Labour joins the immigration bandwagon

Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Pages:
1
2
3
4

Labour joins the immigration bandwagon
Topic Started: Nov 18 2014, 11:30 PM (1,577 Views)
AndyK	Nov 18 2014, 11:30 PM Post #1
Senior Member Posts: 2,474 Group: Members Member #69 Joined: Aug 11, 2014	Quote: EXCLUSIVE: Labour attempt to outflank Tories and Ukip on immigration Rachel Reeves vows to curb access to out-of-work benefits for two years Also wants to end the ‘absurdity’ of child benefit being exported to the EU Could limit access to tax credits used by employees to top-up low wages But agreement would be needed across the EU raising doubts about plan Tories say: 'Nobody will believe what Labour say on immigration or welfare' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2839327/Labour-ban-jobless-EU-migrants-claiming-benefits-TWO-YEARS-plan-curb-welfare-tourism.html#ixzz3JRL8mAIO Lets remind ourselves what the previous rhetoric was.



Affa	Nov 18 2014, 11:41 PM Post #2
Senior Member Posts: 11,999 Group: Members Member #58 Joined: Jul 26, 2014	Tories say: 'Nobody will believe what Labour say on immigration or welfare' Nor what the Tories say either! Will UKIP be any different?



Heinrich	Nov 18 2014, 11:52 PM Post #3
Regular Guy Posts: 2,920 Group: Members Member #51 Joined: Jul 22, 2014	If it will get them votes, nobody can be more Tory than New Labour.



RJD	Nov 19 2014, 08:13 AM Post #4
Prudence and Thrift Posts: 12,499 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	I predicted this three years ago and wait a little and you will learn that Labour are also going to be tough on those nasty Europeans. Nothing to do with convictions and all to do with votes. I do not believe there is one word of sincerity in their recent statement. Charlatans.



papasmurf	Nov 19 2014, 08:28 AM Post #5
Senior Member Posts: 17,280 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	RJD Nov 19 2014, 08:13 AM I predicted this three years ago and wait a little and you will learn that Labour are also going to be tough on those nasty Europeans. Nothing to do with convictions and all to do with votes. I do not believe there is one word of sincerity in their recent statement. Charlatans. Both the Tories and New Labour are making promises about immigration that cannot be done, unless Britain leaves the EU.



RJD	Nov 19 2014, 09:01 AM Post #6
Prudence and Thrift Posts: 12,499 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	papasmurf Nov 19 2014, 08:28 AM RJD Nov 19 2014, 08:13 AM I predicted this three years ago and wait a little and you will learn that Labour are also going to be tough on those nasty Europeans. Nothing to do with convictions and all to do with votes. I do not believe there is one word of sincerity in their recent statement. Charlatans. Both the Tories and New Labour are making promises about immigration that cannot be done, unless Britain leaves the EU. Probably true as we stand, but the EU is run on Pork Barrel politics and even today Germany and others are working hard to see what can be done to keep Treaties in place but inhibit migration flows. France, Germany and Italy also have their pressure groups who like UKIP are making rapid progress into the body politic of their countries. Let us see if they can do enough to stop the rot? I doubt it. That said Labour stinks of rank insincerity as only the other day they were trying to persuade us that their unfettered immigration policy was good for us and a few days before anyone mentioning the word immigrant is a racist.



papasmurf	Nov 19 2014, 09:05 AM Post #7
Senior Member Posts: 17,280 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	RJD Nov 19 2014, 09:01 AM That said Labour stinks of rank insincerity So do the Tories.



RJD	Nov 19 2014, 06:12 PM Post #8
Prudence and Thrift Posts: 12,499 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	papasmurf Nov 19 2014, 09:05 AM RJD Nov 19 2014, 09:01 AM That said Labour stinks of rank insincerity So do the Tories. Not true, they might be ineffective, lacking gonads, emasculated by the EU etc. etc. whatever, but the majority do wish to see controls whereas Labour were very clear about their dogma of unfettered immigration. I do not think you can claim the Tories are insincere, but Milli obviously is. Not only that Labour are now using the Tory slogan that they previously claimed was racist. You have got to larf.



Affa	Nov 19 2014, 06:24 PM Post #9
Senior Member Posts: 11,999 Group: Members Member #58 Joined: Jul 26, 2014	UKIP, the Tories, all of them are using rhetoric that they castigated the BNP for ........ hypocrites the lot of them. Edited by Affa, Nov 19 2014, 06:25 PM.



Deleted User	Nov 19 2014, 06:30 PM Post #10
Deleted User	Latest news...politicians are dishonest.........
Deleted User


somersetli	Nov 19 2014, 06:36 PM Post #11
somersetli Posts: 626 Group: Members Member #12 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	About time too! Labour might talk the talk.............but on immigration they will never walk the walk. Take it with pinch of salt.



