis, there are ways to bring an irrational person back to rational thought. For all intents and purposes, we'll call rational thought "reality." Listed below are some strategies for dealing with the perceived illogical person:''
https://www.daily-journal.com/business/main-street-how-to-apply-logic-to-the-illogical/article_c5c45fcc-db40-59fe-8c3e-aa3fde3b47b7.html
-
Boris has been conspicuous by his absence on this matter. It makes me wonder if this has been deliberately engineered to drive people towards changing to electric vehicles to meet his pie in the sky climate change figures.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/i7Dk9TO.jpg)
-
Boris has been conspicuous by his absence on this matter. It makes me wonder if this has been deliberately engineered to drive people towards changing to electric vehicles to meet his pie in the sky climate change figures.
(https://i.imgur.com/jLzY3wj.jpg)
-
Boris has been conspicuous by his absence on this matter. It makes me wonder if this has been deliberately engineered to drive people towards changing to electric vehicles to meet his pie in the sky climate change figures.
(https://i.imgur.com/jLzY3wj.jpg)
Not on that beach with the plebs. Hopefully in the sea where Jaws will eat him.
-
Hilarious video on social media of a woman filling plastic carrier bags with fuel at a station before putting them in her boot.
You can’t make this shit up.
-
Can we start a rumour there is a jobs shortage, just to see if everyone would rush out and get one.
-
How’s about a run on a few high st banks?
-
Can we start a rumour there is a jobs shortage, just to see if everyone would rush out and get one.
Not while it's easier to sit on benefits doing nothing.
-
I wonder if this is mainly a London thing. I did my weekly fill up on Tuesday in the Subaru and also the Jimny today. I also was specific in wanting Vpower. Some greedy selfish people out there.
-
Had a meeting today with a bloke from near reading. He couldn't believe the difference round here to his area, said there's queues all day and night
-
A ten minute queue at Morrison’s yesterday when I filled the wife’s up.
Drove from Bradford to Ben Rhydding near Ilkley and every petrol station I passed was closed off.
I filled mine up at Sainsbury’s this morning and there was no queue but the only fuel left was Super unleaded. Cashier said they probably had about an hour and half’s worth left.
At least I won’t have to worry about getting stranded in Donny after the game now.
Typically though, yesterday I was going to get the bus into Bradford and then train to Ben Rhydding to save my fuel. Waitedbten minutes and the bus blobbed meaning I would miss my train. So back home and go in the car. Public transport is a joke sometimes.
-
Sounds like people in cities are flapping more than the smaller towns and countryside. Must be a certain type of person.
-
A ten minute queue at Morrison’s yesterday when I filled the wife’s up.
Drove from Bradford to Ben Rhydding near Ilkley and every petrol station I passed was closed off.
I filled mine up at Sainsbury’s this morning and there was no queue but the only fuel left was Super unleaded. Cashier said they probably had about an hour and half’s worth left.
At least I won’t have to worry about getting stranded in Donny after the game now.
Typically though, yesterday I was going to get the bus into Bradford and then train to Ben Rhydding to save my fuel. Waitedbten minutes and the bus blobbed meaning I would miss my train. So back home and go in the car. Public transport is a joke sometimes.
Talking of public transport, First Mainline have jumped on the no driver shortage now, they have suspended the services at my end of Stainforth, leaving a mile walk to get to the nearest bus stop to go to town
-
A ten minute queue at Morrison’s yesterday when I filled the wife’s up.
Drove from Bradford to Ben Rhydding near Ilkley and every petrol station I passed was closed off.
I filled mine up at Sainsbury’s this morning and there was no queue but the only fuel left was Super unleaded. Cashier said they probably had about an hour and half’s worth left.
At least I won’t have to worry about getting stranded in Donny after the game now.
Typically though, yesterday I was going to get the bus into Bradford and then train to Ben Rhydding to save my fuel. Waitedbten minutes and the bus blobbed meaning I would miss my train. So back home and go in the car. Public transport is a joke sometimes.
Talking of public transport, First Mainline have jumped on the no driver shortage now, they have suspended the services at my end of Stainforth, leaving a mile walk to get to the nearest bus stop to go to town
Yes Bus drivers were another group who had massive pay cuts inflicted, I am not surprised if there is a shortage!
-
Hilarious story on the bbc online news. 20 motorists started tailing a tanker down the road until it stopped at a building site. Some of the drivers were furious when they later found out it was not going to a filling station , as it was full of cement.
You just can’t make this shit up can you?
Seriously though. We would be proper f**ked if there was a genuine fuel shortage.
-
Objective truth again.
https://mobile.twitter.com/peterwalker99/status/1444619823976222728
One of the reasons that liars like Johnson get away with lying is that we have utterly shit journalists who let stuff like this pass.
You'd think a journalist paid £400k per year from public funds would be able to say, "Supply, PM? I few seconds ago you said it was demand. Are you making this up on the hoof?"
-
Surely the two are linked? There's high demand (problem 1 due to panic) which if wasn't there would be no issue. However in the south they are now unable to catch up the supply so it's a supply issue. It's not bloody complicated is it?
I'd be a terrible politician mind as I'd be unable to deal with the focus on every single world.
-
If it was basically a demand problem, that is by its very nature self limiting. There is a period over which demand outstrips supply while people who would have been happy to drive with a half empty tank fill up. But demand cannot stay at that level, unless people are using hugely more fuel than usual and therefore having to fill up more often.
So what's happened was initially a supply problem, which, because of the initial panic, produced a temporary demand problem which turned into a much bigger supply problem.
That's dead easy to explain. But Johnson goes into word salad mode and gives the impression of making up responses.
The point being of course, that he gets away with this waffling, whereas other politicians who screw up in interviews are constantly hounded about it.
And the bigger point is, what caused the supply problem in the first place, and why wasn't this foreseen?
-
If it was basically a demand problem, that is by its very nature self limiting. There is a period over which demand outstrips supply while people who would have been happy to drive with a half empty tank fill up. But demand cannot stay at that level, unless people are using hugely more fuel than usual and therefore having to fill up more often.
So what's happened was initially a supply problem, which, because of the initial panic, produced a temporary demand problem which turned into a much bigger supply problem.
That's dead easy to explain. But Johnson goes into word salad mode and gives the impression of making up responses.
The point being of course, that he gets away with this waffling, whereas other politicians who screw up in interviews are constantly hounded about it.
And the bigger point is, what caused the supply problem in the first place, and why wasn't this foreseen?
He probably gets away with it because no-one bothers listening to him any longer. Blah blah b*llocks!
There wasn't a supply problem. Two or three fuel stations down south run dry, which we all now happens now and again, it hits social media and before you know it all they idiots have bled everywhere dry. It had to clear up after a few days of madness when everyone had full tanks.
-
If I recall, bp said a small number of their sites in very selective areas of the uk were going to have resupply issues due to a shortage of drivers for that particular delivery round.
Cue the front page of the suns headline. “ we are running on empty”
The rest you know.
God help us if a viral story of a bank running out of money ever got out.
We live in a very fragile society. Toilet rolls , pasta and now fuel.
Whatever next.
-
If I recall, bp said a small number of their sites in very selective areas of the uk were going to have resupply issues due to a shortage of drivers for that particular delivery round.
Cue the front page of the suns headline. “ we are running on empty”
The rest you know.
God help us if a viral story of a bank running out of money ever got out.
We live in a very fragile society. Toilet rolls , pasta and now fuel.
Whatever next.
That's precisely why Gordon Brown poured money into saving the banking system when they genuinely WERE on the verge of running out of money. And ever since we've had people asking why he didn't just let them fail because they deserved it. Ignoring the fact that the entire economic system would have collapsed if he'd done that.
-
Quote by Normal Rules above:
Cue the front page of the suns headline. “ we are running on empty”
The rest you know.
God help us if a viral story of a bank running out of money ever got out.
It did happen of course, Northern Rock in 2007.
On the evening news one night and massive queues outside NR branches the next day when people tried to withdraw their savings.
-
Quote by Normal Rules above:
Cue the front page of the suns headline. “ we are running on empty”
The rest you know.
God help us if a viral story of a bank running out of money ever got out.
It did happen of course, Northern Rock in 2007.
On the evening news one night and massive queues outside NR branches the next day when people tried to withdraw their savings.
Thanks for reminding me. I lost money with northern rock.
-
2016:
Pretty much everybody who thought about it: "If we leave the EU and stop free movement overnight there will be massive shocks to the supply chain."
Boris Johnson. "Project Fear!"
2021. Pretty much everyone who thought about it in 2016. "Err...thoughts?"
Boris Johnson: "This was the plan all along, to turn us into a high skill economy."
-
Johnson has the guts to fix Britain, which is good because after 11 years of tory rule they are the ones that f**ked it.
It's ironic johnson can fix anything ..................... in the future, he just can't fix anything in front of his face.
-
2016:
Pretty much everybody who thought about it: "If we leave the EU and stop free movement overnight there will be massive shocks to the supply chain."
Boris Johnson. "Project Fear!"
2021. Pretty much everyone who thought about it in 2016. "Err...thoughts?"
Boris Johnson: "This was the plan all along, to turn us into a high skill economy."
Nothing to do with Covid then and similar issues other countries are suffering?
-
2016:
Pretty much everybody who thought about it: "If we leave the EU and stop free movement overnight there will be massive shocks to the supply chain."
Boris Johnson. "Project Fear!"
