Discussion
JawKnee said:
I've been a Labour member for years and voted for Corbyn.
Just remember as you're preaching about democracy and mandates that the ONLY reason Corbyn was an option was the gerrymandering of the process.Had the MPs who were democratically elected voted as per their beliefs (that they were elected to do) he wouldn't have made it on the ballot. It was only through cajoling Blairites to nominate him in order to have the fake left/right debate they thought was appropriate (despite not being what the PLP wanted) he got over the threshold.
So I don't think Labour should be preaching about democratic process, they can't even manage their own.
He's a parasite. A hanger on who's never held office, never had a proper job, never got any qualifications (2 Es don't count). A rabble rouser, safe in the knowledge he can shout a bit and nobody will listen so he doesn't have to actually get anything done. His personality is also quite unsuitable for public office as the Vice doc showed. Why anyone thinks he's the man to lead a party, far less the country is for them to explain.
And that's before we explore his policy ideas and sympathies. Fortunately the constituency arithmetic and rise of the SNP means the only way he'll be PM is if the Tories start bombing the home counties.
nikaiyo2 said:
What I really don't get is why, if C is such an honest man, of integrity, principles etc etc etc
Why did he stay in the labour party for 15 years when it was lead by Bliar and Winky introducing policies he must have found at odds with his old fashioned socialist views?
Also why do these who follow him not start their own party and have an openly old school socialist organisation that is open and honest about its desire to destroy the country, instead of pretending to be main stream.
I suppose it illustrates just how mendacious the average lefty is.
Well said.Why did he stay in the labour party for 15 years when it was lead by Bliar and Winky introducing policies he must have found at odds with his old fashioned socialist views?
Also why do these who follow him not start their own party and have an openly old school socialist organisation that is open and honest about its desire to destroy the country, instead of pretending to be main stream.
I suppose it illustrates just how mendacious the average lefty is.
Derek Smith said:
For the first time in years there is an opposition that differs to a considerable degree from the incumbent.
Interesting post. I'll put some alternative views if I may.Derek Smith said:
The current government method is not the only one, despite this being suggested by the vast majority of media outlets.
True, of course. But what is the alternative being offered? The major problem with Corbyn at the moment is it looks like he wants a re-run of the Labour approach of the 1970's which was a complete disaster was it not? Very left wing 'socialist' experiments such as that undertaken in Venezuela don't hep the cause either. There needs to be a convincing workable alternative but nobody, IMHO, has proffered one yet.Derek Smith said:
I think that government (i.e. my) money should not be used to subsidise landlords and bosses. That's what the current supplementary benefit (whatever it is called) does. People should be paid enough to live on if they work 40 hrs a week. Seems patently obvious to me. But they aren't.
I don't think anyone wants this but isn't this all a bit chicken and egg? As soon as huge housing benefits are put in place in an environment which is already short of housing then the result is inevitable. Those who significantly increased housing benefits are, are they not, a significant part of the problem?The same for tax credits. Once put in place they escalated out of control because it was an opportunity to 'bosses' to reduce wages. Again, the idiots (my view) who put this in place are a significant part of the problem are they not?
Derek Smith said:
Government money should not be paid to those needing to have a roof over their heads if they work 40 hrs a week. Housing allowances (whatever) are subsidies to landlords.
I agree, but see above.Derek Smith said:
On a slightly different point, I don't want my hard earned being used to bail out banks or other failed companies, as a sort of loan at little/no interest.
The problem is your 'hard earned' would be used to bail out whoever. Up to £75k (used to be £85k) is underwritten to each individual per banking establishment so if you let the establishments go bust then the government ends up shelling out a lot of money anyway on top of the economic shock and social/welfare support for those losing their jobs. Is it not the lesser of two evils to 'buy into' those banks/establishments and at least have some equity/return for public purse whilst protecting jobs. I do think, however, that the government should exercise a lot more 'control' over the establishments it has bought into with public money.Derek Smith said:
I think that the attack on unions is wrong. I think that certain providers of essentials should be in public hands, although not banks. I think it daft to pay so much of my money to various railway companies so they can pay their bosses bonuses.
Public money should only be put into infrastructure that is not viable as a 'going concern' but is necessary for a 'healthy' society i.e. security (military and police), health service, transport (railways and roadways) etc.Bonuses are OK but should only be paid against demonstrable achievement and success - I agree that bonuses shelled out against failure on the basis of the best brains would be lost just doesn't bear scrutiny - the best brains wouldn't have failed in the first place so all that is happening is the second raters are being 'retained' and being further motivated to under achieve.