Affa	Nov 19 2014, 06:52 PM Post #12
Senior Member Posts: 11,999 Group: Members Member #58 Joined: Jul 26, 2014	somersetli Nov 19 2014, 06:36 PM About time too! Labour might talk the talk.............but on immigration they will never walk the walk. Take it with pinch of salt. More than a 'pinch' ......... I doubt UKIP can or will walk the walk. Talk is cheap.



Tigger	Nov 19 2014, 07:30 PM Post #13
Senior Member Posts: 20,106 Group: Members Member #18 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	RJD Nov 19 2014, 06:12 PM papasmurf Nov 19 2014, 09:05 AM RJD Nov 19 2014, 09:01 AM That said Labour stinks of rank insincerity So do the Tories. Not true, they might be ineffective, lacking gonads, emasculated by the EU etc. etc. whatever, but the majority do wish to see controls whereas Labour were very clear about their dogma of unfettered immigration. I do not think you can claim the Tories are insincere, but Milli obviously is. Not only that Labour are now using the Tory slogan that they previously claimed was racist. You have got to larf. Verifiable drivel, the predominantly Tory CBI and IoD are both overwhelmingly in favours of ~~cheap and poorly regulated labour~~ sorry plucky immigrants who come here to help Britain out, why even several friends of mine love this cheap labour as well. The only thing the Tory party and it's supporters are capable of is rank hypocrisy in regards to this subject. The end.



Deleted User	Nov 20 2014, 10:39 AM Post #14
Deleted User	Tigger Nov 19 2014, 07:30 PM RJD Nov 19 2014, 06:12 PM papasmurf Nov 19 2014, 09:05 AM RJD Nov 19 2014, 09:01 AM That said Labour stinks of rank insincerity So do the Tories. Not true, they might be ineffective, lacking gonads, emasculated by the EU etc. etc. whatever, but the majority do wish to see controls whereas Labour were very clear about their dogma of unfettered immigration. I do not think you can claim the Tories are insincere, but Milli obviously is. Not only that Labour are now using the Tory slogan that they previously claimed was racist. You have got to larf. Verifiable drivel, the predominantly Tory CBI and IoD are both overwhelmingly in favours of ~~cheap and poorly regulated labour~~ sorry plucky immigrants who come here to help Britain out, why even several friends of mine love this cheap labour as well. The only thing the Tory party and it's supporters are capable of is rank hypocrisy in regards to this subject. The end. I have always been indecisive about the work ethic of the British in general, and now I can't just make up my mind. When I was a 'commercial employer' my employees were extensively British born and bred, because largely speaking I needed technically skilled staff with considerable communication skills supported by trained financial and administrative staff. Like all employers there was an inevitable variation in staff quality rangeing from the 'involuntary temporary' to outstanding. A gross generalisation I know, but my overall impression of the British worker is that they are invariably much more concerned about what they can take from the table rather than what they can put on it. Now having sold my modest business group my need to employ people is much reduced. We have an outstanding English groom and until early last year we also had a delightful and rather elderly English gardener/odd job man who subsequently retired. Since then we employed two English workers; the first was fired for theft and the second for being bone idle. I would always prefer to employ a native English, as far as the law allows me of course, but with a lack of interest to our advertising from English applicants I have now been 'forced' to take on a Pole. After three months he is proving to be immensely hard working, good humoured and trust worthy. He is paid the same as his predecessors at £8.00 per hour for a minimum of a 40 hour week with extra hours also at £8 on an 'as needed basis'. The chap I employed before and had to fire for laziness complained £8 an hour wasn't enough to live on but was never willing to do the available extra hours; my current employee is always delighted to do extra hours and averages 48/50 hours a week. OK a single example doesn't prove a point although this example is borne out by a number of acquaintances with comparable experiences, but it does persuade me that many commercial employers don't fail to take on English workers because they can get cheaper foreign labour but because the English workers don't want the work. A successful business operator know that it is not just the cost of labour but the quality which matters. A common 'mindset' seems to be that 'I am getting a couple of hundred plus a week (jsa, housing allowance, family allowances) and perhaps earning a few quid on the sly from a mate so why should I want to work for forty hours for a measly extra £80 or £100 per week'. In other words the view is that they would not be working for £8.00 per hour but just for the extra say £2 per hour, since they are getting £6 anyway. As a supporter of the Tory party I am sorry that you should consider me a rank hypocrite but I consider that you are wholly unjustified in doing so. No party has a greater responsibility for the influx of 'plucky immigrants' than Labour and the resulting issues regarding rates of pay etc. The Tories have been relatively hamstrung in doing enough about it by EU legislation. I think I see a different target for the accusation of rank hypocrisy.
Deleted User


C-too	Nov 20 2014, 11:32 AM Post #15
Honourable Member Posts: 17,686 Group: Members Member #49 Joined: Jul 12, 2014	Heinrich Nov 18 2014, 11:52 PM If it will get them votes, nobody can be more Tory than New Labour. New Labour no longer exists.