2021. Pretty much everyone who thought about it in 2016. "Err...thoughts?"
Boris Johnson: "This was the plan all along, to turn us into a high skill economy."
Nothing to do with Covid then and similar issues other countries are suffering?
I work for a multi national manufacturer with about 96 factories in about 54 countries dotted around the world.
It's definitely a global issue. It's the bulk of our factories in the far east who are having the most issues, unable to purchase micro-processors, shortage of steel because of covid situations in China and India with a further steel producer in Germany suffering because of the floods. Prices of brass and other materials have gone through the roof.
All the shipping companies have doubled the amount of time that it takes to get product from the Far East into Europe, a situation made much worse by the blockage in the Suez Canal which has then led to a shortage of containers. Air freight has quadrupled in cost meaning we now have to use the rail network from China into Europe.
I could go on, the list is absolutely endless of issues we face across the globe. The only Brexit issue we face is getting product into Northern Ireland which has produced more paperwork and takes longer. Apart from that all of our problems are global ones and the UK plays no part in any of that.
-
Yep, I work for a company that sells automation components and the big players in the market just can't get components. Drives and motors that would usually take a month max to come have been taking 5-6-7 months because materials and microchips are just impossible to get hold of.
-
2016:
Pretty much everybody who thought about it: "If we leave the EU and stop free movement overnight there will be massive shocks to the supply chain."
Boris Johnson. "Project Fear!"
2021. Pretty much everyone who thought about it in 2016. "Err...thoughts?"
Boris Johnson: "This was the plan all along, to turn us into a high skill economy."
Nothing to do with Covid then and similar issues other countries are suffering?
I work for a multi national manufacturer with about 96 factories in about 54 countries dotted around the world.
It's definitely a global issue. It's the bulk of our factories in the far east who are having the most issues, unable to purchase micro-processors, shortage of steel because of covid situations in China and India with a further steel producer in Germany suffering because of the floods. Prices of brass and other materials have gone through the roof.
All the shipping companies have doubled the amount of time that it takes to get product from the Far East into Europe, a situation made much worse by the blockage in the Suez Canal which has then led to a shortage of containers. Air freight has quadrupled in cost meaning we now have to use the rail network from China into Europe.
I could go on, the list is absolutely endless of issues we face across the globe. The only Brexit issue we face is getting product into Northern Ireland which has produced more paperwork and takes longer. Apart from that all of our problems are global ones and the UK plays no part in any of that.
Exactly. But people are making out the problems here are solely down to the Government and Brexit. Personally i think Boris is a bit of a clown and goes AWOL when he should be seen to be doing something, however he has been dealt a shit hand and i doubt if the big guns of labour intelligentsia could have done any better.
-
No AL. I'm saying our problems are exacerbated by Brexit. If they weren't, why is the Govt now backtracking and allowing visas for HGV drivers?
And the real core of what I'm saying is that Johnson now spins this as some master plan. As though it's all part of some genius strategy (which no-one has seen sight or sound of) to turn us miraculously into a high skill, high wage economy.
It is typical Johnson bullshit when faced with a massive problem. Wa e your arms about, crack a joke in Latin a d say everything will be great because we are British.
-
It’s being reported today in certain quarters that the fuel issue has been exasperated by the govts switch to e10 fuel. Many stations have been running their tanks dry in order to get them empty prior to the new deliveries of e10. Thus creating a bit of a knock on effect.many tankers carry diesel and petrol. Filling stations not needing petrol as they are trying to get rid of e5 subsequently not getting their diesel through.
-
https://www.google.com/amp/s/inews.co.uk/news/fuel-shortage-figures-petrol-station-deliveries-panic-buying-crisis-explained-1237349/amp
The stats in this are interesting. It's that erm brexit effect of course...
-
https://www.google.com/amp/s/inews.co.uk/news/fuel-shortage-figures-petrol-station-deliveries-panic-buying-crisis-explained-1237349/amp
The stats in this are interesting. It's that erm brexit effect of course...
modified
Why is the army required?
Just wondering if the source of the story is via the government pud, and why it has only just become apparent?
-
https://www.google.com/amp/s/inews.co.uk/news/fuel-shortage-figures-petrol-station-deliveries-panic-buying-crisis-explained-1237349/amp
The stats in this are interesting. It's that erm brexit effect of course...
modified
Why is the army required?
Just wondering if the source of the story is via the government pud, and why it has only just become apparent?
It was always thus (admittedly a bit harder for you to see from the other side of the world). Press created a non story because they're all looking for them, people panicked, demand massively outstripped normal supply now it's difficult to catch that back up in places. Meanwhile in the north of England it's back to normal now. No queues, no issues, in fact when I put fuel in on Tuesday I was the only car there at 815 in the morning which is unheard of (because they'd all panicked before).
-
thanks pud, I got confused between your link and NR's comment, my comment was to the story about E5 and E10 fuel changeover.