1) Jeremy Corbyn has already changed the face of British politics irrevocably. He has destroyed the Labour party. In under seven months, the two principal parties of opposition of the last hundred years have been pretty well reduced to irrelevance, and there is no obvious way back for either of them. While Cameron's performance has been remarkable, had it not been for Corbyn's help the OE lightweight surely would not have managed what proved to be beyond any politician since the time of the preternaturally lucky politician Stanley Baldwin.
2) It is Liam Young's patriotic duty to share with George Osborne the name of the substance he is imbibing or inhaling and the source of his supply. If Osborne could sell a small amount of that to the Chinese, he would be able to clear the national debt in one go.
Less than 5% of the population is avidly pro the EU.
Equally, only 10% of the population is very keen to leave the EU.
The vast majority of people give it little or no thought. I don't think they can be 'enthused' by either side. But a significant number will vote, as they see it their duty. This is not good for Leave.
I'd rather just ban them, but that's easier said than done no doubt.
You'd then have to do a similar thing to the Jewish courts.
And the Catholic tribunals.
AIUI, they can't rule on divorce, custody or financial matters - only on whether divorcees can remarry and remain within the Catholic church. Since nobody is forced to be a Catholic that is not nearly so serious a business as the ones we're discussing regarding Sharia.
The Church of England has courts as well, but they are effectively a disciplinary organisation for the clergy and senior officials for religious misdemeanours, e.g. a married clergyman running off with a parishioner.
Indeed, but the Church of England is part of the State, and the General Synod is a chamber of Parliament in that it creates legislation which passes into law - though I'm not sure of the precise terms of the definition.
I thought the Synod could not 'create' legislation - only draft it and propose it to Parliament. Moreover, isn't the Church of England no longer officially part of the State since Brown's reforms, which makes it a prerogative of the Sovereign rather than the Crown? I'm not 100% sure (I must admit, as an organist I have been to so many church committee meetings as an ex officio member that the whole governing side leaves me stony cold now) but that was my understanding of it.
Miss Plato, that's an unbelievable decision. Must be bloody awful for the poor girl, and stressful for her parents too.
Indeed yes. The school seems to me to have laid itself wide open to a criminal prosecution under the Equalities Act for failing to make reasonable adjustment. In this case, the reasonable adjustment being to tell the silly children to look where they're putting their damn feet!
If something like that happened in my school - and without going into details, we have several children with severe disabilities whom we have to consider - the SENCO would go through the roof, followed by the Assistant Head Pastoral, as the rest of us were shown through the door. And rightly so.
Speaking of stupidity and clipboards - http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article4646950.ece Blind 7yrs old banned from using her white stick in case classmates trip over it. And now she's been bullied so much - her parents have taken her out of school.
Someone needs to tell these idiots to f*ck right off. You can hardly believe it , and it must be more than one person made the decision....
Less than 5% of the population is avidly pro the EU.
Equally, only 10% of the population is very keen to leave the EU.
The vast majority of people give it little or no thought. I don't think they can be 'enthused' by either side. But a significant number will vote, as they see it their duty. This is not good for Leave.
"the debate over whether or not to remain part of the EU did not feel to many to be particularly urgent, given the other issues at hand (“they should get the terrorism and immigration and all that out of the way first”). Then again, “there is always something happening” and there would never be a time free of competing priorities.
Whether or not it was urgent, to most people in the groups the decision felt very important. Indeed many said it felt a good deal harder than making a choice at a general election.
“It’s a good thing that we’re having a say. I will definitely vote. I don’t know which way, but I will definitely vote.” “In a general election, if you vote one way or another it’s only a few more years and you can change your vote. If you vote to come out and it happens and it’s not a good thing, it’s tough isn't it, you’re out. They won’t let us back in if we make a mistake”. “It feels a bit more serious than a general election. There’s a lot more to think about.”
People found the question daunting for three main reasons: that it was a once-in-a-generation decision, not like choosing a government you could throw out again in five years; that it was not clear what the consequences of outcome choice would be; and that they did not feel qualified or equipped to decide on such a huge and complicated matter (though some were more worried about other people’s ability to make the choice responsibly)."
Have to say, this is nonsense. On that basis, most people don't give a damn about the NHS. In fact, most people don't give a damn about any particular issue. What a content nation we are ;-)
A fair point indeed, although maybe that explains why our parties fight over marginal matters so much, and why there is such a range of issues of similar but low importance. People occasionally lament that the people are pessimistic types who don't realise we are doing better than mist places in the world and human history, but this apparent contentment perhaps show the public do recognise that.
Or just that when put on the spot people's views are thinly spread across a broad range of issues.
Both comments are right, in the same way that the weekly Populus survey about what news people remember usually comes up with nothing much except the occasional disaster. Most people just aren't very interested in public affairs - they don't think they're usually much affected by them or that they could do much about them as individuals even if they were.
And they're sort of right - if none of us on this board, including declared and undeclared (ex-)MPs, journalists and other opinion-shapers, had ever lived, I'm certain that there would be hundreds of individuals who we've known who would have lost (or gained) something, but would it have changed the course of national history? Probably not much. So why should Joe and Jane Bloggs in Sunderland spend time brooding about it, unless it's a hobby that interests them?
Hence the familiar election day pattern of people who vaguely intended to vote but have got preoccupied baking a cake or washing the car. The cake and the car will be better as a result, the election result probably no different.
The Sinfy ref was the obvious exception in recent years - Scots really got into that and discussed it on a daily basis. Initially the rising interest benefited the Outs, but in the end it sucked in the apathetic "don't change, it's risky" voters too with the result we know. I do think that Remain needs to galvanise interest, and squabbling about details in Brussels isn't the way to do it. Principally, I'm afraid, it'll be a negative campaign, because negative sadly grabs atteniton better, as every tabloid editor knows.
I don't agree with your first sentence. Sharia courts are not simple arbitration fora. They seek to rule on matters which are not normally permitted by arbitration tribunals, such as family matters, inheritance, divorce, domestic violence etc. Banning such courts seems to me to be essential and sensible. There simply is no comparison between such courts and an arbitration tribunal subject to the Arbitration Acts and the English courts ruling on a commercial contract, freely entered into by parties with appropriate legal advice.
" They seek to rule on matters which are not normally permitted by arbitration tribunals, such as family matters, inheritance, divorce, domestic violence etc."
AIUI, so do the Jewish Beth Din courts. To the extent of women being unable to divorce husbands, and people wanting to convert to Judaism being forced to live in certain areas to do so.
It's fine to say that there should be voluntary tribunals. The problem occurs when societal factors conspire to make them non-voluntary. And I'd argue that'll happen whenever it involves devout people of any religion. When 'religious marriages' become more important in a community than 'civil marriages', and hence divorces as well.
As long as there are religious courts, you will have people using them to gain advantage in a dispute in a manner that would not be allowed in civil courts. As long as parts of the population look to religious courts over civil courts, we will have problems.
And that's the same for Judaism, Islam or any other religion.
An interesting observation. It is correct that a Jewish man can get a divorce (a get) on demand just by serving a paper signed by the Beth Din on his wife whereas the reverse can't happen and if the man refuses to divorce his wife as far as Jewish law is concerned she can't re-marry.
