Jump to content

Labour Leadership

Otta

By Otta
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

Loz

Loz

Posted
Posted

ratty Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> Sad isn't it? Perhaps it's time to take the streets again? We did it in the 80s and it

> ultimately did for Thatcher!


Rubbish. I arrived in this country and three days later she resigned. It was all my doing.

JohnL

JohnL

Posted
Posted

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ratty Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > Sad isn't it? Perhaps it's time to take the

> streets again? We did it in the 80s and it

> > ultimately did for Thatcher!

>

> Rubbish. I arrived in this country and three days

> later she resigned. It was all my doing.


She was in Maastricht if I remember when she heard

that she hadn't won the first ballot by enough.


The BBC political guy said we wouldn't be seeing her

but we all shouted "she's behind you".

  • 2 weeks later...
????

????

Posted
Posted

Although Corbyn?s press aides claimed the meeting had been positive, one MP rang the Guardian to describe it as ?a complete and utter shambles and the worst meeting I have ever seen for the party leadership. The problem is that Jeremy has never met anyone in his life that disagrees with him and he runs away from any discussion or political argument; he is completely unsuited to being a party leader.?


:)

Blah Blah

Blah Blah

Posted
Posted

Yet another gaff that the Conservatives will be able to exploit. The inexperience and niaivity of the Corbyn/ Mcdonnell partnership is startling. I don't give Corbyn even 18 months if it continues like this.


Polly Toynby made a good point in saying that Corbyn is so used to opposing everything, that he has no idea how to unify.

JohnL

JohnL

Posted
Posted

The answer is that it's still huge and debt itself has doubled since 2010 (that's what you are supposed to say).

The charter can never and will never work - the government lies - the opposition is amateur.


But it doesn't matter once ttip comes in - government then stops mattering - as the EU trade commissioner said "I do not take my mandate from the european people" :)

Blah Blah

Blah Blah

Posted
Posted

Yes TTIP is worrying. It will open the way for NHS privatisation from a country that has the most expensive healthcare in the West. There have been recent examples of corporations buying up drug patents in the USA and then increasing the price of those drugs by up to 10 times. And it's alarming to note that in looking for solutions to the cost of NHS care, the government have looked to how things work in the USA, rather than looking at other European countries that have state and private healthcare combined. It's clear to me which model the Government prefers.


There is sense in Mcdonnell opposing Osbourne's bill. Borrowing for consumption and investment are not the same thing and Osbourne is trying to say they are. The amatuerism from him is on blurring the lines of good economics. We don't borrow to buy food, but we do borrow to buy a house. That makes sense because the house is an asset. The food is consumption. In the same vein, a business will borrow to build a factory and buy plant machinery. They are assets against the loan. So when Mcdonnell argues that removing the ability for a government to borrow for investment and capital projects is a bad idea, he is right.


What is amaturish from both him and Corbyn though, is the way they go about things.

????

????

Posted
Posted
Agree about the Bill totally politically driven and wrong (Osbourne is by the way a secret fan of Gordon brown and his politicisation of legislation as this shows). Labour obligingly walked into it though. Sadly this government will get away with this sort of thing until Labour sorts itself out which a ' group of shabby old men living out their adolescent political fantasy' don't look like achieving. Principled (yawn) as they are.....
Otta

Otta

Posted
  • Author
Posted
No not shame on her. She did what she thought was best for her and her kids. That's how most people vote at the end of the day. Unfortunately for her she swallowed their line and thought they'd look out for someone like her who worked hard, because that's what they like to tell us.
Blah Blah

Blah Blah

Posted
Posted
And Cameron DID say he WOULDN'T cut child tax credits (to match Labours pledge). She voted for someone who lied about something that really makes a difference to her. But (according to Daily Politics today) it looks as though the move is going to be blocked by the Lords, because it wasn't part of the manifesto, so Osbourne might be forced to change something. Apparently 71 Tory MPs sit in marginal seats where this policy might have an adverse effect, and they are worried.
Blah Blah

Blah Blah

Posted
Posted

The clue might have been in 'we will make ?12bn in further cuts but aren't telling you which benefits will be cut'!


The whole steel plant thing is a scandal esp as we could have kept them in business building rails for HS2. Shades of Atlas Shrugged there. It's a bit like Conway shipping kerb stones from China isn't it. Where is the backing for British business? We happily borrow trilions to bail out the city, but let the last remnants of industry go to the wall.

miga

miga

Posted
Posted

Jah Lush Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> http://i1369.photobucket.com/albums/ag237/jahlushh

> ead/12109266_10153711593138493_2628899368328293186

> _n_zps8lr5usba.jpg


It's a darn shame to see people lose jobs, but are you sure the kind of steel produced in the shut plants would have been suitable for that purpose? IIRC there are many different types and it isn't trivial to move from producing one type to another. Just a thought.

JohnL

JohnL

Posted
Posted

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The clue might have been in 'we will make ?12bn in

> further cuts but aren't telling you which benefits

> will be cut'!

>

> The whole steel plant thing is a scandal esp as we

> could have kept them in business building rails

> for HS2. Shades of Atlas Shrugged there. It's a

> bit like Conway shipping kerb stones from China

> isn't it. Where is the backing for British

> business? We happily borrow trilions to bail out

> the city, but let the last remnants of industry go

> to the wall.


Still seem desperate to keep Port Talbot open - wonder

how long that can go on.

JohnL

JohnL

Posted
Posted

miga Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Jah Lush Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >

> http://i1369.photobucket.com/albums/ag237/jahlushh

>

> >

> ead/12109266_10153711593138493_2628899368328293186

>

> > _n_zps8lr5usba.jpg

>

> It's a darn shame to see people lose jobs, but are

> you sure the kind of steel produced in the shut

> plants would have been suitable for that purpose?

> IIRC there are many different types and it isn't

> trivial to move from producing one type to

> another. Just a thought.


Is relying on Chinese steel a good thing though. Surely

they'll put the price up once they get a monopoly.


British Steel used to be high quality IIRC

miga

miga

Posted
Posted

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> miga Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Jah Lush Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > >

> >

> http://i1369.photobucket.com/albums/ag237/jahlushh

>

> >

> > >

> >

> ead/12109266_10153711593138493_2628899368328293186

>

> >

> > > _n_zps8lr5usba.jpg

> >

> > It's a darn shame to see people lose jobs, but

> are

> > you sure the kind of steel produced in the shut

> > plants would have been suitable for that

> purpose?

> > IIRC there are many different types and it

> isn't

> > trivial to move from producing one type to

> > another. Just a thought.

>

> Is relying on Chinese steel a good thing though.

> Surely

> they'll put the price up once they get a

> monopoly.

>

> British Steel used to be high quality IIRC


It's not "better" or "worse" but different types for different purposes, with different production stages and different compositions (as it's an alloy). I'm not a metallurgist, though.


As to whether it's right or wrong that we're happy for others to do not only our factory line production, but also increasingly "knowledge work (engineering, construction, IT)"; I think it's a disaster. In fact, I think that knowledge is very undervalued in our society.

DaveR

DaveR

Posted
Posted

"He was practically a Tory. He won't be missed. Good riddance....."


which is exactly the message that Corbyn and his supporters are giving to the millions of voters who chose Labour when it was led by Blair, but then chose the Tories led by Cameron over Ed. A perfect strategy for getting back into government. Not.

dogcatdog

dogcatdog

Posted
Posted

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> miga Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Jah Lush Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > >

> >

> http://i1369.photobucket.com/albums/ag237/jahlushh

>

> >

> > >

> >

> ead/12109266_10153711593138493_2628899368328293186

>

> >

> > > _n_zps8lr5usba.jpg

> >

> > It's a darn shame to see people lose jobs, but

> are

> > you sure the kind of steel produced in the shut

> > plants would have been suitable for that

> purpose?

> > IIRC there are many different types and it

> isn't

> > trivial to move from producing one type to

> > another. Just a thought.

>

> Is relying on Chinese steel a good thing though.

> Surely

> they'll put the price up once they get a

> monopoly.

>


Market forces will ensure that cannot happen.


rofl

Blah Blah

Blah Blah

Posted
Posted

DaveR Wrote:


> which is exactly the message that Corbyn and his

> supporters are giving to the millions of voters

> who chose Labour when it was led by Blair, but

> then chose the Tories led by Cameron over Ed. A

> perfect strategy for getting back into government.

> Not.


I think the SNP took those Labour votes Dave, not the Tories :D The Tories would have a much bigger majority if there had been any significant swing in Labour voters to them.


Some interesting analysis here.


http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/22/election-2015-who-voted-for-whom-labour-conservatives-turnout


Totally agree regarding strategy though. Doomed to failure at present.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...