I didn't realise I introduced Nazis to this conversation. You've got nothing really have you.
UK General Election - 12th December 2019 | Con 365, Lab 203, LD 11, SNP 48, Other 23 - Tory Majority of 80
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
- Status
I didn't realise I introduced Nazis to this conversation. You've got nothing really have you.
I just cant be arsed arguing in circles with an idiot.
Alright mate you just say your piece and then throw a strop when anyone says anything back.
I'm saying if he applied the standard he is applying to May - that intent is necessary to prove anti-semitism - then there is no proof that Corbyn is one.
Statue of former Italian leader Mussolini is unveiled.
Everyone - Well this seems pretty awful.
Big Brain @nickm - Embarrassing for sure but he isn't being celebrated for his fascism, but for his role in the Italian rail system.
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Frank Grimes effect with certain ''centrist types'' seems to be out in full for this election. The fact they've never being able to understand the political forces that came in play to give the British left the chance to take over most of the party in 2015 & 2016(Same goes for Leave winning the referendum) , has resulted in them being reactionaries in the purest sense. No matter what the left advocates it must be opposed by these centrist types, even if it makes them look like utter bell ends.
Left - Lets plant 2 billions trees in 20 years as part of giant plan to tackle climate change
Centrist- Er...did Diane Abbott come up with those numbers. Lolz..........(Bursts into flames)
Left - Workers create the wealth in companies, so they should also have a stake in it.
Centrist - Think you'll find that's theft. Oh Jezbollah
Left - Nazi statues are bad.
Centrist - Embarrassing for sure but she wasn't being celebrated for her nazi sympathies............
''Well, I don't need safety gloves, because I'm Jeremy Corb-!”
Last edited:
The Astor Tory hypocrisy angle seems counter-productive as it keeps the issue of anti-semitism in the spotlight. I doubt most voters care very much about the rights and wrongs of an American socialite MP who died 60 years ago.
No, and given the type of person he is I have no doubt that he personally isn't racist, what I was saying is he has created this problem himself by not acting quickly and decisively enough to accusations of anti-semitism within the party, not addressing his history of engaging with people the thought of as terrorists, not to mention the whole not accepting the IHRA definition of anti-semitism.
If he'd engaged with the Jewish community leaders on these issues properly instead of reacting with indignation the problem would not exist.
We're talking past each other.
nickm said Theresa May cannot be anti-semitic because even though she unveiled the statue of a Nazi supporter, May did this because of her qualities other than Nazi support. That is, nickm claims to know what May's internal thought process behind the statue was. If that same standard, of assuming Corbyn's internal thought process, was used for his controversial actions, then the charge of anti-semitism would not stick.
It is.
Why don't the workers set up their own co-operative and share the profits of their own business?
Excellent post and I wholeheartedly agree. The reality is that in the private sector if you don’t perform you end up losing market share and dying off. You have to be exceptionally lucky to survive that. I resent the idea that you can run an inefficient public service and the remedy is a clamour for more resource. Conversely , run a lean operation and get your budget slashed. I know this is a huge generalisation, but my partner works in social care for the state, and the avoidable waste she encounters on a day to day basis makes my ears bleed. Yet a brief scan of the news is that the service is criminally underfunded. Anecdotal evidence is only worth so much, but it’s hard to discount when it’s right there in front of my eyes. It does make me wonder is If there is a finite amount of money you can pump into the service to make it work well, or whether it is a case of diminishing returns, ie the more you put in, the less you get for each £1 committed.
I’d love to hear the opinion of state workers on here, who will know a lot more about it than myself and will probably have contrary opinions
Given today's news I suspect the next couple of days during the election cycle are going to focus on
With of course some loony false flag theories
With of course some loony false flag theories
Blair's spending wasn't a problem as a % of GDP as the economy was growing at a rate of knots, however it was a problem in that he increased spending drastically, whilst decreasing productivity on spend because that's what happens when you jizz money left right and centre without rhyme or reason.