Derek Smith said:
I've been called lefty for wanting to cut the social services bill. That's weird. I've been called lefty for thinking that nationalising of banks was a bad idea.
Perhaps those making such remarks do not understand what 'lefty' really means! The welfare bill just has to be cut - it is killing the country at the moment. But how to do it? What is the socialist/left solution to this? I have not seen anything from the left thinking that would actually achieve this!Derek Smith said:
We've had the years under Blair, Brown to a lesser extent, and Cameron where the gap between the rich and the poor has increased tremendously. So perhaps Corbyn is left, because he's against the gap getting even larger. Perhaps privatising the NHS is a bad idea. I believe privatising the police is a terrible idea.
IIRC the gap twixt rich and poor grew most (spectacularly) under Blair's Labour government! What exactly will Corbyn do to arrest this? I would appreciate understanding his approach to this that has a chance of working in practice. But he appears to offer nothing of substance.Derek Smith said:
There was a great hope after the war that 'things' would get better for the working man. To a great extent they did. A tremendous extent in fact. Now there seems to be a concerted attack on pay and conditions of the workers.
Amazing isn't it. Despite all the hand wringing of the left the actual fact is that the working man's lot has increased beyond all recognition since the war. Now we have 'relative poverty' and the descent into the politics of envy! It is the truly vulnerable in society who need to be protected these days, not the working man so much. I'm at a loss to understand the 'attack' on pay and conditions that is supposed to be happening! As stated above, the incessant increase in benefits on the welfare budget is a major driver of the problem - an own goal if ever there was one.Derek Smith said:
I've got a son-in-law who works as a carer for the local council. He pays his way, and his rent. He's a bit of a grafter. His role is about to be privatised. He's decided to stay to help his charges in the transition. His pay will plummet for concocted reasons. He will receive social service payouts. What a f
ked up way to run a country.
Again, this is being driven to a very significant amount, is it not, by the incessantly increasing benefits of the welfare state?ked up way to run a country.What is Corbyn's real world solution to this apart from harking back to a demonstrably failed approach of the past? This is clearly an approach that Einstein once commented upon!
Edited by Garvin on Sunday 5th June 09:53
mjb1 said:
Jeremy Corbyn on 'The Last Leg' (Ch4) tonight. Should be good!
I've just finished watching this an I didn't think my opinion of him could have got any lower but it has. He is one of the most out of touch people I have ever seen. It's almost like he's been transported here directly from the 60's and is in total confusion with everything he sees. He has the most unreal view of the world and absolutely no personality or charisma in the slightest. I;m sure he didn't want to be there but was told by the party to go on and try and let people see who he really is to try and win votes.
Tycho said:
I've just finished watching this an I didn't think my opinion of him could have got any lower but it has.
He's been panned for it in the press, but in fairness I thought actually he wasn't terrible. I'm no fan of his, but that show is well out his comfort zone and it could have been a lot worse.Having said that I didn't watch it all so might have missed something.
jmorgan said:
I think Corbyn will surprise a lot of people and still think he has a shot at the title.
The way the cadre of backers have swarmed around Corbyn, this was always a possibility.
I think he's handled himself quite well during this referendum and has come across as a decent man. Even his comments just now on Cameron's resignation show a lot of class (can't believe I'm typing this lol). The way the cadre of backers have swarmed around Corbyn, this was always a possibility.
BlackLabel said:
jmorgan said:
I think Corbyn will surprise a lot of people and still think he has a shot at the title.
The way the cadre of backers have swarmed around Corbyn, this was always a possibility.
I think he's handled himself quite well during this referendum and has come across as a decent man. Even his comments just now on Cameron's resignation show a lot of class (can't believe I'm typing this lol). The way the cadre of backers have swarmed around Corbyn, this was always a possibility.
Listening to Abbot this am on the TV, it was almost as if they saw this as a win for their leader. Sycophantic or spin? Spinophantic...
Corbyn's fked. He was supposed to be onboard the remain side, went at it half arsed and lost. He's as culpable as Cameron.
It's not like the PLP need more reason to want rid of him, but they've got it. It's just a matter of how they manage the process to get someone electable (i.e. not McDonnell) in.
ked. He was supposed to be onboard the remain side, went at it half arsed and lost. He's as culpable as Cameron.It's not like the PLP need more reason to want rid of him, but they've got it. It's just a matter of how they manage the process to get someone electable (i.e. not McDonnell) in.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff