Who will be the new Labour leader?
Poll: Who will be the new Labour leader?
Total Members Polled: 378
Discussion
williamp said:
Speakingof voice, is she usung her clipped, quiet, educated voice of her brash northern accent??
Neither, it was a shrill pious voice, one that you'd expect from an NUT conference. Didn't detect any Northern in there (not that there's a problem with an accent of any kind).Cobnapint said:
Guybrush said:
The left never learn. Ruined economies litter their CV, yet they still come back for more, trying to convince us with their BS, clearly hoping that people either have short memories, are too young and maybe naïve to know better or are just a bit 
.
Spot on. Lemmings..
They could also be like the disastrous lefty government the Greeks voted in recently, who promised the people they could miraculously magic away the countries enormous debts, and that they (the people) could carry on doing what they have been doing for decades, and not lift a finger to get themselves out of the mess they put `themselves' in. One always seems to get the `I want something for nothing' merchants voting for lefty /labour governments. Of course they try to wrap it up in socialist `Do Gooding' to hide the fact they want something for nothing. But the bottom line is they want to be `given' what other people have to work for. Labour, the party for shirkers, not the workers.
truck71 said:
williamp said:
Speakingof voice, is she usung her clipped, quiet, educated voice of her brash northern accent??
Neither, it was a shrill pious voice, one that you'd expect from an NUT conference. Didn't detect any Northern in there (not that there's a problem with an accent of any kind).motco said:
'Two-Jags' Prestcott was on later. It really took me back to the days of yore when he was always in full-on rant mode. He practises circular breathing - you can hear it. He breathes in through his mouth and talks out of his arse!
How the hell he got a title is beyond me. He was more the Father Dougal of the outfit.Zod said:
truck71 said:
williamp said:
Speakingof voice, is she usung her clipped, quiet, educated voice of her brash northern accent??
Neither, it was a shrill pious voice, one that you'd expect from an NUT conference. Didn't detect any Northern in there (not that there's a problem with an accent of any kind).If I were a Labour party member, I'd be seriously depressed at the moment - no wonder Comrade Corbyn is doing so well, if nothing else he sounds like he has conviction.
Want to fly to the moon ? Ask an engineer. Want to fly around the world? Ask an engineer. Want to communicate to anyone, anywhere anytime? Ask an engineer. Want to watch TV, anywhere anytime? Ask an engineer. Want to cruise the oceans? Ask an engineer. Want to provide energy? Ask an engineer. Want to live in a house? Ask an engineer. Want to drive anywhere, anytime? Ask an engineer. Want to cross a river? Ask an engineer. Want a computer? Ask an engineer. Want to do +1000mph on land? Ask an Engineer. Want to fix the economy of the country. Well, for f***s sake, don’t ask a politician or economist.
Cobnapint said:
Spot on. Lemmings.
Can we please stop this idea of making out anybody on the left of politics to be a complete moron? I joined this website because I like cars, that is something we all have in common but it does seem as though the majority of people on here are certainly right-leaning in terms of politics. That is no bad thing in itself, everybody has the right to an opinion but I really don't think it's fair that the alternative standpoint is constantly talked about in this way. Disagree if you wish but can we refrain from childish insults? I am a Labour voter and a socialist; I wish the Labour Party and the country took a more leftist stand. I am in favour of the nationalisation of transport and utilities, of a completely free NHS (at the point of use), a removal of university tuition fees and an increase in council housing. I am in favour of increasing taxation of the highest earners in order to pay for this, although it's worth adding that actually collecting the taxes currently evaded would help a great deal (£50 billion/year or so). We should also borrow for capital investment where appropriate.
I am not, however, a mindless lemming who somehow follows anything spouted by the Labour party without consideration. I continue to vote for them because they are the closest thing to what I want that might actually win. In other elections (EU) I have used a protest vote, for example to the Socialist Labour Party and in this general election I seriously considered voting for the Trade Union and Socialist Coalition but that would have been a 'waste' under FPTP in Barnsley East.
Moreover, I am not ignorant of what free market capitalism and the reduction of the deficit is meant to achieve. I studied parts of economic history at university, I genuinely understand why to some people the 'invisible hand' or Friedman's ideas, the freedom to build your own life free of government intervention in the market seems appealing and why it seems like common sense to balance a country's budget like that of a household.
However, I choose to disagree with what I feel are rational reasons. The current economic crisis was not caused by Labour's overspending on Socialist ideas but by a a failure of government, mainly in the USA, to regulate investment banks. I believe that this is being used as an excuse by the Tory party to reduce the role of the state (no surprise as this is their key principle) and I feel that this is damaging the lives of British people.
Of course I do not believe that people should be allowed unlimited benefits if they can work, that would be foolish. What I want is a socialist economy with as near to full employment as possible; a higher minimum wage that will actually reduce the benefits burden and comprehensive support around the crucial things a person needs to live: heat, light, education, transport, health. It is possible to achieve all this and more under free market capitalism but it is not possible for ALL to do it and therein lies the problem.
I am sorry for the essay length and for the bit that reads like me talking up my own education/ saying 'ooh aren't I clever.' I just want to point out that those of us on the Left are not 'loonies,' we just happen, following careful consideration of the facts and the morals to disagree with the idea that socialism's track record is terrible while that of capitalism is perfect.
Edited by TomTheTyke on Thursday 23 July 11:48
Mark Benson said:
Zod said:
truck71 said:
williamp said:
Speakingof voice, is she usung her clipped, quiet, educated voice of her brash northern accent??
Neither, it was a shrill pious voice, one that you'd expect from an NUT conference. Didn't detect any Northern in there (not that there's a problem with an accent of any kind).If I were a Labour party member, I'd be seriously depressed at the moment - no wonder Comrade Corbyn is doing so well, if nothing else he sounds like he has conviction.
I'll put it this way instead of calling them morons
They are allowing their left wing socialist ideals blind them selves to the fact that Corbyn in the view of the general public is a hard left wing socialist who will espouse an massively over inflated welfare budget as his solution to the countries problems and will borrow and tax heavy to fund it.
= he is unelectable.
What the country wants a is "lite" Tory government.
Want could have had say if Lib Dems had say 25 more MP's in the 2010 election in a coalition with the tories and had better contained the Tory excesses better.
They are allowing their left wing socialist ideals blind them selves to the fact that Corbyn in the view of the general public is a hard left wing socialist who will espouse an massively over inflated welfare budget as his solution to the countries problems and will borrow and tax heavy to fund it.
= he is unelectable.
What the country wants a is "lite" Tory government.
Want could have had say if Lib Dems had say 25 more MP's in the 2010 election in a coalition with the tories and had better contained the Tory excesses better.
TomTheTyke said:
Can we please stop this idea of making out anybody on the left of politics to be a complete moron? I joined this website because I like cars, that is something we all have in common but it does seem as though the majority of people on here are certainly right-leaning in terms of politics. That is no bad thing in itself, everybody has the right to an opinion but I really don't think it's fair that the alternative standpoint is constantly talked about in this way.
Reasonable discussion is...reasonable! People are probably looking at the dire track record Labour has in the UK over the past 40 to 50 years, rather than some theoretical ideal political model of any type. Isn't that the issue, in terms of how the political left has failed to make their theory work sufficiently well in practice? TomTheTyke said:
The current economic crisis was not caused by Labour's overspending on Socialist ideas but by a a failure of government, mainly in the USA, to regulate investment banks.
There was regulatory failure here as well, with Brown's inadequate tripartite system, but while the root cause developed over the pond in the USA, with Clinton's egalitarian delusion expressed through mandated non-recourse ninja mortgages that never stood a chance of remaining non-toxic, the fact that Brown reverted to type as a big spender between 2001/2 and 2007/8 meant that the UK was in a worse place than it might have been, going into recession earlier and recovering later.TomTheTyke said:
I am in favour of the nationalisation of transport and utilities, of a completely free NHS (at the point of use), a removal of university tuition fees and an increase in council housing. I am in favour of increasing taxation of the highest earners in order to pay for this, although it's worth adding that actually collecting the taxes currently evaded would help a great deal (£50 billion/year or so). We should also borrow for capital investment where appropriate.
IIRC tax evasion is thought to be over £80bn, not to be confused with tax avoidance (I'm not saying you did that) which is both lawful and entirely reasonable...if the due amount of tax is paid, anything else is pure fiction. On the other matters, we must respectfully (I trust) disagree more fundamentally.TomTheTyke said:
I am not, however, a mindless lemming who somehow follows anything spouted by the Labour party without consideration.
Nor are PHers who vote Conservative necessarily accepting and supportive of all Tory proposals or policies. There's plenty of evidence on that score in various PH threads.TomTheTyke said:
Of course I do not believe that people should be allowed unlimited benefits if they can work, that would be foolish. What I want is a socialist economy with as near to full employment as possible; a higher minimum wage that will actually reduce the benefits burden and comprehensive support around the crucial things a person needs to live: heat, light, education, transport, health.
And yet paradoxically, looking back over the recent past, Labour has been very keen on raising transport taxes, penalising private transport users whenever possible, promoting collective transport on an unrealistic ideological basis, and adopting/expanding green taxes that make energy so expensive that more and more pensioners are dying in severe winter spells. See Peter Tatchell writing on Red Pepper under the title "Green is the New Red".TomTheTyke said:
It is possible to achieve all this and more under free market capitalism but it is not possible for ALL to do it and therein lies the problem.
It's not realistic to expect that, any more than we can all get into County athletic squads or get paid drives in the BTCC. You would need a eugenics programme to get "ALL" to the same position, good luck with that. TomTheTyke said:
...disagree with the idea that socialism's track record is terrible while that of capitalism is perfect...
