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 (2,201 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:
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
gansao
Sep 12 2015, 07:07 PM
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 07:01 PM
Lol.

I wonder if he has a copy of Campbell's book for WINNERS there too?


Thats probably the book he thinks he wrote...
Maybe that's what the book says.."become me". The deceit and lies confuse you so much that you eventually turn into him and end up acting like Malcolm Tucker towards your wife family and others.

"F- the f- off!"
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

C-too
Sep 12 2015, 07:07 PM
gansao
Sep 12 2015, 06:59 PM
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 06:57 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep


Actually its' nil by mouth' on the white board by his bed side.
He gets a bit confused..
Just more of your "bullshit" imagination ? Or is that the reality of your position ?


I go by gansao's law of internet bullshit.
The more a poster insists he is something the less likely he is to be it..bit like keyboard warriors.
Remember that and you wont go far wrong , Sonny Jim !jk!
Also appeal to authority is a fallacious argument ie you cant claim that you point has more authority on the basis that you ( or someone else) are qualified to make it.
Also you cannot actually prove your claim and knowing that any personal claim is worthless.
Dont worry you arent the worse bullshitter I have come across..one poster claimed to be the poet laureate of Houston Texas..
You will need a little more practise to beat him.
As for my post..I always mock bullshitters...I claimed I was the King of Spain to the ' Houston poet Laureate' but he was far more interesting and witty than you.
Anyway lets not high jack the thread any longer. Lets agree that you cant prove your claim so therefore its worthless guff shall we?
Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 07:12 PM
gansao
Sep 12 2015, 07:07 PM
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 07:01 PM
Lol.

I wonder if he has a copy of Campbell's book for WINNERS there too?


Thats probably the book he thinks he wrote...
Maybe that's what the book says.."become me". The deceit and lies confuse you so much that you eventually turn into him and end up acting like Malcolm Tucker towards your wife family and others.

"F- the f- off!"


I wish I had watched 'the thick of it now ' :thumbsup:
Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

C-too
Sep 12 2015, 07:09 PM
gansao
Sep 12 2015, 07:05 PM
C-too
Sep 12 2015, 07:04 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep


For the 3rd time..... if you like it then use it.
Arrogant of you to think I need your permission.


Its up to you if you want to use it..I just want you to shut up about it.
Anyway, I probably need to stop mocking you for a bit or JOG will hit me with a ban stick or something, so carry on without me, old boy . !tkq!
Goto Top
 
gee4444
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
C-too
Sep 12 2015, 07:02 PM
gee4444
Sep 12 2015, 06:46 PM
C-too
Sep 12 2015, 06:33 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
You were obviously happy with Tory lite NL based on your comments. I was not and we'll never agree on that point. I've already admitted NL were a better alternative to the Tories. But such a Hobson's choice could never last. If nothing else, Corbyn is a genuine pricipled man and stands as a true alternative to these Tory shysters. If the people of England prefer to be shafted by pro neo corporate fascist Tory policies for the forseeable future then so be it. They'll wake up eventually.
The problem is they never do wake up. 40 years of Tory administration since 1951. 11 years of Old Labour administration.
If the Tories work along the lines of CommyLite Labour, opposition is guaranteed. IMO years of opposition should not be acceptable to decent caring individuals.
In that case I think you need to wake up to the reality that the people of England (esp the South) perfer Tory values. As I said earlier, so be it. I'm not going to dictate how people should vote. If they haven't the gumption to figure it out themselves and ignore those who attempt to point it out then they deserve all that's coming to them. I personally believe that when the people realise the miserable existances the Tory's paint as the strivings of a hard working Brit for what they are then they'll wake up. Unfortunately for us, and happilly for the Tories, the uneducated masses are generally easily duped - so waking them up might well take some time.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Seems like Gansao, Gee4444 and Skwirked are still in denial that so many trade unionists voted to take old school clause 4 and shitcan it. And of course to have Blair as leader. I guess we'll read soon suppositions that they were all Tory-lites too. Here's the thing though, there were more of them than voted for Corbyn.



Offline Profile Goto Top
 
gee4444
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Clause 4 should be re-instated. That's my view. Not the one you seem compelled to imagine I'm associated with.

I didn't vote to have Blair as leader. I didn't get a vote. So that's more imagined BS from you. No need to apologise, we all make mistakes when we start assuming.

There were more of who than voted for Corbyn? Your statement is ambiguous and unclear and, of course, I don't want to make an ass of myself by assuming your meaning.

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
gee4444
Sep 12 2015, 07:40 PM
Clause 4 should be re-instated. That's my view. Not the one you seem compelled to imagine I'm associated with.

I didn't vote to have Blair as leader. I didn't get a vote. So that's more imagined BS from you. No need to apologise, we all make mistakes when we start assuming.

There were more of who than voted for Corbyn? Your statement is ambiguous and unclear and, of course, I don't want to make an ass of myself by assuming your meaning.

A clause 4 is in place right now

I never sad you voted for Blair, how you thought that defeats me

To remove ambiguity: many more trade unionists voted to dump the old school clause 4 and replace it with the current (mixed economy) clause 4 than people of all Labour eligibilities voted for Corbyn
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 12 2015, 07:29 PM
Seems like Gansao, Gee4444 and Skwirked are still in denial that so many trade unionists voted to take old school clause 4 and shitcan it. And of course to have Blair as leader. I guess we'll read soon suppositions that they were all Tory-lites too. Here's the thing though, there were more of them than voted for Corbyn.



Seeing as you never asked me..:)

By the way, can you not attribute Tory-lite to me please, as I specifically said why I don't say it.

I know TU leaders voted for Blair. A lot of them are (or were, before a big swing the other way) essentially, conservative(!=Tory). Blair also supported certain corrupt management and scab unions.

I am NOT defending ANY facet of the labour movement..other than those who suffer as a consequence of unaccountable tyrants making decisions over their heads.

Does that help..?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 07:49 PM
Steve K
Sep 12 2015, 07:29 PM
Seems like Gansao, Gee4444 and Skwirked are still in denial that so many trade unionists voted to take old school clause 4 and shitcan it. And of course to have Blair as leader. I guess we'll read soon suppositions that they were all Tory-lites too. Here's the thing though, there were more of them than voted for Corbyn.


Seeing as you never asked me..:) , ,By the way, can you not attribute Tory-lite to me please, as I specifically said why I don't say it. . .
perhaps you should correct your post 1427 if you don't want it seen that you were so posting. What you applaud is as if you posted it

Quote:
 
. . . I know TU leaders voted for Blair. A lot of them are (or were, before a big swing the other way) essentially, conservative(!=Tory). Blair also supported certain corrupt management and scab unions.

I am NOT defending ANY facet of the labour movement..other than those who suffer as a consequence of unaccountable tyrants making decisions over their heads.

Does that help..?
A bit
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Sep 12 2015, 10:47 AM
johnofgwent
Sep 12 2015, 10:22 AM
Have the beeb got a leaked source ? their wales page title seems all about falling prostrate before the new leader Corbyn, although the first paragraph is rather more their usual mealy mouthed fare, and doesnlt actually crown him ahead of the declaration ...
The election of Corbyn reaffirms Labour's long term ability to shoot itself in the foot.
:facepalm:
So all this bullshot from the Tory Lites... ...NuLab sycophants about how there is no support for "leftism" is now shown to be just that - bullshit.

Corbyn elected leader with 60% of first preference votes, no need to go to second preference votes.

The press are widely reporting that Kendall's abject failure was largely down to her being tainted by Blairism.

So when are Tony "Tory Lite" Blair's fan boys going to admit what most sensible political observers (both professional and arm-chair) knew in 2010 - Blairism is no longer a saleable product.

All The Best
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Phoenix One UK
Sep 12 2015, 05:05 PM
Having said that, I am of the belief that any democratic government needs an opposition. For the present that should be Labour given they have the second largest number of MPs in government.
And that is partly why support for Blairism has collapsed.