ACH1967	Nov 20 2014, 12:17 PM Post #16
Senior Member Posts: 4,226 Group: Members Member #56 Joined: Jul 24, 2014	Major Sinic Nov 20 2014, 10:39 AM Tigger Nov 19 2014, 07:30 PM RJD Nov 19 2014, 06:12 PM papasmurf Nov 19 2014, 09:05 AM Quoting limited to 4 levels deep Not true, they might be ineffective, lacking gonads, emasculated by the EU etc. etc. whatever, but the majority do wish to see controls whereas Labour were very clear about their dogma of unfettered immigration. I do not think you can claim the Tories are insincere, but Milli obviously is. Not only that Labour are now using the Tory slogan that they previously claimed was racist. You have got to larf. Verifiable drivel, the predominantly Tory CBI and IoD are both overwhelmingly in favours of ~~cheap and poorly regulated labour~~ sorry plucky immigrants who come here to help Britain out, why even several friends of mine love this cheap labour as well. The only thing the Tory party and it's supporters are capable of is rank hypocrisy in regards to this subject. The end. I have always been indecisive about the work ethic of the British in general, and now I can't just make up my mind. When I was a 'commercial employer' my employees were extensively British born and bred, because largely speaking I needed technically skilled staff with considerable communication skills supported by trained financial and administrative staff. Like all employers there was an inevitable variation in staff quality rangeing from the 'involuntary temporary' to outstanding. A gross generalisation I know, but my overall impression of the British worker is that they are invariably much more concerned about what they can take from the table rather than what they can put on it. Now having sold my modest business group my need to employ people is much reduced. We have an outstanding English groom and until early last year we also had a delightful and rather elderly English gardener/odd job man who subsequently retired. Since then we employed two English workers; the first was fired for theft and the second for being bone idle. I would always prefer to employ a native English, as far as the law allows me of course, but with a lack of interest to our advertising from English applicants I have now been 'forced' to take on a Pole. After three months he is proving to be immensely hard working, good humoured and trust worthy. He is paid the same as his predecessors at £8.00 per hour for a minimum of a 40 hour week with extra hours also at £8 on an 'as needed basis'. The chap I employed before and had to fire for laziness complained £8 an hour wasn't enough to live on but was never willing to do the available extra hours; my current employee is always delighted to do extra hours and averages 48/50 hours a week. OK a single example doesn't prove a point although this example is borne out by a number of acquaintances with comparable experiences, but it does persuade me that many commercial employers don't fail to take on English workers because they can get cheaper foreign labour but because the English workers don't want the work. A successful business operator know that it is not just the cost of labour but the quality which matters. A common 'mindset' seems to be that 'I am getting a couple of hundred plus a week (jsa, housing allowance, family allowances) and perhaps earning a few quid on the sly from a mate so why should I want to work for forty hours for a measly extra £80 or £100 per week'. In other words the view is that they would not be working for £8.00 per hour but just for the extra say £2 per hour, since they are getting £6 anyway. As a supporter of the Tory party I am sorry that you should consider me a rank hypocrite but I consider that you are wholly unjustified in doing so. No party has a greater responsibility for the influx of 'plucky immigrants' than Labour and the resulting issues regarding rates of pay etc. The Tories have been relatively hamstrung in doing enough about it by EU legislation. I think I see a different target for the accusation of rank hypocrisy. But are you comparing Apples with Apples? If the english guy has two kids and a family and because of benfits only earns £2 more an hour is that the same for the Polish guy? If not, for example the Pole is living in a bed sit sending money home, then because of benefits the job is worth £4 an hour then it's hardly a fair comparison. The point is...is it the people's lack of will, are they disincentivised by the welfare system or are you not paying enough?



RJD	Nov 20 2014, 12:34 PM Post #17
Prudence and Thrift Posts: 12,499 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Affa Nov 19 2014, 06:24 PM UKIP, the Tories, all of them are using rhetoric that they castigated the BNP for ........ hypocrites the lot of them. BNP = Old Labour plus a dash of racism.



RJD	Nov 20 2014, 12:38 PM Post #18
Prudence and Thrift Posts: 12,499 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	C-too Nov 20 2014, 11:32 AM Heinrich Nov 18 2014, 11:52 PM If it will get them votes, nobody can be more Tory than New Labour. New Labour no longer exists. Old Labour has reemerged and we are about to see Milli revving up the malcontents, the Spite and Envy Brigade, and he will be silent on all matters relating to that which pertains to the creation of wealth. The have a grand line in being angry but bugger all when it comes to effective solutions.



C-too	Nov 20 2014, 12:41 PM Post #19
Honourable Member Posts: 17,686 Group: Members Member #49 Joined: Jul 12, 2014	RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:34 PM Affa Nov 19 2014, 06:24 PM UKIP, the Tories, all of them are using rhetoric that they castigated the BNP for ........ hypocrites the lot of them. BNP = Old Labour plus a dash of racism.



RJD	Nov 20 2014, 12:43 PM Post #20
Prudence and Thrift Posts: 12,499 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	ACH1967 Nov 20 2014, 12:17 PM Major Sinic Nov 20 2014, 10:39 AM Tigger Nov 19 2014, 07:30 PM RJD Nov 19 2014, 06:12 PM Quoting limited to 4 levels deep Verifiable drivel, the predominantly Tory CBI and IoD are both overwhelmingly in favours of ~~cheap and poorly regulated labour~~ sorry plucky immigrants who come here to help Britain out, why even several friends of mine love this cheap labour as well. The only thing the Tory party and it's supporters are capable of is rank hypocrisy in regards to this subject. The end. I have always been indecisive about the work ethic of the British in general, and now I can't just make up my mind. When I was a 'commercial employer' my employees were extensively British born and bred, because largely speaking I needed technically skilled staff with considerable communication skills supported by trained financial and administrative staff. Like all employers there was an inevitable variation in staff quality rangeing from the 'involuntary temporary' to outstanding. A gross generalisation I know, but my overall impression of the British worker is that they are invariably much more concerned about what they can take from the table rather than what they can put on it. Now having sold my modest business group my need to employ people is much reduced. We have an outstanding English groom and until early last year we also had a delightful and rather elderly English gardener/odd job man who subsequently retired. Since then we employed two English workers; the first was fired for theft and the second for being bone idle. I would always prefer to employ a native English, as far as the law allows me of course, but with a lack of interest to our advertising from English applicants I have now been 'forced' to take on a Pole. After three months he is proving to be immensely hard working, good humoured and trust worthy. He is paid the same as his predecessors at £8.00 per hour for a minimum of a 40 hour week with extra hours also at £8 on an 'as needed basis'. The chap I employed before and had to fire for laziness complained £8 an hour wasn't enough to live on but was never willing to do the available extra hours; my current employee is always delighted to do extra hours and averages 48/50 hours a week. OK a single example doesn't prove a point although this example is borne out by a number of acquaintances with comparable experiences, but it does persuade me that many commercial employers don't fail to take on English workers because they can get cheaper foreign labour but because the English workers don't want the work. A successful business operator know that it is not just the cost of labour but the quality which matters. A common 'mindset' seems to be that 'I am getting a couple of hundred plus a week (jsa, housing allowance, family allowances) and perhaps earning a few quid on the sly from a mate so why should I want to work for forty hours for a measly extra £80 or £100 per week'. In other words the view is that they would not be working for £8.00 per hour but just for the extra say £2 per hour, since they are getting £6 anyway. As a supporter of the Tory party I am sorry that you should consider me a rank hypocrite but I consider that you are wholly unjustified in doing so. No party has a greater responsibility for the influx of 'plucky immigrants' than Labour and the resulting issues regarding rates of pay etc. The Tories have been relatively hamstrung in doing enough about it by EU legislation. I think I see a different target for the accusation of rank hypocrisy. But are you comparing Apples with Apples? If the english guy has two kids and a family and because of benfits only earns £2 more an hour is that the same for the Polish guy? If not, for example the Pole is living in a bed sit sending money home, then because of benefits the job is worth £4 an hour then it's hardly a fair comparison. The point is...is it the people's lack of will, are they disincentivised by the welfare system or are you not paying enough? Even Darling now admits that their system of benefits has resulted in depressing wage rates. Also as all Economists know the Employers NI is paid for by the Employees. So Labour come out and say what you are going to do to elevate the burden placed on low paid workers, of which there is a massive surplus? A few Bob on the Mansion Tax is a drop in the ocean and you need that £0.5b to save the NHS. You have got to larf. Best tell us what you can do other than revving up the malcontents, tell us how you are going to push up wage rates in a sustainable manner.



Deleted User	Nov 20 2014, 12:44 PM Post #21
Deleted User	RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:38 PM C-too Nov 20 2014, 11:32 AM Heinrich Nov 18 2014, 11:52 PM If it will get them votes, nobody can be more Tory than New Labour. New Labour no longer exists. Old Labour has reemerged and we are about to see Milli revving up the malcontents, the Spite and Envy Brigade, and he will be silent on all matters relating to that which pertains to the creation of wealth. The have a grand line in being angry but bugger all when it comes to effective solutions. No. Old Labour was underpinned by the unions and was a Socialist based party. New Labout has morphed into Tory lite with psuedo Socialist rhetoric.
Deleted User


RJD	Nov 20 2014, 12:45 PM Post #22
Prudence and Thrift Posts: 12,499 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	C-too Nov 20 2014, 12:41 PM RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:34 PM Affa Nov 19 2014, 06:24 PM UKIP, the Tories, all of them are using rhetoric that they castigated the BNP for ........ hypocrites the lot of them. BNP = Old Labour plus a dash of racism. Have you ever read a Manifesto? Try the one from Michael Foot and the last BNP Manifestos for a start. Then you might, just might mind, start to spot the similarities.



C-too	Nov 20 2014, 12:48 PM Post #23
Honourable Member Posts: 17,686 Group: Members Member #49 Joined: Jul 12, 2014	RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:38 PM C-too Nov 20 2014, 11:32 AM Heinrich Nov 18 2014, 11:52 PM If it will get them votes, nobody can be more Tory than New Labour. New Labour no longer exists. Old Labour has reemerged and we are about to see Milli revving up the malcontents, the Spite and Envy Brigade, and he will be silent on all matters relating to that which pertains to the creation of wealth. The have a grand line in being angry but bugger all when it comes to effective solutions. The "spite and envy brigade" are those with much and want so much more while being discontent about having to work instead of just being able to enjoy more and more wealth produced by 'minnows'. The 'kick people when they are down brigade' would be another good title for them.



RJD	Nov 20 2014, 12:50 PM Post #24
Prudence and Thrift Posts: 12,499 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	gansao Nov 20 2014, 12:44 PM RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:38 PM C-too Nov 20 2014, 11:32 AM Heinrich Nov 18 2014, 11:52 PM If it will get them votes, nobody can be more Tory than New Labour. New Labour no longer exists. Old Labour has reemerged and we are about to see Milli revving up the malcontents, the Spite and Envy Brigade, and he will be silent on all matters relating to that which pertains to the creation of wealth. The have a grand line in being angry but bugger all when it comes to effective solutions. No. Old Labour was underpinned by the unions and was a Socialist based party. New Labout has morphed into Tory lite with psuedo Socialist rhetoric. New Labour, even Newer Labour is funded by Public Sector Unions. The Public Sector Unions gave Milli his job. That said I agree that New Labour was all rhetoric and the heart and soul was at root Socialist. Still is, scratch a Labour MP and you are likely to find he is at heart a closet Marxist. Not that he understands the meaning of the word.



C-too	Nov 20 2014, 12:52 PM Post #25
Honourable Member Posts: 17,686 Group: Members Member #49 Joined: Jul 12, 2014	RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:45 PM C-too Nov 20 2014, 12:41 PM RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:34 PM Affa Nov 19 2014, 06:24 PM UKIP, the Tories, all of them are using rhetoric that they castigated the BNP for ........ hypocrites the lot of them. BNP = Old Labour plus a dash of racism. Have you ever read a Manifesto? Try the one from Michael Foot and the last BNP Manifestos for a start. Then you might, just might mind, start to spot the similarities. Michael foot was a product of pre-WWII politics. Labour may get a nudge to the left but no matter what happens and no matter what you dream about, Labour will not be going back that far. The BNP did what UKip are doing and that is misleading people about their real intentions, i.e. right-wing politics hiding behind a moderate face. Edited by C-too, Nov 20 2014, 12:55 PM.



Heinrich	Nov 20 2014, 12:54 PM Post #26
Regular Guy Posts: 2,920 Group: Members Member #51 Joined: Jul 22, 2014	RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:38 PM C-too Nov 20 2014, 11:32 AM Heinrich Nov 18 2014, 11:52 PM If it will get them votes, nobody can be more Tory than New Labour. New Labour no longer exists. Old Labour has reemerged and we are about to see Milli revving up the malcontents, the Spite and Envy Brigade, and he will be silent on all matters relating to that which pertains to the creation of wealth. The have a grand line in being angry but bugger all when it comes to effective solutions. Tony Blair destroyed the Labour Party and replaced it with New Labour. Nothing short of a Resolution at a party conference which condemns the part played by New Labour in invading Iraq as well as a return to socialist policies can restore the Labour Party.



C-too	Nov 20 2014, 12:58 PM Post #27
Honourable Member Posts: 17,686 Group: Members Member #49 Joined: Jul 12, 2014	Heinrich Nov 20 2014, 12:54 PM RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:38 PM C-too Nov 20 2014, 11:32 AM Heinrich Nov 18 2014, 11:52 PM If it will get them votes, nobody can be more Tory than New Labour. New Labour no longer exists. Old Labour has reemerged and we are about to see Milli revving up the malcontents, the Spite and Envy Brigade, and he will be silent on all matters relating to that which pertains to the creation of wealth. The have a grand line in being angry but bugger all when it comes to effective solutions. Tony Blair destroyed the Labour Party and replaced it with New Labour. Nothing short of a Resolution at a party conference which condemns the part played by New Labour in invading Iraq as well as a return to socialist policies can restore the Labour Party. Old Labour were for the best part unelectable.



Deleted User	Nov 20 2014, 01:00 PM Post #28
Deleted User	Heinrich Nov 20 2014, 12:54 PM RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:38 PM C-too Nov 20 2014, 11:32 AM Heinrich Nov 18 2014, 11:52 PM If it will get them votes, nobody can be more Tory than New Labour. New Labour no longer exists. Old Labour has reemerged and we are about to see Milli revving up the malcontents, the Spite and Envy Brigade, and he will be silent on all matters relating to that which pertains to the creation of wealth. The have a grand line in being angry but bugger all when it comes to effective solutions. Tony Blair destroyed the Labour Party and replaced it with New Labour. Nothing short of a Resolution at a party conference which condemns the part played by New Labour in invading Iraq as well as a return to socialist policies can restore the Labour Party. Heinrich. Do you think that the Labour party would not have morphed into New Labour if John Smith had not died ie would Smith have had the clout to keep the Labour party a viable, electable and sustainable Socialist political party?
Deleted User


C-too	Nov 20 2014, 01:01 PM Post #29
Honourable Member Posts: 17,686 Group: Members Member #49 Joined: Jul 12, 2014	RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:50 PM gansao Nov 20 2014, 12:44 PM RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:38 PM C-too Nov 20 2014, 11:32 AM Quoting limited to 4 levels deep Old Labour has reemerged and we are about to see Milli revving up the malcontents, the Spite and Envy Brigade, and he will be silent on all matters relating to that which pertains to the creation of wealth. The have a grand line in being angry but bugger all when it comes to effective solutions. No. Old Labour was underpinned by the unions and was a Socialist based party. New Labout has morphed into Tory lite with psuedo Socialist rhetoric. New Labour, even Newer Labour is funded by Public Sector Unions. The Public Sector Unions gave Milli his job. That said I agree that New Labour was all rhetoric and the heart and soul was at root Socialist. Still is, scratch a Labour MP and you are likely to find he is at heart a closet Marxist. Not that he understands the meaning of the word. New Labour, capitalism with a social conscience. After 18 years of callous Conservatism NL was a breath of fresh air.



Heinrich	Nov 20 2014, 01:08 PM Post #30
Regular Guy Posts: 2,920 Group: Members Member #51 Joined: Jul 22, 2014	gansao Nov 20 2014, 01:00 PM Heinrich Nov 20 2014, 12:54 PM RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:38 PM C-too Nov 20 2014, 11:32 AM Quoting limited to 4 levels deep Old Labour has reemerged and we are about to see Milli revving up the malcontents, the Spite and Envy Brigade, and he will be silent on all matters relating to that which pertains to the creation of wealth. The have a grand line in being angry but bugger all when it comes to effective solutions. Tony Blair destroyed the Labour Party and replaced it with New Labour. Nothing short of a Resolution at a party conference which condemns the part played by New Labour in invading Iraq as well as a return to socialist policies can restore the Labour Party. Heinrich. Do you think that the Labour party would not have morphed into New Labour if John Smith had not died ie would Smith have had the clout to keep the Labour party a viable, electable and sustainable Socialist political party? I don't know enough about John Smith to offer an opinion.



Deleted User	Nov 20 2014, 01:12 PM Post #31
Deleted User	Heinrich Nov 20 2014, 01:08 PM gansao Nov 20 2014, 01:00 PM Heinrich Nov 20 2014, 12:54 PM RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:38 PM Quoting limited to 4 levels deep Tony Blair destroyed the Labour Party and replaced it with New Labour. Nothing short of a Resolution at a party conference which condemns the part played by New Labour in invading Iraq as well as a return to socialist policies can restore the Labour Party. Heinrich. Do you think that the Labour party would not have morphed into New Labour if John Smith had not died ie would Smith have had the clout to keep the Labour party a viable, electable and sustainable Socialist political party? I don't know enough about John Smith to offer an opinion. Oh. I thought you were a Scot. You must be Welsh then.
Deleted User