Though she can get a divorce in an English court the implications within her community are serious. Without a 'get' she is still considered married so no orthodox man would marry her and were she to have children they would be considered illegitimate.
I like this conversation about Sharia Law and seeing people attempt to justify it, I wonder if they're the same people who approved of punishment beatings meted out by the IRA
University dining halls aren’t exactly famous for serving gourmet dishes, but Oberlin students say their meals aren’t merely bad—they are racially inauthentic, and thus, a form of microaggression.
It’s one thing to quietly gripe about the quality of dorm food (students have likely been doing that for centuries). It’s quite another to accuse the dining room staff of stealing from Asian culture because they didn’t prepare the General Tso’s chicken with the correct sauce.
On topic: Mike are you being deliberately disingenuous? Take a little peak at the giant 40% gorilla in the second line of the graphic above. IMMIGRATION is just about the biggest issue and is intimately linked to the issue of terrorism. Paris and San Bernandino were committed by un-integrated immigrants. Europe's borders are wide open. It is, apparently, racist to point this out.
...I would also imagine that school places, housing availability, job availability, pay competition, law and order, etc are all also connected to the issue of immigration...
The EU is a root cause of a lot of things - whose symptoms we do have deep concerns about. Just because 'EU' is 17th on the list doesn't mean it's not hugely important. Just saying.
On topic: Mike are you being deliberately disingenuous? Take a little peak at the giant 40% gorilla in the second line of the graphic above. IMMIGRATION is just about the biggest issue and is intimately linked to the issue of terrorism. Paris and San Bernandino were committed by un-integrated immigrants. Europe's borders are wide open. It is, apparently, racist to point this out.
Well, it is, isn't it?
After all, there are fewer white people than there are people who want a world without white people. Think on.
I don't agree with your first sentence. Sharia courts are not simple arbitration fora. They seek to rule on matters which are not normally permitted by arbitration tribunals, such as family matters, inheritance, divorce, domestic violence etc. Banning such courts seems to me to be essential and sensible. There simply is no comparison between such courts and an arbitration tribunal subject to the Arbitration Acts and the English courts ruling on a commercial contract, freely entered into by parties with appropriate legal advice.
" They seek to rule on matters which are not normally permitted by arbitration tribunals, such as family matters, inheritance, divorce, domestic violence etc."
AIUI, so do the Jewish Beth Din courts. To the extent of women being unable to divorce husbands, and people wanting to convert to Judaism being forced to live in certain areas to do so.
It's fine to say that there should be voluntary tribunals. The problem occurs when societal factors conspire to make them non-voluntary. And I'd argue that'll happen whenever it involves devout people of any religion. When 'religious marriages' become more important in a community than 'civil marriages', and hence divorces as well.
As long as there are religious courts, you will have people using them to gain advantage in a dispute in a manner that would not be allowed in civil courts. As long as parts of the population look to religious courts over civil courts, we will have problems.
And that's the same for Judaism, Islam or any other religion.
An interesting observation. It is correct that a Jewish man can get a divorce (a get) on demand just by serving a paper signed by the Beth Din on his wife whereas the reverse can't happen and if the man refuses to divorce his wife as far as Jewish law is concerned she can't re-marry.
Though she can get a divorce in an English court the implications within her community are serious. Without a 'get' she is still considered married so no orthodox man would marry her and were she to have children they would be considered illegitimate.
IANAE (obviously), but I believe that's wrong: it's equitable. Under the Beth Din's rules, *both* sides have to agree to the divorce, unlike in civil law where either party can petition for divorce, and if one side unreasonably blocks it a judge can issue the divorce (if I've got that wrong, someone'll let us know!). But as you say above, it leads to a situation where one or other parties can unreasonably refuse.
It leads to iniquities such as the situation below, where the Beth Din's 'solution' is both funny and hideous.
On topic: Mike are you being deliberately disingenuous? Take a little peak at the giant 40% gorilla in the second line of the graphic above. IMMIGRATION is just about the biggest issue and is intimately linked to the issue of terrorism. Paris and San Bernandino were committed by un-integrated immigrants. Europe's borders are wide open. It is, apparently, racist to point this out.
Well, it is, isn't it?
After all, there are fewer white people than there are people who want a world without white people. Think on.
Innocent -I am sure you're right. But the (still mostly white) people of Europe are surely allowed to have a view on assimilating an apparently limitless number of those who would see them and their culture gone. FWIW my own view is that we should embrace immigration - but within a number limit and 'desirability' points system (a la Australia, Canada). There are tens of millions of people in Europe (with citizenship) who are of that culture and within which a worryingly high (albeit still small) proportion are radicalised. We have literally no legal mechanism to keep such people out.
It is the desire of the left to ban discussion of this that enables the more serious demagogues among us. Trump says all Muslims should be banned from the USA and 48% of US citizens agree. 30% of UK citizens. If we had an honest and rational debate about the size and make-up of our population and how many people of what qualities we would like to admit each year then much of the heat would be taken out of the issue.
Its an absolutely amazing achievement. Much kudos to the SpaceX team.
It seems it landed on land, rather than the barge they'd tried to return to previously. I wonder if they've abandoned the barge landings, although there were pictures of the barge going to sea at the weekend ...
The next question is whether this first stage will really be reusable, and now much effort and money has to be put into getting it ready for its next use. Those were the factors that killed the shuttle program: it just cost too much to prepare the 'reusable' craft for each flight.
The real tests would be a successful second flight with the same stage. But it looks like they're on their way to that.
First thing I did this morning was tapped 'Spacex' into my phone's browser.
That's one of those things that just shouldn't be physically possible to do, it's a completely bonkers idea to land a rocket on its end from 100km up! If they can keep reusing the stage it will have a huge impact on the cost of putting things in orbit.
Bloody well done to the SpaceX team, great to see that there's still some great innovators out there. I'm sure they are drowning in Champagne now!
Off-topic: Q3 2015 Energy Trends data is reassuring for the greenest government ever, despite lefties & vested interests trying to cling onto subsidies.
Renewables’ share of electricity generation increased to 23½ per cent, up from the 17½ per cent share in the third quarter of 2014. That puts it ahead of: - Coal at 17%, down from 21%. and - Nuclear 22%, an increase from the 20½%.
From an Energy Independence viewpoint: Coal imports were 46 per cent lower, however Gas imports unfortunately 13 per cent higher - although unusually our Gas exports increasing by 29%...
@JosiasJessop Yep - I'd guess they'll be having a damn good look at the first stage now. The space shuttle was a superb exercise in demonstrating that airplanes and spacecraft are two very different things. It must really traumatise NASA to realise how much development energy they basically wasted on that thing...
"Hey guys we've been to the moon, lets fly round the earth for the next 50 years ! "
@JosiasJessop Yep - I'd guess they'll be having a damn good look at the first stage now. The space shuttle was a superb exercise in demonstrating that airplanes and spacecraft are two very different things. It must really traumatise NASA to realise how much development energy they basically wasted on that thing...
"Hey guys we've been to the moon, lets fly round the earth for the next 50 years ! "
Poor old Polly, what an article, she appears to have lost all the 'hope and optimism' she claims her party is renowned for, but still retains the usual level of bile and contempt for her opponents that she is known for.
Its an absolutely amazing achievement. Much kudos to the SpaceX team.
It seems it landed on land, rather than the barge they'd tried to return to previously. I wonder if they've abandoned the barge landings, although there were pictures of the barge going to sea at the weekend ...
The next question is whether this first stage will really be reusable, and now much effort and money has to be put into getting it ready for its next use. Those were the factors that killed the shuttle program: it just cost too much to prepare the 'reusable' craft for each flight.
The real tests would be a successful second flight with the same stage. But it looks like they're on their way to that.
I think the barge idea was to show they could get to the landing area safely, in order to get regulatory approval for the return-to-land test. Last night's landing was at Cape Canaveral, close to the launch location.
Very true about the Shuttle and the difference between reusability in theory and in practice. SpaceX are lucky in that they're experimenting with unmanned craft so far, unlike Need Another Seven Astronauts.
I still can't quite believe they actually landed that rocket. Just brilliant!
@JosiasJessop Yep - I'd guess they'll be having a damn good look at the first stage now. The space shuttle was a superb exercise in demonstrating that airplanes and spacecraft are two very different things. It must really traumatise NASA to realise how much development energy they basically wasted on that thing...
"Hey guys we've been to the moon, lets fly round the earth for the next 50 years ! "
Indeed. The US space program has been beset by political indifference and lack of goals. Meanwhile the Russians have been doing much better (at least in manned flight) than the US< with much less.
As for SpaceX: I'm waiting for salesmen to go around satellite companies saying: "Pssst, would you like this second-hand rocket I've got? One careful owner, only 125 miles on the clock"
Public Sector Finances as initially reported December 2014
Public sector net borrowing excluding public sector banks (PSNB ex) from April to November 2014 was £75.8 billion (2015: £66.9bn);
PSNB ex was £14.1 billion (2015: £14.2bn) in November 2014.
Public sector net debt excluding public sector banks (PSND ex) was £1,457.2 billion (79.5% of GDP) at the end of November 2014, an increase of £89.7 billion (2015: £71.9bn) compared with November 2013.
It seems we are all getting the same thing for Christmas this year. A cornucopia of despair from the sanctimonious left. Delicious. Tuck in...
The year ends with some senior Labour figures wondering whether their party will ever govern again. A year ago, most Labour MPs assumed they had at least a chance of returning to power in some form or another after the election. They have leapt from tentative, nervy, uneasy optimism to apocalyptic gloom. A dark consensus is implicit in all the internal angst.
The Labour party has become dysfunctional, for those on the left and right. Jeremy Corbyn’s followers face the formidable obstacle of recalcitrant MPs. The expanding party membership presents an equally intimidating barrier to the MPs if they want a change of leadership.
On topic: Mike are you being deliberately disingenuous? Take a little peak at the giant 40% gorilla in the second line of the graphic above. IMMIGRATION is just about the biggest issue and is intimately linked to the issue of terrorism. Paris and San Bernandino were committed by un-integrated immigrants. Europe's borders are wide open. It is, apparently, racist to point this out.
Well, it is, isn't it?
After all, there are fewer white people than there are people who want a world without white people. Think on.
Confirmation, if it were needed, that to question the number of people living in a designated place is racist, regardless of the colour, culture or ethnicity of those living there.
If you live in London you'll soon be able to oppose a man who wants quotas based on race, I'm sure you'll be leading the campaign against such blatant discrimination.
Someone called 'saveedmiliband' has just made the following comment in the Guardian below Polly's article:
Totally predictable article by the arch neoliberal Red Tory cheerleader Toynbee.
This country is suffering under the yoke of the most extreme Right-wing Government in history, even worse, unbelievably, than the widely-hated and wildly unpopular Thatcher regime - at least Thatcher didn't introduce the Bedroom Tax, whilst cutting the top rate of tax to 45%, enabling the 1% (who, as we all know, already paid no tax whatsoever) to pay even less.
Jeremy should ignore the splitters and the Right-wing traitors - they can just go and join the Tories! - and concentrate on building a mass democratic grassroots movement, with genuinely democratic participatory structures.
We need a Popular Alliance that campaigns against the entrenched power of the 1%, who recent figures show now own more than 100% of all the wealth, while the 99% steadily descend further in to extreme poverty and destitution.
Our policies should include: the abolition of all immigration controls, which are inherently racist and fascist; an end to all Austerity; taking all major industries in to public ownership, including transport, telecommunications, energy, pharmaceuticals and media; a minimum wage of at least £30/hour, so that working people no longer have to choose between eating and other essentials of life, e.g. Sky TV; a top rate of tax of at least 100%; the total elimination of the private rented housing market; a commitment to building a minimum of two million council houses per year; a Wealth Tax on total assets of more than £250,000; the abolition of the totally unnecessary so-called "Armed Forces"; and the full implementation of the Leveson Report so that unrepresentative Monopoly Media Moguls are no longer able to foist their unpopular and deeply unrepresentative opinions upon us.
Who can doubt the popularity of such policies, and the landslide election result that would follow from a truly Socialist platform like this? Everyone I speak to in my local Labour Party agrees with me about this; most of them are students, so can hardly be described as being out of touch with popular opinion, whatever the Right-wing media (Guardian, BBC etc.) may claim.
For those who want evidence of Jeremy's popularity: the largely unreported result of the Oldham by-election where Labour won 62% of the vote. Yes, 62%! All Labour has to do is achieve that sort of result in at least 300 constituencies in May 2020, and victory is ours!
No wonder Red Tories like Polly Toynbee are terrified of Our Jeremy!
Does anyone think this might actually be SeanT having a laugh or is this a real post by a lunatic?
@JosiasJessop Yep - I'd guess they'll be having a damn good look at the first stage now. The space shuttle was a superb exercise in demonstrating that airplanes and spacecraft are two very different things. It must really traumatise NASA to realise how much development energy they basically wasted on that thing...
"Hey guys we've been to the moon, lets fly round the earth for the next 50 years ! "
They did! Buran flew once fully automated (i.e. unmanned), and AIUI was superior to the Shuttle in many ways. The Russians were also sensible enough to realise that there were few uses for it, so they canned it ...
The Energia rocket that launched Buran was also a beauty. I think the Energia's boosters in modified form are still used to launch satellites.
Speaking of stupidity and clipboards - http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article4646950.ece Blind 7yrs old banned from using her white stick in case classmates trip over it. And now she's been bullied so much - her parents have taken her out of school.
The little blind lass should be issued with her own Guide Wolf. That way, some of these stupid blundering clumsy sighted kids could learn an early lesson in life - to look where they are f*cking going.
All these teachers concerned should be fired. End of.
Polly has spent many of her articles over the years stating that Labour need to be more left wing. So a lot of her readers back Corbyn and now she thinks they are doomed.... PMSL
It seems we are all getting the same thing for Christmas this year. A cornucopia of despair from the sanctimonious left. Delicious. Tuck in...
The year ends with some senior Labour figures wondering whether their party will ever govern again. A year ago, most Labour MPs assumed they had at least a chance of returning to power in some form or another after the election. They have leapt from tentative, nervy, uneasy optimism to apocalyptic gloom. A dark consensus is implicit in all the internal angst.
The Labour party has become dysfunctional, for those on the left and right. Jeremy Corbyn’s followers face the formidable obstacle of recalcitrant MPs. The expanding party membership presents an equally intimidating barrier to the MPs if they want a change of leadership.
On topic: Mike are you being deliberately disingenuous? Take a little peak at the giant 40% gorilla in the second line of the graphic above. IMMIGRATION is just about the biggest issue and is intimately linked to the issue of terrorism. Paris and San Bernandino were committed by un-integrated immigrants. Europe's borders are wide open. It is, apparently, racist to point this out.
Well, it is, isn't it?
After all, there are fewer white people than there are people who want a world without white people. Think on.
If people who aren't white do wish white people to be eliminated (which I don't believe for a moment) then policies like apartheid and Jim Crow would be nothing more than legitimate self-defence.
Polly has spent many of her articles over the years stating that Labour need to be more left wing. So a lot of her readers back Corbyn and now she thinks they are doomed.... PMSL
Much as I find Polly's Mwaaaah Mwaaaaah Mwaaaaah Cameron Has Gerrymandered The System hysteria amusing (his majority might be 20 or 30 bigger if the LibDems hadn't blocked the very reform to 600 MPs that was in their 2010 Manifesto) it is aimed at poisoning politics further. CCHQ needs to spend some time in the New Year knocking this meme on the head.
I think the world would be a better place if we got rid of all the blondes..and then the brunettes..people who live in the country..and then the ones who live in the cities..then we could start on foreign people..and all the ones who don't speak English... The list is endless..
I'd rather just ban them, but that's easier said than done no doubt.
You'd then have to do a similar thing to the Jewish courts.
And the Catholic tribunals.
AIUI, they can't rule on divorce, custody or financial matters - only on whether divorcees can remarry and remain within the Catholic church. Since nobody is forced to be a Catholic that is not nearly so serious a business as the ones we're discussing regarding Sharia.
The Church of England has courts as well, but they are effectively a disciplinary organisation for the clergy and senior officials for religious misdemeanours, e.g. a married clergyman running off with a parishioner.
Indeed, but the Church of England is part of the State, and the General Synod is a chamber of Parliament in that it creates legislation which passes into law - though I'm not sure of the precise terms of the definition.
I thought the Synod could not 'create' legislation - only draft it and propose it to Parliament. Moreover, isn't the Church of England no longer officially part of the State since Brown's reforms, which makes it a prerogative of the Sovereign rather than the Crown? I'm not 100% sure (I must admit, as an organist I have been to so many church committee meetings as an ex officio member that the whole governing side leaves me stony cold now) but that was my understanding of it.
Hmm.
The Synod certainly originates legislation ("Measures") which end up with the same status as an Act, but holds discussions with the Ecclesiastical Committee while it is in process through Synod. The Ecclesiastical Committee of Parliament consider it "final draft" when it arrives, but by convention Parliament does not amend on internal church matters, and the last time an Act of Parliament did that was 1919 iirc.
What is an internal Church matter? And what is "draft"? Not going there :-)
There is other legislation (eg Canons, Doctrines, Order of Service forms) that do not go via Parliament.
Someone called 'saveedmiliband' has just made the following comment in the Guardian below Polly's article:
Totally predictable article by the arch neoliberal Red Tory cheerleader Toynbee.
This country is suffering under the yoke of the most extreme Right-wing Government in history, even worse, unbelievably, than the widely-hated and wildly unpopular Thatcher regime - at least Thatcher didn't introduce the Bedroom Tax, whilst cutting the top rate of tax to 45%, enabling the 1% (who, as we all know, already paid no tax whatsoever) to pay even less.
Jeremy should ignore the splitters and the Right-wing traitors - they can just go and join the Tories! - and concentrate on building a mass democratic grassroots movement, with genuinely democratic participatory structures.
We need a Popular Alliance that campaigns against the entrenched power of the 1%, who recent figures show now own more than 100% of all the wealth, while the 99% steadily descend further in to extreme poverty and destitution.
Our policies should include: the abolition of all immigration controls, which are inherently racist and fascist; an end to all Austerity; taking all major industries in to public ownership, including transport, telecommunications, energy, pharmaceuticals and media; a minimum wage of at least £30/hour, so that working people no longer have to choose between eating and other essentials of life, e.g. Sky TV; a top rate of tax of at least 100%; the total elimination of the private rented housing market; a commitment to building a minimum of two million council houses per year; a Wealth Tax on total assets of more than £250,000; the abolition of the totally unnecessary so-called "Armed Forces"; and the full implementation of the Leveson Report so that unrepresentative Monopoly Media Moguls are no longer able to foist their unpopular and deeply unrepresentative opinions upon us.
Who can doubt the popularity of such policies, and the landslide election result that would follow from a truly Socialist platform like this? Everyone I speak to in my local Labour Party agrees with me about this; most of them are students, so can hardly be described as being out of touch with popular opinion, whatever the Right-wing media (Guardian, BBC etc.) may claim.
For those who want evidence of Jeremy's popularity: the largely unreported result of the Oldham by-election where Labour won 62% of the vote. Yes, 62%! All Labour has to do is achieve that sort of result in at least 300 constituencies in May 2020, and victory is ours!
No wonder Red Tories like Polly Toynbee are terrified of Our Jeremy!
Does anyone think this might actually be SeanT having a laugh or is this a real post by a lunatic?
Someone called 'saveedmiliband' has just made the following comment in the Guardian below Polly's article:
Totally predictable article by the arch neoliberal Red Tory cheerleader Toynbee.
(snip)
We need a Popular Alliance that campaigns against the entrenched power of the 1%, who recent figures show now own more than 100% of all the wealth, while the 99% steadily descend further in to extreme poverty and destitution.
(snip)
No wonder Red Tories like Polly Toynbee are terrified of Our Jeremy!
Does anyone think this might actually be SeanT having a laugh or is this a real post by a lunatic?
"We need a Popular Alliance that campaigns against the entrenched power of the 1%, who recent figures show now own more than 100% of all the wealth"
More than 100%! Arf! Lefties and numbers - this spoofer has got that one nailed.....
There was a pitiful Guardian journalist on Sky yesterday saying how great Jezza was - her arguments [well meaningless use of *everyone* *lots* *many*] wouldn't have lasted 2mins on here.
Someone called 'saveedmiliband' has just made the following comment in the Guardian below Polly's article:
Totally predictable article by the arch neoliberal Red Tory cheerleader Toynbee.
(snip)
We need a Popular Alliance that campaigns against the entrenched power of the 1%, who recent figures show now own more than 100% of all the wealth, while the 99% steadily descend further in to extreme poverty and destitution.
(snip)
No wonder Red Tories like Polly Toynbee are terrified of Our Jeremy!
Does anyone think this might actually be SeanT having a laugh or is this a real post by a lunatic?
"We need a Popular Alliance that campaigns against the entrenched power of the 1%, who recent figures show now own more than 100% of all the wealth"
More than 100%! Arf! Lefties and numbers - this spoofer has got that one nailed.....
Someone called 'saveedmiliband' has just made the following comment in the Guardian below Polly's article:
Totally predictable article by the arch neoliberal Red Tory cheerleader Toynbee.
(snip)
We need a Popular Alliance that campaigns against the entrenched power of the 1%, who recent figures show now own more than 100% of all the wealth, while the 99% steadily descend further in to extreme poverty and destitution.
(snip)
No wonder Red Tories like Polly Toynbee are terrified of Our Jeremy!
Does anyone think this might actually be SeanT having a laugh or is this a real post by a lunatic?
"We need a Popular Alliance that campaigns against the entrenched power of the 1%, who recent figures show now own more than 100% of all the wealth"
More than 100%! Arf! Lefties and numbers - this spoofer has got that one nailed.....
It looks like a spoof comment. You would have to look at others by the same writer I suppose to be sure. Edit Yes surely a spoof when you look at it in full. Very perceptive none the less.
BBC: "Government borrowing rose in November from a year earlier, worse than forecast, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS). Borrowing for the month was £14.2bn, up by £1.3bn compared with November 2014."
Aww, thanx. I binge-watched Louis Theroux's Wild Weekends and laughed myself inside out. I can't understand why he hasn't won more awards - he's inspired and so willing to have-a-go. His experiences of being in porn movie and liposuction were totally WTF.
Polly has spent many of her articles over the years stating that Labour need to be more left wing. So a lot of her readers back Corbyn and now she thinks they are doomed.... PMSL
Much as I find Polly's Mwaaaah Mwaaaaah Mwaaaaah Cameron Has Gerrymandered The System hysteria amusing (his majority might be 20 or 30 bigger if the LibDems hadn't blocked the very reform to 600 MPs that was in their 2010 Manifesto) it is aimed at poisoning politics further. CCHQ needs to spend some time in the New Year knocking this meme on the head.
The cuts to the Short money - without notice, debate or consultation - are nothing other than partisan and designed to give the Tories an even greater financial advantage. It was and is a silly move because it helps to make the case Toynbee is making. The Tories have enough of an advantage anyway. They did not need to do this. And at some stage they will lose power. They can then expect the new government to behave in exactly the same way.
Polly has spent many of her articles over the years stating that Labour need to be more left wing. So a lot of her readers back Corbyn and now she thinks they are doomed.... PMSL
Much as I find Polly's Mwaaaah Mwaaaaah Mwaaaaah Cameron Has Gerrymandered The System hysteria amusing (his majority might be 20 or 30 bigger if the LibDems hadn't blocked the very reform to 600 MPs that was in their 2010 Manifesto) it is aimed at poisoning politics further. CCHQ needs to spend some time in the New Year knocking this meme on the head.
The cuts to the Short money - without notice, debate or consultation - are nothing other than partisan and designed to give the Tories an even greater financial advantage. It was and is a silly move because it helps to make the case Toynbee is making. The Tories have enough of an advantage anyway. They did not need to do this. And at some stage they will lose power. They can then expect the new government to behave in exactly the same way.
'The Tories have enough of an advantage anyway. They did not need to do this'
Oh please politics isn't about being nice to your opponents - when they are down you keep kicking them to make sure they don't get up. Labour aren't gentlemen and certainly don't deserve to be treated as such.
BBC: "Government borrowing rose in November from a year earlier, worse than forecast, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS). Borrowing for the month was £14.2bn, up by £1.3bn compared with November 2014."
Well done, Mr Near-perfect Chancellor.
Actually down by £0.1bn when comparing like with like.
It's really misleading to compare this year's first estimates with last year's final revised numbers.
Miss Plato, that's a bit odd. I remember reading of people being pissed about trying to record F1 highlights, only to find they'd been shifted last minute to BBC2 so they didn't get it, but The Bridge was always broadcast in the same slot (and episodes 6/7 were on different weekends, making it especially peculiar).
Polly has spent many of her articles over the years stating that Labour need to be more left wing. So a lot of her readers back Corbyn and now she thinks they are doomed.... PMSL
Much as I find Polly's Mwaaaah Mwaaaaah Mwaaaaah Cameron Has Gerrymandered The System hysteria amusing (his majority might be 20 or 30 bigger if the LibDems hadn't blocked the very reform to 600 MPs that was in their 2010 Manifesto) it is aimed at poisoning politics further. CCHQ needs to spend some time in the New Year knocking this meme on the head.
The cuts to the Short money - without notice, debate or consultation - are nothing other than partisan and designed to give the Tories an even greater financial advantage. It was and is a silly move because it helps to make the case Toynbee is making. The Tories have enough of an advantage anyway. They did not need to do this. And at some stage they will lose power. They can then expect the new government to behave in exactly the same way.
Funnily enough, cuts do not seem to apply when it comes to paying the Chancellor's advisers or giving sweeties to the Tory core vote.
Miss Plato, that's a bit odd. I remember reading of people being pissed about trying to record F1 highlights, only to find they'd been shifted last minute to BBC2 so they didn't get it, but The Bridge was always broadcast in the same slot (and episodes 6/7 were on different weekends, making it especially peculiar).
@Maomentum_: Sectarian elements on the left have already begun to accuse the leadership of having made a demoralising climb-down. https://t.co/cHtOxHfsy4
'The Tories have enough of an advantage anyway. They did not need to do this'
Oh please politics isn't about being nice to your opponents - when they are down you keep kicking them to make sure they don't get up. Labour aren't gentlemen and certainly don't deserve to be treated as such.
Of course. As you imply, this is all about gaining partisan political advantage - which is what Toynbee is saying, isn't it?
In fact, it is a mistake to see this letter as closing down the debate. Instead, it represents an implicit critique of the failure of the previous leadership – under then Shadow Communities and Local Government Secretary Hilary Benn – for failing to ensure that Labour councils across the country engaged “community campaigners, council staff who are under duress as a result of Tory spending cuts, local citizens and others in defending local services”. The letter opens up the whole question of introducing a new and more overtly political approach instead.
and the best bit
In no sense should the existing legal situation be used as an excuse to implement Tory cuts. If Labour’s new commitment to being an “anti-austerity” party is to be credible, we need to be demonstrating at a local level that we are willing in practice to challenge the imposition of these cuts. It does not automatically follow that setting a legal budget means simply passing on the cuts to our communities. Since they have a disproportionate impact on women, disabled people and minority ethnic communities, cuts which would further widen existing inequalities must not be passed on. The LRC calls on councils to exhaust all available avenues under the law, including extensive drawing-down of reserves and use of prudential borrowing powers, to forestall the latest round of cuts while an effective mass campaign of resistance is built.
@Maomentum_: Sectarian elements on the left have already begun to accuse the leadership of having made a demoralising climb-down. https://t.co/cHtOxHfsy4
Polly has spent many of her articles over the years stating that Labour need to be more left wing. So a lot of her readers back Corbyn and now she thinks they are doomed.... PMSL
Much as I find Polly's Mwaaaah Mwaaaaah Mwaaaaah Cameron Has Gerrymandered The System hysteria amusing (his majority might be 20 or 30 bigger if the LibDems hadn't blocked the very reform to 600 MPs that was in their 2010 Manifesto) it is aimed at poisoning politics further. CCHQ needs to spend some time in the New Year knocking this meme on the head.
They can then expect the new government to behave in exactly the same way.
Erm....were you asleep 1997-2010?
Quango stuffing Lord stuffing Union Money Spin Forces of hell University Chancellorships Postal voting etc etc ad nauseam - a lefty putsch on all of public life
If Cameron is the new Blair he seems to have learned a few of Labour's tricks. I think pre-Blair politics was hard fought but somewhat gentlemanly. Blair politicised everything (actually it was Alastair Campbell - but that is semantics). Shame and honour left the field. It is a naked partisan fight with no honour now. Dave's money, voter registration, boundary ideas are small beer.
Aww, thanx. I binge-watched Louis Theroux's Wild Weekends and laughed myself inside out. I can't understand why he hasn't won more awards - he's inspired and so willing to have-a-go. His experiences of being in porn movie and liposuction were totally WTF.
I almost never DVR anything (only did it for Battlestar Galactica when Pick put it on at bloody silly o'clock, something like 1-2am).
Returning to TA Dodge's first volume of Napoleon after a long period away (between books and don't want to start a new one because I imagine I'll get a couple for Christmas). Napoleonic warfare is much more tedious than ancient stuff, or even medieval battles. The politics seems interesting, though.
Mr. Patrick, sounds like the shift in warfare from the 12th century (when knights were routinely captured and ransomed rather than being killed) to later centuries when mass slaughter was the order of the day.
Polly has spent many of her articles over the years stating that Labour need to be more left wing. So a lot of her readers back Corbyn and now she thinks they are doomed.... PMSL
Much as I find Polly's Mwaaaah Mwaaaaah Mwaaaaah Cameron Has Gerrymandered The System hysteria amusing (his majority might be 20 or 30 bigger if the LibDems hadn't blocked the very reform to 600 MPs that was in their 2010 Manifesto) it is aimed at poisoning politics further. CCHQ needs to spend some time in the New Year knocking this meme on the head.
They can then expect the new government to behave in exactly the same way.
Erm....were you asleep 1997-2010?
Quango stuffing Lord stuffing Union Money Spin Forces of hell University Chancellorships Postal voting etc etc ad nauseam - a lefty putsch on all of public life
If Cameron is the new Blair he seems to have learned a few of Labour's tricks. I think pre-Blair politics was hard fought but somewhat gentlemanly. Blair politicised everything (actually it was Alastair Campbell - but that is semantics). Shame and honour left the field. It is a naked partisan fight with no honour now. Dave's money, voter registration, boundary ideas are small beer.
Fair point. And the Tories have now escalated by reducing the funds available to their opponents, while at the same time changing voter registration rules and mandating new constituency boundaries that will make it much harder for them to win elections. The one thing I doubt they'll change very much is postal voting as that works to their advantage.
In fact, it is a mistake to see this letter as closing down the debate. Instead, it represents an implicit critique of the failure of the previous leadership – under then Shadow Communities and Local Government Secretary Hilary Benn – for failing to ensure that Labour councils across the country engaged “community campaigners, council staff who are under duress as a result of Tory spending cuts, local citizens and others in defending local services”. The letter opens up the whole question of introducing a new and more overtly political approach instead.
and the best bit
In no sense should the existing legal situation be used as an excuse to implement Tory cuts. If Labour’s new commitment to being an “anti-austerity” party is to be credible, we need to be demonstrating at a local level that we are willing in practice to challenge the imposition of these cuts. It does not automatically follow that setting a legal budget means simply passing on the cuts to our communities. Since they have a disproportionate impact on women, disabled people and minority ethnic communities, cuts which would further widen existing inequalities must not be passed on. The LRC calls on councils to exhaust all available avenues under the law, including extensive drawing-down of reserves and use of prudential borrowing powers, to forestall the latest round of cuts while an effective mass campaign of resistance is built.
@Maomentum_: Sectarian elements on the left have already begun to accuse the leadership of having made a demoralising climb-down. https://t.co/cHtOxHfsy4
That sums up all that is wrong with too much of local government. What council staff should be doing is providing services to local residents in the most efficient way possible so that the residents get the services - run as well as possible - that they pay for. And that applies, whoever is in charge in central and local government.
What they should not be doing is running around "defending" local services. This is not a war with some wicked Baron attacking the poor oppressed yokels. Services need to be provided. They need to be paid for. They need to be effective and the staff need to do their jobs as well as possible. The focus - of staff and of local politicians - needs to be on those who rely on and receive the service, whether that's children in care or residents having their bins emptied.
Achieving all that requires intelligent and thoughtful management. Not political posturing. They need to look to John Lewis as their hero rather than to Robin Hood fighting bad King John.
Polly has spent many of her articles over the years stating that Labour need to be more left wing. So a lot of her readers back Corbyn and now she thinks they are doomed.... PMSL
Much as I find Polly's Mwaaaah Mwaaaaah Mwaaaaah Cameron Has Gerrymandered The System hysteria amusing (his majority might be 20 or 30 bigger if the LibDems hadn't blocked the very reform to 600 MPs that was in their 2010 Manifesto) it is aimed at poisoning politics further. CCHQ needs to spend some time in the New Year knocking this meme on the head.
The cuts to the Short money - without notice, debate or consultation - are nothing other than partisan and designed to give the Tories an even greater financial advantage. It was and is a silly move because it helps to make the case Toynbee is making. The Tories have enough of an advantage anyway. They did not need to do this. And at some stage they will lose power. They can then expect the new government to behave in exactly the same way.
Funnily enough, cuts do not seem to apply when it comes to paying the Chancellor's advisers or giving sweeties to the Tory core vote.
My understanding was that the Short Money reductions were in line with other departmental budget cuts announced in the Autumn Statement, and also include the government SpAd budget. If I'm right then taken as a whole the measures seem reasonable, rather than the deliberately vindictive attack on Labour that they are being portrayed as by some people.
MP numbers are also due to be cut from 650 to 600, which will further reduce the cost of politicians to the taxpayer.
I think what the poll is saying is the euroref is one big yawn .Message-stop banging on about Europe.
I think the INNERS would very much like us to stop banging on about Europe, and they'll keep on repeating the message about Europe when of course it's all about the EU.
Like Cameron, they really want the whole issue to disappear.
The cuts to the Short money - without notice, debate or consultation - are nothing other than partisan and designed to give the Tories an even greater financial advantage. It was and is a silly move because it helps to make the case Toynbee is making. The Tories have enough of an advantage anyway. They did not need to do this. And at some stage they will lose power. They can then expect the new government to behave in exactly the same way.
Good news: twitter.com/RadioForthNews/status/679248534198177792
Good news for workers and tourists, well done to the engineering team for their quick work.
No thanks to the politicians who thought they could get away with cutting the routine maintenance budget though, not maintaining stuff is usually a false economy in the long run - as we have seen demonstrated here.
Good news: twitter.com/RadioForthNews/status/679248534198177792
Good news for workers and tourists, well done to the engineering team for their quick work.
No thanks to the politicians who thought they could get away with cutting the routine maintenance budget though, not maintaining stuff is usually a false economy in the long run as we have seen here.
Almost like they added two weeks to spin the "early" completion"...
Mr. Patrick, sounds like the shift in warfare from the 12th century (when knights were routinely captured and ransomed rather than being killed) to later centuries when mass slaughter was the order of the day.
I agree that Campbell is an utter ****.
Maybe Agincourt was the trigger. Henry V ordered all the French prisoners executed because they were potentially about to be recaptured and might re-enter the fray. Chivalry sort of died that day and the thing to talk about for centuries after was not the amazing victory so much as the fact that Henry V made a very hard headed and correct military call by putting his prisoners to death! Bit like Churchill sinking the French fleet in 1940.
Comments
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2015/12/100-days-jeremy-corbyn-last-real-alternative
Just two quick thoughts:
1) Jeremy Corbyn has already changed the face of British politics irrevocably. He has destroyed the Labour party. In under seven months, the two principal parties of opposition of the last hundred years have been pretty well reduced to irrelevance, and there is no obvious way back for either of them. While Cameron's performance has been remarkable, had it not been for Corbyn's help the OE lightweight surely would not have managed what proved to be beyond any politician since the time of the preternaturally lucky politician Stanley Baldwin.
2) It is Liam Young's patriotic duty to share with George Osborne the name of the substance he is imbibing or inhaling and the source of his supply. If Osborne could sell a small amount of that to the Chinese, he would be able to clear the national debt in one go.
Less than 5% of the population is avidly pro the EU.
Equally, only 10% of the population is very keen to leave the EU.
The vast majority of people give it little or no thought. I don't think they can be 'enthused' by either side. But a significant number will vote, as they see it their duty. This is not good for Leave.
If something like that happened in my school - and without going into details, we have several children with severe disabilities whom we have to consider - the SENCO would go through the roof, followed by the Assistant Head Pastoral, as the rest of us were shown through the door. And rightly so.
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/LEAVE-TO-REMAIN-Lord-Ashcroft-Polls.pdf
(page 23/24)
"the debate over whether or not to remain part of the EU did not feel to many to be particularly urgent, given the other issues at hand (“they should get the terrorism and immigration and all that out of the way first”). Then again, “there is always something happening” and there would never be a time free of competing priorities.
Whether or not it was urgent, to most people in the groups the decision felt very important. Indeed many said it felt a good deal harder than making a choice at a general election.
“It’s a good thing that we’re having a say. I will definitely vote. I don’t know which way, but I will definitely vote.”
“In a general election, if you vote one way or another it’s only a few more years and you can change your vote. If you vote to come out and it happens and it’s not a good thing, it’s tough isn't it, you’re out. They won’t let us back in if we make a mistake”.
“It feels a bit more serious than a general election. There’s a lot more to think about.”
People found the question daunting for three main reasons: that it was a once-in-a-generation decision, not like choosing a government you could throw out again in five years; that it was not clear what the consequences of outcome choice would be; and that they did not feel qualified or equipped to decide on such a huge and complicated matter (though some were more worried about other people’s ability to make the choice responsibly)."
And they're sort of right - if none of us on this board, including declared and undeclared (ex-)MPs, journalists and other opinion-shapers, had ever lived, I'm certain that there would be hundreds of individuals who we've known who would have lost (or gained) something, but would it have changed the course of national history? Probably not much. So why should Joe and Jane Bloggs in Sunderland spend time brooding about it, unless it's a hobby that interests them?
Hence the familiar election day pattern of people who vaguely intended to vote but have got preoccupied baking a cake or washing the car. The cake and the car will be better as a result, the election result probably no different.
The Sinfy ref was the obvious exception in recent years - Scots really got into that and discussed it on a daily basis. Initially the rising interest benefited the Outs, but in the end it sucked in the apathetic "don't change, it's risky" voters too with the result we know. I do think that Remain needs to galvanise interest, and squabbling about details in Brussels isn't the way to do it. Principally, I'm afraid, it'll be a negative campaign, because negative sadly grabs atteniton better, as every tabloid editor knows.
Though she can get a divorce in an English court the implications within her community are serious. Without a 'get' she is still considered married so no orthodox man would marry her and were she to have children they would be considered illegitimate.
The EU is a root cause of a lot of things - whose symptoms we do have deep concerns about. Just because 'EU' is 17th on the list doesn't mean it's not hugely important. Just saying.
After all, there are fewer white people than there are people who want a world without white people. Think on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgaWHnY2Ph8?t=39
It leads to iniquities such as the situation below, where the Beth Din's 'solution' is both funny and hideous.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/08/jewish-court-names-and-shames-man-for-denying-wife-a-religious-divorce
This is a huge step forward for humanity. I'd buy Spacex stock, but its not for sale
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-35158105
It is the desire of the left to ban discussion of this that enables the more serious demagogues among us. Trump says all Muslims should be banned from the USA and 48% of US citizens agree. 30% of UK citizens. If we had an honest and rational debate about the size and make-up of our population and how many people of what qualities we would like to admit each year then much of the heat would be taken out of the issue.
It seems it landed on land, rather than the barge they'd tried to return to previously. I wonder if they've abandoned the barge landings, although there were pictures of the barge going to sea at the weekend ...
The next question is whether this first stage will really be reusable, and now much effort and money has to be put into getting it ready for its next use. Those were the factors that killed the shuttle program: it just cost too much to prepare the 'reusable' craft for each flight.
The real tests would be a successful second flight with the same stage. But it looks like they're on their way to that.
Bloody well done to the SpaceX team, great to see that there's still some great innovators out there. I'm sure they are drowning in Champagne now!
Who can save Labour ? Probably nobody until 2025 - looks like Chukka did the smart move.
Renewables’ share of electricity generation increased to 23½ per cent, up from the 17½ per
cent share in the third quarter of 2014. That puts it ahead of:
- Coal at 17%, down from 21%.
and
- Nuclear 22%, an increase from the 20½%.
From an Energy Independence viewpoint:
Coal imports were 46 per cent lower, however Gas imports unfortunately 13 per cent higher - although unusually our Gas exports increasing by 29%...
"Hey guys we've been to the moon, lets fly round the earth for the next 50 years ! "
https://twitter.com/bernerlap/status/679230682208579584
Very true about the Shuttle and the difference between reusability in theory and in practice. SpaceX are lucky in that they're experimenting with unmanned craft so far, unlike Need Another Seven Astronauts.
I still can't quite believe they actually landed that rocket. Just brilliant!
As for SpaceX: I'm waiting for salesmen to go around satellite companies saying: "Pssst, would you like this second-hand rocket I've got? One careful owner, only 125 miles on the clock"
Public sector net borrowing excluding public sector banks (PSNB ex) from April to November 2014 was £75.8 billion (2015: £66.9bn);
PSNB ex was £14.1 billion (2015: £14.2bn) in November 2014.
Public sector net debt excluding public sector banks (PSND ex) was £1,457.2 billion (79.5% of GDP) at the end of November 2014, an increase of £89.7 billion (2015: £71.9bn) compared with November 2013.
If you live in London you'll soon be able to oppose a man who wants quotas based on race, I'm sure you'll be leading the campaign against such blatant discrimination.
A summary of the UK government’s financial position. @ONS https://t.co/uaRkaQmOP9 https://t.co/cMtDI9iUCK
Totally predictable article by the arch neoliberal Red Tory cheerleader Toynbee.
This country is suffering under the yoke of the most extreme Right-wing Government in history, even worse, unbelievably, than the widely-hated and wildly unpopular Thatcher regime - at least Thatcher didn't introduce the Bedroom Tax, whilst cutting the top rate of tax to 45%, enabling the 1% (who, as we all know, already paid no tax whatsoever) to pay even less.
Jeremy should ignore the splitters and the Right-wing traitors - they can just go and join the Tories! - and concentrate on building a mass democratic grassroots movement, with genuinely democratic participatory structures.
We need a Popular Alliance that campaigns against the entrenched power of the 1%, who recent figures show now own more than 100% of all the wealth, while the 99% steadily descend further in to extreme poverty and destitution.
Our policies should include: the abolition of all immigration controls, which are inherently racist and fascist; an end to all Austerity; taking all major industries in to public ownership, including transport, telecommunications, energy, pharmaceuticals and media; a minimum wage of at least £30/hour, so that working people no longer have to choose between eating and other essentials of life, e.g. Sky TV; a top rate of tax of at least 100%; the total elimination of the private rented housing market; a commitment to building a minimum of two million council houses per year; a Wealth Tax on total assets of more than £250,000; the abolition of the totally unnecessary so-called "Armed Forces"; and the full implementation of the Leveson Report so that unrepresentative Monopoly Media Moguls are no longer able to foist their unpopular and deeply unrepresentative opinions upon us.
Who can doubt the popularity of such policies, and the landslide election result that would follow from a truly Socialist platform like this? Everyone I speak to in my local Labour Party agrees with me about this; most of them are students, so can hardly be described as being out of touch with popular opinion, whatever the Right-wing media (Guardian, BBC etc.) may claim.
For those who want evidence of Jeremy's popularity: the largely unreported result of the Oldham by-election where Labour won 62% of the vote. Yes, 62%! All Labour has to do is achieve that sort of result in at least 300 constituencies in May 2020, and victory is ours!
No wonder Red Tories like Polly Toynbee are terrified of Our Jeremy!
Does anyone think this might actually be SeanT having a laugh or is this a real post by a lunatic?
Al Jaz
ISIL lost 14 percent of its so-called caliphate in 2015: report. https://t.co/VyEexVS1LK https://t.co/7AJo8VvL0g
The Energia rocket that launched Buran was also a beauty. I think the Energia's boosters in modified form are still used to launch satellites.
All these teachers concerned should be fired. End of.
PMSL
Surely, she's ripe for one now. Either arguing for or against trying it again. http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/corbyn-is-going-nowhere-and-neither-are-his-critics-so-what-next-a6782011.html
The Synod certainly originates legislation ("Measures") which end up with the same status as an Act, but holds discussions with the Ecclesiastical Committee while it is in process through Synod. The Ecclesiastical Committee of Parliament consider it "final draft" when it arrives, but by convention Parliament does not amend on internal church matters, and the last time an Act of Parliament did that was 1919 iirc.
What is an internal Church matter? And what is "draft"? Not going there :-)
There is other legislation (eg Canons, Doctrines, Order of Service forms) that do not go via Parliament.
More than 100%! Arf! Lefties and numbers - this spoofer has got that one nailed.....
Oh, and just catching up on previous threads, a belated Happy Birthday to you, hope you had a great day
She is still blaming the Press and the Evilz Gerrymandering Tories for making sure that the voting register is correct.
Plus ca change...
Edit
Yes surely a spoof when you look at it in full. Very perceptive none the less.
Borrowing for the month was £14.2bn, up by £1.3bn compared with November 2014."
Well done, Mr Near-perfect Chancellor.
At least cutting Short Money is in line with overall departmental cuts. Why should free money for Parties be a special case for exclusion?
Oh please politics isn't about being nice to your opponents - when they are down you keep kicking them to make sure they don't get up. Labour aren't gentlemen and certainly don't deserve to be treated as such.
Re Man in the High Castle - I enjoyed E1, but the next 5 have dragged terribly. Can someone give me the will to endure more of this?
PS I'm watching S1 of The Affair - I'm seriously hooked.
It's really misleading to compare this year's first estimates with last year's final revised numbers.
They may still be up on the iPlayer.
https://twitter.com/RadioForthNews/status/679248534198177792
Quango stuffing
Lord stuffing
Union Money
Spin
Forces of hell
University Chancellorships
Postal voting
etc etc ad nauseam - a lefty putsch on all of public life
If Cameron is the new Blair he seems to have learned a few of Labour's tricks. I think pre-Blair politics was hard fought but somewhat gentlemanly. Blair politicised everything (actually it was Alastair Campbell - but that is semantics). Shame and honour left the field. It is a naked partisan fight with no honour now. Dave's money, voter registration, boundary ideas are small beer.
I almost never DVR anything (only did it for Battlestar Galactica when Pick put it on at bloody silly o'clock, something like 1-2am).
Returning to TA Dodge's first volume of Napoleon after a long period away (between books and don't want to start a new one because I imagine I'll get a couple for Christmas). Napoleonic warfare is much more tedious than ancient stuff, or even medieval battles. The politics seems interesting, though.
I agree that Campbell is an utter ****.
That sums up all that is wrong with too much of local government. What council staff should be doing is providing services to local residents in the most efficient way possible so that the residents get the services - run as well as possible - that they pay for. And that applies, whoever is in charge in central and local government.
What they should not be doing is running around "defending" local services. This is not a war with some wicked Baron attacking the poor oppressed yokels. Services need to be provided. They need to be paid for. They need to be effective and the staff need to do their jobs as well as possible. The focus - of staff and of local politicians - needs to be on those who rely on and receive the service, whether that's children in care or residents having their bins emptied.
Achieving all that requires intelligent and thoughtful management. Not political posturing. They need to look to John Lewis as their hero rather than to Robin Hood fighting bad King John.
Let's hope the SNP have learnt important lessons, even if their supporters on here and elsewhere have not.
MP numbers are also due to be cut from 650 to 600, which will further reduce the cost of politicians to the taxpayer.
Like Cameron, they really want the whole issue to disappear.
* End dannae work.... http://webapps.stackexchange.com/questions/61397/how-to-share-a-youtube-video-with-a-specific-start-and-end-time
Maybe it is because you t'ick Notherners don't get us Sarfernah!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehPUJKk2_dg
No thanks to the politicians who thought they could get away with cutting the routine maintenance budget though, not maintaining stuff is usually a false economy in the long run - as we have seen demonstrated here.
http://www.harvard-digital.co.uk/euro/pamphlet.htm