General Election 2017 | Cabinet reshuffle: Hunt re-appointed Health Secretary for record third time

[Mozza]

What the feck are people on about it making sense to re-privatise the trains? The last time the Government was in charge they were shite, that's why they could wait to find some idiot to sell them off too.

The Government are awful at running services.

They make profits because they are run as businesses, not as wasteful Government bodies.

Look up the story of the East coast mainline

 

[Nogbadthebad]

She's clearly delores umbridge

 

[Mozza]

The fees are obviously a joke, but worker unions should just create an independant legal representation insurance that also covers tribunal fees. If they can get a significant amount of people to sign up the fees would be affordable. To make it even cheaper the govt. could introduce an individual mandate to completely erase adverse selection.

Union membershipis falling

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

*holds hands up*

Okay, okay, 600,000 is a fair number of people and more than i imagined. But won't these people just move online if the FOBTs in shops are too limited (£2 stakes)?

 

[Mozza]

Reading responses across the board to Labour's manifesto launch, I'm afraid to say I agree most with The Economist's analysis;
http://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonwood/2017/05/labour-s-economic-programme

Same old right wing rhetoric

 

[Mozza]

If we doubt that government has too much time on its hands:

Manifesto:

It's shameful you don't think this is a good thing

 

[Mozza]

Don't forget that 15% tax on financial transactions in The City. A policy McDonnell admitted is 'a gamble'. The City is responsible for 12% IIRC of our GDP and is going to take a significant hit from Brexit.

Labour's manifesto is stupid frankly, entirely indicative of why people don't trust Labour with the economy.

Its 0.5%

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Sounds like Corbyn dropped a major bollock at the launch by declaring that benefits won't be frozen. Have they left it out of the manifesto because it means they can't balance the book with that level of spending in? He sounded like he was blindsided too!

Its 0.5%

It still makes the City less competitive at exactly the time when what it needs is to be as competitive as possible.

 

[Mozza]

To give a bit of balance, the Government already announced a review back in October, so Labour are reiterating what is already in process:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37750115

Amazing how it takes a nice long review before legislation can come in for this

 

[DenisIrwin]

 

[Javi]

Union membershipis falling

Yeah, that why it must be independant; not connected to Union membership (I'm guessing most Unions have this type of insurance anyway).

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

It's shameful you don't think this is a good thing

If you say so. Personally, i'd ascribe that sort of description to the waste in Labour's manifesto, not only the vast amount of money spent, but the missed opportunity to push genuinely innovative and new policies. It doesn't take a very special type of left-winger to nationalise a tonne of stuff while forgetting the maths.

 

[Mozza]

If you say so. Personally, i'd ascribe that sort of description to the waste in Labour's manifesto, not only the vast amount of money spent, but the missed opportunity to push genuinely innovative and new policies. It doesn't take a very special type of left-winger to nationalise a tonne of stuff while forgetting the maths.

Yes, let the bookies continue to profit from human misery, it's the Tory way

 

[711]

The rolling stock could be leased by the now public train operating companies, like the east coast mainline did. They could over time buy new stock and feck over the lease companies as they age.

I don't think the freight companies are part of the nationalisation, they could continue to run as now on the publicly owned network rail

Then it would be a part-nationalisation, which might or might not be a good idea, but the honest thing to do would be to say so instead of leaving it to guys on the internet to guess. The same goes for cost, do they believe they can carry out this (possible) part-nationalisation at zero cost, or if not then how much? I'm not expecting precise detail, but if they want votes they need a bit more than some vague wish-list with no costings.

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

Yes, let the bookies continue to profit from human misery, it's the Tory way

Partly down to a lack of awareness on my part. A bit like yourself yesterday, when stating that you didn't think many employers kick up rough over staff absences.

 

[Mozza]

Then it would be a part-nationalisation, which might or might not be a good idea, but the honest thing to do would be to say so instead of leaving it to guys on the internet to guess. The same goes for cost, do they believe they can carry out this (possible) part-nationalisation at zero cost, or if not then how much? I'm not expecting precise detail, but if they want votes they need a bit more than some vague wish-list with no costings.

The rail franchises run out of contract and automatically come into public ownership, cost 0

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

 

[Mozza]

Partly down to a lack of awareness on my part. A bit like yourself yesterday, when stating that you didn't think many employers kick up rough over staff absences.

I was right yesterday and today

 

[Ubik]

They're gonna need more civil servants, certainly.

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

I was right yesterday and today

After talking with one company owner just last night, and personally being aware of numerous cases where people were quietly eased out of their jobs, i wholeheartedly disagree.

 

[Mozza]

After talking with one company owner just last night, and personally being aware of numerous cases where people were quietly eased out of their jobs, i wholeheartedly disagree.

I thought company bosses were good people? At least that's what the Tories keep telling us. Now you're advocating we legislate to make them behave like humans. Amazing.

The policy doesn't help a lot of people, that was the point I was making. Wealthy Tories can afford to take a year off work, the plebs can't. And what if your mam takes more than a year to die?

 

[Dobba]

The policy doesn't help a lot of people, that was the point I was making. Wealthy Tories can afford to take a year off work, the plebs can't. And what if your mam takes more than a year to die?

The Tories send you a pillow with 'You know what you need to do' on an attached post-it note

 

[711]

The rail franchises run out of contract and automatically come into public ownership, cost 0

Well amidst the guesswork the one thing we can say for sure is that it wouldn't be cost 0, because they are proposing to cap fares, build new trains, increase freight provision and improve accessibility, all of which in railway terms are damned expensive.

Now as a railway supporter I would love all this, however desirability isn't my point, what is my point is that the promises are completely uncosted, along with much else in the manifesto, so how can I have any faith in the ability of Labour to actually deliver them whilst managing the national budget successfully?

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

I missed this in all the chat about nationalisations earlier. In short, they put free degrees in business stuides and railway renationalisation ahead of Osborne's cuts. Super prioritisation there guys.

The policy doesn't help a lot of people, that was the point I was making. Wealthy Tories can afford to take a year off work, the plebs can't. And what if your mam takes more than a year to die?

I don't think that happens to be true, nor is this about wealth. Let's consider a few examples shall we? In-home care and rehab immediately following surgery, accompanying a loved one to radiotherapy, filling in the lag time between diagnosis and commencement of council supplied carers e.t.c.

Then there was the leave for bereavement; companies generally consider 2-3 days to be a fair obligation.

 

[altodevil]

Made me look at her twitter feed, almost every post makes me boke. So far up her own arse.

 

[Nikhil]

Labour will get the most seats in this election. They won't get a majority but they'll get the most seats. Things will change as the polls approach.

Corbyn is getting huge crowds. There will be a push for him.

 

[Damien]

^ Not a chance. He's had big crowds before but it has never translated into votes. He's unpopular with the majority of the electorate.

 

[Cheesy]

Labour will get the most seats in this election. They won't get a majority but they'll get the most seats. Things will change as the polls approach.

Corbyn is getting huge crowds. There will be a push for him.

Huge crowds don't mean much in the context of a wider electorate though.

 

[Ubik]

Labour will get the most seats in this election. They won't get a majority but they'll get the most seats. Things will change as the polls approach.

Corbyn is getting huge crowds. There will be a push for him.

Happy to bet you £50 on that.

 

[sullydnl]

Labour will get the most seats in this election. They won't get a majority but they'll get the most seats. Things will change as the polls approach.

Corbyn is getting huge crowds. There will be a push for him.

Crowd sizes don't really mean much. You can have a strong set of loyal supporters while also failing to appeal enough to the general public.

 

[Sweet Square]

Whoops

 

[Ubik]

Wait...which of those things is untrue?

 

[Classical Mechanic]

The left always has excellent support at the grass root level. Passionate ideologues that seem genuinely surprised when they realise that the wider public is generally not politically engaged and have little interest in their brand of politics.

 

[Sweet Square]

Wait...which of those things is untrue?

Isn't it mostly people earring over £80,000 that will be taxed more. It's implied by both the tory ad(Fair enough I guess)and the BBC article as Labour taxing normal people if they come into power. Not to mentioned that BBC report id hardly a report at all, it's pretty much just the shite attention grabbing headline.


Also it's funny because it's Kuenssberg.

 

[DOTA]

More spending, more borrowing, more taxes is a plan I can entirely get behind. I thought that was precisely the idea?

EDIT - Ahh, we're annoyed because she didn't put 'only for rich cnuts' in her headline.

 

[Tarrou]

Interesting that Farage was quite complimentary about the Labour manifesto on LBC earlier. Could some ex-Labour UKIPs actually be persuaded to move back instead of jumping to the Tories?

Labour seem to be building some momentum now.

 

[Sweet Square]

More spending, more borrowing, more taxes is a plan I can entirely get behind. I thought that was precisely the idea?

EDIT - Ahh, we're annoyed because she didn't put 'only for rich cnuts' in her headline.

Well yeah it would be nice.

 

[Mozza]

I missed this in all the chat about nationalisations earlier. In short, they put free degrees in business stuides and railway renationalisation ahead of Osborne's cuts. Super prioritisation there guys.




I don't think that happens to be true, nor is this about wealth. Let's consider a few examples shall we? In-home care and rehab immediately following surgery, accompanying a loved one to radiotherapy, filling in the lag time between diagnosis and commencement of council supplied carers e.t.c.

Then there was the leave for bereavement; companies generally consider 2-3 days to be a fair obligation.

Taking time off work costs money. Most people can't afford to take more than a few days off work. They have rent or mortgage to make, kids to feed, bills to pay.

 

[DOTA]

Well yeah it would be nice.

I definitely see the point.

 

[Chorley1974]

The rail franchises run out of contract and automatically come into public ownership, cost 0

There will be a whole load of people required to actually manage the ex franchises, it's not like the franchise expires and these services just become part of the public sector. Deluded to think zero cost, and it's not exactly like the public sector has a good track record of cost efficient service delivery.