Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
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:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
Labour Leadership Contest; merged thread
Topic Started: May 15 2015, 01:02 PM (2,206 Views)
Tytoalba
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,
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Replies:
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
gee4444
Sep 4 2015, 07:36 PM
"We are all in this together" was the ubiquitous phrase used by the Tory party, not just Gideon.

"the terms being discussed when the promise was made " - So their top down reorganisation differred in some way. So what! That doesn't change the reality that they are currently performing it.

If you base your election on key promises such as reducing immigration and not performing a top down reorganisation of the NHS then yes, they are pretty important lies.

Well apologies "we are all in this together" is in the 2010 Tory manifesto

But then wrong and wrong. Same manifesto says "We have a reform plan to make the changes the NHS needs. We will decentralise power, so that patients have a real choice. We will make doctors and nurses accountable to patients, not to endless layers of bureaucracy and management. We can’t go on with an NHS that puts targets before patients." It was the coalition agreement that promised only to "We will stop the top-down reorganisations of the NHS that have got in the way of patient care." IE the changes Labour was doinng.

The immigration promise you talk of came after they were elected and I don't doubt they honestly believed (wrongly) they could do it. Seems by your all new reinvented 2015 definition of liar you turn out to be !=== . I'll stick with the English language as is which means neither they or you are.

Perhaps you should actually go read what the word 'liar' means
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 05:34 PM


1. In 2008 others were doing it, that meant the 3 did not go into free fall. But if we did it now we'd be on our own. So as I said before massive horrors

2. A second tranche of QE when we used up all the economy's ability to stand such and haven't restored the robustness would be a sheer disaster. Our interest rates would go through the roof etc etc

3. The whole thing is based on a whopping piece of dishonesty in Corbyn's document. Have neither of you spotted it yet?  ::)

You seem to be blissfully unaware the corrupt banks, and lets face it they were fucking corrupt, had us over a barrel, at least Corbyn is making an attempt to get these venal parasites back at arms length and rein in their corrupting influence, but fuck me that's apparently bad for the country and forproper businesses!

And you talk about dishonesty.............  ::)
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Sep 4 2015, 08:09 PM
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 07:45 PM



So we have Corbyn trying to con us into the ramblings of the unprincipled. You just could not make it up.




I'm sorry, but most everything you write can be summed up as conjecture, the imagined outcomes of 'if'.
Such scaremongering is in bad taste, a politicking practice that has its day, or should have, - since most of us here would be hard pressed to cite an example of past Tory scare tactics that did eventually occur.
For myself, I do recall stating that D Cameron was not the man of the people he professed to be when assuming the mantle of leadership - that has been realised.
But we should not tar all potential leaders with that same brush = Corbyn may very well deliver on what he stands foe election on.


No Affa this was a deliberate intent by Corbyn to deceive all that he had an independent backer of his financial ideas.

He didn't and you've had chapter and verse on that above.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Sep 4 2015, 05:44 PM
Pro Veritas
Sep 4 2015, 05:23 PM
Steve K
Sep 3 2015, 10:26 AM

Which to bring this back to topic suggests, as I posted earlier, Corbyn could be PM in 2020


Be afraid, be very afraid
I'm less afraid of that than I am of Cameron as PM in 2020.


All The Best
He will not be PM in 2020 as he has promised to step down. Osborne is the odds on successor and likely GE winner.

The Tories are ecstatic at the prospects of Comrade Corbyn as Leader of the Labour Party, then just cannot believe their luck. Two bozos in succession. They do not deserve it.
As Corbyn moves Labour to the left then Osborne will consolidate his tanks all over the centre ground where elections are won or lost. The Tory right will be p155ed off, but will have to swallow their plumbs as the Tory rank and file demand Winners.



As referenced earlier about a million idiots could eventually make themselves homeless because they took out interest only mortgages, and thick Brits who love houses more than their own kids futures will naturally blame the current government, that after all is now a tradition.

The we have the potential calamity of a messy exit from the EU, not to mention the exodus of funds from the City which will become more like a village post office than a financial hub.

Plenty there for Corbyn and his team to exploit. :)
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
gee4444
Sep 4 2015, 07:23 PM


2) The first round of QE did nothing to restore the robustness of the economy. Or hadn't you noticed? It succeeded only in inflating stocks and transferring wealth from the bottom to the top. Probably as planned. It's argued the first round of QE actually caused deflation.

Bang on. :thumbsup:

You only have to look at which parts of the economy have seen hefty price spikes to see where the free money went. Land, property and share prices were the main beneficiaries of QE and not the real economy which predictably under Tory rule means discredited trickle down economics which naturally will be fleeting at best.......

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
gee4444
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 08:14 PM
gee4444
Sep 4 2015, 07:36 PM
"We are all in this together" was the ubiquitous phrase used by the Tory party, not just Gideon.

"the terms being discussed when the promise was made " - So their top down reorganisation differred in some way. So what! That doesn't change the reality that they are currently performing it.

If you base your election on key promises such as reducing immigration and not performing a top down reorganisation of the NHS then yes, they are pretty important lies.

Well apologies "we are all in this together" is in the 2010 Tory manifesto

But then wrong and wrong. Same manifesto says "We have a reform plan to make the changes the NHS needs. We will decentralise power, so that patients have a real choice. We will make doctors and nurses accountable to patients, not to endless layers of bureaucracy and management. We can’t go on with an NHS that puts targets before patients." It was the coalition agreement that promised only to "We will stop the top-downreorganisations of the NHS that have got in the way of patient care." IE the changes Labour was doinng.

The immigration promise you talk of came after they were elected and I don't doubt they honestly believed (wrongly) they could do it. Seems by your all new reinvented 2015 definition of liar you turn out to be !=== . I'll stick with the English language as is which means neither they or you are.

Perhaps you should actually go read what the word 'liar' means
From http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/11/pre-election-pledges-tories-are-trying-wipe-internet:

"Perhaps most infamously, the Conservatives repeatedly promised before the general election that there would be no more "top-down reorganisations" of the NHS (Andrew Lansley, Conservative Party press release, 11 July 2007). In a speech at the Royal College of Pathologists on 2 November 2009, Cameron said: "With the Conservatives there will be no more of the tiresome, meddlesome, top-down re-structures that have dominated the last decade of the NHS."

In his 2006 Conservative conference speech, he said: "So I make this commitment to the NHS and all who work in it. No more pointless reorganisations."

The coalition went on to launch the biggest top-down reorganisation of the service in its history."


From http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2979135/I-ll-cut-immigration-kick-Cameron-told-voters-election-numbers-arriving-soared-300-000.html:

"Before the last election, Mr Cameron posed for the cameras signing the document which vowed to reduce net migration to the 'tens of thousands'.....The Conservative party's 'contract' promised to 'control immigration, reducing it to the levels of the 1990s – meaning tens of thousands a year, instead of the hundreds of thousands a year under Labour'.

So your wrong, wrong is in fact right and right.


From: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lie:

"a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood."

A very accurate description of events. So they lied and hence they are liars. Given the misinformation (or maybe disinformation) you provided it's probably best you avoid all accusations of lying. ;D

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Yes of course there is much public disquiet when anonymous posters and bloggers continue to post their wild arsed imaginings. The public craves simple to understand villainry that can explain everything they are dissatisfied with. And there are always idiots ad the malicious so keen to feed their cravings.

Doesn't make it true does it? The plumbing analogy holds very true, I find so many people happy to tell me tey are all rogues and the industry is bent. And they get pissed off too when I tell them different.

BTW perhaps you missed the criminal charges and whopping jail sentence recently over LIBOR.

I note you could not provide evidence of one UK CEO or board that was corrupt. In the USA you could have had Madoff.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 09:08 PM


I note you could not provide evidence of one UK CEO or board that was corrupt. In the USA you could have had Madoff.
Don't be so bloody stupid, the lack of serious investigation here was a shameful national embarrassment, the only nation to seriously go after criminal bankers was Iceland, and some of these fucked off to safe haven London before the Icelandic authorities could feel their grubby collars.

Wake up Steve, most people are aware of how things work in this country when you join the club, the problem with Corbyn is he would not be a welcome addition to the establishment.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
gee4444
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
SK the banks have been shafting us for the best part of 30 years. They are still at it today.

LIBOR (just one of many corrupt practices which higher management turned a blind eye to) made these fraudsters billions upon billions in profits. They pay 1p in the £ or 1c in the $ fines when caught. A fine business model. Their fines are lenient for obvious reasons and only scapegoats are charged with criminal offences.

It puzzles me why do you feel obliged to defend those who only seek to harm you. You must have your reasons.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
gee4444
Sep 4 2015, 09:08 PM
So your wrong, wrong is in fact right and right. . .
And you are going to use the Daily Mail as evidence !jk!

If you look back he promised pre coalition to "take steps" to so reduce immigration. And they did take steps, just inadequate ones. As you definition of "lie" shows, he would have to have known they would fail to be a liar. Do you really think he knew they would fail? I don't

To be mistaken is not to be a liar. A liar is one of the worst things you can be in this world.

And what they did with the NHS is arguable but what you can't argue is that they did not explicitly said what they were going to do in that manifesto. I don't see it as top down re-organisation, that would have been the private insurance model Redwood was opining in the pre-election years and Cameron had to kick off the table. Again you can't be a liar if you believe what you say is true.

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 09:08 PM


BTW perhaps you missed the criminal charges and whopping jail sentence recently over LIBOR.

Yes, the generals did not notice those foot soldiers were acting like crooks and on a looting spree!

To use one of those plumbing analogies you've recently become fond off someone pissed in cold water storage cistern and we all looked the other way.  ::)


Funny isn't it? These senior bankers get multi million pound pay packets and are apparently running complex and very important organisations, and yet despite this they didn't seem to know what was going on. Pull the other one....

And I could never work out why several senior figures at Barclays were never investigated let alone arrested or charged, they after all they traded whilst insolvent and fiddled their accounts which is strictly against international rules, they took a bailout from some moneyed interests in the Middle East and conviniently forgot to mention it until someone noticed interest charges on page 87 of the banks annual report!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
gee4444
Sep 4 2015, 09:21 PM
SK the banks have been shafting us for the best part of 30 years. They are still at it today.

LIBOR (just one of many corrupt practices which higher management turned a blind eye to) made these fraudsters billions upon billions in profits. They pay 1p in the £ or 1c in the $ fines when caught. A fine business model. Their fines are lenient for obvious reasons and only scapegoats are charged with criminal offences.

It puzzles me why do you feel obliged to defend those who only seek to harm you. You must have your reasons.
Tigger
Sep 4 2015, 09:16 PM
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 09:08 PM


I note you could not provide evidence of one UK CEO or board that was corrupt. In the USA you could have had Madoff.
Don't be so bloody stupid, the lack of serious investigation here was a shameful national embarrassment, the only nation to seriously go after criminal bankers was Iceland, and some of these fucked off to safe haven London before the Icelandic authorities could feel their grubby collars.

Wake up Steve, most people are aware of how things work in this country when you join the club, the problem with Corbyn is he would not be a welcome addition to the establishment.

As I said some people want simple explanations for all they find to be not perfect

The real world is more complicated than that

But yes Icelandic bankers were criminal at the top, their politicians more so. The latter had to make sure the former took all the blame, they failed

I'm still waiting for the evidence against UK banks' CEOs or boards. It's not like there hasn't been 7 years for it to come out.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
gee4444
Sep 4 2015, 09:21 PM
SK the banks have been shafting us for the best part of 30 years. They are still at it today.

LIBOR (just one of many corrupt practices which higher management turned a blind eye to) made these fraudsters billions upon billions in profits. They pay 1p in the £ or 1c in the $ fines when caught. A fine business model. Their fines are lenient for obvious reasons and only scapegoats are charged with criminal offences.

It puzzles me why do you feel obliged to defend those who only seek to harm you. You must have your reasons.
I see the US legal system is now lining up to sue three major British banks over rate rigging which they will claim cost US businesses billions in add on costs and fees, two of these banks are still partially state owned so I suspect Osborne will pass the inevitable fines and costs onto the British taxpayer, before fully privatising them
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
gee4444
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 09:23 PM
gee4444
Sep 4 2015, 09:08 PM
So your wrong, wrong is in fact right and right. . .
And you are going to use the Daily Mail as evidence !jk!

If you look back he promised pre coalition to "take steps" to so reduce immigration. And they did take steps, just inadequate ones. As you definition of "lie" shows, he would have to have known they would fail to be a liar. Do you really think he knew they would fail? I don't

To be mistaken is not to be a liar. A liar is one of the worst things you can be in this world.

And what they did with the NHS is arguable but what you can't argue is that they did not explicitly said what they were going to do in that manifesto. I don't see it as top down re-organisation, that would have been the private insurance model Redwood was opining in the pre-election years and Cameron had to kick off the table. Again you can't be a liar if you believe what you say is true.

Whatever SK. Believe what suits you - providing evidence to prove you are wrong is obviously ineffective. All you've got is ridiculing the source (a pro Tory one at that!) and some fuzzy interpretation of policies that are obvious to most reasonable people.

You state "you can't be a liar if you believe what you say is true".

Maybe, but it probably means such people are probably either disingenuous deviants or base fuckwits. I'll go with the former for our Tory friends.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 09:31 PM

As I said some people want simple explanations for all they find to be not perfect

The real world is more complicated than that

There is nothing complicated in outright criminality and fraud, the complication, as you call it sets in when the state and big business are complicit and become interwoven, it's no accident that senior politicians find employment in the City when booted out of office.

It's little more than banana republic stuff and fools only those willing to be fooled, and sadly that would seem to include you.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Is it just me that feels that calling Tom Hayes on a £1M plus salary a "footsoldier" is more than a little dishonest?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 09:31 PM


I'm still waiting for the evidence against UK banks' CEOs or boards. It's not like there hasn't been 7 years for it to come out.
You will be waiting forever as there has never been any serious investigations in this respect and never will be.

Play dumb Steve and expected to be seen as dumb.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
gee4444
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 09:31 PM
gee4444
Sep 4 2015, 09:21 PM
SK the banks have been shafting us for the best part of 30 years. They are still at it today.

LIBOR (just one of many corrupt practices which higher management turned a blind eye to) made these fraudsters billions upon billions in profits. They pay 1p in the £ or 1c in the $ fines when caught. A fine business model. Their fines are lenient for obvious reasons and only scapegoats are charged with criminal offences.

It puzzles me why do you feel obliged to defend those who only seek to harm you. You must have your reasons.
Tigger
Sep 4 2015, 09:16 PM
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 09:08 PM


I note you could not provide evidence of one UK CEO or board that was corrupt. In the USA you could have had Madoff.
Don't be so bloody stupid, the lack of serious investigation here was a shameful national embarrassment, the only nation to seriously go after criminal bankers was Iceland, and some of these fucked off to safe haven London before the Icelandic authorities could feel their grubby collars.

Wake up Steve, most people are aware of how things work in this country when you join the club, the problem with Corbyn is he would not be a welcome addition to the establishment.

As I said some people want simple explanations for all they find to be not perfect

The real world is more complicated than that

But yes Icelandic bankers were criminal at the top, their politicians more so. The latter had to make sure the former took all the blame, they failed

I'm still waiting for the evidence against UK banks' CEOs or boards. It's not like there hasn't been 7 years for it to come out.
Simple explanations for imperfections! Don't be so ridiculous. Blatant theft and fraud with numerous examples would result in most being branded as serial criminals. These banksters are parasites that suck life out the economies on a grand scale.

You want the centre of financial fraud to lead the way in prosecutions! And you claim we are the simple ones! !jk!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
gee4444
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Tigger
Sep 4 2015, 09:31 PM
gee4444
Sep 4 2015, 09:21 PM
SK the banks have been shafting us for the best part of 30 years. They are still at it today.

LIBOR (just one of many corrupt practices which higher management turned a blind eye to) made these fraudsters billions upon billions in profits. They pay 1p in the £ or 1c in the $ fines when caught. A fine business model. Their fines are lenient for obvious reasons and only scapegoats are charged with criminal offences.

It puzzles me why do you feel obliged to defend those who only seek to harm you. You must have your reasons.
I see the US legal system is now lining up to sue three major British banks over rate rigging which they will claim cost US businesses billions in add on costs and fees, two of these banks are still partially state owned so I suspect Osborne will pass the inevitable fines and costs onto the British taxpayer, before fully privatising them
No doubt, he does represent banksters after all.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Sep 4 2015, 09:39 PM
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 09:31 PM


I'm still waiting for the evidence against UK banks' CEOs or boards. It's not like there hasn't been 7 years for it to come out.
You will be waiting forever as there has never been any serious investigations in this respect and never will be.

Play dumb Steve and expected to be seen as dumb.
Not as dumb as you look calling Tom Hayes, who earned £3M in his last year, a foot soldier

BTW the good news for you is that tin foil is BOGOF this week
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 09:39 PM
Is it just me that feels that calling Tom Hayes on a £1M plus salary a "footsoldier" is more than a little dishonest?
Yes you are being dishonest.

He was a mere broker making millions for himself and his bank, and this despite the US authorities tipping off the City regulator on at least three separate occasions on this widespread and systematic abuse, US bankers working for different organisations noticed what was happening but apparently not those supposedly on guard duty in the UK boardrooms drawing multi million pound pay deals.

Just doesn't add up does it?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
gee4444
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 09:39 PM
Is it just me that feels that calling Tom Hayes on a £1M plus salary a "footsoldier" is more than a little dishonest?
No. Who the fuck is Tom Hayes is what I would have said if you'd asked me who he was 12 months ago. He's a scapegoat. £1M salary is peanuts to banksters.

From http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/rain-man-banker-tom-hayes-6215035:

Stepmum Sarah Hayes described the sentence as brutal.
She said: “Tom got a bigger sentence than most violent criminals or child abusers. Where on earth is the justice in that?
“The public have the view that bankers should all burn in hell. There was this desire to make an example of a banker because the industry is such a sea of dishonesty.
“Tom is that scapegoat. To say he was the solo ringleader is ludicrous. “I think the idea is to hang one or two people out to dry then the bosses won’t have to answer for any of it.”

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 09:46 PM
Not as dumb as you look calling Tom Hayes, who earned £3M in his last year, a foot soldier

BTW the good news for you is that tin foil is BOGOF this week
Peanuts compared to the pay and perks some senior banking staff get.

Get your dictionary out and look up flash barrow boy.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
gee4444
Sep 4 2015, 09:49 PM

“The public have the view that bankers should all burn in hell. There was this desire to make an example of a banker because the industry is such a sea of dishonesty.
“Tom is that scapegoat. To say he was the solo ringleader is ludicrous. “I think the idea is to hang one or two people out to dry then the bosses won’t have to answer for any of it.”

Another eight or nine prosecutions are in the pipeline apparently, but again no one up the chain of command seemed to know this gang were rigging a trillion dollar a day bench mark!

Frankly it beggars belief.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Sep 4 2015, 09:53 PM
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 09:46 PM
Not as dumb as you look calling Tom Hayes, who earned £3M in his last year, a foot soldier

BTW the good news for you is that tin foil is BOGOF this week
Peanuts compared to the pay and perks some senior banking staff get.

Get your dictionary out and look up flash barrow boy.
How you getting on with understanding how dishonest Corbyn was with that Richard Murphy line?

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Sep 4 2015, 05:44 PM
Pro Veritas
Sep 4 2015, 05:23 PM
Steve K
Sep 3 2015, 10:26 AM

Which to bring this back to topic suggests, as I posted earlier, Corbyn could be PM in 2020


Be afraid, be very afraid
I'm less afraid of that than I am of Cameron as PM in 2020.


All The Best
He will not be PM in 2020 as he has promised to step down. Osborne is the odds on successor and likely GE winner.

The Tories are ecstatic at the prospects of Comrade Corbyn as Leader of the Labour Party, then just cannot believe their luck. Two bozos in succession. They do not deserve it.
As Corbyn moves Labour to the left then Osborne will consolidate his tanks all over the centre ground where elections are won or lost. The Tory right will be p155ed off, but will have to swallow their plumbs as the Tory rank and file demand Winners.



Without winning you have no power to do anything in politics. Idealism is all very well, but without winning you will just stand on the side-lines and shout boohoo.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tytoalba
Sep 4 2015, 10:25 PM
RJD
Sep 4 2015, 05:44 PM
Pro Veritas
Sep 4 2015, 05:23 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
He will not be PM in 2020 as he has promised to step down. Osborne is the odds on successor and likely GE winner.

The Tories are ecstatic at the prospects of Comrade Corbyn as Leader of the Labour Party, then just cannot believe their luck. Two bozos in succession. They do not deserve it.
As Corbyn moves Labour to the left then Osborne will consolidate his tanks all over the centre ground where elections are won or lost. The Tory right will be p155ed off, but will have to swallow their plumbs as the Tory rank and file demand Winners.



Without winning you have no power to do anything in politics. Idealism is all very well, but without winning you will just stand on the side-lines and shout boohoo.
You can sit on the side-lines and shout "unfair" a tactic that the left are well versed.

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
(please can the mods merge this back into the old thread and re-open it - this is the most important UK Politics topic of the post election year and just a week to go til the result)

Kendall warns of Tory knock out punch

Quote:
 
The Conservatives will launch a drive to "wipe out" Labour as soon as the party chooses its new leader, one of the candidates has warned.
Liz Kendall said the Tories would "throw everything at us" after the leader is named on 12 September.


IMHO she has it wrong. If as predicted they succeed in getting Corbyn elected they will let him dig his own grave first by his preaching positions they can easily dismantle come an election. The very last thing the Tories would want is Corbyn back on the back benches again pre 2020.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
johnofgwent
Member Avatar
It .. It is GREEN !!
[ *  *  *  * ]
OK here's the deal.

That thread is over 1500 posts long.

I'm prepared to give up my sunday to go through the entire thread.

Everybody who even SMELLS of a rule 3 member abuse violation in that thread is going ot get a maximukl warning (to flag them up for easy finding) and a ban of AT LEAST a day to explain how pissed off I am with their abuse of the site.

Once I have wasted my sunday int his way, I'll re-open the thread

BUT the slightest ad-hom gets the perpetrator a ban for a month

Hows that ?

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
johnofgwent
Sep 5 2015, 08:39 PM
. .Hows that ?

IMHO it would be over reaction John. Will PM
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Sep 4 2015, 09:39 PM
Steve K
Sep 4 2015, 09:31 PM


I'm still waiting for the evidence against UK banks' CEOs or boards. It's not like there hasn't been 7 years for it to come out.
You will be waiting forever as there has never been any serious investigations in this respect and never will be.

Play dumb Steve and expected to be seen as dumb.
You can always defend yourself with such statements, but the fact is there has to be laws in place to make the breaking of them offenses, and then you have to have allegations made and investigated, so that proof can be found that laws have been broken. Without any od those things being in play ,no one can be persecuted and charged and then be required to answer for their actions in a court of law.
It really is too easy to claim cover ups and wrong doing, or a lack of will to prosecute, but where is the evidence?
If no evidence or proof, all we have is prejudice, even slanderous allegations
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
johnofgwent
Sep 5 2015, 08:39 PM


Once I have wasted my sunday int his way, I'll re-open the thread

BUT the slightest ad-hom gets the perpetrator a ban for a month

Hows that ?

It is appreciated.
However the cause of the drudgery is not addressed by a focus on ad homs imo. Sometimes the only correct response is to identify the poster as holding a disreputable opinion in the opinion of the reader .... i know I have been in this position. To try and explain what I mean further ..... there are ideological differences which set posters against each other which cannot be debated without going into the whole belief process ....... the usual reaction isn't that of debate, but is instead name calling, 'Lefty', ' NastyTory', 'racist', etc. How to avoid that is beyond my ken.


Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Sep 5 2015, 10:44 PM
johnofgwent
Sep 5 2015, 08:39 PM


Once I have wasted my sunday int his way, I'll re-open the thread

BUT the slightest ad-hom gets the perpetrator a ban for a month

Hows that ?

It is appreciated.
However the cause of the drudgery is not addressed by a focus on ad homs imo. Sometimes the only correct response is to identify the poster as holding a disreputable opinion in the opinion of the reader .... i know I have been in this position. To try and explain what I mean further ..... there are ideological differences which set posters against each other which cannot be debated without going into the whole belief process ....... the usual reaction isn't that of debate, but is instead name calling, 'Lefty', ' NastyTory', 'racist', etc. How to avoid that is beyond my ken.


It is possible to disagree with the opinions of another member without getting personal. Despite their rudeness, it is easy to disregard ad hominem remarks unless they become seriously abusive or habitual stalking. Having said this, I think it is best to ignore some posters rather than be dragged into personal derogatory insults.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
johnofgwent
Member Avatar
It .. It is GREEN !!
[ *  *  *  * ]
AndyK
Jul 9 2015, 11:07 AM
It only takes a recession to cause a change of government.

Personally, I have never seen a recession, am I just lucky?
I remember john major's recession.

I remember leaving my job with a defence company that would shortly go bankrupt and being hired freelance to implement INMARSAT's L band data carrier platform - obsoleted only last week - and I remember the company I was freelancing for in Central Milton Keynes held an "open day" looking to recruit four people . This was supposed to start at 4pm. People started to arrive at 2, and by 3.30 there were over five hundred standing in a line stretching round the block, by the official start time, the numbers had swollen to almost a thousand. The roads were gridlocked and it was manic and insane. Every one of them had a CV with relevant experience.

At 5:45 one of the team leaders who would later be sent to lead the installation team despatched to Perth, Australia - whose tact and diplomacy were so good that he was almost prevented from entering the country after being asked by immigration if he had a criminal record and saying he did not realise you still needed one to get in, and who was soon afterwards deported for behaviour the team were not allowed to talk about - shouted across an open plan office that "I should pack my bags as there were a hundred people out there ready to do what I was doing for a tenth of the fee".

I also remember it was a time when the "Golgafrincham Ark" passengers at the recruiting agencies were thrown on the streets as margins bit, and several agencies - fortunately none of the ones I used to put myself about - actually went bust as client companies failed to pay them.

If you truly have not seen a recession, then you were either not old enough to work then, or were working outside the UK, or you must have been INCREDIBLY lucky.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
johnofgwent
Member Avatar
It .. It is GREEN !!
[ *  *  *  * ]
Heinrich
Sep 5 2015, 11:13 PM
It is possible to disagree with the opinions of another member without getting personal. Despite their rudeness, it is easy to disregard ad hominem remarks unless they become seriously abusive or habitual stalking. Having said this, I think it is best to ignore some posters rather than be dragged into personal derogatory insults.
It is indeed POSSIBLE.

