| 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: |
| Labour Leadership Contest; merged thread | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: May 15 2015, 01:02 PM (2,219 Views) | |
| Tytoalba | May 15 2015, 01:02 PM Post #1 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Chuka Umunna withdraws Labour leader bid, Who is left to lead them? The BBC has been attacking UKIP and Farrage for days, but at least they have a leader. Labour are in a state of uncertainty, and we do need a good opposition in the HOC, |
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| Rich | Aug 16 2015, 09:56 PM Post #721 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well dammit man, make a stand and go somewhere else and get your gas.
|
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Aug 16 2015, 09:57 PM Post #722 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I don't use gas, I'm heavily into renewables ........
|
![]() |
|
| C-too | Aug 16 2015, 11:12 PM Post #723 |
|
Honourable Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
How much do you know about the man ? Have you checked his history ? |
![]() |
|
| Rich | Aug 16 2015, 11:18 PM Post #724 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
How much do I know about you or Jog or anyone else for that matter, I am not a private detective, I take people at their word and from my own observations....so, please tell me, what do YOU know about him and how did you find that information? |
![]() |
|
| C-too | Aug 16 2015, 11:38 PM Post #725 |
|
Honourable Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well, you jumped down my throat when I posted that if the people who were suffering the poverty that existed before WWII were brought into todays world, they would think they were in paradise. Then you give a detailed account of pre-war poverty that backed up my point. I introduced the problems of malnutrition and the conflict between food on the table or a doctor for the child into our exchange. NL did introduce the minimum wage, tax credits that increased take home pay. And they took 1.6 million people out of relative poverty. We live in a capitalist country, a government that attempted to dictate high wage levels would not last ten minutes because the Tory propaganda machine would make mincemeat out of such a government. |
![]() |
|
| C-too | Aug 16 2015, 11:42 PM Post #726 |
|
Honourable Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Does that mean you are perfect (or think that you are perfect) and incapable of making mistakes in your assessment of the country ? |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Aug 16 2015, 11:46 PM Post #727 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
He appears to be anti the current Israel government and for that I would say good http://jeremycorbyn.org.uk/articles/speech-palestine/ But he is accused of being overly friendly with anti semitic terrorist elements and he really does have to answer some questions there. He is said to have referred to “our friends” from Hamas and Hezbollah" when hosting them in Westminster and if true he should be ashamed |
![]() |
|
| Rich | Aug 17 2015, 12:13 AM Post #728 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Am I right in stating that HAMAS is still considered by the democratic counties of this world and the UN as a terrorist organisation, if so, why is anyone backing them? Edited by Rich, Aug 17 2015, 12:14 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Rich | Aug 17 2015, 12:20 AM Post #729 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No, not at all it merely means that I am not afraid to say what I feel to anyone and everyone and I am not a bigot either, I always consider another persons opinion before I give my own, sometimes I find it best just to keep my gob shut, but, that is life, I daresay everyone on this forum could cite the same.....it's no big deal really. |
![]() |
|
| Heinrich | Aug 17 2015, 06:55 AM Post #730 |
|
Regular Guy
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Jeremy Corbyn must be thanking his lucky stars that New Labour's Gordon Brown has intervened against him. This is further proof that Corbyn has the momentum. Brown just put the last nail in New Labour. Morning Star Edited by Heinrich, Aug 17 2015, 08:04 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| C-too | Aug 17 2015, 07:30 AM Post #731 |
|
Honourable Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You said you see no evidence that Corbyn was anti-Semitic, That's why I enquired as to how much you know about the man. |
![]() |
|
| C-too | Aug 17 2015, 07:42 AM Post #732 |
|
Honourable Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Since 1951 Old Labour has had 40 years in opposition and 11 years in office. New Labour had 10 good years in office and 13 years overall. Ed-the-gone got dumped along with his Old Labour approach. Corbyn would probably get more votes than Ed, that should not be too difficult. But Corbyn/Old Labour would guarantee Labour would remain in opposition for as long as he leads the party. And rightly so IMO. |
![]() |
|
| C-too | Aug 17 2015, 07:54 AM Post #733 |
|
Honourable Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Strong opinions are still only opinions, they are often based upon emotional feelings. I think opinions are little more than stepping stones towards greater understanding. I suspect that few pensioners have exactly the same strong opinions they once owned as teenagers. |
![]() |
|
| C-too | Aug 17 2015, 02:42 PM Post #734 |
|
Honourable Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
---- "Electing Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader would be a backward move that risks creating a one-governing-party state dominated by the Conservatives, David Miliband has warned." ---- |
![]() |
|
| Cymru | Aug 17 2015, 03:54 PM Post #735 |
|
Alt-Right
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You can add David Miliband to that list now too. |
![]() |
|
| Heinrich | Aug 17 2015, 04:04 PM Post #736 |
|
Regular Guy
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Actually, Ed Miliband was a sacrificial lamb. He attempted to shift gear and shake-off New Labour but he did not go far enough or fast enough because the party had already been ruined over two decades. His Cabinet was full of New Labour people and there were too many New Labour on his backbenches. New Labour continued to fester and so they lost Scotland. That was a big price to pay not to rock the listing boat. English Labour voters stayed away from the polls. Perhaps it needed this shock for Jeremy Corbyn to emerge to put life back into the corpus delicti. Edited by Heinrich, Aug 17 2015, 04:05 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Nonsense | Aug 17 2015, 04:15 PM Post #737 |
|
Regular Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Considering that the Labour party leadership contenders,with the exception of Corbyn are all 'light' Tories,it is not too difficult to judge that we are already in a 'one-party-state'. The divisions in the Labour party have been there since WW2,the 'right wing' of that party are 'Tories' by nature,if not in name,that's why the electorate have now given up on them. The right wingers are\have been effectively,a 'Trojan Horse' within Labour's ranks,that came to maturity under BLAIR,to my mind, only Wilson was true to the party values of Labour since Attlee. |
![]() |
|
| Tytoalba | Aug 17 2015, 04:25 PM Post #738 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I do not believe he will win C-too. I think Burnham will win. Its against the opinion polls I know, but those generally politically aware are in the majority with activists, and they will do what is best for the long term interest's of the party. I hope I am wrong of course, for Corbyn, though making politics interesting , and gives false hope to many, a straw to clutch at, can never win an election IMO. |
![]() |
|
| Tytoalba | Aug 17 2015, 04:52 PM Post #739 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
CEOs of companies listed on the stock market are elected by their shareholders ,most of the shares held by financial institutions, and their remuneration decided by a ballot of the shareholders. They are expected to perform and their employment sen as just another investment. They are in a competitive market and the best seen as a valuable commodity Our government pays big bucks to the CEO of the bank of England and he is seen as value for money. Can I point out that entertainment loveys who can offer little but act or sing, can earn, and do earn if earn is the right word, a great deal more than CEOs. Hoe much does Lewis Hamilton earn from endorsements alone for driving a racing car? Its all about market forces at work, and they get paid what people are willing to pay, and, BTW its the ordinary man in the street that are willing to pay what is asked to watch these entertainers at work and gives them their millions. |
![]() |
|
| C-too | Aug 17 2015, 07:07 PM Post #740 |
|
Honourable Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Please put your bias away and look at the reality. Here are some examples that show that you are mistaken. During the 18 years of Conservative administration; 1, State schools were run down through lack of funding. While the minority schools in Thatcher's state schools that were "Grant Maintained" received proper funding. NL abolished the 'Grant Maintained' system, they fully funded state schools and introduced a programme of fully equipped new schools and refurbished schools. 2. Thatcher's ideological method of running society saw millions of people fall into the relative poverty area of income. NL took 1.6 million people out of relative poverty. 3. The NHS inherited by New Labour had large waiting lists and a waiting time of up to 18 months for operation. New Labour greatly reduced to as low as 18 weeks! Perhaps you would tell me who suffered most when school funding was too low ? And who gained most when schools were given a financial uplift, and dilapidated exercise books were replaced by computers ? Was an increase in relative poverty acceptable ? And is a decrease of 1.6 million the same as the Tory approach ? Who suffered most when we had long waiting lists and long waiting times for operations on the NHS ? The propaganda that NL are Tory lite, is designed to mislead decent people into thinking it is a fact, it isn't. What New Labour is not, is a left wing party. But that does not mean the are in any way Tories. The realisation of the need for change came after 18 years of Old Labour opposition, mostly under the nastiest, most callous piece of Tory-ism that in no way can be described as New Labour. |
![]() |
|
| Pro Veritas | Aug 17 2015, 07:16 PM Post #741 |
|
Upstanding Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Labour's core principles are based on left-wing economic policies. A "Labour" party that is centre-right on economics just isn't Labour, and in fact is Tory-Lite. You are the ONLY person I know of that proclaims that NuLab wasn't Tory-Lite; because everyone else knows for a fact they were. All The Best |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Aug 17 2015, 07:30 PM Post #742 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
New Labour was not Tory Lite now you've got two |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Aug 17 2015, 07:59 PM Post #743 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well as the saying goes if it can swim, fly and quack you know exactly what it is! |
![]() |
|
| Affa | Aug 17 2015, 08:26 PM Post #744 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
New Labour under Blair can be labelled in one term only that adequately describes its policies .... Pragmatism! It gave way to the Establishment and attempted to adhere to its core values, serving the working class i.e, by 'not' attacking business, but working with it. Called the 'Third Way' it meant inclusiveness instead of conflict, a proper 'We' party instead of 'Us & Them'. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Aug 17 2015, 08:55 PM Post #745 |
|
Deleted User
|
Well thats what they said..but there again Cameron is claiming to be the party of working class now. Not pragmatism but cynicism . To misquote Bob Monkhouse 'The secret of success in Politics is sincerity…… Once you can fake that, you've got it made' |
|
|
| Affa | Aug 17 2015, 10:21 PM Post #746 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I won't disagree with that, but advise that before making judgements it is wiser to examine the true record ........... and that for Blair is rising living standards, the NMW, and Public services restored to a standard that was lost. Now do the same for Cameron ....... falling living standards, a below inflation wage freeze, and public services under attack and declining. No contest really, is it ..... Blair delivered much on his inclusiveness, Cameron has done the opposite - reneged. Edited by Affa, Aug 17 2015, 10:38 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Aug 17 2015, 10:40 PM Post #747 |
|
Deleted User
|
Maybe but..Blair inherited an ( arguably) rising economy from the Tories and Cameron inherited a tanked one. |
|
|
| Rich | Aug 17 2015, 10:47 PM Post #748 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well, my living standards have risen during a coalition administration and have further improved since may.....as usual, I speak as I find. |
![]() |
|
| Nonsense | Aug 17 2015, 11:10 PM Post #749 |
|
Regular Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"Please put your bias away and look at the reality. Here are some examples that show that you are mistaken". In no way am I biased,the reality is,from looking at your post,is that it's you who are biased,in which case I take little notice of your protestation to the contrary. The fact is,I think that all parties are as bad as each other,how one construes that as being 'biased' is beyond me. 1, "State schools were run down through lack of funding. While the minority schools in Thatcher's state schools that were "Grant Maintained" received proper funding". New Labour's response to that was to introduce a 'windfall tax' on the newly privatised utility companies,that were undervalued at flotation & were making excessive profits arising from the flotation that continue today. It was that 'windfall tax' that funded the education budget capital spending program,paid for, NOT by the utility companies,but by their customers,from whom the utility companies would have passed on the cost of that tax. The lesson is,beware of Labour Chancellors bearing gifts,it will cost you dear, just like the 'Warm Front' Scheme in pushing prices ever higher for gas & electricity. The Tories do not do public spending, because it means higher taxes,I'm not saying that Labour were wrong to spend the money, what is highly questionable is, how the money is raised to pay for it. 2. "Thatcher's ideological method of running society saw millions of people fall into the relative poverty area of income". As is the case with CAMERON's Tories. Of course,Gordon BROWN's 'welfare reforms' were,like the Tories now, intended to,"make work pay",yet, with mass unfettered immigration,over 1 MILLION public sector jobs were allocated to MIGRANTS, displacing the indiginous youngsters from the opportunity to work,leaving them entirely dependent on the 'welfare state'. 3." The NHS inherited by New Labour had large waiting lists and a waiting time of up to 18 months for operation. New Labour greatly reduced to as low as 18 weeks!". Indeed they did,but using 'targets' is political interference & when that happens distortions in clinical priorities occur. Of course,their NHS policy was a financial disaster,hospital deficits were rising exponentially each year,with the consequent injection of additional money being required. Then we have the not too little matter of PFI, an unmitigated disaster that only a Chancellor who was content to sell off part of our national reserves in the form of gold could do & which generations of patients-taxpayers will have to endure the burden of. "Perhaps you would tell me who suffered most when school funding was too low" ? Obviously it was the children & the country. The same as with the NHS,with the patients paying the price. "And who gained most when schools were given a financial uplift, and dilapidated exercise books were replaced by computers" ? The teachers gained most, BROWN's first budget(spending round-2 years after the election) increased MP's pay, ALL public sector workers,including civil servants,hospital staff,the legal 'profession',teachers,Social Security staff etc. Those pay\salary increases were literally unfunded by any productivity increases,giving effect to future spending cuts or tax increases,in other words, the reality of Labour economics. Those 'computers' were not funded by the government, they were paid for by the public,who were given 'vouchers' (that paid for the computers)when they spent money in Tesco's & O.S software was by a somewhat smelly deal with Bill GATES. "Was an increase in relative poverty acceptable ? And is a decrease of 1.6 million the same as the Tory approach "? Government's cause increases in poverty,as do changes in one's circumstances,do I find increasing poverty acceptable, NO,but then, show me a government that hasn't caused it. Government's spend from taxes raised, someone receives that money through transfer, others forfeit money through paying taxes,as indeed we all do,it's called, "robbing Peter to pay Paul". "And is a decrease of 1.6 million the same as the Tory approach "? Within the timeframe of NL's last period in office,I would question that statement, it's probably true that children of around that number were taken out of poverty through government spending,which raises questions of policy. For the Tories, they are NOT a party that has any social empathy whatsoever, all that matters to them is lower taxation through lower public spending, with one exception, as long as those whom the Tories support are receiving that public money. In other words, they are hypocrites who excercise double-standards, one for them, another set of standards for the rest,it's the 'Tory' syndrome of, "Them & Us". "The propaganda that NL are Tory lite, is designed to mislead decent people into thinking it is a fact, it isn't. What New Labour is not, is a left wing party. But that does not mean the are in any way Tories". Unfortunately, it's not 'propaganda',there is a concensus amongst the public,more solid than a mere perception,that they are 'Tory-Lite', hence,in large measure why the public deserted them at the 2010-2015 elections. People knew that NL were 'elitist',that they are exactly what they accuse others of being, such as 'bigots',with Gordon BROWN displaying his own 'bigotry' over an ordinary 'Labour' voters concerns about immigration. On numerous occasions BROWN was saying that he would 'listen' to the public,but he never did,it was just for the media to get out of his face for the day. "The realisation of the need for change came after 18 years of Old Labour opposition, mostly under the nastiest, most callous piece of Tory-ism that in no way can be described as New Labour". The very same realisation after 13 years of New Labour in power,arguably under one of the 'nastiest' 'Labour' administrations that I can recall. The 'problem' with 'Labour' is it's 'right wing',the best Labour administrations were from leaders on the 'left' of that party, they were the truly radical & progressive leaders. You will no doubt disagree with that & more.
Edited by Nonsense, Aug 17 2015, 11:42 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Aug 17 2015, 11:11 PM Post #750 |
|
Deleted User
|
I'm all right Jack eh? Or as me old mother used to say 'sod you Jack, I'm all right' . |
|
|
| Rich | Aug 17 2015, 11:15 PM Post #751 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Why do you use such a stupid retort? I am merely telling how it is for me, I have no idea how others are faring. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Aug 17 2015, 11:20 PM Post #752 |
|
Deleted User
|
Exactly
|
|
|
| Affa | Aug 17 2015, 11:54 PM Post #753 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Only after having fallen over the last five years - have they returned yet to pre-coalition status,, and if so indicate why this happened NOW? |
![]() |
|
| Rich | Aug 18 2015, 12:00 AM Post #754 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I am afraid to say that not being an economist of any note and despite my wages being reduced by 10K, I have no answer for you, we still find ourselves able to keep our heads above the water and have enough left over to save a bit and have single days holidays, we are looking at a day out in September to the Guernsey food festival, my good lady is manipulating figures to see if it can become a reality. http://www.visitguernsey.com/food-festival |
![]() |
|
| C-too | Aug 18 2015, 07:06 AM Post #755 |
|
Honourable Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
|
![]() |
|
| C-too | Aug 18 2015, 07:24 AM Post #756 |
|
Honourable Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The point I was making is that New Labour were not Tory-lite, as you posted, they were very different to the Tories. If anything your comment proves my point. Edited by C-too, Aug 18 2015, 07:25 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| C-too | Aug 18 2015, 07:52 AM Post #757 |
|
Honourable Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
in 2006 unemployment was 1.4 million. the lowest for some 25 years. Low unemployment under NL, high unemployment under the Tories is the point I make, showing NL and the Tories to be very different. Immigration is an EU membership problem. Edited by C-too, Aug 18 2015, 07:55 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| C-too | Aug 18 2015, 08:54 AM Post #758 |
|
Honourable Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It may well be the case that an imperfect NHS continued to be, but people were treated much quicker under NL than under 18 years of Tory administration. Two very different parties with different priorities. |
![]() |
|
| C-too | Aug 18 2015, 09:11 AM Post #759 |
|
Honourable Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Ploughing through the propaganda against PFIs is difficult for many people, as it was for myself until a saw a Select Committee meeting of the political channel on Sky TV. Both the Tory minister and the Labour MP agreed that some of the early PFIs were a bad deal for the taxpayer, and should be re-negotiated. All schools PFIs were a good deal for the taxpayer. The figures quoted for PFIs include 30 years of ground and Building maintenance. This makes it difficult to see the difference between a non-PFI cost compared to a PFI cost. In any case only the difference between the two different costs should be used in any debate on PFIs. |
![]() |
|
| C-too | Aug 18 2015, 09:19 AM Post #760 |
|
Honourable Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
New Labour, or more correctly, the international financial meltdown lost the election for NL in 2010. Old Labour Ed-the-gone lost the last election. Left wing Corbyn WOULD lose the next election. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() Our users say it best: "Zetaboards is the best forum service I have ever used." |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic » |



![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)



8:30 AM Jul 11