Deleted User	Nov 20 2014, 01:20 PM Post #32
Deleted User	ACH1967 Nov 20 2014, 12:17 PM Major Sinic Nov 20 2014, 10:39 AM Tigger Nov 19 2014, 07:30 PM RJD Nov 19 2014, 06:12 PM Quoting limited to 4 levels deep Verifiable drivel, the predominantly Tory CBI and IoD are both overwhelmingly in favours of ~~cheap and poorly regulated labour~~ sorry plucky immigrants who come here to help Britain out, why even several friends of mine love this cheap labour as well. The only thing the Tory party and it's supporters are capable of is rank hypocrisy in regards to this subject. The end. I have always been indecisive about the work ethic of the British in general, and now I can't just make up my mind. When I was a 'commercial employer' my employees were extensively British born and bred, because largely speaking I needed technically skilled staff with considerable communication skills supported by trained financial and administrative staff. Like all employers there was an inevitable variation in staff quality rangeing from the 'involuntary temporary' to outstanding. A gross generalisation I know, but my overall impression of the British worker is that they are invariably much more concerned about what they can take from the table rather than what they can put on it. Now having sold my modest business group my need to employ people is much reduced. We have an outstanding English groom and until early last year we also had a delightful and rather elderly English gardener/odd job man who subsequently retired. Since then we employed two English workers; the first was fired for theft and the second for being bone idle. I would always prefer to employ a native English, as far as the law allows me of course, but with a lack of interest to our advertising from English applicants I have now been 'forced' to take on a Pole. After three months he is proving to be immensely hard working, good humoured and trust worthy. He is paid the same as his predecessors at £8.00 per hour for a minimum of a 40 hour week with extra hours also at £8 on an 'as needed basis'. The chap I employed before and had to fire for laziness complained £8 an hour wasn't enough to live on but was never willing to do the available extra hours; my current employee is always delighted to do extra hours and averages 48/50 hours a week. OK a single example doesn't prove a point although this example is borne out by a number of acquaintances with comparable experiences, but it does persuade me that many commercial employers don't fail to take on English workers because they can get cheaper foreign labour but because the English workers don't want the work. A successful business operator know that it is not just the cost of labour but the quality which matters. A common 'mindset' seems to be that 'I am getting a couple of hundred plus a week (jsa, housing allowance, family allowances) and perhaps earning a few quid on the sly from a mate so why should I want to work for forty hours for a measly extra £80 or £100 per week'. In other words the view is that they would not be working for £8.00 per hour but just for the extra say £2 per hour, since they are getting £6 anyway. As a supporter of the Tory party I am sorry that you should consider me a rank hypocrite but I consider that you are wholly unjustified in doing so. No party has a greater responsibility for the influx of 'plucky immigrants' than Labour and the resulting issues regarding rates of pay etc. The Tories have been relatively hamstrung in doing enough about it by EU legislation. I think I see a different target for the accusation of rank hypocrisy. But are you comparing Apples with Apples? If the english guy has two kids and a family and because of benfits only earns £2 more an hour is that the same for the Polish guy? If not, for example the Pole is living in a bed sit sending money home, then because of benefits the job is worth £4 an hour then it's hardly a fair comparison. The point is...is it the people's lack of will, are they disincentivised by the welfare system or are you not paying enough? Those are indeed the three relevent alternatives. As I suspect you would agree each has an influence and each situation varies. Those on the left seem to consider the 'fault' or 'blame' lies squarely with greedy businesses employing cheap and easily exploited immigrant labour, supported by a seeming satanic government who pretend they want to control immigration, but in reality want to encourage it because they are in thrall to their corporate paymasters. Those on the right seem to think that any unskilled or semi-skilled British person who is unemployed is fundamentally lazy and feckless and the welfare system enables them to continue to be. The reality is that all three reasons play their part to a greater or lesser degree depending on the individual circumstances. However the IDS welfare reforms, the principle behind which I am in full agreement with, is demonstrating that the workshy will amazingly manage to find a job only when the benefits are threatened so it is reasonable to conclude that your first two alternatives are inextricably linked. Of course I do accept that this does not apply to all unemployed Brits! In my particular case because I am fully aware of the circumstances I put it down to primarily to welfare financing an individual who was fundamentally lazy enabling him to spend long periods avoiding work. This particular waste of space had a partner and one child. My present chap has an English partner with two children of primary school age who are not his. His partner works as a cashier at night in a filling station whilst he child sits and he works for us during the day. If any unskilled or semi-skilled worker outside London who thinks the option to gross over £400 per week is being underpaid, is living in cloud cuckoo land.
Deleted User


Deleted User	Nov 20 2014, 01:22 PM Post #33
Deleted User	Heinrich Nov 20 2014, 01:08 PM gansao Nov 20 2014, 01:00 PM Heinrich Nov 20 2014, 12:54 PM RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:38 PM Quoting limited to 4 levels deep Tony Blair destroyed the Labour Party and replaced it with New Labour. Nothing short of a Resolution at a party conference which condemns the part played by New Labour in invading Iraq as well as a return to socialist policies can restore the Labour Party. Heinrich. Do you think that the Labour party would not have morphed into New Labour if John Smith had not died ie would Smith have had the clout to keep the Labour party a viable, electable and sustainable Socialist political party? I don't know enough about John Smith to offer an opinion. That doesn't usually stop you!
Deleted User


Deleted User	Nov 20 2014, 01:28 PM Post #34
Deleted User	Major Sinic Nov 20 2014, 01:22 PM Heinrich Nov 20 2014, 01:08 PM gansao Nov 20 2014, 01:00 PM Heinrich Nov 20 2014, 12:54 PM Quoting limited to 4 levels deep Heinrich. Do you think that the Labour party would not have morphed into New Labour if John Smith had not died ie would Smith have had the clout to keep the Labour party a viable, electable and sustainable Socialist political party? I don't know enough about John Smith to offer an opinion. That doesn't usually stop you! Ask him about Plaid Cymru
Deleted User


RJD	Nov 20 2014, 01:39 PM Post #35
Prudence and Thrift Posts: 12,499 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	C-too Nov 20 2014, 12:52 PM RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:45 PM C-too Nov 20 2014, 12:41 PM RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:34 PM Quoting limited to 4 levels deep Have you ever read a Manifesto? Try the one from Michael Foot and the last BNP Manifestos for a start. Then you might, just might mind, start to spot the similarities. Michael foot was a product of pre-WWII politics. Labour may get a nudge to the left but no matter what happens and no matter what you dream about, Labour will not be going back that far. The BNP did what UKip are doing and that is misleading people about their real intentions, i.e. right-wing politics hiding behind a moderate face. Isn't that the reverse of what NL did?



C-too	Nov 20 2014, 01:45 PM Post #36
Honourable Member Posts: 17,686 Group: Members Member #49 Joined: Jul 12, 2014	RJD Nov 20 2014, 01:39 PM C-too Nov 20 2014, 12:52 PM RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:45 PM C-too Nov 20 2014, 12:41 PM Quoting limited to 4 levels deep Have you ever read a Manifesto? Try the one from Michael Foot and the last BNP Manifestos for a start. Then you might, just might mind, start to spot the similarities. Michael foot was a product of pre-WWII politics. Labour may get a nudge to the left but no matter what happens and no matter what you dream about, Labour will not be going back that far. The BNP did what UKip are doing and that is misleading people about their real intentions, i.e. right-wing politics hiding behind a moderate face. Isn't that the reverse of what NL did? I don't think so, they used capitalism for social minded purposes.



Deleted User	Nov 20 2014, 01:48 PM Post #37
Deleted User	C-too Nov 20 2014, 01:45 PM RJD Nov 20 2014, 01:39 PM C-too Nov 20 2014, 12:52 PM RJD Nov 20 2014, 12:45 PM Quoting limited to 4 levels deep Michael foot was a product of pre-WWII politics. Labour may get a nudge to the left but no matter what happens and no matter what you dream about, Labour will not be going back that far. The BNP did what UKip are doing and that is misleading people about their real intentions, i.e. right-wing politics hiding behind a moderate face. Isn't that the reverse of what NL did? I don't think so, they used capitalism for social minded purposes. Well that went well for us didnt it?
Deleted User


marybrown	Nov 20 2014, 01:55 PM Post #38
Senior Member Posts: 10,516 Group: Members Member #60 Joined: Jul 27, 2014	Nu labour is clutching at straws...They are going down like whale sh*t...



C-too	Nov 20 2014, 01:55 PM Post #39
Honourable Member Posts: 17,686 Group: Members Member #49 Joined: Jul 12, 2014	gansao Nov 20 2014, 01:48 PM C-too Nov 20 2014, 01:45 PM RJD Nov 20 2014, 01:39 PM C-too Nov 20 2014, 12:52 PM Quoting limited to 4 levels deep Isn't that the reverse of what NL did? I don't think so, they used capitalism for social minded purposes. Well that went well for us didnt it? It certainly did, right up to the meltdown that was not caused by NL.



C-too	Nov 20 2014, 01:56 PM Post #40
Honourable Member Posts: 17,686 Group: Members Member #49 Joined: Jul 12, 2014	marybrown Nov 20 2014, 01:55 PM Nu labour is clutching at straws...They are going down like whale sh*t... They have already gone.



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2
3
4