Nobody is claiming that capitalism is perfect. However, the track record of Labour in the UK over the past 40 to 50 years really isn't good (describe their various shades of socialist red from Wilson to Foot to Blair any way you like). In basic terms, Labour screws the country as popular people buying 'free' rounds at the bar, Conservatives fix it as unpopular suppliers of medicine that tastes bad, then around we go. Personally I'd rather have the least-bad option of Conservatives in power without the need for major fixes, and with 10+ years ahead, there may be some respite available after 13 years of Labour followed by the dead weight of LibDems in the Coalition.I should point out, as I've done repeatedly in the past, that I'm in favour of a Party that takes an axe to any Big Government, supports enterprise and doesn't vilify or penalise individuals for being financially successful - not for so-called trickle down reasons, but for the basic reality that successful businesses employ people and together with successful individuals pay for pretty much everything that gets spent on less successful people. It's good to encourage more of this because higher tax-take (not to be confused with higher tax rates) will help those in need via cash, rather than the empty promises and fine words of empathy from Labour which pay for nothing and lead to economic ruin eventually.
turbobloke said:
A detailed reply.
Thanks for considering my points there. Firstly I never claimed Tory voters were lemmings, rather that Labour voters across a lot of threads on PH are presented as idioits, as though that's the only explanation anyone would vote for them. On the point of Labour transport policy, that is one of the areas I also would disagree with them. They should not penalise motorists but again that would mean transferring some of that tax burden to the highest earners through direct taxation. They have been far too reluctant to reverse the mistake of privatisation in rail transport, which is not private anyway as the govt still owns (through NR) the infrastructure and the franchise system just transfers profits to the private sector, why else would companies pay for the privilege of running a franchise? There is no benefit for the consumer; I still have no choice if I want to go to Leeds or Sheffield this afternoon I can only go Northern Rail and its the same story on the buses. Same goes for energy but Miliband, for all his failings, had at least pledged to cap prices.
We will have to disagree on this narrative of 'Labour ruins the economy then the Tories fix it.' I agree not regulating the banks properly here as well before 2008 was a serious failing, but that was the failing rather than public spending.
Obviously we disagree also on the basic principle of the incentive of possible success and the avoidance of penalising successful (for successful read those who have made a lot of money) people being the best way to improve a country. I agree that all people can't be exactly equal (that's Communism obviously) but just because someone is less capable/intelligent, without being lazy, should not exclude them from a good standard of living involving all the things I mentioned. To do this necessitates taxing those who are successful (wealthier) more and thereby reducing the gap between rich and poor.This will then enable the children of these people a greater chance to achieve more and also reduce the system of entrenched privilege.
Edited by TomTheTyke on Thursday 23 July 12:38
Timmy40 said:
cirian75 said:
Want could have had say if Lib Dems had say 25 more MP's in the 2010 election in a coalition with the tories and had better contained the Tory excesses better.
it's a real shame we haven't got another coalition, I think it worked well. 
Blimey.
Our mileage clearly varies but I've had enough LibDemLite in the Coalition to last a lifetime. Full-on LibDemism would be totally ruinous, worse than Labour....and I do realise it was the Coalition that you claimed worked well, we haven't had LibDem concentrate (thank goodness). Where the Coalition did badly (environment for example) there was usually a LibDem at the scene of the crash. Cable didn't get Plan B, in spite of lacking Cabinet responsibility and badmouthing Osborne for a successful policy in Plan A.
turbobloke said:
Timmy40 said:
cirian75 said:
Want could have had say if Lib Dems had say 25 more MP's in the 2010 election in a coalition with the tories and had better contained the Tory excesses better.
it's a real shame we haven't got another coalition, I think it worked well. Blimey.
Our mileage clearly varies but I've had enough LibDemLite in the Coalition to last a lifetime. Full-on LibDemism would be totally ruinous, worse than Labour....and I do realise it was the Coalition that you said worked well, we haven't had LibDem concentrate (thank goodness).
You are right about LibDem concentrate, although I hear it's very good for eating the sludge out of a blocked radiator ( just don't get any on your trousers )
Timmy40 said:
turbobloke said:
Timmy40 said:
cirian75 said:
Want could have had say if Lib Dems had say 25 more MP's in the 2010 election in a coalition with the tories and had better contained the Tory excesses better.
it's a real shame we haven't got another coalition, I think it worked well. Blimey.
Our mileage clearly varies but I've had enough LibDemLite in the Coalition to last a lifetime. Full-on LibDemism would be totally ruinous, worse than Labour....and I do realise it was the Coalition that you said worked well, we haven't had LibDem concentrate (thank goodness).
You are right about LibDem concentrate, although I hear it's very good for eating the sludge out of a blocked radiator ( just don't get any on your trousers )
We have an element of disagreement clearly - where the LibDems reined things in, I would have liked to see more free rein as per my Cable edit. Where they largely held sway, I would prefer they had not, as per energy and the environment.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff