You seem to be repeatedly misinterpreting the above posts as an attack on entrepreneurs but I imagine you're doing so purposefully. Every attack on the rich and wealth inequality (i.e inheritance tax) gets reframed in this fashion and it's unhelpful.
Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)
- Thread starter unchanged_lineup
- Start date
You seem to be repeatedly misinterpreting the above posts as an attack on entrepreneurs but I imagine you're doing so purposefully. Every attack on the rich and wealth inequality (i.e inheritance tax) gets reframed in this fashion and it's unhelpful.
Not really. His repeated replies to me saying that it only applies to small businesses rather than those in larger businesses make it clear that I haven't misinterpreted anything. He literally said that it's easy to work hard when you're getting paid lots for it. This is completely false. If anything it's easier to kick back and do nothing when you're getting paid huge sums. People work just as hard, if not harder when they're successful to ensure that the success is continued.
And a quarter are open to the suggestion...A snap survey from Survation & Huffington Post last night.
David Cameron said that Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn has a 'security-threatening, terrorist-sympathising, Britain-hating ideology'. Do you agree or disagree?
1 in 5 Labour voters agree with that statement?
These surveys always crack me up. How can you not know if you agree or disagree with a statement.
Because you haven't made up your mind yet.
In which case you disagree with the statement. It's basic logic.
First TNS poll from scotland post-Corbyn.
Constituency ballot :
SNP 56% (-2)
Labour 21% (-2)
Conservatives 12% (n/c)
Liberal Democrats 6% (n/c)
Regional list ballot :
SNP 52% (+1)
Labour 23% (-1)
Conservatives 11% (n/c)
Liberal Democrats 6% (n/c)
Greens 5% (-1)
http://www.tnsglobal.com/uk/snp-maintains-strong-lead-as-new-leaders-fail-to-boost-Labour-support
http://www2.tnsglobal.com/l/36112/2...od_Voting_Intention_Poll___8_October_2015.pdf
Constituency ballot :
SNP 56% (-2)
Labour 21% (-2)
Conservatives 12% (n/c)
Liberal Democrats 6% (n/c)
Regional list ballot :
SNP 52% (+1)
Labour 23% (-1)
Conservatives 11% (n/c)
Liberal Democrats 6% (n/c)
Greens 5% (-1)
http://www.tnsglobal.com/uk/snp-maintains-strong-lead-as-new-leaders-fail-to-boost-Labour-support
http://www2.tnsglobal.com/l/36112/2...od_Voting_Intention_Poll___8_October_2015.pdf
Asserting a negative isnt the same thing as failing to assert a positive.
So much for a Corbyn leadership bringing Scotland back into play
The obsession with polls and surveys here (and widely regarding politics) is ridiculous. There's only one poll that matters and everything else is noise.
Especially 5 years before an election. It's disappointing to see labour supporters focusing so much on them. Is that all we care about now?
It's quantitative data that can be analysed and used comparatively with the past, with a view to looking at how things will play out in future. To suggest that the General Election is the only barometer of public opinion that should be taken is absurd.
Those polls are for the Scottish elections, which are in 7 months' time.
Silly shamwow. It's been happening in general though.
Might as well stick your head out the window to find out which way the wind is blowing to predict the weather of the whole country in five years. What kind of jobs worths actually carry out and answer these surveys anyway. Robbing a living. It's like those companies that analyse football matches to the Nth degree and think that this gives them accurate data that can be used to predict results with some degree of accuracy. To give any importance or time of day to these silly polls is truly absurd.
Didn't hear this much when Corbyn leapt up in the polls.
Okay? It doesn't take a poll to know when the sun is shining. The main reason polls have some kind of relevance is so they can be used by individuals or organisations to fit their pre-determined agenda. They can be manipulated into telling us whatever we like, and the ones that think they're neutral still tell us nothing really. Same bullshit with the left-right scale with people trying to quantify everything like everything really is that simple and predictable, it's not!
Same kind of evidence denial you hear from climate change deniers. And UKIP.
Opinion polls are not the same as statistical scientific data. One is quantifiable and one isn't, yet both get presented as the same. Don't let me stop you posting or referencing any more anti-Corbyn polls though, I know that they validate your own opinion and it makes you feel good inside.
Most wealth is inherited
For a start you are equating all people who are wealthy with hard working self made CEO's. I would also have you note that I specifically said there were some exceptions.
Most of the people I know who own successful businesses spend more time on the golf course than anywhere else. Half the time when I phone them up to deal with a problem they are on holiday in their second home or away on a long weekend break if you actually want something doing talk to their secretary.
Two out of three of the opps managers I have worked with over the last five years were/are flat out lazy bastards. Its a myth this hard working manager bullshit. Its all about delegation and of course no one can keep tabs on you at that level. Answering an email at 3 am just means he was probably checking his I phone as he left the hooker her money or more likely swiped the company credit card.
If all these CEO's are so hard working how come they seem to know feck all about what their companies are doing? Turn on the TV and look at the VW guy who helped to run a vast company with hundreds of thousands of people working for it and has been paid massive sums for years and years. How can you not know that your engineers had made a cheat device and installed it in all your diesel cars? I mean its not like any senior manager could be expected to know how engines work at a car firm. How exactly can you be in charge of anything that big, if how you achieve the single most important figure used to sell your product, fuel economy, isn't fully in your grasp? Ask them how much they have lost on their options at the moment and I bet they know that.
Managing editors of newspapers are so hard working they don't know how they get the stories they print.
Oil execs who don't know how they drill for oil.
Food companies who can't say for certain what species of animal goes in the meat products they make.
Their kids are brought up by nannies, their houses cleaned for them, their cars driven for them, their days organised by their PA and all they have to do is wear their pressed for them tailored suit and not feck things up. Yet still they manage to feck things up. How on the ball can they really be?
This is just the shit we know about.
Boards and boards full of people who just can't understand how they missed it all when Enron went down or Worldcom or any of the banks or insurance companies or reinsurance companies. Bank management who don't know how their PPI is sold, the Libor rate set, what money laundering is, how tax evasion works, that credit default swaps are financial instruments in the same way my backside is a musical one and of course all the regulators who now admit they couldn't regulate but were saying the opposite just before it all goes awry.
Or shall we move to the hard working worlds of sports a meritocracy if ever there was one, well if you ignore the boards of FIFA all the confederations and national FA's, practically all sports governing bodies and yes all the drug testing agency and their hard working well paid leadership.
On and on and on. Yet we are supposed to all believe this nose to the grindstone sop story they and you on their behalf keep trying to peddle. It would take Scientology scale indoctrination process to make me believe that now.
For a start you are equating all people who are wealthy with hard working self made CEO's. I would also have you note that I specifically said there were some exceptions.
Most of the people I know who own successful businesses spend more time on the golf course than anywhere else. Half the time when I phone them up to deal with a problem they are on holiday in their second home or away on a long weekend break if you actually want something doing talk to their secretary.
Two out of three of the opps managers I have worked with over the last five years were/are flat out lazy bastards. Its a myth this hard working manager bullshit. Its all about delegation and of course no one can keep tabs on you at that level. Answering an email at 3 am just means he was probably checking his I phone as he left the hooker her money or more likely swiped the company credit card.
If all these CEO's are so hard working how come they seem to know feck all about what their companies are doing? Turn on the TV and look at the VW guy who helped to run a vast company with hundreds of thousands of people working for it and has been paid massive sums for years and years. How can you not know that your engineers had made a cheat device and installed it in all your diesel cars? I mean its not like any senior manager could be expected to know how engines work at a car firm. How exactly can you be in charge of anything that big, if how you achieve the single most important figure used to sell your product, fuel economy, isn't fully in your grasp? Ask them how much they have lost on their options at the moment and I bet they know that.
Managing editors of newspapers are so hard working they don't know how they get the stories they print.
Oil execs who don't know how they drill for oil.
Food companies who can't say for certain what species of animal goes in the meat products they make.
Their kids are brought up by nannies, their houses cleaned for them, their cars driven for them, their days organised by their PA and all they have to do is wear their pressed for them tailored suit and not feck things up. Yet still they manage to feck things up. How on the ball can they really be?
This is just the shit we know about.
Boards and boards full of people who just can't understand how they missed it all when Enron went down or Worldcom or any of the banks or insurance companies or reinsurance companies. Bank management who don't know how their PPI is sold, the Libor rate set, what money laundering is, how tax evasion works, that credit default swaps are financial instruments in the same way my backside is a musical one and of course all the regulators who now admit they couldn't regulate but were saying the opposite just before it all goes awry.
Or shall we move to the hard working worlds of sports a meritocracy if ever there was one, well if you ignore the boards of FIFA all the confederations and national FA's, practically all sports governing bodies and yes all the drug testing agency and their hard working well paid leadership.
On and on and on. Yet we are supposed to all believe this nose to the grindstone sop story they and you on their behalf keep trying to peddle. It would take Scientology scale indoctrination process to make me believe that now.
All of this is purely anecdotal. It's like you're referring to one or two businesses from each industry and equating it to mean the vast majority of wealthy people.
I think he's gone a bit OTT here but tbf wasn't your post also anecdotal?
More people have joined Labour since the election than are in the entire Conservative party
More people have joined the Labour party since the general election than are members of the Conservatives, party statistics suggest.
Labour said 183,658 people had joined the party since 5 May, meaning membership has roughly doubled in the months since the party’s loss.
By contrast, total Tory membership is around 150,000 people, according to the latest available figures.
Total membership of the Labour party is now 370,658 – approaching the 400,000 figure recorded at the 1997 election.
The opposition’s membership leap has been partly driven by a surge in joiners during and since the party’s leadership election, which saw Jeremy Corbyn become leader of the party.
Figures released by the party last month showed more than 50,000 people had joined the party since Mr Corbyn’s own election as leader – a figure higher than the 47,000 people who are members of Ukip.
More than 100,000 people paid £3 to register as party supporters during the leadership election, many to vote for Mr Corbyn.
After Mr Corbyn's victory party officials had hoped that many would sign up to Labour as full members.
“I hope they can come with us on the journey to the election in 2020,” newly elected Deputy Leader Tom Watson told BBC One’s Andrew Marr Show.
“Let's get these new members involved in campaigning, helping relay our roots in communities, being involved in a digital revolution in the party that allows members to feel that they're more included in the decisions we make.”
Mr Corbyn was elected as Labour leader by a landslide of nearly 60 per cent of members, supporters, and affiliates.
During the Labour leadership campaign Mr Corbyn spoke to packed halls of supporters.
At a rally in Manchester during the Conservative party conference last week he filled Manchester Cathedral an hour before he was due to speak, and also filled a nearby public square with an overflow crowd.
The enthusiasm of Mr Corbyn’s supporters has not yet been matched by significantly improved polling figures for his party, however.
The Labour membership figures were provided to the Independent by the party upon request. The Conservative party figures were collated by the House of Commons library in August 2015, based on the most recent estimates providing by the party.
The Independent contacted the Conservatives for any updates to the figures but none were immediately provided.
Welcome back.
More people have joined the Labour party since the general election than are members of the Conservatives, party statistics suggest.
Labour said 183,658 people had joined the party since 5 May, meaning membership has roughly doubled in the months since the party’s loss.
By contrast, total Tory membership is around 150,000 people, according to the latest available figures.
Total membership of the Labour party is now 370,658 – approaching the 400,000 figure recorded at the 1997 election.
The opposition’s membership leap has been partly driven by a surge in joiners during and since the party’s leadership election, which saw Jeremy Corbyn become leader of the party.
Figures released by the party last month showed more than 50,000 people had joined the party since Mr Corbyn’s own election as leader – a figure higher than the 47,000 people who are members of Ukip.
More than 100,000 people paid £3 to register as party supporters during the leadership election, many to vote for Mr Corbyn.
After Mr Corbyn's victory party officials had hoped that many would sign up to Labour as full members.
“I hope they can come with us on the journey to the election in 2020,” newly elected Deputy Leader Tom Watson told BBC One’s Andrew Marr Show.
“Let's get these new members involved in campaigning, helping relay our roots in communities, being involved in a digital revolution in the party that allows members to feel that they're more included in the decisions we make.”
Mr Corbyn was elected as Labour leader by a landslide of nearly 60 per cent of members, supporters, and affiliates.
During the Labour leadership campaign Mr Corbyn spoke to packed halls of supporters.
At a rally in Manchester during the Conservative party conference last week he filled Manchester Cathedral an hour before he was due to speak, and also filled a nearby public square with an overflow crowd.
The enthusiasm of Mr Corbyn’s supporters has not yet been matched by significantly improved polling figures for his party, however.
The Labour membership figures were provided to the Independent by the party upon request. The Conservative party figures were collated by the House of Commons library in August 2015, based on the most recent estimates providing by the party.
The Independent contacted the Conservatives for any updates to the figures but none were immediately provided.
Welcome back.
What an odd thing to say, what exactly do you think opinion polls are?
http://www.britishpollingcouncil.org/questions.html
I was being compared to a climate change denier, which is a poor comparison as I was talking about opinion polls and not scientific data that is black and white.
The only thing that really matters in a scientific model is the ability to predict outcomes based on that model. Whether the data is something objectively measureable, like temperature, or something more subjective, like someone's opinion, is neither here nor there.
And if the conservatives introduce £3 for a vote when Gideon and Boris inevitably square off I'm sure they will have loads more members as well
Okay. You're being a bit pedantic for something that wasn't really relevant to the thread or even really too relevant to his or my point. Well done.
Yes. Ordinary people bequeath their farms, houses and other property to their children. But only a small proportion of income is derived from inherited sources. Income is what generally determines people's standard of living.
I don't know the exact present figure, but some years ago about 87% of income in the UK consisted of wages and salaries - the remaining 13% being rent, dividends, interest.... - i.e. income from wealth. When you consider that some of that 13% consists of disbursements from economic entities like pension funds, and some is derived from financial assets individuals acquired in their own lifetimes with money they themselves earned, it doesn't leave a lot of room for people leading cushy lives based on income derived from inherited assets.
Well you were trying to make out that opinion polls were unscientific and therefore of little value, which is nonsense. You're welcome to row back on that if you want, but my response was entirely relevant.
Whether they are scientific or not, they are meaningless noise trying to simplify, quantify and predict incredibly complex and almost random things rendering them a pretty pointless exercise, only being carried out for two reasons, one being that they can be used to validate an agenda, and two because some people actually think they are smart enough to predict such things, which they are not.
You aren't doing a very good job of differentiating yourself from climate change deniers here. All the same ingredients, denial of the science, claims the data itself is meaningless, all with a smattering conspiracy theory shoved in. All because the conclusions are unhelpful to your own agenda.
Climate change data is ultimately produced by people with an agenda, they are paid by somebody.
Scientific models are meaningless? Rightyo.
I don't really care, even if I do sound like a climate change denyer it's still irrelevant and a different unrelated subject all together - only brought up because you ran out of things to say and just threw out an empty comparison like it disproves anything I have said. It's not a conspiracy, not every thing has to be meticulously planned for years by some mastermind and then comes to fruition, it's just the way it has developed. One should pay as much attention to opinion polls as I have your posts of the last 10 pages because they're very transparent.
The article mentions people who've joined the party as full members, not folks paying £3 to vote in the leadership election.
Much is explained.
