Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum
Sign in to follow this  
John Drake

Labour leadership contest

Which of the candidates would make you more likely to vote Labour if they win the leadership?  

55 members have voted

  1. 1. Which of the candidates would make you more likely to vote Labour if they win the leadership?

    • Andy Burnham
      13
    • Yvette Cooper
      13
    • Jeremy Corbyn
      14
    • Liz Kendall
      7
    • I would never vote Labour
      8
  2. 2. Did you vote Labour in the 2015 General Election?

    • Yes
      26
    • No
      29
  3. 3. Do you have a vote in the Labour leadership election?

    • Yes
      11
    • No
      44
  4. 4. Who would you vote for in the Labour leadership election?

    • Andy Burnham
      15
    • Yvette Cooper
      13
    • Jeremy Corbyn
      18
    • Liz Kendall
      9


Recommended Posts

Anyone think Corbyn will still be in charge of the Labour party by the time of the next General Election?

Nope , the Corbyn fan club will then blame it on Torys\Tory press\anything but him.

Homer: How is education supposed to make me feel smarter? Besides, every time I learn something new, it pushes some old stuff out of my brain. Remember when I took that home winemaking course, and I forgot how to drive?

[

i]Mr. Burns: Woah, slow down there maestro. There's a *New* Mexico?[/i]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone think Corbyn will still be in charge of the Labour party by the time of the next General Election?

Like I've said before, if Corbyn has anywhere near the integrity his acolytes believe he has he will step down if it becomes apparent that the party is hemorrhaging support amongst the general public.


"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically you can't actually support any of your claims with fact?

 

Businesses fail because they are uneconomic, inefficient poorly managed and cannot compete.  How was it Thatcher's fault that UK industry had serious structural deficiencies?  How is it her fault that globalisation occured and the UK share of world wealth has shrunk accordingly?

 

Here's an interesting one for you. In the 2nd quarter of 1990 UK manufacturing output hit an all time peak.  This happened again in 2007. 

 

Between 1997 & 2007 labour productivity rose by 50%. The UK is the 6th largest manufacturer in the world.

 

Perhaps it's you who actually needs to go and look at the facts?

I lived with the facts!

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/balance-of-trade

Businesses failed in the 1980's because interest rates were too high (in those days the government decided interest rates) and the pound was thus kept artificially high, which made our exports more expensive.  Companies failed left right and centre because of the economic conditions.  Unemployment soared, the official figure was 3.5. m but no one really knows what the true figure because Thatcher's answer to increasing unemployment was to change the way the figures were calculated in order to show a lower figure.  The TUC estimated the actual figure was 4.5 m.  

At the same time the NHS was allowed to decay.  This was the triumph of Thatcherism, and when the wheels came off in 1990, it was due to the "Lawson boom."   


“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should he sing the National Anthem if he does not believe in a Monarchy? Why should he not leave his collar unbuttoned? Why shouldn't he wear a white poppy?  He'd be just as hypocritical as previous Labour leaders if his did those things when he didn't believe.  Mind you , has he sworn the oath of allegiance?

 

However, instead of his weasel words, he should have said that he didn't sing the anthem because it would have been hypocritical of him as an abolitionist, that he won't wear a red poppy because he is a (semi?) pacifist. His choice, and he should say so, otherwise he'll be just as bad as those he criticises.


Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In July 2015, the UK had a 50% trade deficit, we exported £22.8bn and imported £33.9bn.  (source: ONS)  In 2013, we had an annual deficit of £115bn, in 2014 that increased to £127bn, although it is expected to stay roughly the same this year.  The manufacturing heartlands were ripped out in the 80s and quite deliberately so in my opinion.  Thatcher would have happily seen every unionised trade destroyed simply to beat the unions.  She wholeheartedly believed that we should move to a services based economy, thinking catastrophically incorrectly that that was the only way to beat globalisation.

 

I offer in comparison Germany: £171bn annual trade surplus in 2013, rising to £191bn in 2014 and expected to keep rising.  Same constraints on the economies in the 80s plus Germany had reunification as a major financial millstone for well over a decade.  A heavy investment in tradeable industry plus some very shrewd politicking over the Euro has left Germany in the position of the European flat-track bully that no-one can touch.  It's seen as acceptable to sneer at Germany for being the EU trade bully but that's really just the 21st century equivalent of 100 years ago with the landed gentry sneering at industrialists with their petty money grubbing.  All it would take is a French and German unity to cripple the UK services market and the City especially by implementing their often considered tax on services done outside of the Euro in their countries.