NuLab were NOT an "opposite" in any shape or form for the Tories; they were a pale, ill disguised shadow of them.

In this country we had two parties both espousing Neo-Liberal economic policies that regarded the average joe as a commodity, a unit of labour, and nothing more.

Blair's third way tried to hide this, but it wasn't really fooling anyone with an IQ bigger than their waist measurement (in inches) and maybe for a while it fooled some people, but it isn't fooling anyone any more.

People now want a political party that values human beings for their non commercial worth at least as much, and preferably more than for their purely commercial worth.

Blairism, like Toyism, knew the cost of everything, and the value of nothing.

All The Best
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
More name calling by someone unable to articulate a cogent argument on the point ^

As for this election the figures show it very much was perverted. Corbyn had a majority of just over 80,000 votes. He got more than that (88,499) out of the 105,000 three pounders plus then there are the 100,000 new members since the election. Those so committed to Labour they did stuff all to help when it mattered.

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
gee4444
Sep 12 2015, 06:15 PM
So a number of shadow cabinet members have resigned. They're all passable for Tories so nothing to worry about there.

I hope the result of this leadership election is a sign that the electorate (excluding the right wing fruit cakes of course - as has been demonstrated by their comments on here already) have worked out exactly what the Gideon and 'Call me Dave' show and co. are really all about and want a true alternative to the fat cat paradise they are striving towards.

The fact the Tories were actually sending members of their party into Corbyn's speeches incognito tells me all I need to about their mentality. Their smear campaign backed by pro Tory media will go into overdrive for the next few months with all sorts of slanderous hyperbole. Corbyn is big enough to ignore it, I hope the rest of the Labour party are too.

Time to attack Tory policies without having to defend or accept embarrassment about previous Tory like policies which NL were associated with.
I know you and I differ on a great many issues; this is not one of them.

It was, in my opinion, a political travesty that NuLab were allowed to continue using the term "Labour", had they been a manufacturer of tangible goods they would have been fined under the Trades Description Act.

Blair was no more a socialist then Cameron.

All The Best
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 12 2015, 08:35 PM
Those so committed to Labour they did stuff all to help when it mattered.

When did it matter?

There was no Labour Party post Blair and pre Miliband.

Go plot NuLab's policies on something like Political Compass - NuLab were right of centre.

Labour is left of centre.

These are FACTS you can not deny.

All The Best
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 12 2015, 08:35 PM
More name calling by someone unable to articulate a cogent argument on the point ^
That you think there were no cogent points in my post says a lot more about you than it does me.

All The Best
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Opinionater
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Opinionater
Jul 23 2015, 02:57 PM
Heinrich
Jul 22 2015, 01:57 PM
Tony Blair does not want Jeremy Corbyn to be the new leader. This is a clincher for true socialists; Corbyn is just what is needed to disinfect the party of New Labour. There is hope yet.
Well two points here Heinrich and you may fine at least one difficult to believe.

What Tony Blair has done in my opinion is raised awareness of what Corbyn stands for and as such I think the only thing he has achieved is to help him get elected.

The more I listen to Corbyn the more I respect him, he offers something refreshing and seldom seen in politicians, he actually believes in what he is saying and as you say he is a true sociallist.
He offers something very different that the others, think he would make a great labour leader.

Would I vote for a Labour Party with him as leader, not a chance but I wish him well and my £20 at 8 to 1 to become the new leader looks good to me.
Well got to say Labour delivered for me at 8 to one. To think he was 200 to one at the start.

Now what's the betting on a split in the Labour Party?
And who will lead the new party?

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Sep 12 2015, 08:40 PM
Steve K
Sep 12 2015, 08:35 PM
Those so committed to Labour they did stuff all to help when it mattered.

When did it matter?

There was no Labour Party post Blair and pre Miliband.

Go plot NuLab's policies on something like Political Compass - NuLab were right of centre.

Labour is left of centre.

These are FACTS you can not deny.