However, there are some on here who admit they indulge in this for their own personal pleasure. I think the only way to deal with that is to ban them forever the instant they bring that behaviour out of the dungeon (they've never USED the dungeon for that purpose by the way, they prefer to soil the threads everywhere else with their repeated combat by insult, and I for one am royally fucked off by it
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
johnofgwent
Member Avatar
It .. It is GREEN !!
[ *  *  *  * ]
jaguar
Jul 13 2015, 06:39 PM
I'd guess that less than 10% of the UK population could name all four candidates on the ballot paper. And less than 1% could name the deputy nominations.
Considering that 3% of the general population (and 6% of Labour supporters) want Stewart Lewis to be Labour Leader, IMO
Labour are now so insignificant that their leadership election doesn't interest anyone except their die-hards.
But why is that a surprise, or even a problem ?

This country has long been one in which the electorate vote for the rosette and the true power to rule the country lies in the hands of the party whip under the direction of the PM.

Did anyone stop to ask WHY these people wanted "Stewart Lewis" to lead the party, what qualities he brought to the job ? No, they were too busy rubbishing the ignorance of the people they shoved a microphone under the nose of when I would suggest almost all who picked them either had another MP in mind or simply took one look at the others on the list and decided "aw fuck not them no way".

I don't suppose anyone has figures for labour party membership as of aug 31st have they ? I think they might be interesting.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
johnofgwent
Member Avatar
It .. It is GREEN !!
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Jul 14 2015, 09:32 AM
How many rich constituencies have a Labour MP ?
Funnily enough, Experian rate this part of Newport East as wealthier than the streets for miles around, all down to the asinine way the property prices went into orbit in after '97 but there you go.

But in answer to your question, Newport east is one, and we're lumbered with the bitch because of all those bloody loafers in those sink estates.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
johnofgwent
Member Avatar
It .. It is GREEN !!
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Aug 3 2015, 09:00 PM
Point 2 is just wriggling ........ unless you want to say that things have changed markedly?




Well, I would say the way the parties measured things has definitely changed markedly.

I presume you are aware of the furore about this claim

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/03/tories-ed-balls-labour-vat-tax-credits

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
johnofgwent
Member Avatar
It .. It is GREEN !!
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Aug 10 2015, 10:58 PM
You have to say that Blair, Prescott and now apparently Campbell criticising Corbyn is just making his election more likely

Maybe we need that idiot victory to finally lance the boil. 2 years of Corbyn dribbling at the ballot box and being humiliated by his own MPs rebelling and the polls destroying Labour then someone will do a Geoffrey Howe on him and get rid

And maybe by then Chukka will be prepared to stand - now he could be a serious Labour leader.
Good God. It took 14 pages of tripe and drivel before someone came up with a plausible reason for Chukka chucking in the towel

(it was originally 18 pages, but four pages of ad-homs have been purged to this point)

I wonder, is this WHY Chukka did what he did ? Send the party to meet an iceberg and in two or three years time - or in eight after another GE defeat - he'll lead the search and rescue team ?

Devious bastards, these Nigerians ...
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
johnofgwent
Member Avatar
It .. It is GREEN !!
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Aug 13 2015, 08:25 PM
C-too
Aug 13 2015, 08:16 PM
If the system can be seriously abused and it appears to be the case that it can.
Its the same system that was used to elect Miliband.

No one complained about it then.

This is the last sad, sorry remnants of Blair's NuLab trying to hang on by any means necessary - even if that means rigging the vote.

You should be ashamed to be seen supporting this theft of democracy.

All The Best
I rather think it is anything but.

"The system used to elect milliband" featured mass union votes, did it not.

The whole business Milliband wanted to end was "Union Affiliated Member Voting" because Labour had no direct line to the wallets of those people and wished to have those details so they could bombard them with demands for money ...

What we have now is anyone can register to vote, as long as they don't support the labour party ideals espoused by Michael Foot ...
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Locked Topic