"Taking into account the fact that real spending on these public services grew by more than inputs (and therefore by more than outputs), the average “bang for each buck” (outputs over spending) is estimated to have fallen by 13.4% between 1997 and 2007 – an average fall of 1.4% a year. Had “bang for each buck” in 2007 been at the same level as it was in 1997 then, according to these estimates at least, for the same level of spending 15.5% more could have been delivered. Alternatively the same quantity and quality of public services could have been delivered for £42.5 billion less spending. Of this £42.5 billion, £10.8 billion represents the decline in measured productivity (the fall in outputs divided by inputs) while the remaining £31.8 billion (numbers do not sum due to rounding) represents rising pay and prices relative to the general level of prices in the economy. "
I think it's absurd that we didn't have a budget surplus of at least £50b per annum by 2007.
Last edited:
Social Work is criminally (literally) underfunded in Scotland, staff are paid very poorly (relative to the sane ranks in the NHS for instance) for a highly skilled and often dangerous job and it's incredibly hard to hire anyone as a consequence. I have no doubt that there are inefficiencies but it's way past the point of that being the primary issue. Children will die as a consequence and no doubt some overworked and underpaid social work will cop the flack for it.
There is no reason at all that the public sector can't be run with more efficiency and the only motivation to achieve that is most assuredly not personal gain. That is important. However, the issue of underfunding is real, serious and dangerous.
No mental gymnastics from me and I'm probably one of the biggest Beeboaners on here. Well done to them.
So you think the BBC is completely impartial then?
Last edited:
Haha feck no. Dude, have you seen any of my comments on this thread? They're 99% about how I think the Beeb and Laura K are lying Tory puppet cnuts.
I live in an area where the Tories could put Gary Glitter up as their candidate and he'd still win. I do vote but it feels like a waste of time.
I just googled to see when was the last time someone other than a Conservative candidate won, it was in 1918 when the Tories didn't field a candidate (it was won by the even more right-wing "National Party").
I just googled to see when was the last time someone other than a Conservative candidate won, it was in 1918 when the Tories didn't field a candidate (it was won by the even more right-wing "National Party").
Well said.
Ok, well as I said anecdotal experience only goes so far (hence me asking for some wider opinions) and I certainly can’t speak for the issues in Scotland.
One of the ones I see regards seasonal demand, and this public body’s refusal to use temporary labour. So, in a time of high demand, around this time of the year, there’ll be a hefty recruitment drive. When the demand tails off they’ll have people rota’d on who literally sit in the office all day without taking calls. I question this as, although it is a skilled position (more skilled than it’s given credit for) surely there must be an option for taking on pre/part qualified temps and getting them up to a standard, or sending them out on the mandatory double-up calls?
Sick time also seems to be a massive issue, that isn’t managed stringently, with a general culture that you can take the piss to a reasonable degree without it being eye-wateringly blatant.
I know I’m referring to an isolated and small part of public services, but my assumption is that it’s not confined to just the specific area I’m discussing, and the general points will probably apply further.
Ha ha!
Fun day of debate in here. Particularly enjoyed the skewering of sun-tzu and Mike's defence of New Labour.
I'm basically happy to completely ignore the intra-left arguments of this election, believing that it's completely irrelevant, as the best we can hope for is a repeat of 2017. That would then presumably be followed by the resignation of JC, and I'm sure quite a rumble will then follow. But (thankfully) that's not the debate for today...
To the end of hoping for a repeat of 2017, I suppose there are two things that could still move the election;
1) The complete collapse of the Lib Dems in the polls. It already feels like support for the Lib Dems is collapsing, but we've a long way to go if the share of the vote is to reach 2017 levels. If that happens, I imagine the electoral map becomes more like 2017 than what's in the MRP poll? As in, there will surely be some Tory/ Lib Dem marginals that swing blue, but apart from that, you'll see better odds for Labour in Blue/Red swingseats.
2) The wrecking ball of Donald Trump coming to London, one week before the election date. I just can't see any way that that ends positively for the Conservatives.
If the above can help close the Labour/Tory gap by 2/3 points, we're back to likely minority government territory. I don't think that's a completely ridiculous outcome?
Finally:
I'm basically happy to completely ignore the intra-left arguments of this election, believing that it's completely irrelevant, as the best we can hope for is a repeat of 2017. That would then presumably be followed by the resignation of JC, and I'm sure quite a rumble will then follow. But (thankfully) that's not the debate for today...
To the end of hoping for a repeat of 2017, I suppose there are two things that could still move the election;
1) The complete collapse of the Lib Dems in the polls. It already feels like support for the Lib Dems is collapsing, but we've a long way to go if the share of the vote is to reach 2017 levels. If that happens, I imagine the electoral map becomes more like 2017 than what's in the MRP poll? As in, there will surely be some Tory/ Lib Dem marginals that swing blue, but apart from that, you'll see better odds for Labour in Blue/Red swingseats.
2) The wrecking ball of Donald Trump coming to London, one week before the election date. I just can't see any way that that ends positively for the Conservatives.
If the above can help close the Labour/Tory gap by 2/3 points, we're back to likely minority government territory. I don't think that's a completely ridiculous outcome?
Finally:
He really is unelectable.
Boris Johnson’s dad says the general public is ‘illiterate’
https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/29/boris-johnsons-dad-says-general-public-illiterate-11239709?ito=social
https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/29/boris-johnsons-dad-says-general-public-illiterate-11239709?ito=social
Wtf is with the Green Party !?
Nonsense - my parents were married.
Ouch.
Pretty sure his twitter account is run by a 16 year old most of the time.
Terrible answer, though he has always come across as a bit Farron-esque. Wonder if he thinks gay sex is a sin too.
This. Absolutely fecking this. It’s basic crisis management and he totally ballsed it up.
This is the reason i resort to ad homs out of pure frustration and rage, there's just so much wrong with your response because i have to inductively reason from your inability to actually attempt to tackle ANYTHING i said in my post that you are a carbon copy of the type of NPC tory voters i mentioned. Why would you put a dig in at the labour party for causing the 2008 financial crash, your not serious? if you wanted an easy one you could have gone with blair's foreign policy and the iraq war which is something that haunts me still.
You either cant logically reason why you vote for them, or if you do, you refuse to say why because you know the ideology to which the party follows has a proven track record to cause demonstrable harm to majority segments of the country, both in recent memory, historically and in the near future as a continued trend of their current policy positions. It is also hilarious that your almost chalking the last decade of government policy as a positive under the circumstances? The depth of the austerity measures put in place were not the only economically viable option, and as a result the schism under the fabric of British society has only proceeded to widen to outcomes you can point to plain as day. Resurgence in gang violence in the capital and other major cities, work poverty, homelessness, straining NHS and public services, food banks, child poverty, widening gap in income inequality and social mobility, 0 hour contracts bolstering employment numbers, housing shortages, the Brexit vote and increases in bigoted and racial incidents. It's an absolute fallacy that we didn't suffer as a direct result of government policy over this period, and we now have an even further right iteration of the conservative party, i mean jesus the home secretary is one of the most vile politicians in recent memory.
The point is you do have to justify why your voting for them, by pointing to actual outcomes in society and their track record or to an identification with an ideology which you need to show fits your philosophical axioms. If you cant or wont attempt to convince people your point of view is correct perhaps its time to take a look at why that is.
I maintain your individual vote carries consequences because of the impact of the policy positions that you are empowering, and a vote for the conservative party out of either ignorance or you just don't care about people(which is actually fine in principle if you are able to ground your personal philosophy) which makes you either a useful idiot for their agenda, or a disgusting human being.
I implore you to do some research.
Why doesn't Boris get asked why he needs others to decide if he sits down with Brillo Neill? He's the PM FFS, can't he decide for himself whether he will do an interview on the biggest network with the biggest interviewer in the run-up to an election?
the fact that labour proposed that tenants could purchase their rented property from a landlord against the landlords wishes and at a value not set by the owner of the property is an astonishing attack.
I own multiple businesses, own over £3m in property and have an economics background. Now you know this, do you really think I don’t have a handle of the economic virtues of the parties vying for power?
I would be happy to speak to any rational person about the policies set out in this election. However, it doesn’t matter how many paragraphs you write, I don’t need to justify my view to you on anyone on a forum...
Do you expect everyone to justify the way they intend to vote? Is the purpose so that you can ridicule them if they don’t agree with you? It seems you want an argument rather than a discussion.
Are you guys on whatsapp now? If this is true, then it's all over. There is no way to win back whatsapp voters.
Well clearly voting conservative is in your best interest....if you don't give a feck about others.
- Status