Jeremy Corbyn

[SydneyRover]

So did they give you a date?

Give me a date? What on Earth are you on about?

When JC and McDonnell said they will call an election once no-deal had been locked down, did they give you a date or anyone a precise date? it's quite a simple question

[BillyStubbsTears]

SS.

I think you're getting a little confused over what constitutes a "lie".

What Corbyn did, was to make a quick response to an emerging situation,then change his mind when he'd had time to consider all the implications.

That might make his first response a poor one, but it doesn't make it a lie. A lie requires some intent to deceive, usually for gain. I fail to see how Corbyn has gained anything from his original stance. If anything, he's looked weaker for changing his position.

Contrast with yesterday, when Johnson assured the Chief Constable of West Yorkshire that he was only going to talk about police numbers and funding with a backdrop of police cadets looking down on him, then proceeded to lay into his opponents over Brexit and the Election.

That meets the definition of a lie perfectly. He deliberately deceived the CC,and in appearing to have the blessing of the police for his stance on Brexit and the Election, he was gaining an advantage by his deception.

Don't you agree?

[SydneyRover]

I won't tell you again BED!

You've been really testy this last week anything bothering you?

[DonnyOsmond]

To all of you having a pop at me today, point me to where I've ever defended either Boris Johnson or the Tory Party. What I've always said is that the rabble in Westminster are all useless, and have been accused of being a "lazy thinker" because of it.

Well it looks like my views are vindicated today, as both Corbyn and McDonnell had stated that once the bill to block Non Deal had been locked down, they'd vote for an election. Now they''re saying they won't.

So they're not only cowards and cheats, they're a pair of f*cking liars as well.

They're clearly waiting till after Boris has extended it. No one wants to take over running a country with a couple weeks before deadline. Boris extends and they'll be 100% up for a November election. We have also had it speculated today that Boris requested a October date so that students won't have time to update addresses which plays into Tory hands, so why would Labour help Tories?

Edit: Its not speculated actually. Boris's aides have admitted it.

You're missing my point DO, which is that Corbyn and McDonnell lied when they said they would vote for an election once the No Deal bill got Royal Assent. The inference on here is always that the only liars in all this are Johnson and the ERG.

As I've said before, they all lie and con and cheat to pursue their agendas.

There's a difference between changing their mind and lying. Should they stick to what they said originally if they know it to be strategically daft compared to waiting?

[Bentley Bullet]

So, if Tories change their minds they lied, but If socialists change their minds they just...... well.... changed their minds! I see!

[Tarkovsky_Mikluzhkin]

A lie is surely saying something that is factually incorrect rather than a broken promise or change of strategy.
Even most of Boris' lies are misrepresentation and manipulation rather than lying after the fact.
Although it seems pretty obvious with that definition of lying Boris would still be ahead of any Socialist in the BS game... even Uncle Joe.

[wilts rover]

That's a good definition TM - but who decides where manipulation ends and lies begin?

It was reported in the Sunday papers that Johnson and Cummings wanted an election on 14th October.

Johnson went on national tv on Monday night to deny that he wanted an election. He said this again in the HoC during PMQ's and the debate on Wednesday.

After loosing the vote on Wednesday he then asked for an election.

So was the call for an election a change in strategy due to circumstances? Or did he lie to the public (on national tv) when he said he did not want something he was planning to have?

[SydneyRover]

So, if Tories change their minds they lied, but If socialists change their minds they just...... well.... changed their minds! I see!

Can someone please design a hamster wheel imoji?

[BillyStubbsTears]

TM

If your definition was correct, every time someone got an answer wrong in a pub quiz, they'd be lying.

And on the subject of Johnson, I disagree. Most of his lies are lies.

Like the one with the WYCC.

Like the one when the leader of the Tory party sacked him, after Johnson categorically told him he wasn't having an affair when he was.

Like the one when he made up an entire section of an article in The Times and for sacked for that.

[Bentley Bullet]

So, if Tories change their minds they lied, but If socialists change their minds they just...... well.... changed their minds! I see!

Can someone please design a hamster wheel imoji?

So you malign me for being monotonous for not changing my mind at all, whether lyingly or genuinely!

[DonnyOsmond]

That's a good definition TM - but who decides where manipulation ends and lies begin?

It was reported in the Sunday papers that Johnson and Cummings wanted an election on 14th October.

Johnson went on national tv on Monday night to deny that he wanted an election. He said this again in the HoC during PMQ's and the debate on Wednesday.

After loosing the vote on Wednesday he then asked for an election.

So was the call for an election a change in strategy due to circumstances? Or did he lie to the public (on national tv) when he said he did not want something he was planning to have?

From the outside we can see he changed his mind. If we knew for a fact he wanted an election despite saying he didn't then he'd be lying.

[Tarkovsky_Mikluzhkin]

Billy

You're right about the pub quiz thing I should have said I should have put "knowingly giving factually incorrect information"

You examples of Boris lying are spot on, I think I did say he lies loads more than anyone else it's just sometimes people call other dick moves he does lying and that can strengthen and add to his support.

Calling them all liars when they are not seems to then make it acceptable behaviour for them to be upping their outright lie count and before to long you end up with a leader who draws on a map with a felt tip pen to prove the hurricane will hit Alabama just like he said.

Boris is the biggest outright liar in frontline politics I've known in my lifetime, Hes maybe not told the most damaging lies but definitely the most, But my worry is that in 10/15 years time that wont be the case and we will have outright liars in every cabinet post just like what some people already think we have but don't.
Its dangerous to say people are lying when they aren't because when they do start lying your credibility is gone.

[tommy toes]

Something I found on the net.............

A London School of Economics study into how Jeremy Corbyn is represented in the media found that only a paltry 11% of all newspaper articles about him bothered to accurately state a single one of his actual policies. In the hard-right Daily Mail and Express that figure was 0%.

Given this lack of unbiased political coverage it's not difficult to understand why so many people are so unfamiliar with Jeremy Corbyn's actual policies, and tend to judge him as if politics is some kind of vapid personality contest.

So here are some of the Jeremy Corbyn policies that the mainstream media really don't want to tell you about, so you can judge for yourself whether you like them or not.

Labour Party policies


Ban companies based in tax havens bidding for government contracts
It's astounding that this isn't the case already. How on earth could anyone even attempt to justify taxpayers' cash being paid to companies based in tax havens for the purpose of dodging tax?

£10 minimum wage for all workers over the age of 18

The UK is the only country in the developed world where workers' wages are declining in real terms, while the economy is actually growing. A £10 minimum wage would help to reverse this scenario, and it would also significantly reduce the cost of in-work benefits like tax credits and housing benefit (most of which goes to working families these days).

All rented accommodation to be fit for human habitation

Again, astounding that this isn't the case already, but in January 2016 the Tories (over 1/3 of whom are landlords) deliberately voted down a Labour Party amendment to their housing bill to ensure that all rented accommodation is fit for human habitation.

Renationalise the railways

This is a very popular policy that is supported by an overwhelming majority of the public. Do you support rail renationalisation too, or are you one of the minority who think that the current profiteer-administered shambles is acceptable?

Renationalise the NHS

The Tory party have been carving up the English NHS and distributing the pieces to the private sector, Jeremy Corbyn has pledged to reverse this process. Are you one of the 84% of people who thinks the NHS should be run as a not for profit public service, or the 7% who agree with the ongoing Tory privatisation agenda?

Free school meals

The policy of providing free school meals to all school children between the ages of 4 and 11 is based on evidence based research showing that universal free school meals lead to significantly improved grades. It will be paid for by ending the generous tax breaks (public subsidies) for the 7% of kids who go to private fee-paying schools.

Create a National Education Service

Jeremy Corbyn believes that education is a right, not a commodity. He wants to create an integrated National Education Service to ensure that education is freely available to anyone who needs it.

Scrap tuition fees

Thanks to the Tories (and their Lib-Dem enablers) UK students now face the most expensive tuition fees in the developed world for study at public universities, meaning students typically leave university with £50,000 of debt, and two thirds of them will never pay off their student debts. Labour would end this lunacy by getting rid of student fees.

Restore NHS Bursaries

One of the first things Theresa My did when she came to power was to scrap NHS bursaries for nurses and other NHS workers. This removal of financial support for nurses has caused a huge 10,000 decline in the number of applicants to nursing courses. This collapse in nursing recruitment would be bad enough in its own right, but in combination with a record increase in the number of EU nurses quitting the NHS, and a mind-boggling 92% fall in nursing recruitment from EU countries, the UK is clearly facing a massive NHS recruitment crisis. Labour would reverse this calamitous state of affairs by restoring NHS Bursaries for trainee nurses.

Increase the carers allowance

Labour are proposing to increase the Carers Allowance for the 1 million unpaid carers in the UK. This would be paid for by scrapping the Tories' Inheritance Tax cut for millionaires. Unpaid carers save the UK economy an estimated £132 million a year, and they're doing ever more work as a result of the £4.6 billion in Tory cuts to the social care budget.

Create a National Investment Bank

This is actually one of Jeremy Corbyn's best policies, but few people actually understand it. It's absolutely clear that allowing private banks to determine where money is invested ends up in huge speculative bubbles in housing and financial derivatives, while the real economy is starved of cash. A National Investment Bank would work by investing in things like infrastructure, services, businesses and regional development projects, and would end up becoming a kind of sovereign wealth fund for the UK.

End the public sector pay freeze

Under Tory rule UK workers suffered the longest sustained decline in real wages since records began. The public sector pay freeze contributed massively to this. You'd have to be economically illiterate to imagine that repressing public sector wages with below inflation pay rises for year after year would not exert downwards pressure on private sector wages too. Ending the public sector pay freeze would actually boost the economy by putting more money in people's pockets, meaning an increase in aggregate demand.

End sweetheart tax deals between HMRC and massive corporations

David Cameron (the son of a tax-dodger) repeatedly lied through his teeth about how serious he was about confronting tax-dodging, whilst allowing HMRC to concoct sweetheart deals with corporations like Google, Vodafone and Starbucks. One of the main reasons the corporate press are so strongly opposed to Jeremy Corbyn is that they know that unlike David Cameron, he's serious when he talks about clamping down on tax-dodging.

Stop major corporations ripping off their suppliers

Major corporations are withholding an astounding £26 billion through late payment, which is responsible for an estimated 50,000 small businesses going bust every year. The scale of this problem is so massive that it should be a national scandal, and Jeremy Corbyn is absolutely right to align himself with small businesses to defend their interests.

Reverse the Tory corporation tax cuts

Since 2010 the Tories have cut the rate of corporation tax for major multinational corporations from 28% to just 17% (by 2020) meaning the UK has one of the lowest corporation tax rates in the developed world. The global average is 27% and the G7 average is 32.3%. Theresa May has already threatened to lower the corporation tax even further to turn post-Brexit Britain into a tax haven economy, Corbyn is proposing to do the opposite and increase corporation tax rates so they're more in line with the rest of the developed world.

Defend Human Rights

Theresa May has repeatedly expressed her intention to tear up Winston Churchill's finest legacy, the European Convention on Human Rights. Labour would oppose this Tory attack on our human rights.

Zero Hours Contracts ban

Almost a million UK workers are now on exploitative Zero Hours Contracts. Last year the New Zealand parliament voted to ban them, and Labour is proposing to do the same. Long-term employees and workers doing regular hours would be protected from Zero Hours Contract exploitation.

Holding the Tories to account over Brexit

Labour have said that they won't block Brexit, but they will seek to hold the Tories to account over it. A landslide Tory victory would be a disaster for the UK because it would allow the Tories to pursue the most right-wing pro-corporate anti-worker Brexit possible with almost no democratic scrutiny. The only way to make sure the Tories don't push a fanatically right-wing Brexit on the nation is to return a Labour government, or ensure that there are enough opposition MPs to hold them to account.

Housebuilding

Under the Tory government the level of UK housebuilding has slumped to the lowest levels since the 1920s, even though demand for housing is extremely high. Labour are guaranteeing to invest in a programme of house building, and committing to ensure that half of the new houses are social housing. This wouldn't just alleviate the housing crisis, it would also stimulate the economy by increasing aggregate demand.

Combat inequality

George Osborne's ideological austerity agenda resulted in the longest sustained decline in workers' wages since records began and condemned an additional 400,000 children to growing up in poverty, meanwhile the tiny super-rich majority literally doubled their wealth. Labour is pledging to reduce the inequality gap and introduce progressive policies to reduce the gap between the incomes of the highest and lowest paid. There is plenty of evidence to show that the least unequal societies are more economically successful places where the people are happier.
Conclusion

So out of these 20 Labour Party policies, how many do you actually strongly disagree with?
Footnote


This article attracted rather a lot more interest than I'd imagined (well over 1 million hits in 3 days!). One of the big questions people have been asking is how all of this would be paid for.

The answer is that quite a lot of the policies are actually investments that would pay for themselves in the long-term because they would stimulate more economic activity than the investment cost. Other policies could easily be funded if we had a government that was actually serious about cracking down on tax-dodging, which costs the country vast amounts per year. Just ending sweetheart deals between HMRC and major multinationals would generate £billions, which would pay for stuff like restoring the NHS bursary many times over.

If anyone is genuinely worried about how stuff is going to be paid for, the first thing on their mind should of course be the impending threat of a "no deal" Tory strop away from the Brexit negotiating table that the Tories have made the centrepiece of their so-called "negotiating strategy". If that happens the IFS have estimated a 6.3% -9.5% collapse in GDP, which would be a much more significant economic meltdown than the one that was caused by the 2007-08 global financial sector insolvency crisis (that our economy and our wages have still nowhere near recovered from). What do you think would happen to the tax take and the budget deficit if the economy tanked even worse than it did in 2009 thanks to the Tories' alarmingly woeful threat-based Brexit negotiation strategy resulting in the chaos of an economically ruinous cliff edge Brexit?



 

[Metalmicky]

I saw a joke that I thought was amusing................

Jeremy Corbyn walks into a Bank to cash a cheque. "Good morning, could you please cash this cheque for me?"

Cashier:"It would be my pleasure. Could you please show me your ID?"

Corbyn :"Actually, I did not bring my ID with me as I didn't think there was any need to. I am Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the Labour Party.

Cashier:"Yes, I know who you are, but with all the regulations and monitoring of the banks because of impostors and forgers and requirements of the legislation etc., I must insist on seeing ID."

Corbyn: Just ask anyone here at the bank who I am and they will tell you. Everybody knows who I am."

Cashier: "I am sorry, Mr Corbyn, but these are the bank rules under the legislation, and I must follow them."

Corbyn,"Come on please, I am urging you, please cash this cheque."

Cashier: "Look sir, here is an example of what we can do. One day, Lee Westwood came into the bank without ID. To prove he was Lee Westwood he pulled out his putter and played a beautiful shot across the bank into a cup. With that shot we knew him to be Lee Westwood and cashed his cheque."

"Another time, Andy Murray came in without ID. He pulled out his tennis racket and made a fabulous shot where the tennis ball landed in my cup. With that shot we cashed his cheque. So, sir, what can you do to prove that it is you and only you?"

Corbyn stands there thinking and thinking and finally says.....

"To be honest, my mind is a total blank...there is nothing that comes to my mind. I can't think of a single thing. I have absolutely no idea what to do. I don't have a clue"

Cashier: "Will that be large or small notes Mr Corbyn....?....

[SydneyRover]

Thanks TT for posting the labour party policies, nothing rabidly red there, nothing wildly lefty just a reasonable log of claims that most rational people could live with and if adopted by either side of politics (as if) would allow those on the margins to live a better life.

Yep I'd like to hear why anyone would oppose any of that?

I also rewatched the vid of JC being questioned about the Trident System and the labour party's intention to review it.

So a review not a moratorium or an outright ban a dismantling or anything else. I thought JC answered the questions in a reasonable, thoughtful and knowledgable way and would from what I've seen much prefer the deterrent to be in the hands of JC than bj. He went through the thought process of decision making from where one should start, way before getting into the stupidity of one of the last questioners what ifs to show that there is a better way. I also thought that the program wasn't moderated very well. Again I think a reasonable person would find it difficult to disagree with the logic behind his thinking and that we would be less likely to end up in a N-war with that approach.

[Ldr]

Thanks TT for posting the labour party policies, nothing rabidly red there, nothing wildly lefty just a reasonable log of claims that most rational people could live with and if adopted by either side of politics (as if) would allow those on the margins to live a better life.

Yep I'd like to hear why anyone would oppose any of that?

I also rewatched the vid of JC being questioned about the Trident System and the labour party's intention to review it.

So a review not a moratorium or an outright ban a dismantling or anything else. I thought JC answered the questions in a reasonable, thoughtful and knowledgable way and would from what I've seen much prefer the deterrent to be in the hands of JC than bj. He went through the thought process of decision making from where one should start, way before getting into the stupidity of one of the last questioners what ifs to show that there is a better way. I also thought that the program wasn't moderated very well. Again I think a reasonable person would find it difficult to disagree with the logic behind his thinking and that we would be less likely to end up in a N-war with that approach.

As stated in the OP, it's down to the man himself and his cronies not policies

[DonnyOsmond]

Thanks TT for posting the labour party policies, nothing rabidly red there, nothing wildly lefty just a reasonable log of claims that most rational people could live with and if adopted by either side of politics (as if) would allow those on the margins to live a better life.

Yep I'd like to hear why anyone would oppose any of that?

I also rewatched the vid of JC being questioned about the Trident System and the labour party's intention to review it.

So a review not a moratorium or an outright ban a dismantling or anything else. I thought JC answered the questions in a reasonable, thoughtful and knowledgable way and would from what I've seen much prefer the deterrent to be in the hands of JC than bj. He went through the thought process of decision making from where one should start, way before getting into the stupidity of one of the last questioners what ifs to show that there is a better way. I also thought that the program wasn't moderated very well. Again I think a reasonable person would find it difficult to disagree with the logic behind his thinking and that we would be less likely to end up in a N-war with that approach.

As stated in the OP, it's down to the man himself and his cronies not policies

Personally I don't find him half as bad as Farage or Boris. That isn't the Daily Mail telling you what to think about him, is it?

[Ldr]

No, I think all 3 are despicable