 

Even if you include services into the mix, the net cash flow from the UK in 2013 was £75bn (2014 figures not released yet).  That's £75bn the economy has lost.  In the same timeframe, Germany had a net cash flow into the country of £179bn.  They beat us on both trade goods and services.

 

With all that in mind, don't forget that we had the added bonus to the UK exchequer of north sea oil.  So where's all that money gone?  Into the pockets of the minority.  In Norway, their government invested some of the oil revenues in a sovereign investment fund that conservatively owns 1% of all the world's stocks and is valued at 190% of Norway's GDP (2014 figures), in the UK the money was blown on tax cuts and sod all investment.

 

We now have the lowest corporation tax in the G20.  The lowest tax burden in the G7.  The lowest amount spent on state funded healthcare by any G7 nation by a long way (including the "die in a skip" US healthcare system).  The second lowest benefits per head of the G7.  The worst child mortality rate in Western Europe (25% higher than the average).  I could go on.

 

There you go, some facts for you.

 

There you go, some facts for you.  

 

Yer avin a larff!!

 

The manufacturing heartlands were ripped out in the 80s and quite deliberately so in my opinion.   That is not a fact

 

Thatcher would have happily seen every unionised trade destroyed simply to beat the unions.  That is not a fact

 

The worst child mortality rate in Western Europe (25% higher than the average). That is not a fact

etc

etc

etc

 

It is arrant nonsense to cherry pick the best  "facts" about what goes on in different countries without considering the whole picture in each country.

 

You were probably still in nappies when all that was going on. I and millions of others were working hard to provide for their families whilst the government was putting right the tax and borrow disasters caused by Harold Wilson and others (Yes, I was working then, too, so it's not story book stuff from some LSE coursework comic) whilst seeing the likes of Militant, the NUM ,NUT, dockworkers, car workers etc bringing the economy  to its knees in a (fortunately failed) attempt  in pursuit of what we now see from Corbyn.

 

 I could go on.

 

You do Oscar, you do.

 

One last FACT

Norway's sovereign wealth fund posted a -0.9 percent return, or a loss of 73 billion Norwegian kroner (8.79 billion U.S. dollars), in the second quarter of 2015, the first negative quarterly return in three years, the fund said on Wednesday.


Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it's not a national anthem is it? It's an anthem to an unelected family of German aristocracy.

Imagine if you will that the national anthem of the USA was a song glorifying Mickey Mouse we're not that far off that in truth are we.

Plus, outrage from the red tops, what's more "traitorous" not singing GSTQ or hacking the royals phones?


"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There you go, some facts for you.  

 

Yer avin a larff!!

 

The manufacturing heartlands were ripped out in the 80s and quite deliberately so in my opinion.   That is not a fact

 

Thatcher would have happily seen every unionised trade destroyed simply to beat the unions.  That is not a fact

 

The worst child mortality rate in Western Europe (25% higher than the average). That is not a fact

etc

etc

etc

 

It is arrant nonsense to cherry pick the best  "facts" about what goes on in different countries without considering the whole picture in each country.

 

You were probably still in nappies when all that was going on. I and millions of others were working hard to provide for their families whilst the government was putting right the tax and borrow disasters caused by Harold Wilson and others (Yes, I was working then, too, so it's not story book stuff from some LSE coursework comic) whilst seeing the likes of Militant, the NUM ,NUT, dockworkers, car workers etc bringing the economy  to its knees in a (fortunately failed) attempt  in pursuit of what we now see from Corbyn.

 

 I could go on.

 

You do Oscar, you do.

 

One last FACT

Norway's sovereign wealth fund posted a -0.9 percent return, or a loss of 73 billion Norwegian kroner (8.79 billion U.S. dollars), in the second quarter of 2015, the first negative quarterly return in three years, the fund said on Wednesday.

 

...and absolutely nothing to do with the governments of Eden, Macmillan and Heath? And nothing to do with the ###### poor management and lack of long term investment in favour of short term profiteering prevalent in British industry? Only half the story. As usual. 

Edited by Griff9of13

"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He has exacerbated the damage to London's architecture, destroyed the Skyline (in particular around St Paul's but also elsewhere), he's ridden roughshod over local communities in terms of planning applications, he's directly and deliberately encouraged the mass-selling of London to foreign 'investors' who are simply using this city as a safe deposit box, he's destroyed communities in the process, he's sold land assets to friendly organisations like Free Schools for less than market rates...I could go on. In fact, Christian Woolmar had an excellent piece recently about BoJo's actions as Mayor and put the direct cost to Londoners at about £600million.

 

For me though, the worst thing is the destruction of communities. I grew up in Acton, which was very working class albeit with some areas that were aspirational and others perhaps not so much. Of the kids I went to school with only one or two still live there and just a handful more are even in the local area. Most have relocated to the very edges of London or even further out into commuter towns. To live there now you have to be very well paid to afford even a bog-standard terraced house, or so poor that you qualify for one of the tiny number of social homes still to be found. The term social cleansing has been used a lot in recent years but it's absolutely bang on.

 

On the flip side, I'm struggling to think of even one positive thing Boris Johnson's achieved.

 

That's an impressive charge sheet, although I wonder whether the changing social makeup of London is a long term trend, regardless of who is the Mayor.

 

The main thing I know about Johnson is his opposition to a third runway at Heathrow and his advocacy of a new airport in the Thames estuary, which, in my uninformed way, and if I lived in London, I think I would favour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends whether you think Northern Ireland should really be a part of the UK given that in the referendum, 26 counties voted for independence and only 6 voted to remain part of the UK. In most referendums the minority are obliged to concede to the majority.

 

Actually it doesn't depend on anything.

 

Praising the IRA for using bombs and bullets against his own country is wrong in any context.

 

And what referendum are you referring to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since when did singing GSTQ become compulsory? Surely to stand is respectful enough, or has this been hijacked, like wearing the poppy, for political purposes?

 

Strictly speaking it isn't compulsory.

 

But when you're attending an event organised by the RAF charity to pay tribute to the fallen, and you're invited to represent not yourself, but a major political party, I think you probably should sing it out of respect to the context of that event.

 

I notice that Nicola Sturgeon sang the national anthem recently as the leader of the SNP, although I suspect she may have similar Republican views as Corbyn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it's not a national anthem is it? It's an anthem to an unelected family of German aristocracy.

Imagine if you will that the national anthem of the USA was a song glorifying Mickey Mouse we're not that far off that in truth are we.

Plus, outrage from the red tops, what's more "traitorous" not singing GSTQ or hacking the royals phones?

 

It's the anthem of the United Kingdom and the words reflect that title, whether we like it or not.

 

What annoys me is when the national anthem is played in the wrong context, for example when England, not the UK, are taking part in sporting events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strictly speaking it isn't compulsory.

 

But when you're attending an event organised by the RAF charity to pay tribute to the fallen, and you're invited to represent not yourself, but a major political party, I think you probably should sing it out of respect to the context of that event.

 

I notice that Nicola Sturgeon sang the national anthem recently as the leader of the SNP, although I suspect she may have similar Republican views as Corbyn.

 

The SNP, under Sturgeon, have repeatedly confirmed they would retain the monarchy in Scotland.


Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if he had sung GSTQ the headlines would have read "Hypocrite Corbyn who is a Republican and an Atheist sings national anthem" 


"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the anthem of the United Kingdom and the words reflect that title, whether we like it or not.

 

What annoys me is when the national anthem is played in the wrong context, for example when England, not the UK, are taking part in sporting events.

It's never been obligatory to sing the anthem, in fact it's often better etiquette to not sing it than to sing it.  It is, after all, a very colonial thing to do in standing singing along.  When I've ever had a choice I refuse to sing it, as a civilian that means I never sing it.  Even in the army, I never sang it as the etiquette of every time it was played meant I was expected to be silent and stand to attention.  Why should I sing a fawningly sycophantic dirge to ask a non-existent deity to save one of the most privileged people in the world?  There's very little of that anthem that represents me and, although I recognise it as a symbol of our state and will respect it, I will not sing it.  In the same light, it'd be a greater hypocrisy for Corbyn to sing it than stand respectively for its singing.

 

I don't see a problem with England having GSTQ as a national anthem, she's the Queen of England as well as Queen of each constituent country of the United Kingdom.


“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" - Mark Twain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" - Mark Twain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In July 2015, the UK had a 50% trade deficit, we exported £22.8bn and imported £33.9bn.  (source: ONS)  In 2013, we had an annual deficit of £115bn, in 2014 that increased to £127bn, although it is expected to stay roughly the same this year.  The manufacturing heartlands were ripped out in the 80s and quite deliberately so in my opinion.  Thatcher would have happily seen every unionised trade destroyed simply to beat the unions.  She wholeheartedly believed that we should move to a services based economy, thinking catastrophically incorrectly that that was the only way to beat globalisation.

 

I offer in comparison Germany: £171bn annual trade surplus in 2013, rising to £191bn in 2014 and expected to keep rising.  Same constraints on the economies in the 80s plus Germany had reunification as a major financial millstone for well over a decade.  A heavy investment in tradeable industry plus some very shrewd politicking over the Euro has left Germany in the position of the European flat-track bully that no-one can touch.  It's seen as acceptable to sneer at Germany for being the EU trade bully but that's really just the 21st century equivalent of 100 years ago with the landed gentry sneering at industrialists with their petty money grubbing.  All it would take is a French and German unity to cripple the UK services market and the City especially by implementing their often considered tax on services done outside of the Euro in their countries.

 

Even if you include services into the mix, the net cash flow from the UK in 2013 was £75bn (2014 figures not released yet).  That's £75bn the economy has lost.  In the same timeframe, Germany had a net cash flow into the country of £179bn.  They beat us on both trade goods and services.

 

With all that in mind, don't forget that we had the added bonus to the UK exchequer of north sea oil.  So where's all that money gone?  Into the pockets of the minority.  In Norway, their government invested some of the oil revenues in a sovereign investment fund that conservatively owns 1% of all the world's stocks and is valued at 190% of Norway's GDP (2014 figures), in the UK the money was blown on tax cuts and sod all investment.

 

We now have the lowest corporation tax in the G20.  The lowest tax burden in the G7.  The lowest amount spent on state funded healthcare by any G7 nation by a long way (including the "die in a skip" US healthcare system).  The second lowest benefits per head of the G7.  The worst child mortality rate in Western Europe (25% higher than the average).  I could go on.

 

There you go, some facts for you.

 

I actually tried to post this last night, but the connection dropped and I'v had to wait until now.  I see others have added since...

 

I think you need to check your figures.  The trade gap in May 2015 was £393m.

 

What is this ridiculous obsession with Thatcher?  There was a whole world outside the UK that everyone seems to want to ignore as being the single largest influence on change in the UK.

 

Germany and the UK had what similar economic constraints in the 80's? The UK enjoyed strong growth and low inflation (2% in 1986)

 

Germany was doing very nicely thank you, so much so that Nigel Lawson felt trying to emulate their economic policies and shadowing the value of the Deutschmark would be good for the UK. This proved to be a disaster. Interest rates doubled to 15% and inflation quadrupled to 10% by 1990.   Then Major compounded this by joining the ERM.

 

The reunification of Germany was far from being a millstone.  It prompted massive growth. To counter inflation, the Germans raised interest rates.  To keep within the ERM the UK and others had to follow suit.  This killed the value of the pound for exports. Once we got out, the UK enjoyed well over a decade of growth.

 

You want to compare the UK to Germany? You need look no further than the car industry.

 

North Sea Oil? The Labour government in power did what with the first revenues?  It didn't set up a sovereign wealth fund, nor did it in 1997.  Where did the money go? Take a look at the reduction in income tax rates and increase in personal tax allowances, balance of trade figures etc that came starting with Thatcher.  How is cutting taxes and leaving working people with more of their money a bad thing?

 

Norway enjoys the highest tax rates and highest cost of living anywhere in the world. The government has a controlling share in 8 of the 10 largest companies. Where does all the oil money go in Norway? What happens when the oil runs out?

 

I think it's fantastic we have such low tax rates.  It's not how much you spend, it is how it's spent..

 

In 2013 the infant mortality rate (a much better measure) was the lowest ever recorded rate per 1,000 live births in the UK. Is that down to Thatcher?

 

We are often told the NHS is the envy of the world.  More than 44,000 deaths from hospital acquired infections under Labour (ONS 2009) Hospital acquired infections now kill three times more people a year than car accidents (DOT 2009)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's never been obligatory to sing the anthem, in fact it's often better etiquette to not sing it than to sing it.  It is, after all, a very colonial thing to do in standing singing along.  When I've ever had a choice I refuse to sing it, as a civilian that means I never sing it.  Even in the army, I never sang it as the etiquette of every time it was played meant I was expected to be silent and stand to attention.  Why should I sing a fawningly sycophantic dirge to ask a non-existent deity to save one of the most privileged people in the world?  There's very little of that anthem that represents me and, although I recognise it as a symbol of our state and will respect it, I will not sing it.  In the same light, it'd be a greater hypocrisy for Corbyn to sing it than stand respectively for its singing.

 

I don't see a problem with England having GSTQ as a national anthem, she's the Queen of England as well as Queen of each constituent country of the United Kingdom.

 

Get your car to the nearest garage, it's steering is pulling badly to the left :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually tried to post this last night, but the connection dropped and I'v had to wait until now.  I see others have added since...

 

I think you need to check your figures.  The trade gap in May 2015 was £393m.

 

 

 

What is this ridiculous obsession with Thatcher?  There was a whole world outside the UK that everyone seems to want to ignore as being the single largest influence on change in the UK.

 

 

 

Germany and the UK had what similar economic constraints in the 80's? The UK enjoyed strong growth and low inflation (2% in 1986)

 

 

 

Germany was doing very nicely thank you, so much so that Nigel Lawson felt trying to emulate their economic policies and shadowing the value of the Deutschmark would be good for the UK. This proved to be a disaster. Interest rates doubled to 15% and inflation quadrupled to 10% by 1990.   Then Major compounded this by joining the ERM.

 

 

 

The reunification of Germany was far from being a millstone.  It prompted massive growth. To counter inflation, the Germans raised interest rates.  To keep within the ERM the UK and others had to follow suit.  This killed the value of the pound for exports. Once we got out, the UK enjoyed well over a decade of growth.

 

 

 

You want to compare the UK to Germany? You need look no further than the car industry.

 

 

 

North Sea Oil? The Labour government in power did what with the first revenues?  It didn't set up a sovereign wealth fund, nor did it in 1997.  Where did the money go? Take a look at the reduction in income tax rates and increase in personal tax allowances, balance of trade figures etc that came starting with Thatcher.  How is cutting taxes and leaving working people with more of their money a bad thing?

 

 

 

Norway enjoys the highest tax rates and highest cost of living anywhere in the world. The government has a controlling share in 8 of the 10 largest companies. Where does all the oil money go in Norway? What happens when the oil runs out?

 

 

 

I think it's fantastic we have such low tax rates.  It's not how much you spend, it is how it's spent..

 

In 2013 the infant mortality rate (a much better measure) was the lowest ever recorded rate per 1,000 live births in the UK. Is that down to Thatcher?

 

 

 

We are often told the NHS is the envy of the world.  More than 44,000 deaths from hospital acquired infections under Labour (ONS 2009) Hospital acquired infections now kill three times more people a year than car accidents (DOT 2009)

 

 

So, the government's lying about its own trade deficit?  That alone means I can't be bothered. but, in short, you're wrong.


“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" - Mark Twain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if he had sung GSTQ the headlines would have read "Hypocrite Corbyn who is a Republican and an Atheist sings national anthem" 

 

They might well have said 'Show of respect from Labour leader an example to us all'

 

Unlike Sinn Fein reps, Corbyn has taken the oath of allegiance and takes his seat in the Commons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, the government's lying about its own trade deficit?  That alone means I can't be bothered. but, in short, you're wrong.

 

I don't know where you get your figures from, or what methods you are using, but you are way off.  I'm wrong because you say so?  That's brilliant debating skill on show!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They might well have said 'Show of respect from Labour leader an example to us all'

 

Ha, yeh right. :dry:


"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's never been obligatory to sing the anthem, in fact it's often better etiquette to not sing it than to sing it.  It is, after all, a very colonial thing to do in standing singing along.  When I've ever had a choice I refuse to sing it, as a civilian that means I never sing it.  Even in the army, I never sang it as the etiquette of every time it was played meant I was expected to be silent and stand to attention.  Why should I sing a fawningly sycophantic dirge to ask a non-existent deity to save one of the most privileged people in the world?  There's very little of that anthem that represents me and, although I recognise it as a symbol of our state and will respect it, I will not sing it.  In the same light, it'd be a greater hypocrisy for Corbyn to sing it than stand respectively for its singing.

 

I don't see a problem with England having GSTQ as a national anthem, she's the Queen of England as well as Queen of each constituent country of the United Kingdom.

That's the stance I've always taken, that I stand silently for GSTQ out of respect to the constitutional monarch of the state I happen to be part of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...