All The Best
Yes we understand that in your world there is "no Labour Party" unless it agrees with you.

Thankfully the real world is not like that. Your supposed "FACTS" are just that: supposed

The Labour party has never stood for being "left of centre" in some arbitrary observer's view. Its stated goals remain

a) A DYNAMIC ECONOMY, serving the public interest
b) A JUST SOCIETY, which judges its strength by the condition of the weak as much as the strong,
c) AN OPEN DEMOCRACY, in which government is held to account by the people
d) A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT, which we protect, enhance and hold in trust for future generations

And Political Compass has always shown it being well to the left of the Conservatives.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
PV.
So all this bullshot from the Tory Lites... ...NuLab sycophants about how there is no support for "leftism" is now shown to be just that - bullshit.
Tory Lites as apposed to Commie Lites.
The intelligent NL supporters who ended the 18 year Tory nightmare.
I never suggested there was no support for leftism. I'm fully aware of the fact that there is and always was, it's why Labour has spent so much time as an opposition party. Ed Milliband was the latest example.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 12 2015, 09:27 PM
Yes we understand that in your world there is "no Labour Party" unless it agrees with you.
Why would it need to agree with me?

I am not "labour", I disagree with a number of genuine Labour core principles.

All The Best
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Sep 12 2015, 09:31 PM
Steve K
Sep 12 2015, 09:27 PM
Yes we understand that in your world there is "no Labour Party" unless it agrees with you.
Why would it need to agree with me?

I am not "labour", I disagree with a number of genuine Labour core principles.

All The Best
Well if you want to be that picky then we all know to you there is "no Labour party" unless you agree its policies are what you see as being correct for Labour. So to you it has no ability to refine or evolve.

So now we have a Tory party that espouses paying benefits, a state NHS, free education to 18 etc presumably in your book there is no Tory party either

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 12 2015, 08:04 PM
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 07:49 PM
Steve K
Sep 12 2015, 07:29 PM
Seems like Gansao, Gee4444 and Skwirked are still in denial that so many trade unionists voted to take old school clause 4 and shitcan it. And of course to have Blair as leader. I guess we'll read soon suppositions that they were all Tory-lites too. Here's the thing though, there were more of them than voted for Corbyn.


Seeing as you never asked me..:) , ,By the way, can you not attribute Tory-lite to me please, as I specifically said why I don't say it. . .
perhaps you should correct your post 1427 if you don't want it seen that you were so posting. What you applaud is as if you posted it

Quote:
 
. . . I know TU leaders voted for Blair. A lot of them are (or were, before a big swing the other way) essentially, conservative(!=Tory). Blair also supported certain corrupt management and scab unions.

I am NOT defending ANY facet of the labour movement..other than those who suffer as a consequence of unaccountable tyrants making decisions over their heads.

Does that help..?
A bit
As I understand it, the bit you refer to in gee's post:

"Tory like policies"

!= Tory-lite!

Some of their policies were indeed Tory like (their Thatcher-style attacks on those on benefits, far exceeding her cruelty when it came to the disabled) but I remain convinced they were just right-wing labourites.

There have always been r-w elements in the labour part and in the labour movement as a whole.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Sep 12 2015, 08:40 PM
Steve K
Sep 12 2015, 08:35 PM
Those so committed to Labour they did stuff all to help when it mattered.

When did it matter?

There was no Labour Party post Blair and pre Miliband.

Go plot NuLab's policies on something like Political Compass - NuLab were right of centre.

Labour is left of centre.

These are FACTS you can not deny.

All The Best
The reality is that NL were a centre left party working in a right wing economy. And there was neither a mandate or an opportunity for change before 2008.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 09:41 PM
Steve K
Sep 12 2015, 08:04 PM
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 07:49 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
perhaps you should correct your post 1427 if you don't want it seen that you were so posting. What you applaud is as if you posted it

Quote:
 
. . . I know TU leaders voted for Blair. A lot of them are (or were, before a big swing the other way) essentially, conservative(!=Tory). Blair also supported certain corrupt management and scab unions.

I am NOT defending ANY facet of the labour movement..other than those who suffer as a consequence of unaccountable tyrants making decisions over their heads.

Does that help..?
A bit
As I understand it, the bit you refer to in gee's post:

"Tory like policies"

!= Tory-lite!

Some of their policies were indeed Tory like (their Thatcher-style attacks on those on benefits, far exceeding her cruelty when it came to the disabled) but I remain convinced they were just right-wing labourites.

There have always been r-w elements in the labour part and in the labour movement as a whole.

But here's the thing. To my knowledge the Tory party has done some daft things but it has never campaigned for the abolition of the age old game of cribbage. Neither have many if not all Labour leaders. On the logic you applauded that makes them Tory-lite

I call that logic trash. There will always be points of common ground. Was Attlee a Tory for working with Churchill? Of course not.
Edited by Steve K, Sep 12 2015, 09:47 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 12 2015, 09:46 PM
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 09:41 PM
Steve K
Sep 12 2015, 08:04 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepyour post 1427
As I understand it, the bit you refer to in gee's post:

"Tory like policies"

!= Tory-lite!

Some of their policies were indeed Tory like (their Thatcher-style attacks on those on benefits, far exceeding her cruelty when it came to the disabled) but I remain convinced they were just right-wing labourites.

There have always been r-w elements in the labour part and in the labour movement as a whole.

But here's the thing. To my knowledge the Tory party has done some daft things but it has never campaigned for the abolition of the age old game of cribbage. Neither have many if not all Labour leaders. On the logic you applauded that makes them Tory-lite

I call that logic trash. There will always be points of common ground. Was Attlee a Tory for working with Churchill? Of course not.
Steve, "!=Tory-lite". I know that they aren't Tories.

Do you disagree that Blairites were on the right of the labour movement.

I would say they drifted between being centrist and centre-right under Brown. But just as you get right-wing social democrats in other countries.. they still weren't "Tory".

If you disagree with any of that tell me why
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Matthew Brady
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
The prospect of Corbyn running to country genuinely worries me. Granted, he probably will not win the next election, but in the quite possible event of a serious economic downturn, just about any candidate would beat the incumbent party.

This is a man who was prepared to send his child to a sink estate comprehensive rather than a grammar school, and this apparently contributed to him divorcing his second wife. In other words, his loyalty to his ideology (which is communism) trumps his loyalty to his own offspring. So we can be fairly sure that his loyalty to his ideology would trump the national interest.

I have no doubt he really would impose no limitations on immigration. I am quite sure he would be sympathetic to IRA and Islamic terrorists if he were prime minister, just as he has been as a backbencher. I am quite sure he would fund a massive expansion in public spending through money printing as he states, which is simply taxation by another means that disproportionately hits those who cannot invest in property, shares, gold etc. (ie. everyone other than the wealthy), and ultimately, it could well provoke hyper inflation that would destroy the wealth of almost everyone.

Why so many people are so enthusiastic about someone who would give away our country to the third world, pander to those who hate us, and completely ruin the economy, I am not altogether clear. Being a man of conviction is not a good quality of your convictions are terrible.
Edited by Matthew Brady, Sep 12 2015, 10:04 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 09:41 PM
Steve K
Sep 12 2015, 08:04 PM
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 07:49 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
perhaps you should correct your post 1427 if you don't want it seen that you were so posting. What you applaud is as if you posted it

Quote:
 
. . . I know TU leaders voted for Blair. A lot of them are (or were, before a big swing the other way) essentially, conservative(!=Tory). Blair also supported certain corrupt management and scab unions.

I am NOT defending ANY facet of the labour movement..other than those who suffer as a consequence of unaccountable tyrants making decisions over their heads.

Does that help..?
A bit
As I understand it, the bit you refer to in gee's post:

"Tory like policies"

!= Tory-lite!

Some of their policies were indeed Tory like (their Thatcher-style attacks on those on benefits, far exceeding her cruelty when it came to the disabled) but I remain convinced they were just right-wing labourites.

There have always been r-w elements in the labour part and in the labour movement as a whole.
The "attack" as you call it on the disabled was pretty much a catastrophe
BUT. The Numbers claiming IB during the Tory administrations rose from 0.75 million claimants in 1979 to 2.2 million in 1997. It is thought that many of them were working people made redundant and ended up on IB.

Between 1997 and around 2005 the number of IB claimants rose from 2.2m to 2.6m. While the tests for fitness to work turned out to be far too heavy handed, I suspect that a fair number of the 2.6m claimants were/are capable of work.

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Sep 12 2015, 10:05 PM
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 09:41 PM
Steve K
Sep 12 2015, 08:04 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepyour post 1427
As I understand it, the bit you refer to in gee's post:

"Tory like policies"

!= Tory-lite!

Some of their policies were indeed Tory like (their Thatcher-style attacks on those on benefits, far exceeding her cruelty when it came to the disabled) but I remain convinced they were just right-wing labourites.

There have always been r-w elements in the labour part and in the labour movement as a whole.
The "attack" as you call it on the disabled was pretty much a catastrophe
BUT. The Numbers claiming IB during the Tory administrations rose from 0.75 million claimants in 1979 to 2.2 million in 1997. It is thought that many of them were working people made redundant and ended up on IB.

Between 1997 and around 2005 the number of IB claimants rose from 2.2m to 2.6m. While the tests for fitness to work turned out to be far too heavy handed, I suspect that a fair number of the 2.6m claimants were/are capable of work.

Yep the 90's Tories shunted people onto IB to massage the figures..a practice continued under Blair.

Gormless put an end to that and intro'd far more, as you say, heavy handed tests.

Gormless also royally messed up the economy as chancellor, sowed a lot of discontent through his idiotic and hapless way of treating the public with contempt.

Single handedly he managed to do quite a bit of damage to both the labour brand and the country. As for your clairvoyancy re the 2.6m figure, I am sure RJD agrees with you.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
gansao
Sep 12 2015, 01:38 PM
Tytoalba
Sep 12 2015, 01:22 PM
gansao
Sep 12 2015, 12:05 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
The result of the election shows that they have already lurched to the left
When I came in convoy on a troop ship from India during the last war, the ship I was on lurched to the right as everyone rushed to the side when England fist came into view. The captain had to send a message out on the tannoy loud speaker system asking passengers to move to the other side of the ship as the ship was becoming unstable and unmanageable.
Good advice for the Labour party to try to get to the centre and the ship of state upright IMO before they flounder.


No it doesnt it shows that labour realises that they have had Tory lite leaders posing as people who could care a shit about the ordinary people.
It means the reds have crawled out from under the beds. Don't mistake the vote of the 500000, activists and fellow travellers as being supported by the rest of the Labour movement, The resignations and refusal to serve under Corbyn must indicate that is the case.
The bottom line is that to gain power you have to win elections, and that always requires degree of pragmatism.
Labour does not pretend to represent the majority , just their core vote.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 07:12 PM
gansao
Sep 12 2015, 07:07 PM
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 07:01 PM
Lol.

I wonder if he has a copy of Campbell's book for WINNERS there too?


Thats probably the book he thinks he wrote...
Maybe that's what the book says.."become me". The deceit and lies confuse you so much that you eventually turn into him and end up acting like Malcolm Tucker towards your wife family and others.

"F- the f- off!"
Pulled down to G's level. I thought you had more sense.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Well you did say :

"Three sets of letters after my name and a book published, how many letters after your name ?
I notice you didn't answer the question, if there is a "bullshitter" here, it's yourself."

A bit of a daft thing to say, that.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 09:57 PM
Steve, "!=Tory-lite". I know that they aren't Tories.

Do you disagree that Blairites were on the right of the labour movement.

I would say they drifted between being centrist and centre-right under Brown. But just as you get right-wing social democrats in other countries.. they still weren't "Tory".

If you disagree with any of that tell me why

No real disagreement. Brown was definitely further left than Blair. Both failed in my book not because they wanted a successful private sector to employ many and fund welfare for the rest. They failed socially because they too easily accepted large numbers of unemployed. That's a corrosive evil that undermines not just their families but also those in low paid work that fear unemployment. I really believe they both thought it would keep moving towards a full employment position.

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 10:27 PM
Well you did say :

"Three sets of letters after my name and a book published, how many letters after your name ?
I notice you didn't answer the question, if there is a "bullshitter" here, it's yourself."

A bit of a daft thing to say, that.
? :) The comment is in context to the comments I was replying to. Are you turning into gansao MK 2 ?
Edited by C-too, Sep 12 2015, 10:53 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
It was a really daft thing to say to anyone.. and you were lightly made fun of because of it.

Are you going to address post 1468? ;)
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
gee4444
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
SteveK: 'To remove ambiguity: many more trade unionists voted to dump the old school clause 4 and replace it with the current (mixed economy) clause 4 than people of all Labour eligibilities voted for Corbyn '

To that I can only reply: So what?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 10:13 PM
C-too
Sep 12 2015, 10:05 PM
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 09:41 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepyour post 1427
The "attack" as you call it on the disabled was pretty much a catastrophe
BUT. The Numbers claiming IB during the Tory administrations rose from 0.75 million claimants in 1979 to 2.2 million in 1997. It is thought that many of them were working people made redundant and ended up on IB.

Between 1997 and around 2005 the number of IB claimants rose from 2.2m to 2.6m. While the tests for fitness to work turned out to be far too heavy handed, I suspect that a fair number of the 2.6m claimants were/are capable of work.

Yep the 90's Tories shunted people onto IB to massage the figures..a practice continued under Blair.

Gormless put an end to that and intro'd far more, as you say, heavy handed tests.

Gormless also royally messed up the economy as chancellor, sowed a lot of discontent through his idiotic and hapless way of treating the public with contempt.

Single handedly he managed to do quite a bit of damage to both the labour brand and the country. As for your clairvoyancy re the 2.6m figure, I am sure RJD agrees with you.
You obviously do not understand the context the comment was made in. Your comments on it prove that to be a fact.
-----------------------------------------
I posted figures and backed them up, to PV recently showing that Unemployment fell substantially under NL and the number of people in employment rose substantially under NL (prior to the meltdown).

The point being that many people claiming IB will be fit for work. So you can claim the tests on IB claimants were over the top, but surely you don't claim that there was no need for any tests ?

Gordon Brown inherited a troubled economy and was then hit by the international meltdown. IIRC he had the economy showing growth when the Tories won the election.

I am going on memory with the 2.6m claimants on IB, but there were 2.2m in 1997 and a significant increase under NL. 2.6m comes to mind.

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Marconi
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Steve K
Sep 12 2015, 10:32 PM
Brown was definitely further left than Blair. Both failed in my book not because they wanted a successful private sector to employ many and fund welfare for the rest. They failed socially because they too easily accepted large numbers of unemployed. That's a corrosive evil that undermines not just their families but also those in low paid work that fear unemployment. I really believe they both thought it would keep moving towards a full employment position.

Steve, those 2 didn't give a sh1t except to further their careers. I left school when there were 3 and 1/2 million on the dole and riots under the Tories. Got a little better under NL for a bit, then worse again. Now the Tories are back with their job insecurity dogma.

I'm going to give Corbyn a chance, with a healthy dose of cynicism. And even though his views on NATO scare the hell out of me.

He can't be any worse than the cronies of both parties who failed so many.
Edited by Marconi, Sep 13 2015, 02:55 AM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Cymru
Alt-Right
[ *  *  *  * ]
What makes Corbyn's victory so remarkable was just how overwhelming it was.

Out of 422,000 voters 251,000 of them voted for Corbyn.

He easily got the majority of votes amongst each of the three voting groups: Labour Party members, Registered Supporters and Affiliated Supporters.

His victory was so convincing that a second round of votes was not needed. Leadership elections with 3 or more candidates are almost guaranteed to go to a second round because no one candidate is able to get the 50% of the votes needed for an outright majority. Corbyn got 60%.

A consequence of this crushing victory is that it leaves no room for manoeuvre for the Blairites working to undermine him.
Edited by Cymru, Sep 13 2015, 12:00 AM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Going back to the OP.
I have witnessed a troubling development in a particular manufacturing company recently.
The company in question was turned into an Employee ownership trust recently. There has been and will not be any advantage to the employees of this particular company in it being an Employee ownership trust however..this is quite clear.
The company in question has relied on casual labour through a series of employment agencies in the past but has had a core of regular employees some skilled some not so skilled and some unskilled.

The company is now creating an internal 'employment agency'. Their attitude towards their staff is illustrated by the quasi agency using the company canteen to interview prospective workers and getting them to fill in forms and generally hang around during the lunch time( lunch time consists of 20 minutes away from the noisy factory) this is the only break allowed to both agency workers and the regular workers who ( in theory) partly own the company.
Now the internal agency can and will produce workers permanently on zero hour contracts that are maginalised from being ' owners'( or more importantly full employees) because they are effectively sub contractors.
This is the brave new world for the future young, non existent job security and permanent minimum wages. There is no guarantee that a sub contracted young person could or would not be fully trained by the company and still be working on a zero hours contract and STILL be on minimum wage.

So to simplify my point ..ordinary people will continue to race to the bottom on wages and job security with both the Tories and NL.
I've seen how you do it and if the idiots running this particular company can do it , anyone can.

If you really want this Tory/Tory lite future for your kids or anyone elses kids then f&ck you and lets look at what Corbyn can do.
Complacent old farts ,xenophobics and the fearful of having to pay a bit more taxes should not be allowed to commit working people into both the old days of working poor and into the brave new world of neo liberalism.
The Tories and their greedy scum bag followers actively encourage this and New Labour would not have the balls or gumption change it...so this is the future ...if we allow it.
Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Sep 12 2015, 11:19 PM
skwirked
Sep 12 2015, 10:13 PM
C-too
Sep 12 2015, 10:05 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepyour post 1427
Yep the 90's Tories shunted people onto IB to massage the figures..a practice continued under Blair.

Gormless put an end to that and intro'd far more, as you say, heavy handed tests.

Gormless also royally messed up the economy as chancellor, sowed a lot of discontent through his idiotic and hapless way of treating the public with contempt.

Single handedly he managed to do quite a bit of damage to both the labour brand and the country. As for your clairvoyancy re the 2.6m figure, I am sure RJD agrees with you.
You obviously do not understand the context the comment was made in. Your comments on it prove that to be a fact.
-----------------------------------------
I posted figures and backed them up, to PV recently showing that Unemployment fell substantially under NL and the number of people in employment rose substantially under NL (prior to the meltdown).

The point being that many people claiming IB will be fit for work. So you can claim the tests on IB claimants were over the top, but surely you don't claim that there was no need for any tests ?

Gordon Brown inherited a troubled economy and was then hit by the international meltdown. IIRC he had the economy showing growth when the Tories won the election.

I am going on memory with the 2.6m claimants on IB, but there were 2.2m in 1997 and a significant increase under NL. 2.6m comes to mind.

I sure did and added my own bit of context.

No claim was made that fitness testing isn't needed, YOU said it yourseldf they were too heavy handed.

Now you and others have no proof about how many people are really fit for work, so why do youpersist?

Btw the employment stats are rightly lambasted because of the rapid expansion of the public sector. It was a little unsustainable, not saying I agree as to the extent withe the likes of RJD..

The economy was showing growth in 1996 too. I'm still glad the Tories got booted out.
And yes, he did mess things up, we could have at least tried to regulate the banks as much as the swivel-eyes in finance would have allowed. He could have reigned in our debt by about 2-3%of GDP at least.

Not glad the Tories got in again, but p-d off with labour for f-ing things up.
Edited by skwirked, Sep 13 2015, 12:04 AM.
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